seat

WASHINGTON — President Trump reshaped this year’s U.S. Senate map by sidelining some Republican incumbents and promoting loyalists to replace them. Now the question is whether he’ll put his money where his mouth is.

With four months to go until November’s elections, it’s still unclear how much MAGA Inc., the country’s largest political war chest, with $382 million in the bank as of last month, plans to spend on key races.

The silence has persisted even as Senate Republican leaders have urged Trump’s team, both privately and publicly, to pick up the tab for the president’s decisions.

Front and center is Texas, where Trump successfully endorsed fiery conservative Ken Paxton over Sen. John Cornyn, a choice that some Republicans grumble has turned a safe election into a toss-up that will drain resources away from other battlegrounds. Democratic nominee James Talarico, a state lawmaker, has made Paxton’s history of corruption allegations a central target of his campaign.

“The president picked Paxton, and he’s got $350 million,” Cornyn recently told Semafor. “I think he can spend his money.”

Another challenge has emerged in North Carolina, where Sen. Thom Tillis declined to run for reelection after feuding with Trump last year over healthcare spending.

Trump backed Michael Whatley, his former handpicked chair of the Republican National Committee, to run instead, and Democrats hope to flip the seat with former Gov. Roy Cooper.

Some in Republican campaign leadership are expecting MAGA Inc. to pitch in for Whatley in North Carolina, where the several metro media markets can be pricey.

Republicans will likely be able to count on generous support from well-funded official party committees, which the U.S. Supreme Court ruled earlier this week should be allowed to make unlimited direct contributions to candidates’ campaigns.

But even that sum falls short of what Trump has stockpiled in MAGA Inc. Even though the president is constitutionally barred from running again, he began raising money shortly after winning a second term, and he’s regularly held fundraisers at his resort properties where tickets cost $1 million per person.

James Blair, the former White House political director who left his government job to coordinate the president’s midterm efforts, was evasive in an interview with Sean Spicer, a former Republican spokesman who hosts a podcast.

“The president is going to expend substantial resources to win the midterms,” said Blair. “He cares deeply about the party winning.”

As a super PAC, MAGA Inc. can raise unlimited money from individuals and corporations. However, it is barred from coordinating with individual campaigns or national Republican committees, which adds to the sense of mystery surrounding its plans.

It’s been more than two months since Blair, along with White House Chief of Staff Susie Wiles, pollster Tony Fabrizio and political advisor Chris LaCivita huddled at Washington’s Waldorf Astoria to discuss MAGA Inc.’s strategy.

The huddle was focused on assembling teams of vendors, such as advertisers, canvassing providers and digital media company leaders who had worked with the Trump team in key states during previous elections and who would be dispatched once plans were in place.

The president has spent much of the year waging a war of retribution against Republicans who have crossed him. He viewed Cornyn as insufficiently loyal, held a grudge against Sen. Bill Cassidy of Louisiana for voting to convict him in an impeachment trial and assailed Rep. Thomas Massie of Kentucky as the “worst Republican Congressman in history.”

All of them lost their primaries to Trump-backed challengers.

Cornyn’s loss weighs heavily on Senate Republicans, who suggest that Paxton could cost the party an extra $100 million to defend the seat.

Senate Leadership Fund, the principal super PAC aligned with Senate Majority Leader John Thune, is still expected to spend money on advertising in Texas, but not to play a central role given its obligations elsewhere.

Democrats must net four seats to take the majority, and they see Alaska, Maine, North Carolina and Ohio as their best opportunities. The Senate Leadership Fund has already committed to spending $342 million across these four states, plus Iowa, Georgia, Michigan and New Hampshire.

When Paxton came to Washington after winning the nomination May 26, he had a cordial meeting with Thune focused on moving forward together, according to people with knowledge of the conversation who were not authorized to speak publicly.

Later that day, Thune suggested that Trump should be putting up money for a candidate whom Senate Republicans hadn’t asked for.

“We will do what we need to do to make sure the state stays red,” Thune told reporters. “But I’m certainly hopeful the president and the resources he can bring to bear will be engaged.”

“It’s going to be an expensive race,” he added.

Beaumont writes for the Associated Press. Associated Press White House correspondent Seung Min Kim contributed from Washington. Beaumont reported from Des Moines.

A man named Daniel took to Twitter to share his frustration after a fellow passenger refused to swap seats with him so he could sit next to his girlfriend on their flight, sparking a viral plane passenger etiquette debate

What would you say if someone asked to swap seats with you on a flight?

It’s a difficult and touchy topic. We live in an age in which most people who fly will play the easyJet and Ryanair lottery, in which seats are allocated to them at random if they opt not to pay a hefty fee to choose where they sit.

That means that if you end up with a solid spot on a flight, you’ve either forked out for it or your lucky numbers have come in.

I recently wrote about how I played the Ryanair roulette during a trip to Athens and ended up with the best seats on the plane, for both the outbound and return flight. You can read about my unproven but promising technique here.

Tensions rose on a recent flight over seats, and specifically, whether it is acceptable to ask somebody to swap with you. It all kicked off when one man took to Twitter to vent his frustration after a fellow passenger refused to exchange seats with him so he could sit alongside his girlfriend.

Their reason for declining? They simply wanted to enjoy the window view.

But who was in the right here, and who was in the wrong?

In his tweet, the man, named Daniel, wrote: “A boomer refused to swap seats on a flight this morning to let my gf and I sit together on the last day before we’re apart for 2.5 months – because they wanted to look out the window. Strong generational metaphor areas, Shane.”

Hundreds liked his post, yet more than 200 people waded in with their opinions in the comments section.

One user branded him an “entitled brat” saying: “Did you stomp your feet like the spoiled, entitled brat you come across as???”

Another fired back: “Your lack of planning is nobody else’s problem.” A third chimed in: “Your petty complaint has no merit and naming him reflects very much on you, not the boomer.”

A fourth person argued that the poster could have taken steps to avoid the situation unfolding. “There are so many steps you could have taken prior to boarding to ensure you sat next to her if you felt it that important. You put yourself in that situation, not the boomer,” they wrote. Some users noted that it was difficult to fully assess the situation without knowing what the other passenger was thinking or going through at the time.

Following the wave of criticism, Daniel decided to launch a poll to settle the debate once and for all. He asked followers to vote on whether or not it’s acceptable to request a seat swap on a plane.

The final results revealed that 64 percent of those who participated considered it a “reasonable request”, while 36 percent felt you’d be pushing your luck by doing so.

Do you think it’s unreasonable to ask someone to swap seats with you on a plane? Let us know in the comments below.

The decision of where to sit on a plane could impact the rest of your holiday

As millions of Brits gear up to jet off on their summer holidays, one decision that many may have overlooked could make or break their entire trip. Choosing the right seat on the plane might be the difference between relaxing on a sun-soaked beach or making endless trips to the toilet.

Research has revealed that whether passengers opt for a window, middle, or aisle seat could potentially affect their chances of catching a viral infection before the holiday has even got underway. However, your seat selection alone won’t be the sole factor determining your overall risk of falling ill.

How close you are to someone carrying a virus is the single biggest indicator of how likely you are to pick up an infection. This is followed by how busy the flight is, as the greater the number of passengers on board, the higher the likelihood that some will be carrying viruses.

Airflow throughout the cabin, passenger movement, contact with shared surfaces (such as in the bathroom) and whether or not you wear a mask will all have a bearing on your risk of catching a viral infection during a flight.

Dr Sophie Dix, Head of Medical Affairs at online pharmacy MedExpress, has offered guidance on how travellers can lower their risk of falling ill while flying, including advice on where to sit. She said: “Although there is no guaranteed way to avoid picking up an illness while flying, there are practical steps people can take to reduce their exposure to germs and viruses on planes.”

She shared her top tips for travellers looking to lower their chances of picking up an infection. Here’s what she advised.

Seat selection matters

“The best advice to avoid getting sick on the plane is to try and reduce as much contact with germs and other passengers as possible, so choosing where you sit may have more impact than you might have originally thought.

“Window seats are a great option as they are often far away from high traffic areas such as bathrooms and busy walkways. Aisle seats also increase your exposure to people who frequently pass by throughout the flight, queue for the toilet, and access luggage from overhead compartments. One study found that sitting in a window seat can reduce your interactions with other passengers or crew by up to five times compared to if you sit in a middle or aisle seat.”

She added: “Additionally, research may suggest that leaving the middle aisle free reduces the spread of airborne diseases by 37%, so choosing seats that appear to have middle aisles empty could be a strong choice. Whilst protection from illness is never guaranteed, this highlights that creating distance between other passengers greatly reduces your chances of getting sick.”

Wipe down any surfaces

“Surfaces such as tray tables, armrests, seatbelt buckles, touchscreens, magazines and window shutters can harbour germs easily as they are used so frequently by previous passengers. Wiping down surfaces with disinfectant wipes or sanitiser greatly reduces your risk of coming into contact with germs on them.

Wash your hands regularly

“Maintaining good hygiene standards while travelling can greatly reduce your chances of getting sick. Washing your hands regularly with soapy water or hand sanitiser, especially after coming into contact with surfaces, is a simple but effective way to stop the spread of germs while you’re on the plane.

Stay hydrated

“Cabin air on planes can be extremely dry and irritate your nose and throat whilst travelling, leaving you feeling more run down and vulnerable to picking up any viral infections. Make sure to drink plenty of water and keep on top of hydration throughout the flight to strengthen your immune system. Keep water easily accessible throughout the flight, and drink regularly, especially if you’re travelling with children.

Wear a face mask

“Wearing a face mask greatly reduces the spread of any airborne viruses, as we saw throughout the COVID-19 pandemic. Crowded flights may become a hotspot for any infections due to the cramped space and close proximity to other passengers, so taking preventative measures may help reduce the spread of any current infections.

Ensure you’re well rested

“Those who don’t get adequate rest before a flight are over 4 times more likely to catch a cold compared to those who are fully rested. This is due to your immune system being weaker when you haven’t got enough sleep, making you more susceptible to picking up any infections.

Travel expert said he has been doing this for ‘literally years’

A travel expert has revealed a “genius” hack that holidaymakers can use to dodge paying for seats on Ryanair and other airlines.

Rob Adcock regularly posts travel videos to his 141,000 Instagram followers, and in a recent clip he shared a tip he has been using for “literally years” to cut costs when flying. In the video, Rob asked: “Does everyone do this Ryanair seat hack or am I an actual genius? [Get] a better seat and it will not cost you a single penny.”

Rob recommends checking in “as normal” and selecting the free, randomly-allocated seat option, rather than forking out to choose where you sit. He continued: “Check-in closes online two hours before the flight departs so just before that go back into the app, click manage booking, then go to add or change seats. Then it’s going to show you a map of all the empty seats that are on the flight. Remember those seats.”

