president

There are few people, if any, who’ve tracked U.S. elections for longer or in greater depth than Charlie Cook.

Ever since 1984, when he started his eponymous political newsletter, Cook and his stellar crew of nonpartisan analysts have plumbed many thousands of races — for president, Congress, governor — following the money, sussing out the candidates, watching their ads and assaying the campaign landscape at a granular level.

Cook calls this midterm election the strangest he’s ever seen.

What appeared to be a fairly normal election for a president halfway through his term — a probable setback, as unhappy voters register their discontent — has the potential, Cook said, to turn into a disaster for Republicans. Big losses aren’t rare for the party in the White House. Democrats picked up 41 House seats in President Trump’s last midterm election, in 2018.

What’s unusual, Cook suggested, is the prospect of big Democratic gains when Republicans started out this election season with so many advantages. (And that was before the GOP set off on a gerrymandering jag at Trump’s behest.)

Roughly two-thirds of the Senate seats up in November are in states Trump carried in 2024. Five of the seven toss-up races are in states Trump won, several by double digits.

On the House side, Republicans maintain control by an exceedingly narrow margin, meaning there aren’t a lot of low-hanging districts for Democrats to aim for. As Cook rightly noted, “A party cannot lose a seat they don’t have.”

But Trump’s deteriorating approval rating, an unpopular war, persistent inflation and the president’s egotistical indulgences have jeopardized a number of GOP-held seats that normally would be automatic wins, including contests in such Republican strongholds as Alaska, Florida, Iowa, Ohio and even Texas.

“I’m not a meteorologist, but it’s kind of like three competing weather fronts collided,” Cook said. “One was Iran and gasoline, diesel prices going sky high … Then there’s trade, tariffs, overall non-energy cost of living, tariff impact on farmers. And then the third is kind of the catch-all and it’s everything from ballrooms, reflecting pools, arches, vaccines, Medicaid cuts.”

We’ll get to predictions in a moment. (Patience, dear reader.)

First, let’s hear from Nathan Gonzales, another longtime election handicapper. He’s been tracking political contests nationwide for more than 25 years and edits and publishes Inside Elections — formerly the Rothenberg Political Report — another nonpartisan field guide to campaigns. Like Cook, he traffics in clear-eyed, dispassionate analysis, not partisan wish-casting or political spin.

Gonzales, too, sees a bad moon rising for Republicans.

A detail of the exhibit in the Epstein Files Bookmobile during a campaign stop for Democratic House candidate Bob Brooks at the United Steelworkers of America office in Bethlehem, Pa. Brooks is challenging Republican incumbent Ryan Mackenzie (R-Pa.) in Pennsylvania’s highly competitive 7th Congressional District in the upcoming midterm election.

(Alex Wong / Getty Images)

Trump’s performance — his approval rating is flirting with record lows — “has inspired Democrats, turned off independents and created a group of apathetic Republicans,” Gonzales said, “and those are the ingredients for a good or great Democratic year.”

He noted Democrats don’t need a big wave to seize control of the House. A pickup of just three seats would flip the House, marking the seventh straight midterm election in which one chamber or the other changed partisan hands.

(For the record, there is no authoritative definition of a wave election, though it’s generally agreed the term applies to an election in which one party or the other gains a large and lopsided number of House and Senate seats.)

It’s beginning to feel a lot like 2006, Gonzales said.

“We had an unpopular Republican president, a war in the Middle East that drove up gas prices. Some members on Capitol Hill that were behaving badly,” Gonzales recalled. “I remember talking to Republicans after the fact and they admitted that, while they thought they had great research on Democratic candidates and they had a fundraising advantage, voters just didn’t care. Voters weren’t in the mood to listen to what they were saying about Democrats because they were so frustrated with what was going on with the status quo and the direction of the country.”

In that election, at the midpoint of President George W. Bush’s second term, Democrats gained six seats to take control of the Senate and netted 31 in the House, allowing the installation of Nancy Pelosi as the first female speaker in history. “A thumpin’,” Bush called it.

So, 2026.

Gonzales and his team of experts believe the House is most likely gone for Republicans, forecasting a Democratic gain of seven to 15 seats, unless the bottom falls out for the GOP and their losses climb much higher.

In the Senate, where Democrats need to pick up four seats to take control, Gonzales sees the chamber teetering on a knife’s edge, forecasting a Democratic gain of three to five seats.

“It’s too late to fundamentally change the trajectory of this election,” Gonzales said. “But if Republicans can boost Republican turnout, it might be enough to save the Senate.”

For his part, Cook agrees that Mike Johnson may be nearing the end of his speakership. The best-case scenario for the GOP would be keeping its losses to 25 House seats or less, Cook said, which is right around the average for midterm elections going back well over half a century.

“It starts getting into eyebrow-raising territory if it gets north of 35,” Cook said, “because that shouldn’t be possible with the few competitive districts we have now.”

As for the Senate, he suggested the best Republicans can hope for is a net loss of two seats, keeping the GOP barely in control. (A loss of three would mean a 50-50 split, leaving Vice President JD Vance poised to be the tiebreaker on close votes — and wouldn’t he love having to drop off the 2028 campaign trail to be on hand, just in case.)

Of course, there’s still an election to be held, votes to be cast and ballots to be counted.

Blue wave, tsunami or a pale sapphire puddle?

We’ll know in a little more than four weeks.

Michael Kotlikoff expresses deep sorrow over the case, calling it one of the most challenging periods for Cornell.

Cornell University’s president, Michael Kotlikoff, has called the alleged 2024 gang rape of a student at a fraternity house “deeply disturbing”, pledging greater transparency amid mounting outrage over how the school handled the case.

“My heart aches when I think of what she experienced,” Kotlikoff said in an eight-minute video message to the Cornell community on Saturday.

He characterised the past week as one of the most difficult in the university’s history and said it would weigh on the university for years to come. “It raises heartbreaking and troubling issues about sexual assault, dehumanisation and aspects of party culture, alcohol and drug use,” he said.

The woman, identified in court documents as Jane Doe, alleges she was sexually assaulted by multiple members of the Chi Phi fraternity in 2024 and has sued the university and seven former students.

Scrutiny over Cornell’s handling of the case intensified after New York Governor Kathy Hochul said newly released information had undermined her confidence in the local prosecutor, who initially declined to bring charges.

Hochul subsequently appointed state Attorney General Letitia James as special prosecutor to take over the criminal investigation, saying she would “not allow anyone to sweep this case under the rug”.

The case has also renewed scrutiny of the “voluntary intoxication loophole” in New York law that makes it difficult to prosecute sexual assaults involving victims who voluntarily consumed alcohol or drugs, even if they later became too intoxicated to consent.

Tompkins County District Attorney Matthew Van Houten had cited the legal provision in defending his original decision not to pursue charges. Hochul has pledged to push for changes to it.

At a student assembly hearing on Thursday, several speakers called for Kotlikoff’s resignation.

In Saturday’s video, Kotlikoff reaffirmed his support for an independent review of the university’s handling of the case and said Cornell’s Board of Trustees would announce details next week. He also called for a “serious look at the role of fraternities and sororities in campus life”.

James’s appointment has placed the case under a prosecutor whose office has repeatedly clashed with President Donald Trump. She has separately described the case as “an active criminal investigation”.

EXCLUSIVE

In exclusive Al Jazeera interview, President Hassan Sheikh Mohamud says attempts to pull Somalia into Middle East crises won’t succeed.

Somalia will not accept Israeli presence in the country “under any circumstances” and will resist any attempts to be pulled into the Middle East’s crises, its President Hassan Sheikh Mohamud tells Al Jazeera.

Speaking in an exclusive interview, Mohamud said that Israel was planning to establish a naval base in Berbera and use the city’s airport, adding that its real aim was to get closer to the Gulf states and Iran.

Berbera is a port city on the Gulf of Aden coast in Somaliland – the self-declared republic in northwestern Somalia that Israel recognised last year, but which is claimed by Mogadishu.

Berbera faces Yemen across the water near the strategic Bab al-Mandeb strait. The Iran-aligned Houthis have previously enforced a blockade on Israel-linked ships in the area.

“We will overcome the challenges posed to our country by Israeli moves,” Mohamud said in his wide-ranging interview.

He added that the Israeli plans fall under the “Greater Israel” project – referring to a term for various proposals, often rooted in biblical interpretations, for Israeli control over territory beyond its current borders. Some versions extend from the Nile to the Euphrates.

Israel has not adopted it as official policy, but Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said in an August 2025 interview that he felt connected to the vision, prompting condemnation from Arab governments.

The Somali president described Israel as a “destabilising force” that does not abide by international law.

He also criticised Tel Aviv’s recognition of Somaliland in December.

No country other than Israel recognises Somaliland, while the region’s own residents are completely opposed to an Israeli presence, Mohamud said.

Somaliland declared independence from Somalia in 1991 and has governed itself independently for more than three decades. But it had not secured recognition from any United Nations member state until Israel’s move.

Fight against armed groups

The Somali president told Al Jazeera the United States remains his country’s strongest partner in the fight against “terrorism”, and added that al-Shabab has no presence in the major cities, leaving no possibility of the group taking control in Somalia.

Al-Shabab is a Somali armed group that emerged from the Islamic Courts Union in the mid-2000s and pledged allegiance to al-Qaeda in 2012. It has fought Somalia’s federal government for years, holds territory in parts of southern and central Somalia, and has carried out deadly attacks, including in Mogadishu and in neighbouring Kenya.

Regarding the East Africa region, Mohamud said Somalia’s relations with neighbouring Ethiopia are good, and Mogadishu does not object to Addis Ababa gaining access to the sea through Somali territory.

Ethiopia has been landlocked since Eritrea became independent in 1993 and relies largely on Djibouti’s ports for trade. In January 2024, Addis Ababa signed a memorandum of understanding with Somaliland on sea access, which Somalia condemned as a violation of its sovereignty. Somalia and Ethiopia later agreed to ease tensions.

Houthis ‘destabilising’ region

Mohamud also accused Yemen’s Houthis of “destabilising” the region and disrupting navigation in the Bab al-Mandeb strait.

