US Midterm Elections 2026

Primary races across the country have offered an early read on where voters want their parties to head before November’s consequential midterms in the United States.

With only a handful of US states remaining in the congressional primary calendar, voters in Alaska and Wyoming — two reliably Republican strongholds — head to the polls on Tuesday, with races that could send ripples well beyond their small electorates.

Although the state has long been safe Republican territory in federal elections, this year marks the third consecutive election cycle in which Alaska finds itself among a handful of states at the centre of the fight for control of Congress.

Wyoming offers a different kind of race: a rare wholesale turnover of Republican leadership. Wyomingites have a glut of new leaders to choose from at the statehouse, in the governor’s mansion and in the US Capitol. Contests that could further consolidate the state’s ultraconservative politics or begin to push them to the centre.

Here’s what’s on our radar.

Alaska

When do polls open and close?

Polls open at 7am (15:00 GMT) and close at 8pm local time (04:00 on Wednesday GMT), although Alaska’s two time zones stagger poll closings across the state.

What makes Alaska’s primary different?

Unlike most states, Alaska uses a single primary rather than separate Republican and Democratic contests. This comes after Alaska voters approved Ballot Measure 2 back in 2020, which effectively eliminated the state’s traditional party-primary system for most offices. Instead, all candidates appear on a single, nonpartisan primary ballot. The top four vote-getters advance.

What are the key races to watch in Alaska?

The US Senate race carries the clearest national stakes because it could tip control of the chamber. The governor’s race is worth watching because of its exceptionally crowded and competitive field.

Seventeen candidates are running to replace Alaska’s staunchly pro-Trump Republican Governor Mike Dunleavy, who is barred by term limits from seeking a third term. Among them is former Governor Bill Walker, who is running as an independent. Republican candidates include former state Senators Click Bishop, Shelley Hughes and Lesil McGuire, former Anchorage Mayor Dave Bronson, former state revenue Commissioner Adam Crum, Matanuska-Susitna Borough Mayor Edna DeVries, former state Attorney General Treg Taylor and business owner and conservative activist Bernadette Wilson.

Former state Senator Tom Begich and former state Representative Jonathan Kreiss-Tomkins are the two Democrats in the race.

Meanwhile, sixteen candidates are running for Alaska’s US Senate seat, but the race has two chief frontrunners: incumbent Republican Senator Dan Sullivan and former Democratic Representative Mary Peltola. The Cook Political Report ranks the race among the country’s most competitive Senate contests.

Why the Senate race matters nationally

Though Alaska has not sent a Democrat to the Senate since 2008, former Representative Peltola, who represented Alaska in the US House from 2022 to 2025, demonstrated that a Democrat can win statewide there.

The race has drawn millions in campaign spending, including money being spent to elevate political unknowns who are unlikely to win the seat, but could materially alter the November field.

Super PACs have spent more than $2m trying to boost candidates who are not considered serious contenders for the seat, according to Alaska Public Media.

An Alaska Survey Research poll conducted in March found Peltola ahead of Sullivan among primary voters, 46.4 percent to 40.9 percent. In a simulated general-election matchup using Alaska’s ranked-choice system, Peltola also polled ahead of Sullivan.

A tale of two Dan Sullivans

There is an unusual Senate subplot: two Republicans named Dan Sullivan are on the ballot. One is the incumbent senator; the other, Dan J Sullivan Jr is a retired teacher from Petersburg. The state’s Division of Elections initially removed him from the ballot after determining that his candidacy appeared intended to confuse voters, but the Alaska Supreme Court later ordered officials to restore him to the primary ballot.

That creates a problem that is particularly acute in Alaska’s primary. Unlike the November election, the primary is not ranked-choice: voters select a single candidate, and the four highest vote-getters prevail in the general election. With two Dan Sullivans vying for the same electoral spot, even a relatively small number of mistaken votes could influence which candidate clears the hurdle.

Senator Sullivan will appear on the ballot as “Dan S. Sullivan” alongside the labels of “Registered Republican” and “Incumbent”. Challenger Sullivan will be listed as “Daniel J. Sullivan Jr.” without any party affiliation listed, although he filed for office as a Republican.

On Israel, Sullivan and Peltola find common ground

Much of the attention around incumbent Dan Sullivan’s fundraising reflects the issues that have defined his Senate career, including his strong support for Israel and his hawkish approach to Iran.