You should then close the app without paying for anything extra or changing your seat. Rob added: “Then when you get on the plane go and find those seats that you saw that were empty – ideally a full row or extra leg room – and just brazenly sit in it, safe in the knowledge that that seat is empty.”

Rob revealed he has been pulling off this trick for “literally years”, adding: “The flight attendant has never once asked me for my seat number. Just be careful of the front five or back five rows on the plane. Sometimes they check people for weight distribution so stay away from those.”

Although the video focused on Ryanair, he noted in the post’s caption that the trick can be applied to other airlines too, writing: “Best case? Extra leg room. Empty row. Window seat. No stranger falling asleep on your shoulder.

“Worst case? You go back to your original seat and carry on with your life. This obviously won’t magically create business class on a full flight… but for budget airlines like Ryanair, EasyJet and Wizz Air, it’s honestly elite behaviour.”

Both Ryanair and Wizz Air were contacted for a response but had yet to reply at the time of publication. An easyJet spokesperson, however, commented: “We allocate seats for free and also provide the customers with the option to choose a specific seat when booking for a small fee.

“While we require customers to sit in their allocated seats for safety reasons, should customers like to move after take-off, our crew will be happy to help.”

The wheels can come off too

A holiday expert has posted a video testing a £25 suitcase from Primark against Ryanair cabin size rules – which have just been updated.

Not only is the suitcase a great price, but its wheels can be removed to help it meet the requirements. Ryanair is one of the most popular airlines in the UK, offering cheap flights to a number of destinations. Its bag rules state: “All fares include one small personal bag (40 x 30 x 20 cm) that must fit under the seat.”

Talking about the free bag, it adds that the small personal bag “such as a handbag or laptop bag” must adhere to its measurements and “fit under the seat in front of you. If you need additional baggage allowance, there are various options available to you.”

It adds: “Additional options include Priority boarding with a second 10kg cabin bag, checked bags of 10kg, 20kg (up to 3), or 23kg (1 allowed). Infants have no cabin allowance but may bring a 5kg baby bag and two baby equipment items free.”

Focusing on the small personal bag size, and creating five TikTok videos on the bag alone, Chelsea Dickenson, who has appeared on shows like This Morning to share her tips, said she loves the suitcase and is “genuinely impressed with the quality for something that’s fairly affordable.”

Trying to fit the case into the bag size checker, she showed that it didn’t fit. That was until she took off the wheels.

It also remained below the red line, suggesting it met the airline’s standards, and thankfully, she got through security with no issues. Not only does it meet pre-boarding size requirements, but she also demonstrates that it fits neatly under the seat, describing it as “super slim.”

And if you’re wondering where you pop the wheels, she reveals: “It comes with a cloth bag that you can pop the wheels into. These are best put in your pocket – so remember to wear something with pockets big enough! Otherwise, you could pop it back in the suitcase.”

But be careful. In one of her videos on the £25 bag, she says she ended up losing a wheel and advises others to ensure the wheels click securely back into place when reattaching them.

What happens at the boarding gate if my cabin bags are bigger than my allowance?

Ryanair state: “You must adhere strictly to the baggage allowance on your booking. If your small bag or 10kg cabin bag does not fit in the baggage sizers, it will be refused at the boarding gate, or where available, placed in the hold of the aircraft for a fee at the level set out in our Regulations.

“You will be required to leave your bags at the aircraft steps, in the gate bag trolley, or as directed by Ryanair agents, for stowage in the hold.”

READ MORE: Ryanair cabin bag rules to change and it’s good news for passengers

The small constituency of Makerfield in northwest England has found itself in the eye of the storm of British politics with a by-election on Thursday that will not only produce a new member of parliament but could also pave the way for a new prime minister.

The by-election was triggered last month when the previous MP, Josh Simons, stood down to allow Manchester Mayor Andy Burnham to contest the seat. If Burnham wins, he intends to challenge UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer for the leadership of the ruling Labour Party.

Starmer is facing mounting pressure to step aside following dismal council election results last month and this week’s resignation of Secretary of State for Defence John Healey and Armed Forces Minister Al Carns over the United Kingdom’s defence budget.

Seeking to derail Burham’s hopes for the Labour leadership, however, is far-right Reform UK candidate Robert Kenyon, whose campaign has been dogged by controversy over alleged sexist and misogynistic social media posts but who remains within striking distance in the polls. Reform came second at the last election in Makerfield, however, and are seen as presenting a real challenge to Labour, which has held the seat since its creation in 1983.

Here’s a closer look at the race, why it matters and how its consequences could extend far beyond Makerfield.

Why is a by-election happening in Makerfield?

Despite winning the 2024 general election in a landslide, Labour’s popularity has tanked over the past two years as support for the far-right, anti-immigration Reform UK has soared. In council elections last month, Reform swept up hundreds of council seats at Labour’s expense. Overall, Labour lost nearly 1,500 local council seats while Reform surged from 100 to about 1,450 seats.

On the right, Labour’s rhetoric on immigration has failed to stem support for Reform UK, which continues to attract both former Conservative voters and sections of Labour’s traditional working-class base – particularly in the north of England. On the left of the party, many voters who feel aggrieved by Starmer’s stance on Israel and cuts to welfare have shifted towards the Green Party.

Now, according to polling group Ipsos, Starmer is the most unpopular prime minister since it began voter surveys in the late 1970s.

As Labour’s internal tensions have grown as a result, Burnham has consistently emerged as one of the party membership’s preferred alternatives to Starmer. Recent polling suggests Starmer would defeat most potential challengers in a leadership contest, with one notable exception: Burnham.

As Mayor of Manchester, Burnham is not an MP and cannot currently stand for leadership of the Labour Party. Earlier this year, he was blocked from standing for Parliament via another by-election in Gorton and Denton, a seat Labour ultimately lost to the Green Party.

As pressure on the prime minister has mounted, however, Labour’s National Executive Committee has been increasingly unwilling to block Burnham from standing as an MP again.

Announcing his resignation as Makerfield MP following the council elections, Simons said Labour was heading towards a divisive leadership contest with “no hope, no energy that anything would change”. He described Makerfield as “where Andy Burnham has lived for 25 years” and said the mayor was “coming home”.

“Labour needs to change and the whole government needs to change,” Simons added.

Who is standing and what are they campaigning on?

Labour: Andy Burnham

Burnham currently serves as the highly popular Mayor of Greater Manchester, having left Westminster after previously serving in several cabinet positions under former Labour prime ministers Tony Blair and Gordon Brown.

As mayor, Burnham has built a reputation as one of Labour’s most recognisable politicians, benefitting from his distance from Westminster while arguing that it could learn from what he calls “Manchesterism” – a blend of pro-business policies designed to attract investment while bringing essential services back under public control.

Known by some supporters as the “King of the North”, Burnham gained national prominence for challenging the Conservative government during the COVID-19 pandemic and for his long-running campaign for justice for the victims of the Hillsborough disaster.

His appeal to Labour’s working-class base in the north of England has led some party members to view him as Labour’s strongest candidate for winning back the so-called “Red Wall” – former industrial constituencies that have increasingly shifted towards Reform UK in the north of England.

Political commentator and journalist Aaron Bastani told Al Jazeera that Burnham’s personal reputation “makes a difference” and that he represents Labour’s best chance against Reform UK.

“A lot of Reform voters actually like him. Many people have a good word to say about him, and he’s been a politician in the area for 25 years.”

But he added that, among some voters, he is still tarred by his “association with Labour as the party of government”.

“Many Reform voters see Labour as the party that backed the Iraq war, and there’s a deep sense of disillusionment with the political establishment … What’s interesting is that some Reform voters were making left-wing criticisms of Burnham, such as the cuts to winter fuel payments and broader dissatisfaction with the government’s direction.”

Reform UK: Robert Kenyon

Hoping to spoil Burnham’s chances is Reform’s Kenyon, affectionately referred to by some members of the UK media as “the plucky plumber” in reference to his profession. He represents a party whose rapid rise and anti-immigrant message has transformed Britain’s political landscape.

Reform UK’s rise has largely been driven by Nigel Farage, the architect of Brexit, whose party has capitalised on the collapse of support for the former ruling Conservative Party. Many big names from the Conservatives have defected to Reform in recent months. That has enabled Reform to attract both traditional right-wing voters and some former Labour supporters, largely on a platform that directs local grievances towards migration.

“For many voters, the proliferation of vape shops and takeaways on high streets has become a shorthand for a sense of decline,” Bastani told Al Jazeera.

“It’s often one of the first things people talk about when discussing immigration and changes to their local area. The concern isn’t really about vape shops themselves – they’re seen as visible symbols of a declining economic model, the loss of local identity and a feeling that places are deteriorating.”

Bastani, however, described Kenyon as “unimpressive”. His campaign has been overshadowed by allegations relating to historic social media activity.

Anti-extremism group HOPE not hate published posts attributed to Kenyon that included COVID-19 conspiracy theories, endorsements of sexualised comments about television presenter Carol Vorderman and remarks about female rugby players.

The group also highlighted comments on an online forum in which Kenyon allegedly described himself as sexist and suggested women make false rape allegations to obtain abortions.

Restore Britain: Rebecca Shepherd

Another factor is Restore Britain, a breakaway far-right party founded by former Reform UK MP Rupert Lowe, who argues that Reform UK has become too mainstream and is no longer hard enough on combating undocumented immigration.

Lowe, a former Reform member, was suspended by Reform UK in March 2025 after publicly criticising party leader Nigel Farage and was later expelled following a series of workplace bullying allegations and complaints from female staff members, which he denies.

Since launching the new party less than four months ago, Restore Britain claims to have attracted more than 96,000 members and 13 councillors, many of them former Reform figures. Should a significant share of those voters ultimately switch from Reform UK, it could dent Reform’s share of the vote just enough to benefit Labour.

Conservative: Michael Winstanley

Winstanley is the former mayor of Wigan, standing as candidate for the former ruling Conservative Party. He was elected as a councillor for the local ward of Orrell and 2000, and served for 16 years.

Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch called Winstanley “an excellent champion of the area having lived in, worked in and represented the local community for years”.

Observers do not expect any great show of Conservative voters at this election, however. In May’s local elections in Wigan, Labour won 42 seats, Reform 25, and the Conservatives got none. And, in the last general election in Makerfield, the Tories came in third – behind Labour and Reform – with just over 10 percent of the vote.

What do the polls say about the candidates?

Polling suggests the contest is effectively a two-horse race between Labour and Reform UK. The largest survey of the campaign, conducted by Opinium for Forward Democracy, indicates Burnham holds a narrow lead.

Based on a mixed-method survey of 543 local residents, Burnham leads Kenyon by five percentage points among voters most likely to cast a ballot. Among those rating themselves at least seven out of 10 likely to vote, Burnham stands on 46 percent compared with Kenyon’s 41 percent.

However, Kenyon’s share may have been damaged by the 7 percent that Shepherd is expected to win in Restore Britain’s first parliamentary outing. The Conservatives are polling at just 2 percent.