His comments come as the group attempts to build on its lightning offensive that captured the country’s Red Sea coast last month.

Thus far, Yemeni government forces have been able to hold their positions on the front lines and even claimed to have inflicted heavy losses against the Houthis.

The Houthis have also intensified their attacks on Saudi Arabia, but the kingdom’s Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman (MBS) has promised not to compromise on its security, saying the Yemeni rebels chose “chaos and destruction, threatening the Yemeni people and the region”.

The full interview with President Mohamud will be broadcast on Al Jazeera Arabic on Sunday.

The 49th Kennedy Center Honors gala will go on despite the recent closure of the Kennedy Center, with the event moving to the Capital One Arena in Washington, D.C., on Dec. 7. The honorees and a broadcaster for the program will be disclosed at a later date.

The annual event will take place amid an ongoing legal battle as President Trump attempts to add his name to the building.

Hours after a federal judge blocked the president’s attempt to restore his name, the Kennedy Center’s board voted on Sept. 15 to shutter the venue for renovations. Trump, however, threatened on social media to block the $250-million renovation, which he initially proposed, if his name weren’t added to the facade.

In mid-September, a picture of the president aboard Air Force One reviewing plans that were titled “Kennedy Center Demo[lished]” prompted panic as architectural, preservation and civic organizations asked the court for a “neutral officer to protect the building and institution.”

A federal judge ordered Kennedy Center leaders to provide 30 days’ notice before any changes, including demolition.

Last year’s Kennedy Center Honors gala, which recognizes artists who have contributed to American culture, was hosted by Trump and televised on CBS and Paramount. The ceremony, honoring Sylvester Stallone, Kiss, Gloria Gaynor, Michael Crawford and George Strait, earned the lowest ratings in its history. It was not announced whether Trump would return as master of ceremonies for this year’s event.

Photo: Acting President Ramón J. Velásquez (1993–1994) and his cabinet on the last day of his term. Dr. Velásquez, both during his brief tenure and previously at the helm of a special commission, was a leading proponent of decentralization in the late 20th-century. | Source: Archivo Fotografía Urbana.

The next democratically elected president of Venezuela will inherit an office that is simultaneously too powerful and not powerful enough.

Too powerful because decades of centralization have placed extraordinary political, fiscal and administrative authority in Miraflores. Not powerful enough because whoever inherits it will also confront a damaged bureaucracy, weak public services, deteriorated infrastructure and institutions that may still be controlled by political adversaries.

That combination will make concentration tempting.

A new government will have an enormous reconstruction mandate and voters impatient for results. Every institutional restraint will risk looking like another obstacle left behind by chavismo. Decentralization can wait until the State is stabilized. Congressional procedures can wait because the crisis is urgent. Extraordinary executive authorities can be justified because ordinary government is too slow.

Many of those arguments will contain some truth.

That is what makes them dangerous.

Chávez inherited Venezuela’s presidentialist political culture and radicalized it.

If Venezuela wants this transition to be the last one it needs, the country cannot simply transfer the powers accumulated in the presidency to someone more democratic. But neither can it respond to authoritarianism by constructing an executive incapable of governing.

The question is not whether Venezuela needs a strong president or a weak one. It needs to decide what the president should actually be strong enough to do.

Miraflores was powerful before Chávez

Chavismo radically expanded executive power, but it did not invent Venezuelan presidentialism.

Long before Hugo Chávez, the presidency occupied an unusually commanding position over the political system. Oil reinforced that arrangement. Whoever controlled the national government controlled the principal source of public revenue, and the ability to distribute that revenue made Caracas not merely the political center of Venezuela but the financial center on which much of the rest of the government depended.

The result was a particular understanding of political effectiveness. Presidents were expected to not merely administer the executive branch but to solve national problems, distribute resources, arbitrate conflicts and impose direction on the State.

Chávez inherited that culture and radicalized it.

Carlos Rangel would have recognized something familiar in the phenomenon. His critique of Latin American political culture repeatedly returned to the attraction of the providential leader: the politician whose extraordinary personal mandate supposedly allows him to rise above institutions that appear slow, compromised or incapable of producing the transformation the country requires.

A new democracy has to be built for the political society Venezuela actually has.

Chavismo gave that tradition a twenty-first-century vocabulary. The leader possessed a direct relationship with the people. Institutions that resisted him therefore did not represent legitimate constraints on democratic power; they interfered with the popular mandate.

That logic did not begin with Chávez, and removing chavismo will not automatically remove it.

This is one reason institutional design matters more than hoping Venezuela will simply develop a different political culture. A new democracy has to be built for the political society Venezuela actually has, including its recurring attraction to presidents who promise to cut through institutions rather than patiently govern through them.

Decentralization was one answer

Venezuela has attempted to solve part of this problem before.

The decentralization reforms beginning in 1989 transformed Venezuelan politics by allowing voters to directly elect governors and mayors. They created alternative centers of democratic legitimacy, allowed regional leaders to build careers outside national party hierarchies and weakened the assumption that every important political decision had to originate in Caracas.

Those reforms were real democratic progress.

They also occurred during the accelerating crisis of the political system that had governed Venezuela since 1958. Carlos Andrés Pérez was attempting a profound economic transformation while confronting social unrest, two coup attempts, resistance within his own party and an increasingly fragmented political environment.

Enough independently powerful actors with absolute vetoes can also make coherent government extraordinarily difficult.

It would be wrong to claim that decentralization caused Pérez’s downfall. The crisis of his second government had far deeper causes. But the period should caution against the assumption that dispersing power automatically produces better government. A political system needs restraints. It also needs the capacity to reach decisions.

Juan Linz famously warned that presidential systems contain an inherent problem of competing legitimacy: both the president and the legislature can claim a direct mandate from voters. Venezuela could face that problem almost immediately in a transition. A newly elected president may claim a national mandate for reconstruction while legislators, governors, courts and other institutions exercise equally legitimate powers to resist particular policies.

Those conflicts are not defects but rather an essential part of democracy.

But enough independently powerful actors with absolute vetoes can also make coherent government extraordinarily difficult. The goal cannot therefore be to create as many obstacles to presidential action as possible.

Decentralization has to mean power, not administration

Chavismo subsequently demonstrated another weakness in Venezuela’s earlier decentralization: elected local government does not necessarily amount to decentralized power.

A governor who depends overwhelmingly on transfers determined in Caracas may be politically elected but remains fiscally vulnerable to the center. A municipality with responsibilities but inadequate revenue possesses decentralization on paper. A regional government whose police, infrastructure projects or public services can be bypassed by parallel national authorities is autonomous only until Miraflores decides otherwise.

Chávez and his successors became adept at exploiting these weaknesses. Political authority could be recentralized, resources redirected, parallel institutions created and opposition-controlled governments bypassed without formally abolishing governors or mayors.

A president who negotiates every administrative action with multiple institutions would not protect democracy for very long. It could instead discredit it.

A serious decentralization therefore has to involve more than another constitutional declaration that Venezuela is a federal State.

It must ask where revenue is collected, who controls it, which responsibilities genuinely belong to states and municipalities and which functions require national coordination. Regional governments need enough authority and predictable resources to govern without requesting political permission from the president. But the national government must retain enough capacity to maintain common standards, respond to national emergencies, redistribute among regions and preserve the Venezuelan State as a functioning whole.

That balance is much harder than simply transferring competencies from one level of government to another.

The State must still be able to act

An executive constrained by law is not the same thing as an impotent executive. The Venezuelan president should be capable of executing a legally approved budget, directing the national administration, coordinating responses to disasters, conducting foreign policy and implementing the program on which voters elected the government. Rebuilding infrastructure, stabilizing public finances and restoring basic services will require a national government capable of making decisions and making those decisions stick.

A presidency that must negotiate every administrative action with multiple institutions would not protect democracy for very long. It could instead discredit it. Citizens judge democratic government partly by whether it governs. If elections repeatedly produce leaders incapable of responding to crime, blackouts, inflation or deteriorating public services because every decision disappears into institutional paralysis, frustration with democratic restraint will eventually become politically valuable. The politician promising to eliminate the obstacles will always be waiting.

Institutional design has to emerge from Venezuela’s own history and needs.

Machiavelli understood the underlying problem centuries before modern constitutionalism gave it different terminology: a political order that cannot preserve itself will not remain a political order for long. Democracies require enough power to respond to genuine threats.

The danger lies in what happens next.

Emergency authorities created to save the State can outlive the emergency. Executive discretion justified by reconstruction can become normal government. A president given extraordinary authority because democratic institutions are initially weak acquires the ability to ensure that those institutions remain weak.

Venezuela has already lived that cycle.

Miraflores should matter less

The difficult conclusion is that democratic reconstruction will require whoever next controls the presidency to surrender powers at precisely the moment when there will be compelling reasons to retain them. That is a much harder political proposition than replacing chavista officials.

Someone who has spent years fighting to reach Miraflores may arrive there facing a devastated country and discover an arsenal of executive authority that could make reconstruction easier. It will be extraordinarily tempting to argue that institutional reform should come later, after the emergency has passed and the country has stabilized.

But democratic restraints are easiest to support when they constrain somebody else. Their real test comes when they constrain us.

The president should not determine whether an opposition governor receives the resources necessary to govern. The executive should not be able to transform regulatory authority into political discipline. Emergency powers should expire without depending on presidential generosity. Institutions capable of investigating the government should not owe their survival to that government’s continued support.

None of this necessarily requires turning Venezuela into a parliamentary republic, copying the United States or mechanically importing someone else’s federal model. Institutional design has to emerge from Venezuela’s own history and needs.

But one principle should survive whatever arrangement eventually emerges: winning the presidency should not mean winning the State. That principle protects more than the opposition, it also protects the president.

Winning should give politicians the authority to govern without giving them the tools to decide whether anybody else will ever govern again.