Furthermore, while Labour currently leads in the by-election campaign, the constituency’s longer-term political trajectory may ultimately favour Reform UK. When respondents were asked how they would vote in a future general election, Reform UK led with 42 percent compared with Labour’s 34 percent, suggesting that Burnham’s personal appeal may be helping Labour outperform its own national reputation.

In May, Labour lost all eight of its local council seats in Makerfield to Reform.

Tom de Grunwald, founder of Forward Democracy and StopReformUK.Vote, said tactical voting could prove decisive. “If you live in Makerfield and you would normally vote Green, Liberal Democrat, or anyone else, and you don’t want Reform UK to win this seat, the maths is clear: Andy Burnham is the only candidate who can stop them,” he said.

However, Bastani said he is sceptical that many Restore Britain supporters will ultimately return to Reform UK. “A lot of those voters now see Farage as part of the establishment,” he said, adding that Restore Britain could outperform expectations on polling day – which could split the far-right vote and benefit Burnham. While he expects Burnham to win, Bastani said the result should not obscure the rise of Reform.

“I’d be surprised if Burnham didn’t win. But if Reform were running a stronger candidate, this could look very different. If Farage somehow managed to win a seat like this against someone with Burnham’s profile, it would rank among the most significant political achievements of his career.”

A Ryanair passenger claims she was recently told it was “unlikely’ she’d be able to board a plane for an unexpected purpose. Aisling Finlay was left taken aback and has since issued an alert

A Ryanair passenger was left concerned after she was reportedly told she’d be “unlikely to board a plane”, and it’s not the first time someone has claimed they were denied a seat with the airline. Aisling Finlay recently opened up about her alleged travel issue, as she wanted to alert others to the fact that it could happen.

Aisling recently shared her story on TikTok, where she claimed she didn’t know something like this was possible when travelling with Ryanair. The clip has since gone viral as people couldn’t believe how events unfolded in the unlikely air travel tale that left many taken by surprise.

It’s not the first story of its kind to be shared either. Previously, a four-year-old boy was said to have been told he couldn’t board a plane either.

In the clip, she said: “There’s a high chance we’re not getting on this flight. So, a reminder to everyone to check-in way in advance, as they’re overbooking the planes.

“So, we’re flying to Spain at 11am. So, I checked in last night at about like 10pm, and weren’t able to like reserve a seat or allocate a seat, so I was like ‘strange’.

“And then our boarding card came up saying ‘seat allocated at the gate’, and then we arrived there, and they’re basically like ‘we’ve overbooked the flight by nine seats’.

“We’re number five and six to get on the plane. So she was like ‘it is unlikely you’ll get on the flight’. Brilliant.”

The video has been viewed over 27,000 times since it was shared, and people were quick to comment too. Hundreds have since offered their thoughts on the matter.

One said: “In all my years travelling bumping has never happened to me, and I’ve never seen it happen. It must be a very new thing with Ryanair.”

Another added: “I had that once. Due to fly from Dublin to Bristol. They couldn’t get me on so they flew me to Birmingham and then paid for a taxi to Bristol, and a few weeks later I got £250 compensation. More than I paid for my whole trip.”

A third replied: “This is becoming so common. Happened two weeks ago. One member of our party didn’t get on, and was lucky to get a seat the next day. Check in as early as possible and book seats to make it safer.”

Meanwhile, a fourth also commented: “Most airlines do this!” One more also noted: “Every airline does this.”

What you need to know

When Ryanair was approached for comment, it stated as a policy the airline does not overbook flights. The airline also claimed the passenger travelled on the flight from Dublin to Palma de Mallorca on June 3.

However, some more information is available on its website. It states: “Ryanair, as a policy, does not overbook its flights. However, in the unlikely event that a seat is not available for a passenger with a confirmed reservation, we will seek volunteers to surrender their seats in exchange for benefits that we and the volunteer may agree upon before involuntarily denying boarding to other passengers.

“If there are insufficient volunteers, and we deny you boarding involuntarily, you are entitled to the rights set out below.” These rights are outlined on the website.

A woman has shared her shock after an ‘entitled’ stranger stole her pre-booked plane seat – sparking an argument onboard as she tried to claim back what she’d paid for

When arriving at the airport, travellers cannot wait to board their flight and jet off on their well-earned holiday. But one woman’s much-needed getaway started with friction when a stranger stole her plane seat and refused to give it up.

Taking to Reddit, she explained how she pre-booked a window seat on the plane, 27A, but when she arrived at her row, there were two women already sat down. She said: “I politely told them I had 27A, and one of them goes, ‘No, this is 27C the window seat. 27A is the aisle.’ “I was a bit confused, so I double checked after sitting down briefly in the aisle seat, and asked a flight attendant. She confirmed that 27A was in fact the window seat.

“So I go back and explain that to the woman, nicely, and her response was, ‘For f***’s sake, what are you so desperate to sit by the window for?'”

Wanting to avoid an argument, she told her that she’d pre-booked that specific seat on purpose and kindly asked her to sit in the one assigned to her.

She added: “She snaps back, ‘We all paid for it’, and still refuses to move.

“At this point the flight attendant is right there witnessing everything and says, ‘It’s her seat if she wants to sit there, she will.’

“Only then did the woman finally move, but the attitude the whole time was unbelievable. No apology, no basic respect, just pure entitlement.

“Honestly, I don’t get how people can act like that over something so straightforward. If it’s not your seat, just move. It’s not that deep.”

Commenting on her post, one user said: “It’s rude and it is not allowed. You sit in the correct seat period. They just wanted to take your seat. That’s where the flight attendants come in and say move it.”

Another added: “I remember when they said people had to sit in their assigned seat so they could be identified in an accident.”

A third chimed in: “People need to learn that doubling down on mistakes is wrong and stupid.”

One more person said: “I hope you didn’t need to leave your seat during the flight. I bet she’d b**** about that!

A plane passenger has shared their shock after getting a mouthful for reclining their seat during a long-haul flight – sparking a heated debate over airline etiquette

A plane passenger sparked a debate after reclining their seat without a second thought on a long-haul flight – leaving them questioning whether they had done anything wrong. The traveller took to social media to share the awkward encounter, which unfolded during a nine-hour economy flight aboard a Boeing 747-400.

Like many passengers on long journeys, they decided to get comfortable after the meal service had finished and prepared to recline their seat before trying to get some sleep. However, what happened next was the last thing they expected. As they pushed their seat backwards, they suddenly heard somebody shouting: “Whoa, whoa, whoa!”

At first, they assumed the noise was coming from the TV show they were watching on their tablet and carried on as normal.

But moments later, a passenger sitting behind them tapped on their seat and delivered a stern warning.

The traveller explained the man claimed they had almost hit his young daughter in the head when reclining their seat.

According to the passenger, the dad then told them they needed to notify him every time they wanted to recline so he could make sure the child was out of the way.

The unexpected confrontation left the traveller completely stunned.

They admitted they hadn’t even realised a child was sitting behind them until the man pointed it out.

When they later caught sight of her, they estimated she was somewhere between three and five years old.

Reflecting on the incident, they questioned how the child had managed to be in the path of a reclining seat in the first place.

The passenger wrote: “I am still absolutely baffled by this.”

Not wanting to risk an argument in the middle of the flight, they immediately returned their seat to the upright position and decided not to recline it again for the remainder of the journey.

While they felt guilty after being accused of almost hurting a child, they couldn’t shake the feeling the situation wasn’t entirely their fault.

Their partner believed the parents should have simply treated the incident as an accident and encouraged their daughter to sit properly in her own seat.

Meanwhile, their mother-in-law took an even firmer stance, arguing that if the family wanted extra room for the child to move around, they should have paid for seats with more space.

The incident has since sparked a wider discussion online about airline etiquette, with many travellers divided over who is responsible when it comes to reclining seats.

One user said: “A bit like reversing in a car, always good to take a quick look and make sure the coast is clear.”

Another user added: “He didn’t say you couldn’t recline your seat, he asked you to warn them. Three to five-year-olds aren’t known for being super cooperative.

“Maybe her head was down and her tray was out or something. Would you prefer he physically restrain her in her seat and she screamed the whole time?”

Even on her way out, Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-San Francisco) — 86 and retiring — held sway.

Last month, in the final stretch of the race to replace her, Pelosi endorsed Connie Chan, a member of the San Francisco board of supervisors and a candidate who had until then struggled to gain traction. The move clearly had an effect, with Chan advancing out of Tuesday’s primary to the general election in November, according to the Associated Press.

Political observers were quick to note that Pelosi’s famed political influence was alive and well, as made clear as of Wednesday morning by Chan’s bounding past the third-place finisher, tech millionaire and Democratic political operative Saikat Chakrabarti, who self-funded his campaign to the tune of nearly $10 million.

But cast another way, the race’s early results also showed the limits of Pelosi’s influence — in the form of state Sen. Scott Wiener, who as of Wednesday morning was clearly the race’s front-runner, holding a double-digit lead over both Chan and Chakrabarti.

Wiener — an ambitious and prolific state lawmaker with a strong base in San Francisco, particularly in the liberal bastion’s LGBTQ+ community — has long eyed the seat but held off from running for years in deference to Pelosi, a trailblazing politician and one of the most powerful of her generation. She was the first woman ever elected House Speaker in 2007 and oversaw both of President Trump’s first-term impeachments.

However, that changed in late October, when Wiener, 56, announced he couldn’t wait any longer and would be running this year. His announcement came before Pelosi had announced her own plans, amid broader party backlash against gerontocracy and elderly incumbents holding on within the aging Democratic establishment, and it appeared to irk her.

In early November, shortly after California voters passed Proposition 50 to allow Democrats to redraw the state’s congressional districts to better favor Democrats — an initiative she helped spearhead — the still influential Pelosi announced she would retire.

In that announcement, Pelosi thanked San Francisco voters for giving her wide latitude to be a fearless voice in Washington. She hadn’t faced a serious election challenge since the Reagan administration. In her last race, in 2024, she won reelection with 81% of the vote.

Pelosi then waited until last month to endorse Chan as her chosen successor.

Chan, 47, who was born in Hong Kong and immigrated to San Francisco with her family at age 13, was first elected to the board of supervisors in 2020, and has been chair of its budget committee since February 2023. Before winning office, she was a Chinese interpreter and then an aide for nearly 15 years to several different Democratic politicians from the Bay Area, including then-San Francisco Dist. Atty. Kamala Harris.

Other establishment figures, such as Sen. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) and former San Francisco Mayor Willie Brown, endorsed Chan as well.

Last week, Pelosi said she’d decided to weigh in and back Chan in part because, after spending years boosting women into positions of power, she’d realized there weren’t enough around anymore.

“It’s not about women being better than men; it’s that we have to have women at the table,” she told NBC News.

At her election night party, Chan told the SF Standard that Pelosi’s endorsement “absolutely changed the tide” in the race, delivering a “fatal punch” on behalf of her campaign.

But that punch, if devastating to Chakrabarti’s campaign, had clearly not knocked out Wiener — who was ready Tuesday night with a few punches of his own in a speech to his supporters.

“Tonight, San Franciscans sent a very clear message,” he said, according to shared remarks. “San Franciscans are ready for bold leadership, real results, and a new generation of leaders that isn’t afraid to take on the toughest fights facing our country.”

Wiener, who served in the San Francisco board of supervisors himself before winning election to the state Senate in 2016, said in this political moment, “we can’t afford politics that simply preserve the status quo.”

He said, “I’m not going to Washington to sit quietly, protect the status quo, or wait my turn.”

“I’m going to fight relentlessly for Medicare for all, to build millions of homes, to make public transit more expansive and reliable, for affordable clean energy, for working families, for civil rights, and for democracy itself,” he said. “I’m going to fight to protect our immigrant neighbors, LGBTQ people, reproductive freedom, and the rule of law — and to protect them from Donald Trump and MAGA extremism.”

Others, including many in the LGBTQ+ community, also cheered the strong showing from Wiener, who is gay and has long championed LGBTQ+ rights. Kelley Robinson, president of the LGBTQ+ rights organization Human Rights Campaign, said her organization was “thrilled.”

“We need more voices like Wiener in Washington. Not only would he expand the number of openly LGBTQ+ members of Congress, he has a record of impact and delivering for his constituents,” Robinson said. “We are excited to support him on to victory in November.”

With Tuesday’s primary settled, a new head-to-head race for Pelosi’s seat begins — one that, given her endorsement of Chan and Wiener’s intentional focus on pulling San Francisco in a new direction, will be an even clearer referendum on her influence.

Los Angeles City Councilmember Traci Park opened up a commanding lead over public interest attorney Faizah Malik in the race to represent the city’s coastal neighborhoods, according to early election returns Tuesday night.

Park has been a close ally of the police and fire unions in the city, calling for more cops and firefighters. Malik has been endorsed by the Democratic Socialists of America and also is backed by the Los Angeles County Federation of Labor and Unite Here Local 11, which represents hotel and airport workers.

L.A. City Council candidate Faizah Malik, left, and incumbent Traci Park.

(Eric Thayer and Francine Orr / Los Angeles Times)

Park reported raising $1.3 million in campaign contributions, according to the latest campaign finance reports filed with the city, compared with about $540,000 for Malik.

Park said she felt good about the early returns.

“It confirms that we have been right on the priorities and the results have spoken for themselves,” she said. “I have been writing a comeback story for the Westside for the last three years, and I’m super excited to finish it.”

In a speech to supporters at the Lincoln, a bar on the Westside, Malik remained upbeat.

“This campaign has demonstrated that we can chart a new course for a sustainable future and we can lead the way here on the Westside,” Malik said.

Los Angeles voters cast ballots for eight of the 15 City Council seats in Tuesday’s election, including races in two districts where the incumbents are leaving because of term limits.

In races with more than two candidates, the top two vote-getters will compete in a Nov. 3 runoff unless a candidate gets a majority vote in the primary.

Jose Ugarte was leading Estuardo Mazariegos in the field of six candidates in the District 9 race held by termed-out Councilmember Curren Price.

District 9 candidates Jose Ugarte, left and Estuardo Mazariegos.

(Genaro Molina / Los Angeles Times)

Ugarte is a former deputy chief of staff for Price, and Mazariegos is co-director of the Alliance of Californians for Community Empowerment Los Angeles and is backed by the Democratic Socialists of America.

Mazariegos said he felt confident he would make it into the Nov. 3 runoff against Ugarte.

“I feel a sense of relief and accomplishment,” he said.

The other candidates in the race were trailing Ugarte and Mazariegos in early returns. They are Elmer Roldan, executive director of Communities in Schools of Los Angeles; Martha Sánchez, a therapist; Jorge Nuño, an entrepreneur; and Jorge Hernandez Rosas, an educator.

The district includes the Convention Center, USC and communities along the Harbor Freeway.

In the San Fernando Valley’s District 3, Tim Gaspar and Barri Worth Girvan were leading the field of three candidates vying for the seat being vacated by Bob Blumenfield.

Christopher “C.R.” Celona, left, Barri Worth Girvan, center, and Tim Gaspar are running for L.A. City Council District 3.

(Stephanie Lorens, Yauma Olstead and Tim Sullens)

Gaspar is the founder of an insurance company, and Worth Girvan is a district director for Los Angeles County Supervisor Lindsey Horvath.

Worth Girvan said she was confident she would face Gaspar in a runoff in November.

“[The campaign] has been about ensuring the West Valley gets its fair share of resources,” Worth Girvan said.

In a statement, Gaspar said he was feeling “incredibly optimistic” about the coalition of business owners and community leaders he built during his campaign.

“They are showing they want a fresh perspective in City Hall,” he said.

The third candidate, tech entrepreneur Christopher Robert “C.R.” Celona, trailed behind.

In District 13, Councilmember Hugo Soto-Martínez was leading three challengers — Dylan Kendall, who runs Grow Hollywood, an economic development corporation; Rich Sarian, vice president of strategic initiatives for downtown’s South Park Social District; and Colter Carlisle, vice president of the East Hollywood Neighborhood Council.

City Council District 13 candidates, clockwise from top left: Councilmember Hugo Soto-Martinez; Colter Carlisle; Rich Sarian; and Dylan Kendall.

(Los Angeles Times)

Soto-Martínez also was backed by the Los Angeles chapter of the Democratic Socialists of America for the district that includes Atwater Village, Glassell Park, Elysian Valley, Echo Park, Silver Lake and Hollywood and East Hollywood.

Soto-Martínez said in a statement he was feeling optimistic about the early returns.

In District 1, which covers Highland Park in the northeast to University Park in the southwest, Councilmember Eunisses Hernandez was leading a pack of four challengers in the race, according to early returns.

Maria Lou Calanche, executive director of the nonprofit Expanded Learning Alliance, trailed Hernandez, according to early returns. They were followed by Raul Claros, chief executive of UNO Partners; Nelson Grande, president of Grande Enterprises; and Sylvia Robledo, who worked as an aide to several elected L.A. officials and who has fallen into last place.

Hernandez was grateful for the support that put her far ahead on the first night of results.

“I just feel reassured that all these fights we’ve been taking on for the last 3½ years have been worth it and people have been watching,” Hernandez said.

In other races, Councilmember Tim McOsker had a wide lead over Green Party member Jordan Rivers for the 15th District seat, which includes Harbor City, San Pedro, Watts and Wilmington. But the incumbent said while the early returns were encouraging, it was too early to declare victory before 9:30 p.m.

“I’ll be back in City Hall early tomorrow morning to get back to work,” McOsker said from his campaign party at the Dalmatian-American Club in San Pedro.

His campaign, he said, was focused on moving forward projects “past the point of no return” to make real change in the district that encompasses Watts, Wilmington, Harbor Gateway, Harbor City and San Pedro.

In the 5th District, which includes Bel-Air, Westwood, Cheviot Hills and Hancock Park, Councilmember Katy Yaroslavsky declared victory in her race around 9 p.m. after early ballots pushed her far ahead of the two challengers.

“Across the spectrum, people are looking for lights to be fixed and sidewalks to be usable,” she said.

In the north San Fernando Valley’s 7th District, Monica Rodriguez was running unopposed.

Buoyed by a new Congressional map favoring their party, California Democrats were eyeing Tuesday’s primary elections as a critical first step toward flipping a handful of House seats and taking back power in Washington.

Results from California’s massive and slow-moving election process were not immediately clear late Tuesday, as polls closed and mail ballots continued to be processed and counted. Still, Democrats were bullish about their chances of advancing candidates to November’s general election in all five districts that were redrawn in their favor as a result of last year’s Proposition 50 ballot measure.

“The path to winning back the House starts with voting in the June 2nd primary,” the California Democratic Party posted online Monday.

Meanwhile, California Republican Party Chairwoman Corrin Rankin urged Republican voters to make their own voices heard too.

“Like President Trump said, we need to make it too big to rig,” Rankin said on “The Benny Show.” “We need to swamp the vote.”

One of the most closely watched races was in the redrawn 22nd Congressional District in the Central Valley, where incumbent Rep. David Valadao (R-Hanford) is facing challenges from moderate Assemblymember Jasmeet Kaur Bains (D-Delano) and progressive college professor Randy Villegas.

Another closely watched race was in the redrawn 48th Congressional District in San Diego and Riverside counties, where Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Bonsall) decided to retire rather than run for reelection, and where Republican San Diego County Supervisor Jim Desmond — who is endorsed by Trump — is running against a pack of Democrats.

Prop. 50 — which Californians passed with nearly 65% of the vote a year ago — was California Democrats’ response to Texas Republicans redrawing their state’s Congressional maps in the GOP’s favor, at President Trump’s behest. It was also the only major Democratic counterpunch in the wider mid-decade redistricting brawl that has spread across the country in the last year.

Experts expect the redistricting battle to deliver a net gain of a handful or more House seats to Republicans. But Democrats could gain even more ground given Trump’s lousy approval ratings and the long history of midterm election losses for the president’s party.

Combined, those factors make the battle for control of the House incredibly close, which in turn makes the five seats up for grabs in California pivotal — and potentially decisive.

Tuesday’s primaries won’t determine if any of those five seats will indeed flip parties in November. However, the primaries will define those head-to-head races to come and better inform the odds of Democrats toppling Republican incumbents, experts said.

In addition to flipping the seats currently held by Valadao and Issa, Democrats are hoping to pick up three additional seats.

In the 1st Congressional District — which after Prop. 50 lost rural reaches of northeast California and picked up liberal North Bay communities — various candidates were vying for the seat long held by the late Rep. Doug LaMalfa (R-Richvale), who died in January. They include Democratic state Sen. Mike McGuire and Republican Assemblymember James Gallagher, who is endorsed by Trump.

Voters from the existing district are also voting in a special election Tuesday to fill the remainder of LaMalfa’s term.

In the 3rd Congressional District, which lost an eastern rural stretch along Nevada and now holds more tightly to the Sacramento suburbs, Rep. Ami Bera (D-Elk Grove) — who currently represents a different district — is running to remain in Congress in a new seat.

Meanwhile, the 3rd Congressional District’s incumbent, Rep. Kevin Kiley (I-Rocklin), is seeking to do the opposite. He quit the Republican Party, became an independent and is now running for Bera’s current seat in Congressional District 6, which includes the city of Sacramento and Placer County suburbs.

In the 41st Congressional District, which became more liberal after Prop. 50 by losing voters in Riverside County and gaining them in Los Angeles County, a slate of candidates — including Rep. Linda Sánchez (D-Whittier), who currently represents a different district — are running to replace Rep. Ken Calvert (R-Corona). Calvert, a 17-term incumbent, decided to run in the neighboring 40th Congressional District instead.