A system in which the loss of Miraflores does not mean losing access to every meaningful source of political authority makes electoral defeat less existential. Governors can govern. Legislators retain influence. Parties can preserve territorial organizations. Former incumbents can imagine returning through elections rather than manipulating the State to avoid leaving. Distributing power can therefore make alternation easier to accept.

The point is not to make political victory meaningless. Elections must have consequences. Governments need enough authority to implement different programs or democracy becomes little more than a ritual for changing administrators.

The objective is narrower: winning should give politicians the authority to govern without giving them the tools to decide whether anybody else will ever govern again.

That is the distinction Venezuela failed to maintain.

And it brings three problems of institutional reconstruction together. Venezuela needs institutions that remain democratic regardless of who occupies them. It needs a State capable of implementing rules while remaining bound by them. And it needs political power distributed widely enough that no single electoral victory becomes an ownership of the Republic.

For 25 years, Venezuela’s political system increasingly revolved around a simple question: who controls Miraflores?

A durable democracy will require making the answer matter considerably less. The next president of Venezuela should inherit enough power to govern the country, but considerably less power to define it.

The computer hacker who released documents which led to the Premier League investigation into Manchester City says Fifa president Gianni Infantino “should have no place in the future of the game”.

City have been found guilty of breaching Premier League financial rules over a nine-year period, though they continue to deny any wrongdoing and have until 2 October to submit an appeal.

The Premier League investigation was launched following information released into the public domain by the Football Leaks website in 2018, via German publication Der Spiegel, and following a separate investigation by European football’s governing body Uefa.

In a message on X, external, Rui Pinto, creator of Football Leaks, repeated allegations from 2018 that Infantino intervened to help City and Paris St-Germain avoid financial fair play sanctions from European football’s governing body Uefa.

According to a report by Der Spiegel, external, the clubs overvalued sponsorship deals to help meet FFP rules and, when facing sanctions over the matter, the allegations in the documents state Infantino helped arrange more lenient punishments for them in 2014.

A PSG statement at the time said it “has always acted in full compliance with the laws and regulations enacted by sports institutions” and it “denies the allegations”.

“Since the introduction of Financial Fair Play, Paris St-Germain have been one of the most audited and scrutinised clubs in history,” the club added.

“Back in 2014, there was a man who was already aware of the irregularities involving Manchester City,” 37-year-old Portuguese Pinto wrote on Wednesday.

“The infamous Gianni Infantino, then Uefa general secretary, abused his authority, shared confidential documents and, in short, outmanoeuvred the investigatory chamber, doing everything in his power to ensure that both Manchester City and PSG would merely receive a fine, avoiding a deeper investigation that could have led to a Champions League ban.

“All of these details were also revealed through Football Leaks.

“Given his actions as Uefa general secretary and, more recently, as Fifa president, I can only say, in my humble opinion, that Gianni Infantino has become a cancer on football and should have no place in the future of the game.”

When the allegations first surfaced, Uefa stressed that it was within the remit of the general secretary to assist in such matters, adding: “This may include discussions, meetings, assistance to help find solutions, and other interactions to assist the [investigating body] in its work.”

Infantino similarly pointed to how his “job entails having discussions, having conversations, exchanging documents, drafts, ideas, whatever, on many, many, many, many, topics.

“So if then this is being portrayed as something bad, I think there’s not much I can do more than my job in an honest way, in a professional way and trying to defend the interests of football.”

BBC Sport has contacted Fifa following Pinto’s latest statement.

Infantino has come under increasing pressure following his now-shelved plans to sell stakes in the World Cup.

European football’s governing body Uefa accused Infantino of “criminal mismanagement” over the Fifa Forward Enterprise (FFE) scheme, while the Swiss Football Association (SFV) is the latest association to withdraw its support for the Fifa president.

“The decision follows a comprehensive reassessment of developments over the past few months,” an SFV statement read.

“From the SFV’s perspective, various incidents raise fundamental questions regarding leadership, governance, transparency and decision-making processes within Fifa.”

Both Fifa and Uefa are based in Switzerland.

Infantino will stand for election for a fourth time in March 2027, with his opponents having until 18 November to find an alternative candidate.

The 39th annual Hispanic Heritage Awards — which will honor the contributions and accomplishments of Latinos in the U.S. and Latin America — will air nationwide Friday on PBS.

In a historic decision by the Hispanic Heritage Foundation, which presents the annual awards, the event departed from its home base of Washington. Instead, Latino luminaries gathered at the Orchestra Hall in Minneapolis, where the celebratory occasion was taped for broadcast Sept. 10.

The move to the Midwest was a timely decision for members of the Hispanic Heritage Foundation, a nonprofit organization established by the White House in 1988. They took into consideration Minnesota’s response to a large-scale immigration enforcement campaign that began in December, known as “Operation Metro Surge.”

“We went to Minneapolis because we wanted to recognize what’s great about our community, [our] courage, resilience, strength, unity and looking out for each other,” said Antonio Tijerino, president and CEO of the Hispanic Heritage Foundation, in a phone call with De Los.

The Department of Homeland Security called the undertaking the “largest DHS operation ever” earlier this year on X, with an estimated 2,000 agents deployed to the Minneapolis–St. Paul metropolitan area. Thousands of Minnesota residents rallied against the tactical and militant methods used by Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents.

Civil unrest hit a boiling point following the killings of Renée Good and Alex Pretti on Jan. 7 and 24, respectively, by federal agents.

“ We actually went with a delegation of national Latino leaders to offer our support of the community during this crisis and we were overwhelmed by the heroism,” said Tijerino, who recalled a group visit to Minneapolis in February. There, he and his colleagues learned more about the rapid response efforts underway in the city.

“It was an American story that we wanted to tell,” he added.

At the 39th ceremony, Los Tigres del Norte presented a bit of that story to the people of Minnesota — who were collectively honored with the Humanitarian Award.

“Peaceful, hard-working communities of immigrants and refugees found themselves in fearful chaos as more than 4,000 parents, grandparents, neighbors, friends and families were taken by force, U.S. citizens among them,” Los Tigres del Norte announced in English while presenting the award. The players closed the show with a rendition of their 1984 song “Jaula de Oro,” which speaks to the plight of the undocumented community.

“I think Minnesota [is] a reflection of all of our Latino communities across the nation,” said Henry Jiménez, president and CEO of Propel Nonprofits, who was one of the individuals on stage representing the people of Minnesota.

“It uplifted the people. I think people felt validated for all of their hard work and effort that they’ve had to endure, not just the last couple months, but really a lifetime of work,” said Jiménez, whose organization helps consult and raise funds for budding nonprofits.

The relocation of the Hispanic Heritage Awards also comes as D.C. deals with the temporary closure of the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts — which hosted the Hispanic Heritage Awards in years prior.

The Kennedy Center closed its doors indefinitely on Sept. 15 after an inspection found acute public safety concerns, among them roofing issues. In a letter to Congress, various former employees allege that leadership was aware of the issues but halted plans for repair in April.

The closing also comes after a federal judge blocked the board’s decision to include President Trump’s name on the building in September. Trump’s takeover of the Kennedy Center began in February 2025, when he dismissed half its board members and installed himself as chairman.

“We were [at the Kennedy Center] for a very long time. It brought a lot of prestige and to fill a historic venue like that with Latinos was wonderful,” said Tijerino. “After many years of being at the Kennedy Center, we decided we wanted to go to another venue.”

In April 2025, the Hispanic Heritage Foundation announced that it would host its 38th annual awards at the Warner Theater instead; previous versions of the ceremony have also taken place at the historic Warner Theater venue, including in 2015 for the 28th Annual Awards and 2017 for the 30th celebration.

Hosted by comedian Anjelah Johnson-Reyes, the other honorees of the 39th Hispanic Heritage Awards included Venezuelan artist Oscar D’León, the salsa singer behind notable hits such as “Llorarás” and “Me Voy Pa’ Cali,” who received the Legend Award for his lifelong contributions to the genre.

Chilean singer-songwriter Mon Laferte, the vocal powerhouse behind power ballads like “Tu Falta de Querer” and “Amárrame (feat. Juanes),” also received the Social Justice Award. The Latin Grammy-winning artist has long championed feminist causes and challenged sexual harassment in the entertainment industry — a topic central to her 2024 Netflix documentary, “Mon Laferte, Te Amo.”

Puerto Rican rapper Eladio Carrión, whose trap flow famously featured in songs like “Coco Chanel” with Bad Bunny and “Sigue Bailandome,” was also honored with the Inspira Award.

Mexican singer-actor Ximena Sariñana, whose early composition appeared on the soundtrack of the 2002 teen film “Amar Te Duele,” received the Music Award as well.

Following the success of their Minneapolis awards show, the Hispanic Heritage Foundation is now toying with the idea that the ceremony can take place anywhere where there is a strong Latino presence.

“Who knows if L.A. is the [next] spot!” said Tijerino, who hails from Long Beach,

Though Jiménez assures that he is not swayed by any particular city at the moment, he offers one idea: “I hope that the community that’s chosen [to host] doesn’t have to go through a difficult time to be chosen.”

With gas prices topping $6 a gallon and an unpopular war continuing in Iran, President Trump’s approval has slipped with California Republicans — a falloff that could diminish the party’s chances in the state’s few competitive congressional races.

A new poll by the UC Berkeley Institute of Governmental Studies, co-sponsored by The Times, found that 76% of Republican voters in the state approve of the president’s performance, down from 83% last year.

The president’s approval has softened even among those who still support his performance. Only 44% of Republicans in California said they strongly support Trump’s performance, down from 57% who said the same in August 2025.

That could translate into lower Republican turnout in the state’s few competitive races, said the poll’s director, Mark DiCamillo.

“Republicans are losing some of their enthusiasm in terms of being motivated to vote,” he said.

In addition, the more Trump tries to make the midterm elections about himself — such as the pro-Trump ads recently sponsored and paid for by the government — the more Democrats might be inclined to show up, said G. Cristina Mora, the UC Berkeley institute’s co-director.

“That might actually have a galvanizing effect on voters,” she said.

Trump’s sinking support in California mirrors a national decline in the president’s approval, even among Republicans.

The congressional map in the state was already challenging for Republicans after voters last year approved a referendum championed by Gov. Gavin Newsom to redraw districts to be more favorable for Democrats — a response to similar efforts by Republicans in Texas and other states.

In the new map, only four of the state’s 52 districts are currently considered safe Republican districts, while three additional districts are seen as competitive, according to the Cook Political Report, a nonpartisan political handicapper.

The remaining 45 districts are seen as either likely or solidly Democratic in a state where Democrats hold a roughly 20% advantage in party registration.

Only one race is considered by Cook to be a true toss-up — California’s 22nd Congressional District in the Central Valley, which is held by Republican Rep. David Valadao.

“We’re looking at the best case scenario for Democrats at this point,” said Erin Covey, Cook’s U.S. House editor.

Valadao, one of only 10 Republicans to vote for Trump’s impeachment in the wake of the Jan. 6, 2021, insurrection, faces progressive Democrat Randy Villegas, a political science professor who has the backing of Bernie Sanders. The Vermont senator is joining Villegas this weekend for a rally in Bakersfield.

Valadao first won a seat in Congress in 2012, but was ousted from office during the Democrats’ “blue wave” election in 2018, in which the party gained 40 seats in the House in the first election after Trump took office in 2016. Valadao was able to win back his seat in 2020 and has held it since.

There has been scant public polling in the race, but a poll conducted in June by a political committee backing Villegas showed the Democrat holding a 4-point lead over Valadao.

Two other congressional districts in the state are listed by Cook as leaning Democratic:

• California’s 48th Congressional District in Riverside and San Diego counties, now held by Republican Rep. Darrell Issa, who opted to retire rather than seek reelection in the redrawn district.
• California’s 13th Congressional District in the San Joaquin Valley, where Democratic Rep. Adam Gray is trying to fend off a challenge from Republican Kevin Lincoln, the former mayor of Stockton.

Trump’s approval also dipped among Black and Latino voters in the poll. Both groups were part of Trump’s winning coalition in the 2024 presidential election.

The poll also found broad disapproval of two signature Trump administration policies.

It found that 70% of California voters disapprove of Trump’s decision to go to war in Iran, including 1 in 5 Republicans.

Also, 70% of California voters believe that the president’s immigration policies are hurting California’s economy and local businesses, including 1 in 5 Republicans.

The poll was conducted online in English and Spanish between Sept. 15 and Sept. 20 and included the opinions of 6,989 registered California voters. The margin of error is plus or minus 1.5 percentage points.

Arrests were made over interference with refereeing procedures, among other accusations, Turkish justice minister says.

The head of Turkiye’s football refereeing body and six other people have been arrested over accusations of interference in refereeing procedures, Justice Minister Akin Gurlek said.

“Claims regarding interference in the formation of referee classifications, assignments, scoring and appointment processes, as well as rule examinations, have been investigated,” Gurlek wrote in a social media post on Tuesday.

Ferhat Gundogdu, the president of the refereeing body, and his deputy were among those arrested.

Gurlek said searches had been carried out at the suspects’ “residences, workplaces and offices”.

“We will steadfastly continue the fight for clean football so that claims undermining trust in Turkish football are clarified, those responsible are held accountable before the law, and football is remembered for the effort, struggle, and sportsmanship on the field,” Gurlek added.

A year ago, the Turkish Football Federation (TFF) suspended 149 referees on charges of involvement in an illegal betting scandal.

The TFF investigation found that 371 out of the country’s 571 referees officiating in the professional leagues had betting accounts and 152 of them actively placed bets.

Some 29 people were arrested in the sprawling scandal, including 14 footballers, one of whom was Fenerbahce’s international midfielder Mert Hakan Yandas.

Authorities suspended more than 1,000 players, including 25 from the first division.

However, Gurlek did not draw any link between last year’s betting scandal and the current investigation.

WASHINGTON — Under a light rain on Sunday at the Australian ambassador’s residence in Washington, CNN hosted its third annual tennis tournament, the Kangaroo Cup, pitting Beltway journalists against administration officials. The event aims to inject some levity into an historically adversarial relationship, reminding both sides of the spirit of the game. Themed drinks and tennis whites set the tone.

White House officials played with grace. But the mood this year was altogether different down Pennsylvania Avenue. Despite a federal judge demanding the administration reverse course on President Trump’s punitive actions toward his disfavored news outlets — CNN, MS NOW and Politico — he has refused to resume full access to the storied cable news channel, dismissing its reporters as “fake news.”

It is only the latest attack on press freedom by a president whose drive to punish critics and exert influence over the media appears to be growing.

During last week’s lavish state visit for Xi Jinping, Trump praised China for having “the friendliest press corps” and dismissed their repression of speech, despite the World Press Freedom Index ranking China among the world’s worst offenders — at the bottom of the list, alongside North Korea and Eritrea — for restrictions on journalists.

Five times in the last two months, the president has sneered at and insulted female reporters, mocking their appearance or dismissing their credentials.

He has declined to name a successor for his former press secretary, Karoline Leavitt, whose final news conference, on Aug. 27, was one of only a handful of briefings held throughout the summer. His administration launched its own streaming service last week, called Trump TV, in an attempt to circumvent traditional cable news. And on Monday, he posted renderings of the White House briefing room reconverted to its former use as a presidential pool and spa.

Trump’s escalating attacks on the press come just weeks before the midterm elections, as former officials and election experts warn the administration could seek to undermine confidence in the results. They also come at a precarious moment for public trust in the media, with more Americans saying limits on the press can be justified to combat misinformation.

A Pew Research Center survey released earlier this month found that 73% of Americans regard a free press as “very” or “extremely” important to society. Yet the country remains deeply divided over whether journalists should be barred from reporting “inaccurate” information, with a majority, 53%, supporting limits in some circumstances — even if it means the government itself would have the final say in determining what is true.

Trump’s attempt to bar three outlets from the White House grounds came just three days after the Pew poll was released.

“Plenty of presidents have complained about the press before. And presidents have restricted certain forms of press access or press action during wartime,” said Peter Kastor, chair of the History Department at Washington University in St. Louis. “In the moment — and especially afterward — Americans condemned this as antithetical to the constitutional protections for press freedom and the national commitment to an open democracy.

“What I find most striking about Trump’s press action is that he has made it unabashedly personal,” Kastor added. “He doesn’t like the way media outlets are covering him, so he is going to punish them.”

President Nixon famously limited White House access for the Washington Post over its coverage of the Watergate scandal. But he never attempted to bar press credentials completely — and ultimately authorized the conversion of the pool facility into the briefing room that exists today.

Other presidents have jostled with the press. President Obama was accused of limiting access to independent photojournalists, and famously favored nontraditional media outlets at the advent of the social media age. President George W. Bush limited his personal interactions with the press and curtailed access to government records.

Thomas Jefferson, the nation’s third president, once stated he “deplored” the “putrid state into which our newspapers have passed, and the malignity, the vulgarity, and mendacious spirit of those who write for them.”

Yet, “it is however an evil for which there is no remedy,” he also said. “Our liberty depends on the freedom of the press, and that cannot be limited without being lost.”

Trump’s particular style — as a showman and his own spokesman — makes his relationship with the media innately personal, said Andrew Rudalevige, a professor of government at Bowdoin College and author of “The New Imperial Presidency.”

“Presidents almost always feel that bad press is a feature of their staff’s poor communication of their policies — not that the policies themselves are unpopular or ill-advised,” Rudalevige said.

“Since President Trump does so much of his communication, though, this deflection is less available,” he added, and “thus the problem is with the press itself, not the policy or its purveyor.”

CNN’s legal fight continues, even after securing temporary reprieve from a judicial restraining order. So does the Associated Press’ lawsuit over the administration’s effort last year to punish the wire service for refusing to adopt Trump’s preferred name, “Gulf of America,” for the internationally recognized Gulf of Mexico.

While he keeps losing in court on 1st Amendment grounds, the president keeps testing new limits, looking for what will stick.

On the tennis court Sunday, at least, his administration won.

Gianni Infantino has indicated a greater amount of money could be distributed to Fifa members from its estimated £4.4bn cash reserves.

In a letter seen by BBC Sport, and sent to the governing body’s six continental confederations on Monday, Fifa president Infantino said he would support “the greatest level of additional funding that can responsibly be delivered”.

Infantino has come under increasing pressure over his aborted Fifa Forward Enterprise (FFE) plan, which proposed selling stakes in the World Cup and other competitions to private investors, sparking a major backlash.

His letter comes after Uefa and Concacaf – the confederations for Europe and North America, Central America and the Caribbean – demanded Fifa pays $10m (£7.5m) to all 211 members from its reserves.

The proposal will be considered by the Fifa Council when they meet on 15 October.

“I will not prejudge the amount,” Infantino said in the letter.

“A single figure can begin the discussion, but it cannot complete a global policy.”

Infantino issued his latest defence of the failed proposal to sell a slice of the World Cup commercial rights that brought calls for his resignation, again claiming it had been intended to generate additional money for the game.

“The recent commercial proposal, now withdrawn, was intended to enable Fifa to invest more in football,” wrote the Swiss-Italian.

Earlier this month, Football Association chair Debbie Hewitt, a Fifa vice-president, told Infantino to release all documents relating to his controversial plan, and called for an independent review of FFE.

Infantino will stand for election for a fourth time in March 2027, with his opponents having until 18 November to find an alternative candidate.

WASHINGTON — President Trump asked Chinese President Xi Jinping if he wanted to buy weapons from the United States, the U.S. ambassador to China said.

David Perdue said Trump raised the prospect of the arms sales from the U.S. to its ascendant geopolitical rival, an unlikely offer that if consummated would upend generations of U.S. policy toward China and Taiwan and expose U.S. technology to a potential foe. Perdue, speaking to Shannon Bream on Fox News Channel’s “Fox News Sunday” days after Trump hosted Xi for a state visit in Washington, didn’t specify when the offer was made.

Perdue said Sunday that Trump, a Republican, was downplaying longstanding U.S. arms sales to Taiwan — which have drawn protest from Beijing for years — by couching it as just one of many sales Washington makes around the world — and even asking Xi if he’d be in the market for U.S. weaponry.