In the 40th Congressional District, which covers a swath of inland Orange County and portions of San Bernardino and Riverside counties, incumbent Rep. Young Kim (R-Anaheim Hills) is now going head-to-head with Calvert, while also facing several Democratic challengers.

Other districts that were not part of the Prop. 50 shuffle are also attracting attention.

In the 11th Congressional District in San Francisco, several Democratic candidates are vying to replace Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-San Francisco), the retiring former House Speaker, including state Sen. Scott Wiener; tech millionaire and Democratic political operative Saikat Chakrabarti; and Connie Chan, a member of the San Francisco board of supervisors who Pelosi endorsed.

Democrats are also closely watching several races where younger Democrats and progressives are challenging older incumbent Democrats, and where newer Democratic incumbents are seeking to hold onto their seats in relatively competitive districts.

On the ballot this year is an entirely new congressional map.

Redrawn with the passage of Proposition 50, the new districts favor Democrats in November. But those gains aren’t guaranteed. Candidates have to make it through California’s primary, where the top two vote-getters move on to the general election regardless of party preference.

While many districts shifted only slightly, some Republican districts were split, some Democrat districts were strengthened, and in one district lines were redrawn with no overlap at all with their 2024 boundary.

Several seats are competitive — either with a tight race between Republicans or because the seat is expected to flip from red to blue. With redistricting, only four seats are considered solidly Republican, according to the Cook Political Report, down from the nine GOP seats won in 2024.

The 1st Congressional District — which was redrawn farther south to cover portions of Butte, Colusa, Glenn, Lassen, Modoc, Shasta, Siskiyou, Sutter, Tehama, and Yuba counties — is one to likely flip.

Rep. Ken Calvert’s 41st District in the Inland Empire was eliminated and completely redrawn in Los Angeles County. Calvert is now challenging Republican incumbent Young Kim in the 40th District. Both are marked as incumbents in the results below.

In its new position, the 41st District was carved, in part, out of the previous 38th District. The current representative for the 38th District, Democrat Linda Sánchez, is running in the 41st District and is marked as an incumbent.

Several seats, such as former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s 11th District, are competitive between candidates from differing wings of the Democratic party. While in District 22, Democrats are competing to challenge Republican Rep. David Valadao in a redrawn, Latino-majority swing district.

Also on this page are noncompetitive local districts that may still be of interest to Times’ readers in Southern California.

Not seeing the race you’re looking for? See all of California’s U.S. House races on the statewide election page.

Arthur B. Laffer, professor, businessman and possible candidate for next year’s Republican nomination for the U.S. Senate from California, speeds down the freeway in his telephone-equipped BMW 733i, sipping a can of Diet Pepsi and reflecting on his life in the fast lane.

The impatient energizer of the nationwide tax-cut movement–a tenured professor at age 28, chief economist of the White House Office of Management and Budget at 29–has long prided himself on his ability to keep several balls in the air at once. But he acknowledges that his high-speed juggling act can sometimes get him in trouble.

“When you move very fast, you rustle the fields,” said Laffer, whose choirboy looks belie his 44 years. “You cause a commotion. Without meaning to, you create squalls.”

Controversial Figure

As a result, his life has been marked by controversy as well as achievement. Squalls spawned by Laffer’s frenetic pace have cost him a marriage and two college professorships.

Most recently, the designer of the Laffer Curve–which illustrates his disputed theory that cutting taxes can actually increase government revenues while a tax hike might reduce them–relinquished his post at USC’s School of Business Administration last September after a bitter dispute with the school’s dean. Toward the end, Laffer, who by all accounts is an excellent teacher, and the dean, Jack D. Steele, refused to even speak to each other.

USC blames Laffer’s schedule for the rupture. “With all his outside affairs, he was spreading himself too thin,” said Cornelius J. Pings, USC’s provost and senior vice president for academic affairs. “He just wasn’t meeting his obligations on campus.”

He Disputes View

Steele confirmed that Laffer’s extracurricular activities were a problem, although Laffer disputed that view.

As if to prove that he can run his $2.7-million-a-year economic consulting business and explore the possibility of seeking public office and advise President Reagan and teach, Laffer recently joined the faculty of Pepperdine University’s School of Business and Management. It was a step down in the academic world, though in many ways he and his new employer are well matched.

Pepperdine, founded in 1937 by a conservative auto-parts magnate, shares Laffer’s passion for the free enterprise system and his knack for self-promotion. Indeed, Pepperdine recently ran advertisements picturing “the renowned originator of the Laffer Curve” in the Wall Street Journal and The Times.

Although Laffer’s economic views mesh well with those of the Church of Christ-affiliated school, he is no fan of Pepperdine’s strait-laced social scene. Drinking is banned on campus and chapel attendance is mandatory.

Laffer, on the other hand, maintains an extensive cellar of German and California wines at his Rolling Hills Estates home. And, though raised as a Presbyterian, he doesn’t attend church–and says he won’t start should he decide to run for office.

About the only concession the plump professor has made to the image makers while testing the political waters has been to shed 15 pounds by substituting Very Vanilla Sego, a diet drink (“Yuk–I hate it!”), for his beloved sushi. Currently weighing in at 175, the 5-foot, 7-inch Laffer figures he has another 15 or 20 pounds to go.

Although considering a run for the Senate, Laffer is openly contemptuous of Congress. “If you look at congressmen and senators,” he tells audiences across the state, “you see a group who invariably prefer complex error over simple truth.” It is his biggest applause line. “If you ever saw what those guys actually did for a living, you’d recognize their banality and you’d throw them out of office.”

Six Children

Laffer’s personal life is as packed with activity as his professional one. Besides Traci, the 25-year-old second wife he fondly calls “my Valley girl” (she grew up in Ontario), the Laffer clan includes six children ranging in age from 6 months to 20 years, 15 rabbits, 10 parrots, 4 macaws, 3 tortoises, 2 horses, a Jack Russell terrier and a Norwegian blue fox. Laffer, an amateur biologist who once considered forsaking economics for a career in biology, manages to find time for all of them.

The menagerie used to be bigger. Fern, a pet weasel, drowned in the Laffers’ swimming pool, though her place in family folklore is secure. Laffer cackles when he remembers the time his daughter, Rachel, then 6, tossed the wriggling creature onto First Lady Nancy Reagan’s lap at a 1980 dinner party.

“I don’t think I’ve ever come so close to heart stoppage,” said Laffer, who at the time was trying to sell his supply-side theories to presidential candidate Ronald Reagan. “Everyone held their breath waiting to see how she’d react, but Mrs. Reagan was quite the lady about it.”

Unconventional Ideas

The economist revels in his new and unconventional ideas. He would reward elected officials and the head of the Federal Reserve Board with big bonuses when the economy booms and slash their salaries during recessions. He would wipe out the capital gains tax. He would amend the Constitution to provide for national referenda. And he would give $15,000, tax free, to the top 5% of scorers on the Scholastic Aptitude Test.

“Can you imagine if all of a sudden you could get out of the ghetto by studying instead of by playing basketball?” Laffer asked. “If you play basketball 16 hours a day, you become a great basketball player. If we could get these kids to study 16 hours a day, they’d become great students.”

Such schemes have won Laffer the friendship of “new ideas” Democrat Sen. Gary Hart of Colorado and the grudging admiration of some fellow economists. “Whatever you think of Laffer’s ideas, at least he thinks,” said Lester C. Thurow, a liberal professor of management and economics at Massachusetts Institute of Technology whose views often differ from Laffer’s.

Some say Laffer’s boyish looks and small stature could prove a liability should he decide to seek office. Characteristically, Laffer employs humor to disarm the size issue. In speeches, he invariably mentions flat-tax advocate Sen. Bill Bradley (D-N.J.), the former New York Knicks basketball star. Then, in his best Joan Rivers delivery, he adds: “It’s disgusting how tall he is.”

Penchant for One-Liners

Indeed, Laffer’s penchant for jokes and one-liners (sample: “The British pound is so weak that they’ve started calling it the ounce”) have led some to question his seriousness. Samuel Armacost, president and chief executive officer of BankAmerica Corp., recently quipped that a speech by Laffer “isn’t economics–it’s entertainment.” Laffer says he uses humor to make complex subjects palatable.

Although he is a polished speaker, Laffer appears to be reining in his glib, shoot-from-the-hip style. He disavows a 1981 comment embracing “the freedom to smoke pot if we want to.” Laffer acknowledged having made the remark, but said: “I think I was probably showing off at the time–trying to show you don’t have to be a conservative on all issues to favor tax cuts.”

Other Laffer views reflect his coming of age as an undergraduate at Yale and a graduate student at Stanford during the turbulent ‘60s. He staunchly opposes the draft, contending that Vietnam-era draft resisters were the spiritual ancestors of today’s anti-tax movement. “The draft is a specific tax on your body,” Laffer said.

Still, Laffer rarely wanders from economic matters in his speeches and articles. He strongly supports the concept of a flat tax, predicting that some sort of bill equalizing personal-income tax rates will emerge from Congress this year.

‘Enterprise Zones’

Another Laffer idea that has been picked up and championed by the Reagan Administration is the establishment of inner-city “enterprise zones.” Corporations locating factories in such zones would get big tax breaks and relief from minimum-wage and other regulations. The economist argues that setting up such zones would break the cycle of poverty and dependency in urban ghettos.

Despite Laffer’s emphasis on economics, mainstream economists and even conservative allies question the quality of his scholarship. “He really wasn’t interested in the life of a scholar,” said George Stigler, a professor at the University of Chicago’s Graduate School of Business, where Laffer held his first teaching job. “Doing painstaking, detailed work wasn’t his game. He went for quick and glamorous results.”

It was a trauma at Chicago, Laffer said, that turned him away from academia and pointed him toward the business and public policy arenas. In 1971, some colleagues at Chicago accused Laffer, who hadn’t yet earned his Ph.D. from Stanford, of misleading a faculty committee that had earlier promoted him to full professor.

Laffer quickly finished up his Stanford doctoral dissertation and got the degree. “It was just a question of dotting the i’s and crossing the t’s,” Laffer said, explaining that he never finished in the first place because he got swept away by his other commitments. A university committee headed by Stigler investigated the matter and found Laffer guilty of nothing worse than “carelessness,” Stigler says.

Career at a Standstill

Nonetheless, as Laffer tells it, lingering suspicion from the incident “put a stop to my career.” For the next five years, he didn’t get a raise at Chicago and academic journals shunned his articles. Suddenly, the boy wonder was a pariah. “So what do you do?” Laffer asked, “sit there and commit suicide? No, you find new avenues of expression.”

It was during this period that Laffer in 1974 sketched his now-famous curve for former journalist Jude Wanniski and an aide to President Gerald R. Ford on a cocktail napkin in a Washington restaurant. “He just scribbled it out,” Wanniski recalled, “and I thought it was a useful device for getting the message across.” The message (see chart) was a simple one: that cutting taxes could actually result in an increase in government revenues by creating incentives for people to work harder and save and invest more.