Bream had cited concerns from Republican and Democratic lawmakers over delayed aid packages and weapons orders to Taiwan, the self-ruled democracy that seeks to defend itself from China’s threat to invade the island. Bream asked if the U.S. is denying arms to Taiwan to appease the Chinese president, who visited Trump last week.

Perdue pushed back on the suggestion, stating that Trump “is as strong on Taiwan as I’ve ever seen anybody” and has sold it plenty of weapons. Perdue also said Trump and Xi continue to talk about future U.S. weapons sales to Taiwan.

“But President Trump continues to say, ‘Hey, we sell arms to other people around the world,’” Perdue said. “He actually asked President Xi, would he like to buy some, at one point.”

The U.S. is bound by its own laws to provide Taiwan with the means to defend itself. While not recognizing Taiwan as a country, the U.S. is the island’s strongest informal backer and arms provider. But multiple U.S. leaders have left ambiguous whether they would commit military force to defend the U.S. ally should China invade.

China has pressed Washington to halt the arms sales, most prominently during a previous summit in May between Trump and Xi in Beijing. After that meeting, the United States paused the sale of a record-breaking $14 billion package — and Trump described arms sales to Taiwan as a “very good negotiating chip” with China.

In their private talks at the White House last week, Xi pressed Trump to oppose Taiwan independence, according to Chinese state media.

In Beijing, China’s foreign ministry spokesperson Guo Jiakun did not confirm Perdue’s remarks when asked about the matter on Monday. But he told reporters that China has always strengthened its national defense capabilities based on its needs and is committed to maintaining world peace and stability.

Finley writes for the Associated Press.

“America will never be a communist country,” states the 30-second television ad.

Never mind that socialism is a more probable scenario given the rise of New York Mayor Zohran Mamdani and Nithya Raman’s healthy lead in the Los Angeles mayoral race. This commercial is not about semantics, political systems or the health of the nation.

It’s about touting the alleged achievements of President Donald Trump, from “reigniting American manufacturing” to “defend[ing] law and order” and giving Americans the “largest tax cuts in history.”

One can argue the legitimacy of such claims if they still have the energy to do so after 10 years of relentless MAGA puffery, but the real issue here is that this particular piece of bluster is produced and funded by the U.S. government.

Laws prohibit taxpayer funds from being used for “publicity or propaganda,” even if the White House is referring to its new ad campaign as a PSA.

“This is the sort of government propaganda one might expect in North Korea, not the United States of America, and it is an egregious and utterly illegal misuse of Americans’ hard-earned tax dollars,” wrote Democratic House and Senate Appropriations Committee members in a letter sent Friday to Trump’s Chief of Staff Susie Wiles.

They demanded that the ad be immediately taken off the air and that “Federal employees who knowingly violated Federal law in working on and paying for this advertisement” be disciplined. “The law is not complicated,” they wrote. “You cannot use taxpayer dollars for political advertisements.”

The spot, which first aired Wednesday on conservative media outlets Fox News and Newsmax, cost $14,000, according to the firm AdImpact, which tracks media spending. By Friday, that number had jumped to $430,000 as the ad hit multiple markets across the country.

And it isn’t the only instance of American tax dollars at work — for Trump. A second ad paid for by you aired Thursday night on CBS.

The minute-long commercial featured footage of the president speaking against the backdrop of Mount Rushmore in an audacious display that might have turned George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Abraham Lincoln, and Theodore Roosevelt to stone if they weren’t already immortalized in granite.

It included clips from the U.S. military’s Jan. 3 capture of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro and his wife, snippets from Trump’s Independence Day weekend speech, a voiceover from UFC CEO Dana White praising the president as “the toughest, most resilient person” he’s ever met, and a montage of images featuring Trump, Trump and more Trump. It ends with the star of the show proclaiming, “This is only the beginning of the golden age of America,” then comes the written disclosure: “Paid for by the U.S. Government.”

Anyone who has lived in or traveled to countries with state-run media will recognize the similarities between Trump’s ads and those of, say, former Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein or current strongmen like North Korea’s Kim Jong Un: the intense leader-like gaze, the baseless claims, substandard production quality and music that suggests the subject of the ad should be worshipped. (Trump’s choice for the first ad was “Love Me” by R&B singer JMSN, who opposed the use with an emphatic “I would never…”)

But on U.S. television, the ad feels more desperate than dictatorial. The whiff of desperation coming from the ad blitz may have something to do with the president’s dismal polling numbers headed into November’s midterms.

The administration has argued its ads are “educational and unapologetically patriotic” public service announcements. The White House said in a statement, “These public service announcements are about reminding Americans to love their country and understand what makes it worth defending, at home, at our borders, and abroad.”

A White House official reportedly said that the PSAs “are clearly not political” and noted that “the President is not on the ballot and the ads don’t have a call to action.”

Trump has repeatedly told his base to vote like he was on the ballot.

With propaganda like this coming out of the White House, communism is hardly the biggest threat facing the country.

Man, we Latino men have it rough.

Americans have demonized us as criminals, buffoons, lechers, invaders, criminals and job stealers since the fall of the Alamo. Latino culture typecasts hombres as eternal machos always a few drinks away from brawling or bawling. Educators view us as underachievers. The political class long stereotyped Latino men as a sleeping giant who could change the country, if only we showed up to vote with the same enthusiasm as attending a Raiders game or lining up for a sneaker drop.

And then came Donald Trump.

So many of us fell for his siren call that 48% of Latino voters of all genders chose Trump in 2024, the highest percentage ever captured by a Republican presidential candidate. Progressives immediately blamed Latino men for Trump’s victory while holding up Latinas as the brave heroines who stood up against tyranny.

The blame game continues. A study released this month by UCLA’s Latino Policy & Politics Institute basically paints Latino men as little better than MAGA minions, trumpeting a gender gap on standing up to this administration’s deportation deluge, defending democracy and “fighting the Trump agenda.” To the media and to outraged internet commentators, it didn’t matter that two-thirds of Latino men had responded that each of those three issues was “very important” or “somewhat important.”

We just aren’t anti-Trump enough, which marks us as alien to the president’s critics. The UCLA paper’s cover page even features a red man and a blue woman conversing in what look like Aztec speaking glyphs — as if the sexes can’t understand each other and probably never will.

To explain the Latina-Latino political chasm, UCLA offers hypotheses straight out of “Men Are From Mars, Women Are From Venus.” The women supposedly work more in caretaker jobs like teaching and healthcare, softening their views toward the least of us. The men are in blue-collar sectors with a Darwinian outlook. But it doesn’t take a fancy academic paper to come to that conclusion — all you need to do is, you know, talk to Latino men.

When Trump descended that damned escalator in 2015 to announce his first presidential run by sliming Mexican immigrants as rapists and drug dealers, I knew that this racist excuse for a leader — the most anti-Latino politician in our nation’s history — would nevertheless appeal to many Latino men.

The reasons were evident: Trump’s fame. His strongman persona. His riches. His default setting of, as we Mexicans say, me vale madre — I don’t give a damn what people think. Yet three successive Democratic presidential campaigns willfully ignored these flashing sirens, instead insisting that Green New Deals and diversity, equity and inclusion programs would appeal to working-class Latino men.

Pundits thought we were still motivated by the radical politics of the Chicano movement, as previous generations were. What they didn’t realize was that assimilation had transformed Latino men into the modern equivalent of President Nixon’s silent majority.

A “Latino Americans for Trump” office in Reading, Pa., during the 2024 elections.

(Joe Lamberti / Associated Press)

I’ve always thought Latino male Trumpers were deluded — but I’ve always understood where they’re coming from. They’re believers in rancho libertarianism, my neologism for the individualistic politics exemplified by the Mexican men who raised me and who I grew up with.

Rancho libertarians, like their Scotch-Irish cousins from another mother, are forever skeptical of government, respect insurgents who want to take on the establishment, love their people and subscribe to a bootstraps approach to life. Not as praiseworthy is a tendency to dislike being told what to do, and in proving a point, to not only cut off their nose to spite their face but to lop off their heads as well.

No wonder so many Latino men went for Trump. To quote another Mexican saying, por eso estamos como estamos. That’s why we’re the way we are.

And look at what it’s earned us.

MAGA has been a miasma on this land, but especially for the blue-collar Latinos whom Trump increasingly courted with each election cycle. Immigration agents have arrested U.S.-born Trump supporters and thrown their friends and family members into squalid detention centers to await certain deportation. Diesel and gas prices are outrageously high, after Trump started a war with Iran that seems to have no end.

Nothing has degraded more for Latino men, however, than the simple pleasures of life.

When my dad and my brother had a pool party for some cousins and their children last month at our Anaheim home — no more than 15 people — the cost of carne asada, chicken, chorizo and tortillas from a local carnicería was more than $200. That side of the family never supported Trump while not exactly being wokosos, either. As Spotify blasted Antonio Aguilar and Banda El Recodo, they complained about the economy and the Republicans who have rubber-stamped the Trump agenda, when we should have been talking about the Dodgers and vacations back to our ancestral Mexico state of Zacatecas.

If my Arellano cousins are ready to stick it to Trump on election day, so should the Latino men who supported him two years ago.

In 2024, Latinos were the pivotal vote that delivered swing states to Trump. In this year’s midterms, Latino men are the swing vote within that constituency, from congressional races once considered safely red in Texas and Florida to local elections across the country. It’s gotten so dire for Republicans that Florida Rep. Maria Elvira Salazar put out a television ad warning Trump that “the same Hispanics who brought you to the White House … feel betrayed today.”

Honor remains big among rancho libertarians, and no politician has insulted the Latino way of life more than Trump. Helping to flip the House and Senate to the Democrats wouldn’t end his influence, but it sure would help. Plus, it would be a perfect rebuke to a pendejo who fooled too many good Latino men.

American society, whether the left or the right wing, will never fully accept us. We’ll always be thought of as too conservative, too dumb, too reactionary, too violent by too many.

Well, if we’re going to be loathed, we might as well stand on the right side of history. It’s time for Latino men to stand up and hit Trump with another Mexican saying:

Ya, güey. Enough already, man.

WASHINGTON — Republicans are growing increasingly grim about their chances in November, with aligned groups pumping money into reliably GOP states and candidates scrambling to distance themselves from unpopular White House policies.

From Texas to Ohio and Alaska to Iowa, campaigns are grappling with a fed-up electorate that is sour on the president and angry over soaring fuel prices driven by an unpopular war. While Republicans are flush with unprecedented cash that could move the needle in some races, overall the mood is glum heading into the election’s final stretch as campaigns try to counter palpable Democratic enthusiasm to maintain their narrow lead in the House and Senate this November.

“Everybody is tired. You see the poll numbers. Everybody is cranky about gas prices,” said Jeanette Hoffman, a Republican strategist from New Jersey. “The party in power is playing defense. This is a referendum on the incumbents.”

Trump is trying to protect Republicans with cash

After mounting pressure from endangered candidates in battleground states, groups affiliated with President Trump finally began unleashing their stockpile of campaign cash earlier this month, joining with Republican committees that have amassed a record fortune that dramatically eclipses their Democratic counterparts.

“Republicans have air superiority. House Democrats are scrambling to catch up with the very limited resources they have,” said Mike Marinella, a spokesperson for the National Republican Congressional Committee.

But the spending underscores the extent to which Republicans are playing defense.

Three Trump-aligned groups — MAGA Inc., No Going Back PAC and Safety and Affordability PAC — have spent more than $163 million on advertising and air time since Sept. 1. Nearly 40% of that money — more than $63 million — has been spent in states and districts where Trump won by 10 percentage points or more in the 2024 election, according to an Associated Press analysis of data from AdImpact, which tracks media spending and ad buys.

That includes 12 House districts and three states with major Senate races.

In Texas, Republicans have spent nearly $107 million on ads and reservations since the beginning of the month trying to bolster scandal-plagued attorney general Ken Paxton in his Texas Senate race against Democratic state Rep. James Talarico. The spending, which is for ads through Election Day, is nearly four times as much as Democrats in a state Trump won by nearly 14 points.

Further north in Ohio, Republican spending to defend Sen. Jon Husted has exceeded $152 million, compared with $90 million on behalf of Democratic nominee Sherrod Brown, according to AdImpact.

Terry Casey, an Ohio Republican strategist, said both Republicans and Democrats are “kind of sitting on pins and needles because of the national and economic circumstances.” The outcome, he said, would depend on whether Democrats can turn out voters.

Democrats are competing in Republican stronholds

States that Trump won by wide margins — like Texas, Iowa, Ohio and Alaska — have become some of the most competitive battlegrounds in the midterms.

The White House is even investing time in states that haven’t been considered competitive for years. Vice President JD Vance recently traveled to Kansas to campaign for Sen. Roger Marshall, who is facing a challenge from Democratic nominee Adam Hamilton.

The founder of the nation’s largest United Methodist church, Hamilton received a rousing welcome from scores of people who crammed into a Topeka coffee shop to see him Tuesday.

“In all my 50, 60 years in politics, I’ve never seen a candidate that quite has the momentum going,” said Jim Ploger, an 82-year-old longtime Democratic activist from Topeka who believes Hamilton gives the party “the best chance we’ve ever had” to win a Senate seat.

Vance has also been to Iowa, Ohio, Maine and North Carolina to bolster Republican candidates, while Trump is also hitting the road. The week after the party’s unusual midterm convention in Dallas, he traveled to North Carolina to hold a rally with Michael Whatley, his former national party chairman. Republicans are increasingly concerned that he could fall short in his Senate race against Democratic former Gov. Roy Cooper.

There are more concerns about Georgia, where Rep. Mike Collins is trying to unseat Democratic Sen. Jon Ossoff. Although Ossoff began the cycle as Republicans’ top target, Collins has endured weeks of negative headlines about a House ethics investigation and his son-in-law’s white nationalist views.

“I don’t think anyone’s expecting Collins to win,” said Tim Waters, chairman of the Peach County Republican Party. “Do I like that? No, I don’t like that. But it’s just the facts.”

In Texas, officials are hoping a huge influx of last-minute cash will help save Paxton. Sen. John Cornyn, who lost his primary to Paxton after Trump turned on him earlier this year, isn’t so confident.

“I think it’s going to be very rough, lots of headwinds,” he said. “Even in places like Texas, which are pretty red, we’ve got flawed candidates who I think are going to have a hard time.”

Republican National Committee spokesperson Natalie Baldassarre said the party is focused on turnout and is well aware of the historic trend in which the party in control typically loses seats in the midterm.

“We have money to spend and we’re not taking anything for granted this cycle,” she said. “This is very high stakes, and it’s unfortunate that other people feel glum and down. But we’re doing everything we can to protect and expand our majorities so we’re full steam ahead.”

Party officials are more bullish on races in Maine and New Hampshire, where Democrat Kamala Harris won in 2024, and remain optimistic about Michigan, where Trump won by less than two points and where former Rep. Mike Rogers faces progressive Democrat Abdul El-Sayed.

Some Republicans call for an end to the war

Some Republicans are taking steps to distance themselves from Trump even as he urges his supporters to vote like he is on the ballot.

Rep. Tom Tiffany and Rep. John James, the party’s nominees for governor in Wisconsin and Michigan, both joined calls for an end to the war in Iran.

“War is terrible, and no one likes war,” James told reporters.

Mike Rogers, the Republican Senate nominee in Michigan, released an ad in which he also called for ending the war. Standing in a grocery store, he bemoaned high prices and said the government should suspend gas taxes and stop diesel exports.

“The war with Iran needs to end and end quickly,” Rogers said. ”Michigan families can’t afford to wait.”

In Iowa, where Republicans are trying to hold onto the Senate seat being vacated by retiring Sen. Joni Ernst, Rep. Ashley Hinson, who is locked in a tight race against Democrat Josh Turek, voiced the same frustrations.

“Iowans are being squeezed and shouldn’t have to foot the bill at the pump or the checkout line for the war in Iran” she wrote on social media. “These actions to lower costs are needed ASAP, and the war needs to be brought to a successful and immediate end.”

Hinson, however, did not join two fellow Iowa Republicans in battleground districts — U.S. Reps. Zach Nunn and Mariannette Miller-Meeks — in voting with Democrats on a resolution intended to halt Trump’s ability to continue military action without lawmakers’ approval.

Perhaps the most dramatic break with Trump came from Rep. Maria Elvira Salazar, a Republican defending her seat in a competitive, majority Hispanic South Florida district. Last week, she released an ad filmed in front of the White House as she criticized the president for going “too far” on immigration policy.

Others have continued to scrub references to Trump from their websites. The latest was Republican Byron Donalds, who is running for governor in Florida, who recently revamped his site so that it no longer includes a number of prominent references to Trump and his endorsement, the Miami Herald first reported.

‘It’s a very competitive environment out there’

White House spokesperson Davis Ingle said Trump “is the unequivocal leader, best messenger, and unmatched motivator for the Republican Party” and that “the choice has never been more clear: doubling down on President Trump’s winning, commonsense agenda or the Democrats’ extreme liberal policies and obstruction.”

Some Republicans are acknowledging that voters aren’t satisfied.

“We shouldn’t say, ‘Hey everything’s perfect,’ because it’s not,” said Sen. Bernie Moreno of Ohio. “But look what we’ve done in 18 months, and we need two more years to finish the job.”

Sen. John Kennedy of Louisiana, who has traveled across the country campaigning for his colleagues, said Democrats appeared to have enthusiasm on their side in the midterms, and he said his party needed to level with the country.

“You can’t look the American people in the eye and say, ‘Don’t believe your lying checkbooks,’” he said. “The cost of living increase is real.”

He also said that voters are “confused about the war” and “they don’t understand how we’re going to get out.”

Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., was measured in his assessment on Tuesday.

“Well, I’m hopeful, obviously, but also realistic,” he said. “It’s a very competitive environment out there.”

Colvin and Kessler write for the Associated Press. Colvin reported from New York. AP writers Mike Catalini in Morrisville, Pa., Bill Barrow in Atlanta, Thomas Beaumont in Des Moines, Iowa, John Hanna in Topeka, Kan., and Lisa Mascaro, Mary Clare Jalonick, Steven Sloan and Joey Cappelletti in Washington contributed to this report.

Infantino proposed an independent review of FIFA’s decision-making process amid criticism to his leadership.

A letter from FIFA President Gianni Infantino this week to ⁠all 211 members, offering to discuss reforms within world football’s governing body – amid an ongoing crisis over his failed plan to sell a stake in the World Cup – is a ⁠mere ploy to get himself re-elected, Germany’s Football Association (DFB) President Bernd Neuendorf has said.

In Monday’s letter seen by the Reuters news agency, Infantino proposed an independent review of FIFA’s decision-making process, in a move that could help him regain support after the withdrawal of his controversial private investment plan.

Striking a ‌conciliatory tone, he also said he would propose consultations with confederations, member associations and other stakeholders about strengthening FIFA’s decision-making.

Infantino faced a fierce backlash over his proposal to sell a 20 percent stake in FIFA’s commercial rights, including the World Cup, to private investors.

The plan was abandoned in July after strong opposition and boycott threats, with UEFA, the Asian Football Confederation and CONCACAF calling for changes to FIFA’s leadership.

They said there had been no consultation with any continental confederation at ⁠any stage, with Infantino acting alone. UEFA has said a change in leadership was now necessary, with the European body having lost faith in the current president.

“I regard Gianni Infantino’s letter as a transparent ploy to secure ⁠his re-election next year,” said DFB President Neuendorf on Tuesday. “Fundamentally, FIFA now seems to have recognised that changes are essential.

“However, Gianni Infantino ⁠is definitely not the right person to lead a reform ⁠process. He has squandered all credibility.”

Neuendorf is also a member of the FIFA Council, the organisation’s main decision-making body.