The curve didn’t gain notoriety until 1978, when Wanniski included it in his book “The Way the World Works: How Economies Fail and Succeed.” “At first,” Wanniski said, “Art was embarrassed by the name Laffer Curve–until he started to make a lot of money off it.”

Indeed, Laffer has used his high visibility to build his consulting company, A. B. Laffer Associates, into a multimillion-dollar enterprise with 20 full-time and 15 part-time employees. The firm has about 300 corporate clients who pay between $6,000 and $8,000 a year for Laffer’s economic analyses; special contracts added another $200,000 to the firm’s 1984 revenues, and about 85 speaking engagements by Laffer himself yielded $433,000.

Two Homes

Business profits and Laffer’s Pepperdine salary afford the family a comfortable life style in their antique-filled Rolling Hills Estates home and a 17-acre mountaintop retreat in Rancho Santa Fe. Such wealth is nothing new for Laffer; his late father was chairman of the board of Gould Inc., the big electronics concern, and young Arthur attended private day school in a prosperous Cleveland suburb before going on to Yale.

Despite Laffer’s commercial success, the jury is still out on his celebrated curve. Donald W. Kiefer, an economist with the Congressional Research Service, calls it “an overly simplistic approach which ignores complex economic relationships.” Critics say that the huge budget deficits that followed the Laffer-supported Kemp-Roth bill that reduced personal income taxes by 25% underscore the shortcomings of Laffer’s theory.

Laffer, on the other hand, blames delays in the tax cuts and increased government spending for the deficits. Besides, he argues, this year’s $200-billion deficit is neither “a crisis” nor “a panic situation” given the U.S. economy’s underlying vigor. Like Reagan (and unlike most economists), he believes that economic growth eventually will take care of the problem. Laffer gets to promote his economic views at periodic meetings of the President’s Economic Policy Advisory Board, of which he is a member.

Moved to California

In 1976, with his academic career going nowhere, Laffer gave up on Chicago and moved to USC. In California, he became a key supporter of 1978’s landmark real-estate tax-cutting initiative, Proposition 13. A year later, his first marriage broke up, the victim of Laffer’s four-day-a-week travel schedule. “I came home from a business trip and the kids told me my wife had been gone for three days,” Laffer recalled.

He met Traci Laffer when she was a political science major at USC moonlighting as a secretary to Dean Steele. The pair hit it off when they realized they shared a love for exotic birds. Laffer proposed to her in Paris and they were married in 1982 in an elaborate Beverly Hills wedding attended by 800 friends.

“I got a package deal,” Traci Laffer said, referring to the four children from Laffer’s previous marriage and the large collection of animals.

Laffer still travels frequently, often sleeping on “red eye” flights to the East Coast, doing his business and flying home that day. “He has this idea that you can, in effect, live two lives by cramming as much as possible into your finite number of years on Earth,” said Wanniski, who now operates his own competing economics consulting firm.

None of Laffer’s friends expect him to slow down anytime soon.

California’s decision to redraw its congressional map to flip as many as five House seats to Democrats in November is poised to play a big and potentially decisive role in the nation’s broader, bare-knuckle fight for control of Congress.

Tuesday’s primary races — where the top two candidates will advance to November runoffs — won’t determine which Republicans are ousted in most cases, but they will provide an important first look at voter sentiment and bring the fall’s most crucial head-to-head contests into focus.

“There will be some real cues and signals about what to expect,” said Christian Grose, a redistricting scholar and political science professor at USC. “We’re going to know how strong the Democrats’ chances are going to be based on who advances.”

As one example, Grose pointed to the redrawn 22nd Congressional District in the Central Valley, where incumbent Rep. David Valadao (R-Hanford) is facing challenges from moderate Assemblymember Jasmeet Kaur Bains (D-Delano) and progressive college professor Randy Villegas.

Grose said Bains is probably a stronger challenger than Villegas in a district that’s still a reach for Democrats — even if “either one could probably beat Valadao if 2026 is a big Democratic wave.”

Grose will also be closely watching the race between incumbent Reps. Young Kim (R-Anaheim Hills) and Ken Calvert (R-Corona) in the redrawn Congressional District 40, which covers a swath of inland Orange County and portions of San Bernardino and Riverside counties, including parts of Kim’s and Calvert’s current districts.

The district race wasn’t designed to deliver Democrats a seat, but will produce “one of the first casualties for Republicans from the new map” — months before other expected ousters — if Kim and Calvert don’t both advance.

The national picture

The redistricting war was prompted by President Trump’s unprecedented pressuring of Republican-controlled states to redraw their maps mid-decade for partisan advantage in order to retain control of Congress, given his sinking approval ratings and a history of midterm voters punishing the president’s party.

After Texas Republicans heeded Trump’s call to redraw five districts in their party’s favor, California Democrats responded with Proposition 50, a ballot measure passed by voters in November to sideline the state’s independent redistricting committee and allow Democrats to redraw five congressional districts in their favor.

The war ratcheted up — with more Republican states suddenly considering map changes — after a U.S. Supreme Court decision in April that weakened the 1965 Voting Rights Act and its long-standing protections for majority-Black districts in the South.

Republicans have now acted to redraw congressional maps in Alabama, Florida, Louisiana, Missouri, North Carolina, Ohio and Tennessee, with varying degrees of success, while a battle in Utah could add a single additional Democratic seat there. Attempts in other states have failed, including by the GOP in South Carolina and Democrats in Virginia.

Experts say the net result from the flurry of redistricting will probably be a gain of a handful or more seats for Republicans — but in a year when Democrats are expected to make gains more broadly, leaving control of the House up for grabs. California’s new map is “a huge deal” precisely because that math is so close, said David Wasserman, senior editor and elections analyst for the independent, nonpartisan Cook Political Report.

“Democrats are modest favorites for House control based on the political environment, but also because of California,” Wasserman said in an interview with The Times. “Picking up these four or five seats is a prerequisite to Democrats getting the majority.”

California seats in play

California has 52 seats in the U.S. House of Representatives, by far the most of any state. With their new map, California Democrats are hoping to increase their 43 House seats to 48. That would leave just four seats represented by members of the GOP despite Republicans accounting for a quarter of the state electorate.

But that outcome isn’t guaranteed.

Paul Mitchell, a Democratic redistricting expert who devised California’s new map, said the reconfigured congressional districts had to create a pathway for new Democrats to win additional seats without undermining incumbent Democrats’ reelection. And the result is a map with three pretty safe pickups for Democrats, and two districts that are “100% on the table, ready for Democrats to win,” but will nonetheless “require shoe-leather and grit.”

The redrawn congressional district boundaries enacted by Proposition 50 promise to shake up at least three seats, experts said.

Congressional District 1: Held by the late Rep. Doug LaMalfa (R-Richvale) for 13 years until his death in January, the district is currently rural and conservative, stretching from the Sacramento outskirts through Redding to the Oregon border and California’s northeastern corner. Under the state’s new congressional district map, it loses some of its rural reaches and picks up liberal coastal communities, and favors a Democrat such as state Sen. Mike McGuire, who is one of the leading candidates.

Congressional District 3: The seat is currently held by Rep. Kevin Kiley (I-Rocklin) and stretches from the Sacramento suburbs through Lake Tahoe and south along the Nevada border. Under the new map, it holds more tightly to the Sacramento suburbs, favoring a Democrat.

The changes were enough to convince an incumbent Democrat, Rep. Ami Bera (D-Elk Grove), to leave his current district — Congressional District 6, which includes the city of Sacramento and the suburbs of Roseville and Rocklin in Placer County — and run in District 3 instead.

Meanwhile, Kiley did the reverse. He quit the Republican Party, became an independent and announced he would be leaving District 3 and running instead in District 6 — the one Bera is leaving — against a slate of new Democratic challengers.

Congressional District 41. The seat is now held by Calvert, a 17-term incumbent, and currently stretches from Corona to the Coachella Valley. The new map made the district more liberal, losing voters in Riverside County and gaining them in Los Angeles County, and Calvert decided to run instead in Kim’s redrawn but still Republican-leaning Congressional District 40 that is just to the west.

The two toughest flips for Democrats, experts said, are Congressional District 22, Valadao’s heavily Latino district in the Central Valley, followed by Congressional District 48 in San Diego and Riverside counties, where Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Bonsall) decided to retire rather than run for reelection.

Valadao is viewed as especially vulnerable because of his recent support for Medicaid cuts, but he has proved resilient in the past. Meanwhile, his two leading Democratic challengers, Bains and Villegas, are in a bitter fight, with Bains receiving Democratic establishment support and Villegas winning endorsements from prominent progressives.

In Issa’s district, moderate Republican San Diego County Supervisor Jim Desmond is running against several infighting Democrats, including San Diego Councilwoman Marni von Wilpert and former Obama labor official Ammar Campa-Najjar.

Not new, or over

Jeff Wice, a New York Law School professor who was involved in California redistricting efforts in 2010, said the state “has long played hardball politics on redistricting,” including when then-Rep. Phil Burton, a powerful San Francisco Democrat, bragged more than 40 years ago that the complex congressional boundaries he’d crafted for Democrats were his “contribution to modern art.”

But in five decades studying redistricting, Wice said he has never seen such “politically driven, partisan politics” as are occurring now across the nation, which he said have “no root in law, reason or fairness” — and are only likely to continue.

“This state-by-state war is far from over, and may continue all the way through 2030,” he said. “A lot of it depends on the outcome of this November’s election.”

Wasserman said the country has “entered an era of no-holds-barred redistricting,” and he also sees redistricting efforts continuing — including in California, where they would present a distinct threat to the state’s few remaining Republicans.

Michael Li, senior counsel in the Democracy Program at the Brennan Center for Justice at NYU Law, said California is a “big part of the story” this election cycle, thanks to Proposition 50. “Democrats in California proved to be very determined and resourceful and managed to get that done, and right now California is the big offset to Republican gerrymandering around the country,” he said.

But what will come of it all — in California and across the country — is still to be determined.

“When you’re gerrymandering, you’re making a bet that you know what the politics of the future will look like, and it’s hard to predict,” he said. “It’s a high-risk, high-reward venture.”

BATON ROUGE, La. — Louisiana lawmakers passed a new congressional map Friday designed to pick up a Republican seat while leaving the state with just one of its two majority-Black House districts represented by Democrats.

Approval of the new House map came a month after the U.S. Supreme Court struck down the state’s current map as an illegal racial gerrymander, weakening the landmark 1965 federal Voting Rights Act. That decision intensified a national redistricting battle fueled by President Trump’s efforts to protect the Republicans’ slim House majority in the midterm elections.