Infantino said in the letter that member associations’ positions on proposals or governance matters would not affect their ‌treatment by FIFA, whose development and solidarity programmes would continue under existing rules.

The Swiss is up for re-election in March next year, with his opponents struggling to find a candidate ‌to ‌challenge the president. Sources familiar with the discussions told Reuters this month that he still had enough votes to win, prompting opponents to focus on curbing his powers.

Madrid boss Jose Mourinho accuses officials of bias after his side’s 2-1 derby defeat by Atletico Madrid.

La Liga President Javier Tebas has hit out at what he calls accusations of a refereeing “conspiracy” by Real Madrid after their derby loss to Atletico Madrid.

Real Madrid coach Jose Mourinho brought two printed screenshots of what he thought were red-card tackles committed by Atletico players to his post-match news conference after Sunday’s 2-1 defeat.

Tebas responded to a pro-Real article on social media with a lengthy riposte on Tuesday to allegations of a “conspiracy” against the 15-time European champions.

“Here they go again, the mouthpieces and the regime’s television, building the same old narrative – the permanent conspiracy,” said Tebas, who has often been at odds with Real Madrid and the club’s outspoken president, Florentino Perez.

“This article goes further. It claims that referees harm ‘the business that feeds them’.

“What exactly is it asking for? Refereeing based on revenue, viewership or the badge? What a way to understand equality in the competition.

“Real Madrid are crucial to La Liga. But claiming that ‘La Liga is worth nothing’ without them reveals the disdain for the other clubs, their fans and their history. The competition belongs to no one.”

Madrid have made a stuttering start to the season and already sit six points behind reigning champions and early leaders Barcelona in the La Liga table.

“Claiming that referees are directed against Real Madrid is living in another galaxy,” Tebas added.

“That narrative serves as an excuse to cover up other shortcomings that are plain to see in these first matches of the season.

“It’s more comfortable to point to a conspiracy than to explain what’s happening on the pitch.”

Mourinho returned for a second spell in charge at the Santiago Bernabeu in the close season, tasked with ending a two-year spell without a major trophy.

After the heated capital derby on Sunday, Mourinho was furious that Atletico defender Cristian Romero was not sent off for a stamp ⁠⁠on Jude Bellingham and also complained about a challenge by Lee Kang-in on Federico Valverde before the visitors were themselves reduced to 10 men five minutes after half-time.

Valverde finished the match but was later diagnosed with “severe trauma to his left ankle”, the ⁠⁠club said in a statement. The midfielder will undergo further tests, it added.

“We could skip the press conference because the story of the match is right here,” Mourinho said, holding up the images in what was the start of a near five-minute rant.

“Those were two clear red cards. The difficulties we’ve faced since the sending-off: 11 against 10. Well, we can imagine what 50 minutes of ‌‌11 against nine would have been like if justice had been done.”

Caracas, September 21, 2026 (venezuelanalysis.com) –  Venezuelan Acting President Delcy Rodríguez hosted Paraguayan counterpart Santiago Peña at the Miraflores Presidential Palace in Caracas on Saturday as the two South American nations relaunch bilateral diplomatic and consular relations.

The high-level working meeting reportedly focused on establishing a shared agenda centered on trade expansion, energy cooperation, consular assistance, and joint efforts to combat transnational organized crime.

The summit concluded with a joint statement announcing the renewed bilateral relations, signed by foreign ministers Félix Plasencia and Rubén Ramírez Lezcano for Venezuela and Paraguay, respectively.

Following the signing ceremony, Rodríguez and Peña expressed optimism regarding the reestablished cooperation.

“We are working together for a more integrated Paraguay,” Peña declared in a press conference, emphasizing that the dialogue was focused on “the well-being of citizens” from both countries.

For her part, Rodríguez claimed the accord did justice to principles of sovereignty, dialogue, and South American integration in Venezuela’s foreign policy.

“Venezuela continues to advance a sovereign diplomacy of peace, rooted in mutual respect, self-determination, and constructive dialogue among our nations,” she stated. “This meeting opens a new stage of cooperation aimed at addressing shared challenges and serving the concrete interests of both our peoples.”

The Caracas meeting reversed years of political friction and diplomatic tensions between the two nations. Bilateral ties were initially severed in January 2019 under former Paraguayan President Mario Abdo Benítez, who aligned Asunción with Washington’s regime-change strategy by recognizing opposition figure Juan Guaidó’s self-proclaimed “interim government.”

Relations experienced a brief thaw in late 2023 under Peña’s incoming administration before breaking down again in January 2025. The Venezuelan government formally severed diplomatic channels after Peña supported far-right opposition candidate Edmundo González’s victory claim in the July 2024 Venezuelan presidential elections. The Paraguayan president further backed Venezuelan anti-government forces by attending María Corina Machado’s Nobel Peace Prize ceremony in December 2025.

A central point on the reopened diplomatic agenda was the resolution of a long-standing debt owed by Paraguayan state oil company Petróleos Paraguayos (Petropar) to Venezuela’s state energy company, Petróleos de Venezuela S.A. (PDVSA).

The financial dispute stems from fuel shipments received by Petropar under the 2004 Caracas Energy Accord, an energy integration initiative launched under President Hugo Chávez to provide favorable financing conditions for oil imports across Latin America and the Caribbean. Paraguay currently maintains an outstanding principal debt estimated at approximately US $300 million.

Addressing the issue ahead of the summit, Paraguayan Foreign Minister Rubén Ramírez Lezcano acknowledged the core obligation but highlighted technical disagreements regarding accumulated interest calculations.

“The differential of that debt is linked to interest that applies outside the commercial agreement that exists with that country,” Ramírez explained during a press conference last week, noting that the specific arbitration over interest rates remains before the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) in Paris.

The resolution of the debt has been paralyzed for years primarily due to the severing of diplomatic ties, compounded by unilateral sanctions imposed by the United States against PDVSA.

With diplomatic channels now reopened, both governments signaled their intention to structure a viable settlement mechanism outside of imperial financial restrictions.

Since the January 3 US military strikes and kidnapping of President Nicolás Maduro, the acting Rodríguez government has aligned its foreign policy with Washington, mending or expanding ties with US partners in Latin America and beyond while scaling back support for long-term allies such as Cuba and Iran.

Following Saturday’s summit in Caracas, Acting President Rodríguez departed Venezuela for New York City, where she will attend the 81st Session of the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) this week.

According to Reuters, Rodríguez is slated to hold discussions on energy and mining agreements, as well as Venezuela’s ongoing debt restructuring process. 

On Monday, the Venezuelan acting president met with IMF Managing Director Kristalina Georgieva, though no details of the talks were disclosed. Caracas has sought to unblock around $4.5 billion in IMF-issued Special Drawing Rights (SDR) for recovery efforts following the June 24 double earthquake.

Likewise on Monday, Rodríguez held talks with World Bank President Ajay Banga.

Edited by Ricardo Vaz in Lisbon, Portugal.

Is President Trump holding the Kennedy Center hostage? The allegation has been made at least twice, most recently by John F. Kennedy’s niece Kerry Kennedy, and earlier by Rep. Joyce Beatty (D-Ohio), an ex-officio member of the board, who has sued to keep Trump’s name off the building.

The Merriam-Webster dictionary defines “hostage” as, “a person taken by force to secure the taker’s demands.” Swap, “person” for the “Kennedy Center” and “taker” for “Trump,” and you have a pretty straightforward “yes.”

The ongoing Kennedy Center dumpster fire points to an unusual presidential obsession with the nation’s premier performing arts venue that dates back to Trump’s first term when he became the first sitting president in history to twice miss the annual Kennedy Center Honors.

In his second term, Trump turned that snub upside down by firing the board and strong-arming his way into being named chairman. If he expected to be welcomed into the arts community with open arms, he was gravely mistaken. His takeover resulted in a wave of high-profile cancellations that ultimately led to a massive dip in ticket sales. The exodus became even worse when the Trump-appointed board voted to add Trump’s name to the building late last year. The reaction, it seems, injured the president’s fragile ego and incurred his wrath.

By early February the president announced he would close the center for a two-year, $257-million renovation. Calling the historic venue “dilapidated,” Trump said he would be the one to restore it to glory. Behind the scenes another story was unfolding, and six months later the Washington Post reported that “ticket sales and fundraising collapsed” after Trump’s name was added to the building, “even as the center’s leaders publicly touted a financial turnaround.”

This week saw chaos at the venue that even the most seasoned journalists struggled to keep up with as the board voted to close the building on the same day that a federal judge upheld an order that Trump’s name could not be restored to its facade after he ordered it removed in late May.

Trump took to social media to decry the decision, threatening to withhold his support for the renovation and noting that the center could be “ripped down” if he wasn’t formally honored with his name on the building. Despite a preliminary injunction barring the venue from closing, people were kicked out of the building and barricades erected in the name of public safety that same day.

Those prone to hyperbole might be tempted to call this presidential tantrum disguised in procedural clothes a constitutional crisis. Or you could just say that Trump has taken the Kennedy Center hostage. The taker wants his name on the building, and the center will not be released for renovation or reopening if that doesn’t happen.

In the meantime an image of Trump on Air Force One was captured that shows him holding a large placard that reads, “Kennedy Center DEMO[LISHED],” leaving concerned parties to wonder just what exactly the chairman of the board has in mind. Is he using a Sharpie at this very moment to slash a line through the image at the center on that board, or is it just a prop to be trotted out in a cruel bit of future social media hazing?

Getting lost in all the drama: a beloved arts venue has gone pointlessly dark, and the people who loved it are heartbroken. If no one is inside to hear the wind whistle, does it make a sound?

I’m Arts editor Jessica Gelt, willing to rustle up a ransom. This is your arts and culture news for the week.

The week ahead: A curated calendar

FRIDAY

Oliver Lee Jackson: Form Follows Feeling
The Bay Area painter, sculptor, and printmaker’s work, created over decades, is inspired by the human figure in its composition and structure.
Opening reception, 6-8 p.m. Friday; 10 a.m.-6 p.m. Tuesday-Saturday. Lisson, 1037 N. Sycamore Ave. lissongallery.com

“Vitruvian Figure (Los Angeles Memorial Coliseum),” 2026, 3D model by Paul Pfeiffer.

(Paul Pfeiffer/Perrotin)

Paul Pfeiffer: Olympia
In new work focused on Los Angeles, the artist explores the intersection between media, spectacle, architecture and the body ahead of the city hosting the 2028 Olympic Games.
Opening reception, 6-8 p.m. Friday; Pfeiffer in conversation with Britt Salvesen, 3 p.m. Saturday; exhibition, 10 a.m.-6 p.m. Tuesday-Saturday, through Nov. 7. Perrotin, 5036 W Pico Blvd. perrotin.com

SATURDAY

“Couple walking, Park Avenue,” 1960.

(Estate of Roy DeCarava)

Roy DeCarava: the sound i saw
The exhibition presents more than 130 images created between the late 1940s and 1960s, depicting the photographer’s intense interest in the relationship between the visual and the aural. Accompanying the exhibition, in the gallery next door, will be “SIDE B: the sounds,” a listening room featuring DeCarava’s personal playlists and favorite jazz album.
Opening reception, 6-8 p.m.; exhibition runs through Oct. 31. David Zwirner Gallery, 606 and 6166, N. Western Ave. davidzwirner.com

Sutton Foster
The two-time Tony winner and TV star performs Broadway hits and standards with Pacific Jazz Orchestra, featuring new arrangements by conductor Chris Walden.
8 p.m. The Soraya, 18111 Nordhoff St., Northridge. thesoraya.org

Mia Middleton: Summoning Cleo
New work by the artist explores interpreting familiar forms through a surreal lens.
Opening reception, 5-7 p.m. Saturday; exhibition runs through Oct. 24. Roberts Projects, 442 S. La Brea Ave. robertsprojectsla.com

Mrs. Warren’s Profession
Real-life mother and daughter Cyndy Fujikawa and Nell Murphy star in this production of George Bernard Shaw’s 1893 play about a Victorian woman coming to terms with how she built a business empire. Directed by Michael Rothaar.
Opening night, 8 p.m. Saturday; 8 p.m. Thursdays, Fridays and Saturdays; 3 p.m. Saturdays and Sundays (check website for exceptions), through October 25. Pacific Resident Theatre, 707 Venice Blvd, Venice. pacificresidenttheatre.org

Grammy Award-winning composer and bandleader Arturo O’Farrill and Afro Latin Jazz Orchestra open the Segerstrom Center for the Arts’ Jazz series.

(John Abbott)

Arturo O’Farrill & Afro Latin Jazz Orchestra
The pianist and composer, a six-time Grammy winner, and his ensemble kick off the Segerstrom Center for the Arts’ 2026-27 Jazz series with Afro-Cuban rhythm, modern jazz harmony and big-band sounds.
8 p.m. Segerstrom Center for the Arts, 600 Town Center Drive, Costa Mesa. scfta.org

Other Places
An alternative art fair devoted to contemporary art spaces and projects, plus workshops, readings, talks and performances.
Noon-7 p.m. Angels Gate Cultural Center, 3601 S. Gaffey St., San Pedro. opaf.info

Karma
The gallery presents solo exhibitions by painters Randy Wray (“Hothouse”) and Felipe Suzuki, one featuring vivid abstractions, and the other, work created through the lens of memory .
Opening reception 6-8 p.m. Saturday; 10 a.m.-6 p.m. Tuesday-Saturday, through Oct. 24. Karma, 7351 Santa Monica Blvd. karmakarma.org

SUNDAY

Alexander Apóstol
“Regime: Dramatis Personae” (2017), a series of black-and-white portraits of archetypal figures in both populist and authoritarian governments, uses photography to analyze the intertwining of art and political power in Latin America.
11 a.m.-5 p.m. Tuesday, Wednesday and Friday; 11 a.m.-8 p.m. Thursday; 11 a.m.-6 p.m. Saturday-Sunday; through Jan 3, 2027. Museum of Contemporary Art, 250 S. Grand Ave., downtown L.A. moca.org

Textile Alchemy: The Art of Reiko Sudō and NUNO
More than 100 limited-edition textiles, along with numerous objects, including drawings, sketches, raw materials, tools, mock-ups, and prototypes, are part of the largest retrospective ever of the Japanese designer’s work created with her textile collective and other collaborators from throughout Japan,
Through March 7, Los Angeles County Museum of Art, Resnick Pavilion, 5905 Wilshire Blvd. lacma.org

TUESDAY

The entrance of the Lucas Museum of Narrative Art in Los Angeles in Exposition Park.

(Ron De Angelis/For The Times)

Lucas Museum Of Narrative Art
Where else will you see Luke Skywalker, Vincent Van Gogh, Norman Rockwell, Gordon Parks and Charles Schulz under one roof? The new museum officially opens Tuesday, featuring 100,000 square feet of space spread across more than 30 galleries, exhibiting a mind-bending range of visual storytelling. Check out our full coverage.
Public opening, 10 a.m.-5 p.m. Tuesday; regular hours, 10 a.m.-5 p.m. Mondays, Wednesdays and Thursdays; 10 a.m.-5 p.m. Fridays; 9 a.m.-9 p.m. Saturdays; 9 a.m.-5 p.m. Sundays. Lucas Museum of Narrative Art, Exposition Park, 3800 S. Vermont Ave. lucasmuseum.org

THURSDAY

Bilal
The Grammy Award-winning singer-songwriter delivers a blend of soul, funk, and jazz. Queens-born R&B musician Yaya Bey is the opening act.
8 p.m. Carpenter Center, 6200 E. Atherton St., Long Beach. carpenterarts.org

Each Other’s Hands: Trans Mutual Aid, 1966—1996
Oxy Arts, Occidental College’s community-based arts hub, presents an exhibition featuring the work of six L.A. artists. curated by Umi Hsu. The opening reception marks the launch of the 2026 CIRCA Queer Histories Festival hosted by One Institute.
Opening reception, 7 p.m. Thursday; 11 a.m.-4 p.m. Monday-Saturday. Oxy Arts, 4757 York Blvd. oxyarts.oxy.edu

Arts Anywhere

Robert Wilson and the Civil Wars
The newly remastered 4K version of Howard Brookner’s 1987 documentary, the essential yet long elusive film about the 1984 L.A. Olympics Arts Festival, can finally be streamed courtesy of Criterion Channel. It is everything LA28 doesn’t want you know. criterionchannel.com

— Mark Swed

Culture news and the SoCal scene

Christian Barillas, Melinda Page Hamilton and John Lavelle in “The Visit” at Pasadena Playhouse.

(Jeff Lorch)

Pasadena Playhouse opened a new production of Swiss dramatist Friedrich Dürrenmatt’s revenge tragicomedy “The Visit,” and The Times got in on the action. Contributor Jenelle Riley wrote a preview about how the new show features more than a dozen creatives behind the Playhouse’s production of Peter Shaffer’s “Amadeus” earlier this year, including director Darko Tresnjak and actor Jefferson Mays. “Amadeus” was a major hit, so Artistic Director Danny Feldman welcomed the team back with open arms.

Meanwhile, Times theater critic Charles McNulty attended opening night and declared the play a refreshing success (with a few caveats), and expressed “gratitude for the high-level production, gratitude for making the case for why the play still matters, and gratitude for the opportunity of allowing us to make up our own minds about whether the work earns its designation as a modern classic.”

Castulo Guerra as Tlahtoani Klion in a dress rehearsal ahead of its premiere of “Antigone: In the Language of the Kings” by the Latino Theater Company at the Getty Villa.

(Ariana Drehsler/For The Times)

McNulty also headed to the Getty Villa for its annual outdoor theater production. This year, the Villa’s outdoor stage marks its 20th anniversary with a co-production with Latino Theater Company of Sophocles’ “Antigone,” reimagined to take place in pre-conquest Tenochtitlan and performed in English, Spanish and Nahuatl. “If the drama is oversimplified, it nonetheless makes for a gripping spectacle,” McNulty writes.

Finally, a very busy McNulty checked out out a revival of José Rivera’s “Marisol” in an Open Fist Theater Company production at Atwater Village Theatre. The play originally opened in the early 1990s around the same time as Tony Kushner’s “Angels in America,” and McNulty says this new staging is gratifying because it allows a new generation to “embrace the play’s kinetic freedom.”

There are as many acrobats as actors in “Water for Elephants,” which is running at the Hollywood Pantages Theatre through Sept. 27 before heading to Segerstrom Center for the Arts (Nov. 10-22, with stops in Portland, Seattle, Reno, Sacramento, Tempe, Fresno and Eugene in between). Contributor Jenelle Riley headed backstage before opening night to watch the high-stakes performers warm up with poles, hoops, ropes and more. When the curtain raises, there’s a real circus onstage.

Long Beach Opera will perform its 2026-27 season aboard the Queen Mary.

(Allen J. Schaben / Los Angeles Times)

Long Beach Opera announced its 2026-27 season, which is slated to be performed aboard the historic Queen Mary. First up: three works by composer Georges Aperghis, with vocal performances from coloratura soprano Habin Kim. Next: soprano Amanda Forsythe and Opera Prima in a performance of “Tormento Seicento.” Four additional productions include: an Anna Schubert recital, Peter Brook’s “Impressions of Pelleas,” Handel’s “Tolomeo” and Ana Sokolović’s “Svadba.”

The Jewish Federation of Greater Los Angeles and Daniel Gryczman, the federation’s board chair, sued Pasadena’s Norton Simon Museum for the return of the diptych “Adam and Eve,” a pair of 16th century masterpieces by Lucas Cranach the Elder. The suit was one of two filed in the state “since California and Congress passed a pair of laws bolstering U.S.-based claims to Nazi-looted artwork around the world,” reports the Times’ Kevin Rector.

— Jessica Gelt

And last but not least

The Food section got the skinny on Skywalker Grill at the Lucas Museum, which is already booked through the end of the year.

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.