Louisiana Republicans had considered drawing a map giving the party a shot at winning all six of the state’s U.S. House seats. But that would have required adding more Black voters to Republican-held districts, potentially backfiring with losses. Some Republicans said a 5-1 map better protects U.S. House Speaker Mike Johnson from facing a difficult reelection.

Republican Gov. Jeff Landry is expected to sign the new map into law.

In the weeks following the Supreme Court’s decision, several other Republican-controlled Southern states have seized upon a weakened federal Voting Rights Act to try to redraw their own congressional districts. It’s the latest flare-up in a heated national redistricting battle heading into the November elections, spurred along by Trump.

So far, Republicans are winning the redistricting contest. But that doesn’t necessarily mean they will win a narrowly divided U.S. House in November. So far, Republicans think they could gain as many as 14 seats from their redistricting efforts, while Democrats think they could gain six seats from new districts in California and Utah.

In Louisiana, Republicans currently hold four of six congressional seats on a court-ordered map drawn in 2024 to comply with the Voting Rights Act by including a second district with a majority-Black population.

That map, however, was challenged in court, and the Supreme Court responded on April 30 by striking it down as an illegal racial gerrymander.

Landry postponed the state’s U.S. House primary, scheduled for May 16, until later this summer to allow time for Republican lawmakers to draw and pass a new map.

The proposed map redraws Democratic U.S. Rep. Cleo Fields’ district, clustering it around predominantly white communities in the Baton Rouge area and southern Louisiana. It also adds part of Baton Rouge to a heavily Democratic, majority-Black district based in New Orleans currently represented by Democratic U.S. Rep. Troy Carter.

More lawsuits were expected over the new map.

Democrats say the proposed map could still constitute a racial gerrymander because it packs Black voters into a single congressional district. Meanwhile, the plaintiffs in the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision criticized the Legislature’s map for leaving a majority-Black district in place.

Several other Southern states also have acted on redistricting since the Supreme Court’s decision.

Florida’s Legislature passed new congressional districts just hours after the ruling, completing a redrawing that was in the works in anticipation of the decision. It could yield Republicans as many as four additional seats in the midterm elections.

Tennessee adopted new U.S. House districts a week after the ruling, carving up a majority-Black district based in Memphis in a Republican attempt to win an additional seat.

In Alabama, Republicans are attempting to pick up another seat by redrawing two districts where Black residents compose a majority or close to it. Democrats hold both seats, and the proposal is mired in a court battle.

South Carolina’s Senate, meanwhile, decided against redistricting, despite pressure from Trump.

Brook and Levy write for the Associated Press.

PLANO, Texas — As it turned out, it would never be enough.

U.S. Sen. John Cornyn tried for more than a year to show President Trump and Texas Republicans that he and the president were on the same team.

Cornyn posted a photo of himself reading Trump’s “The Art of the Deal.” He proposed legislation to rename a stretch of interstate in Trump’s honor. Perhaps most glaringly, the Senate institutionalist who long supported the filibuster reversed his position in a failed effort to advance voting restrictions that are a priority for the president.

None of it worked. On Tuesday, Cornyn became the latest in a line of Republicans who lost their primaries after falling out of favor with a president with little tolerance for dissent and a seemingly insatiable appetite for retribution. The four-term senator lost by double digits to Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, who Trump endorsed last week as “a true MAGA Warrior.”

Cornyn, on the other hand, “was VERY disloyal to me,” Trump wrote on social media.

Trump’s intervention in the Texas runoff came after weeks of successfully backing primary challengers in Indiana, Louisiana and Kentucky as revenge against incumbents who broke with his agenda.

Cornyn’s attempt to avoid the same fate made even some of his supporters wince.

“You look at the positions he took to please the president and the groveling and whatever,” said former Sen. Jeff Flake of Arizona, a Republican and Trump critic who didn’t seek reelection during the president’s first midterm in 2018. “It was rather painful to watch.”

Trump took an uncommonly equanimous approach to Tuesday’s results the following morning.

“Congratulations to Ken Paxton on such a tremendous win, and to John Cornyn for having run a strong and powerful race but, more importantly, having had a truly great career,” he wrote on social media. “John will remain my friend for a long time to come, as we both watch Ken become a fantastic, common sense Senator, one who is respected by all.”

Cornyn started early with ad touting pro-Trump voting record

Cornyn’s loss wasn’t for a lack of political gymnastics and astronomical campaign spending.

His campaign began running an advertisement last summer — part of an astounding nearly-$100-million air war by the senator and allied groups — with Cornyn looking into the camera and saying, “I voted with President Trump 99% of the time.”

On Cornyn’s campaign homepage, Trump and Cornyn stand side-by-side with thumbs pointed upward in an image aimed at projecting solidarity. Deeper in the website, the category titled “The Trump-Cornyn Record” notes the senator’s role securing votes for Trump’s signature 2017 tax cut bill.

Cornyn has also been championing provisions in Trump’s signature tax-and-spending legislation to finance work on the U.S.-Mexico border wall.

The senator had dismissed the project as “naive” during Trump’s 2016 campaign. But in January, he stood along a section of completed wall in Texas’ Rio Grande Valley touting the measure’s $11 billion for Texas contractors’ work at “the direction of the president of the United States, to whom I am very grateful.”

Cornyn’s 2023 dismissal of Trump’s return glares in background

Cornyn’s praise for his party’s leader and president were not unusual, but they clash with a statement Cornyn made in May 2023, when Trump was mounting his presidential comeback campaign.

“Trump’s time has passed him by,” he told reporters. “I don’t think President Trump understands that when you run in a general election, you have to appeal to voters beyond your base.”

Trump would go on to easily win the nomination and carry every battleground state in the general election.

Cornyn would hew closely to the president for the first 16 months of his second administration, hoping at the outside chance of his endorsement or to keeping him from weighing in at all.

But Trump did not forget the past slights.

“John Cornyn is a good man, and I worked well with him, but he was not supportive of me when times were tough,” he wrote on social media while endorsing Paxton.

Smaller gestures, and one big one

Cornyn has playfully worked to promote Trump fandom, last year posting a picture on social media of himself thoughtfully peering into the pages of Trump’s 1987 memoir and business advice book, “The Art of the Deal.”

In a more obvious gesture, he proposed designating a section of a U.S. highway from the Texas Gulf Coast to Montana as “Interstate 47,” to honor a 47th president with a well-documented love of naming things after himself. In a news release about the proposal, filed just over two weeks before Tuesday’s runoff, Cornyn said it would be known as the “Trump Interstate.”

The more tectonic shift occurred in March, after Trump had teased a possible endorsement of either Cornyn or Paxton in the runoff.

Paxton swiftly said he would consider dropping his candidacy if the Republican-controlled Senate lifted the filibuster and passed the SAVE America Act, a series of voting restrictions that Trump has described as an essential part of his agenda.

The following week, Cornyn wrote an op-ed in the New York Post — Trump’s favorite hometown newspaper — backing away from his previous support of the filibuster. He vowed to “support whatever changes to Senate rules that may prove necessary” to get the bill “through the Senate and on the president’s desk for his signature.”

Flake watched with unease.

“I know John and his long-held positions on the filibuster and the Senate’s institutions,” he said. “No office is worth that.”

Beaumont and Bedayn write for the Associated Press. Bedayn reported from San Antonio. AP writer Mary Clare Jalonick in Washington contributed to this report.

The catalog of unrequited hopes and hearts is a long one.

Captain Ahab went mad in his vengeful search for “Moby Dick.” Jay Gatsby’s ostentatious fortune failed to win the love of Daisy Buchanan. Charlie Brown never kicked the football.

Then there’s Texas, the land of broken Democratic dreams.

It’s been half a century since the party carried Texas in a presidential election. The last time Democrats won a statewide office, back in 1994, “The Lion King” was smashing box office records, Boyz II Men ruled the radio and the World Wide Web was about to change everything.

As Texas grew increasingly Republican, and politically beyond reach, Democrats insisted every election year was the one when they’d end their futility and take back power in either Washington or Austin, the state capital.

It never happened.

But is this, finally, the year?

With Ken Paxton stomping incumbent John Cornyn on Tuesday in a fierce and astronomically expensive U.S. Senate primary, many Democrats believe so — and even neutral observers agree they’ve been handed their best shot at resurrection in a good while.

“Paxton is going to be a much tougher guy [for Republicans] to haul over the finish line five months from now as opposed to Cornyn, who never lost an election until this one,” said Richard Murray, an emeritus political science professor at the University of Houston, who spent decades surveying Texas voters. “We’re looking at a very expensive, hard-fought race.”

Paxton, Texas’ three-term attorney general, is a singularly flawed candidate. Indicted, impeached, accused by his ex-wife of adultery, the GOP nominee is, to put it mildly, “an ethically challenged individual,” as the famously understated (and concerned) Republican Maine Sen. Susan Collins put it.

But Paxton was the choice of President Trump — he, too, of impeachment, indictment and adulterous infamy — and that settled that.

Trump described Cornyn, a four-term senator and former justice of the Texas Supreme Court, as a “good man” but insufficiently supportive when “times were tough.” Among those occasions of abandonment, Cornyn voted to certify the incontrovertible result of the 2020 presidential election, thwarting Trump’s bid to illegally stay in office.

The Democratic nominee for U.S. Senate is James Talarico, 37, a state representative from Austin and a Presbyterian seminarian and former public schoolteacher who’s built a nationwide following with his articulate and scriptural takedown of Republican foes. Imagine Beto O’Rourke with a clerical collar and capacity to mint money.

In 2018, O’Rourke came from seemingly nowhere and nearly upset Republican Ted Cruz in the closest Texas Senate race in decades. Before that it was the filibustering Wendy Davis who fired up Democratic imaginations nationwide. She commandeered the floor of the state Senate to briefly block antiabortion legislation — This is the year! — before falling well short in a 2014 bid for governor.

The key difference this time, with all due credit to Talarico and his prodigious fundraising, is his damaged-goods opponent. Normally, all it takes to win in Texas is a Republican ‘R’ beside a candidate’s name. But polling suggests a not-insignificant number of GOP voters could have a hard time supporting Paxton, which doesn’t necessarily mean they’ll back Talarico. They may simply not vote in the Senate race, which could be nearly as costly.

(The counterargument is that Paxton, a martyred hero to the MAGA movement, could boost turnout among the party base at a time Trump is leaking support within the establishment GOP.)

Either way, the president’s me-first political self-indulgence is not making things any easier for his fellow Republicans as they fight to hang on to control of the House and Senate in November.

In the 2022 midterm election, Trump boosted a batch of unappealing misfits — their sole attribute being their fealty to him — with poor results. Republicans lost eminently winnable Senate contests in Arizona, Georgia, New Hampshire and Pennsylvania and, with it, their chance at control of the chamber.

Even if Paxton prevails in November, Trump’s endorsement could prove quite costly to the GOP, and not just in the figurative sense.

Democrats need a gain of four seats to flip the Senate. To do so, they must successfully defend seats in Georgia, Michigan, Minnesota and New Hampshire and then pick up at least four others from a menu that includes Alaska, Iowa, Maine, Montana, Nebraska, North Carolina, Ohio and, now, Texas.

It’s a considerable reach. But Democratic chances look a lot better than they did just a few months ago, before Trump mired the country in an Iranian quagmire and the price of gas and just about everything else began to sail through the ceiling.

Holding on to Cornyn’s seat will end up costing Republicans a kingly sum — money that “can’t be spent in two places at the same time,” as Matt Mackowiak, a longtime Texas GOP strategist and advisor to Cornyn’s campaign, noted. “It can go either to Michigan, New Hampshire, Georgia, Iowa, Alaska. Or it can go here to Texas, which is extremely expensive.”

Odds are against Talarico and Democrats winning the Senate race in November, because Texas remains, fundamentally, a Republican and conservative-leaning state. Paxton may win for that reason and that reason alone.

“This is as good an environment as Democrats are going to get realistically,” said Jim Henson, head of the Texas Politics Project at the University of Texas in Austin, who’s witnessed many highly touted Democrats fail in a blaze of unwarranted hype. “But when you start doing the math, it’s a little bit hard to see it all adding up.”

Which is not to say it can’t happen.

Truth, as the saying goes, can be stranger than “Moby Dick” or any other fiction.

PLANO, Texas — Texans are choosing a Republican nominee for U.S. Senate in Tuesday’s runoff election, bringing to a close the extended, bitter and expensive primary where President Trump weighed in late to tip the race in another effort to rid the GOP of leaders less devoted to him.

Trump’s endorsement of state Atty. Gen. Ken Paxton over four-term Sen. John Cornyn gives the challenger a late boost and puts Cornyn at risk of becoming the first Republican senator in Texas history to seek the party’s nod and lose.

That’s despite Cornyn’s campaign and allied groups spending roughly $90 million in advertising since last year, the vast majority of it attacking Paxton.

It’s the latest GOP contest where Trump has sought to punish a Republican he sees as insufficiently loyal. This month, he has successfully backed challengers to incumbents in Louisiana, Kentucky and Indiana, a sign of his enduring influence among primary voters.

Paxton’s campaign and a pro-Paxton super PAC began airing ads promoting the endorsement within 24 hours of Trump’s announcement. Cornyn acknowledged Trump’s move would have an impact but said he wasn’t giving up.

“I know who gets to choose our senators, and it’s the people of Texas,” he said hours after the endorsement.

The winner will run in November against Democratic state Rep. James Talarico.

Tuesday’s runoffs also will decide Democratic U.S. House nominees for districts in Dallas and Houston that overwhelmingly support Democrats, and a San Antonio-area seat the party hopes to flip.

The primary has been long, bitter and costly

Cornyn led Paxton in the March primary but failed to win a majority in the three-way contest that also included U.S. Rep. Wesley Hunt, who finished in a distant third.

That was after Cornyn’s campaign and allied groups waged a monthslong ad campaign, mostly attacking Paxton for ethical and personal questions. The two-term attorney general was acquitted in a 2023 impeachment trial when allegations of extramarital affairs surfaced. Last year, Paxton’s wife filed for divorce, citing “biblical grounds.”

The alliance of pro-Cornyn groups have continued its attack, outspending Paxton’s campaign and two allied super PACs $16.5 million to $5.9 million since March 3, according to the ad-tracking firm AdImpact.

Trump promised to endorse immediately after the primary, asking the unchosen candidate to withdraw. But he didn’t act until after early voting began on May 18.

“Ken Paxton has gone through a lot, in many cases, very unfairly, but he is a Fighter, and knows how to win,” Trump wrote in a social media post endorsing him. “Our Country needs Fighters, and also Loyalty to the Cause of Greatness.”

Pro-Cornyn groups lately have been airing ads criticizing the attorney general office’s handling of a Waco sex abuse case. Pro-Paxton groups had seized on Cornyn’s awkward relationship with Trump.

Trump snubs Cornyn amid retribution campaign

The negative tenor could diminish turnout in an election already complicated by coming a day after Memorial Day, Texas Republican strategist Tyler Norris said. About 2 million of Texas’ 18.7 million voters participated in the GOP primary.

The dynamic could favor Paxton, whose support draws from more of the most loyal Trump base in Texas, said Norris, who isn’t affiliated with either campaign.

“The defining battle lines are based around hyper-negative messaging, which dampens turnout to begin with,” he said. “So who is going to show up is the hardest of the hard core.”

Trump in his endorsement also poked at Cornyn, as he has done with other Republicans who are not in lockstep with the president.

He blasted Republican Louisiana Sen. Bill Cassidy as “a Disloyal Disaster” on May 16, before Cassidy lost a GOP primary for the office he has held since 2015. The two-term senator had voted to convict Trump after his 2021 impeachment trial over the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol. Trump backed U.S. Rep. Julia Letlow, who advanced to a runoff with John Fleming, the state treasurer. Cassidy finished well behind them.

Last week, Trump celebrated as Kentucky Rep. Thomas Massie, a critic of the Trump administration’s handling of the Jeffrey Epstein files, lost his primary to Ed Gallrein. Trump called Massie “the worst congressman in the history of our country.”

In endorsing Paxton, Trump said Cornyn “was not supportive of me when times were tough” and that “John was very late in backing me.”

Cornyn suggested in 2023 that Trump could not win the presidency again in 2024 and that his “time has passed him by.” He also was an early critic of Trump’s plan for a border wall between the U.S. and Mexico — a project he now supports.

Senate GOP leaders backed Cornyn, saying he would be stronger in the general election. Some GOP strategists have argued a Paxton nomination would cost millions of dollars more to promote in the fall, when money could be spent defending Republican seats in more competitive states. Democrats need to gain a net of four seats to take the majority.

Democrats also will choose U.S. House nominees

Newly elected Rep. Christian Menefee and veteran Rep. Al Green are vying for the party nod in Texas’ 18th District, which the Republican-led Texas Legislature redrew last year to help the GOP. The new map led to a contest between incumbents and marks the end of a dizzying series of elections in the Houston area. Menefee was elected in a special runoff in January to the seat that had been held by the late Rep. Sylvester Turner, who died in March 2025.

Menefee finished narrowly ahead of Green in the March 3 primary but didn’t win a majority to avoid the runoff.

Former Rep. Colin Allred and U.S. Rep. Julie Johnson are competing in the Dallas-area 33rd District. Johnson was elected to the seat in 2024, the year Allred lost his U.S. Senate challenge to Republican Sen. Ted Cruz. Allred was running for Senate again this cycle but dropped his bid and instead is looking to return to the House.

Near San Antonio, Democratic leaders are trying to prevent Maureen Galindo, who has expressed antisemitic views, from winning the party’s runoff with Johnny Garcia. While Texas lawmakers redrew the 35th District to help Republicans, Democrats view it as within reach and don’t want Galindo’s past comments to impede them.

Beaumont and Bedayn write for the Associated Press. Bedayn reported from Austin.

A FURIOUS passenger has called out a major airline for giving him a smaller than usual seat.

A British passenger has bashed KLM Royal Dutch Airlines after they revealed their assigned seat was “30 per cent smaller than usual”.

Follow The Sun’s award-winning travel team on Instagram and Tiktok for top holiday tips and inspiration @thesuntravel.

Calling out the airline on X, Mike (@finnishmike), said: “Almost 8 months ago @KLM said they will reimburse my payment for this seat, which is not supposed to be on sales for passengers.

“Since then, they’ve completely ignored me won’t even reply back to emails anymore.”

According to The Mail, Mika was assigned seat 30A but when he arrived he realised it was much smaller than he expected it to be – even though he had sat in the same seat previously.

Read more on travel inspo

DEEP DIVE

All the lidos in the UK mapped – with FREE entry, water slides and cocktail bars

HOL YES

I’m a travel editor & mum-of-3… my favourite family holidays from just £3pp a night

Mika had specifically paid to be on an exit row, which usually means extra leg room.

However, the seat he eventually sat in was 30 per cent smaller than the one next to it, despite both seats being the same price.

Mika added: “It was only €99 (£85.57) and its not about the money, its principle.

“Just common sense they should reimburse me back, shame.”

One commenter pointed out that the seat is relatively new and is normally used for staff travelling between cities.

Sun Travel has contacted KLM for comment.

A pilot’s wife has urged passengers to stop booking a certain seat to travel on planes. Laurie said it’s vital people avoid it if they want a smooth and comfortable journey

If you’re going to listen to advice from someone about travelling abroad, one person you should pay attention to is probably a pilot’s wife. After all, they know all the dos and don’ts when it comes to air travel and making the most of your holidays.

This is why Laurie, known as travelby_laurie on TikTok, is happy to offer advice whenever she can, and she recently turned her attention to the worst seats to book to travel on planes. According to her, there are particular rows you need to avoid to ensure your journey is executed as comfortably and smoothly as possible.

She’s not the only pilot’s wife to have made such a confession either. Previously, another woman opened up about the task she needs to complete every morning.

In the clip, Laurie said: “Do not sit in these seats the next time you’re flying in an airplane. Number one, the obvious seat to avoid is the very last row of any airplane, because they do not recline.

“There are two other reasons to avoid that back row seat. Number one, because you’ll be last off the airplane.

“Number two, if you have a connecting flight, where you are catching another airplane in that airport, to get to your final destination, avoid being in the back of the plane.

“The airlines do not tell you that 50 minutes is not enough time to connect to another flight but they are still going to allow you to book them.”

She also noted she doesn’t ever want to sit in the row that’s in front of the exit row. This is because the exit row may not recline, and the seat in front of the exit row also often does not recline.

This is an aviation safety measure put in place to ensure the seatbacks don’t block the aisle and impede a rapid evacuation in an emergency. However, even though the rule can be imposed for a reason, Laurie noted journeys can already be “uncomfortable”, so it’s best to do your research before booking a seat to see which areas are more comfortable.

If you have a lengthy flight ahead, these spots are probably best avoided. It’s worth noting that some airlines in America include row 13 in their fleets; however, several other airlines around the world often omit the number entirely to accommodate passenger superstitions about bad luck.

What you need to know

While some people avoid the row directly in front of an emergency exit row, as these seats typically have their recline mechanism disabled, there’s something else most people need to consider. Booking a seat at the back of the plane could be more problematic for passengers.

Usually, people tend to avoid them because seats often do not recline, are located directly next to noisy lavatories and galleys and will leave you feeling the most turbulence. As well as this, sitting there will take you longer to deplane, which means you may have limited meal options as service starts from the front.

Even though the very back row can sometimes be cheaper or less crowded on off-peak flights, the general consensus points to several major drawbacks. If you have a connecting flight, it could also cause issues too, as you may be last to get off the plane.

This is why Laurie generally advises against it. It’s a nugget of travel wisdom you may not have known before.