The 61-year-old has repeatedly backed military aid and closer US-Israel defence ties while vehemently opposing efforts by the International Criminal Court (ICC) to prosecute Israeli officials. His congressional record includes repeated efforts to maintain or strengthen sanctions on Iran.

Sullivan’s reelection run has attracted substantial backing from high-profile political organisations, including the Republican Senate Leadership Fund, which has committed at least $15m towards his campaign. The American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC ) has also helped funnel about $250,000 in individual contributions to Sullivan during the first quarter of 2026.

Peltola has also championed Israel-related legislation during her time in the House, and sometimes even broke with fellow Democrats on Israel-related votes. The Jewish Democratic Council of America, which describes itself as advocating for a strong US-Israel relationship, endorsed her Senate campaign back in March.

Wyoming

When do polls in Wyoming open and close?

Voting begins at 7am local time (13:00 GMT) and ends at 7pm local time (01:00 GMT the following day).

What’s one big race to watch?

The Senate Republican primary.

In deep-red Wyoming, the Senate primary is less a contest about whether the GOP will hold the seat than about which Republican candidate will win it.

The Cowboy State has voted Republican in every presidential election since 1964, with the exception of 1976, when Jimmy Carter carried Wyoming. The Senate race is also interesting because it is an open-seat succession fight.

What are the important races in the Wyoming primary election?

The US’s least populated state is in for a political makeover, with a shake-up at nearly every level. With incumbent Senator Cynthia Lummis declining to seek re-election and Representative Harriet Hageman relinquishing her House post to try to succeed her in the Senate, Wyoming is poised for an unusually broad reshuffling in elected officeholders.

Wyoming’s Republican Party is divided between a hard-right bloc that already controls the state House and more traditional conservatives who retain greater influence in the Senate.

Hageman, the Trump-backed hard-lined congresswoman who rose to national prominence after unseating Liz Cheney in the 2022 Republican primary, is the clear favourite to succeed retiring Senator Cynthia Lummis. Among the other Republicans running to replace Lummis in the US Senate are former Kirby Mayor Sam Mead and former environmental services business owner Jimmy Skovgard.

In an April interview with Jackson Hole Community Radio (KHOL), Mead said that the endorsements Hageman received from Trump, Lummis and Barrasso come with an expectation that she will support the administration “no matter what.” While Mead has promised that he would push back against Trump on public lands, tariffs and foreign wars when he believes the administration’s policies run counter to Wyoming’s interests.

Nine active candidates are competing for the Republican nomination to replace Hageman in the US House in what’s shaping up to be the most expensive contest on Tuesday’s ballot. The field includes former state Superintendent of Public Instruction Jillian Balow, state Senate President Bo Biteman, businessmen Steve Friess and Reid Rasner, and Wyoming Secretary of State Chuck Gray.

Democrats in the United States have approved a shakeup to their 2028 presidential primary calendar as the party looks to take back the White House.

During a meeting on Saturday in Austin, Texas, Democratic National Committee (DNC) members voted to overhaul which states have the first say in picking the party’s presidential nominee.

South Carolina will once again take centre stage as the party’s first official nominating contest, with its Democratic primary scheduled for January 22, 2028.

Nevada will go second on February 1, followed by New Hampshire on February 8. New Mexico, Michigan and Virginia will round out the early states over the course of that month.

The new calendar formalises a change that began during the last presidential election cycle in 2024, when the national Democratic Party similarly put South Carolina at the front of its primary lineup.

The 2028 primaries set up a more competitive calendar for Democrats, giving greater influence to states with more racial diversity, in an effort to better represent the party’s key constituencies.

Debate over primary calendar

But plans to reshape the primary calendar have been met with controversy in the past.

In 2024, for instance, local leaders in New Hampshire defied party leaders by holding a state-run primary ahead of the first party-led vote in South Carolina. As justification, New Hampshire officials cited a state law requiring their primary to be the first in the nation.

There was also pushback in Iowa, whose state caucus had ushered in the primary season for decades.

Iowa Democrats warned that moving the state lower in the party’s calendar could send the wrong signal to rural voters, who often feel overlooked in national politics and tend to lean rightward.

Still, proponents of the calendar change argue that it will help the Democratic primaries better mirror the overall population of the US.

South Carolina has normally been Democrats’ first contest in the southern US, and it has a significant population of Black voters. Roughly a quarter of the state identifies as Black, according to census estimates.

Nevada and New Mexico, meanwhile, have large Latino or Hispanic populations, with 31 percent and 49 percent of their residents identifying as such, respectively. All three states will be at the forefront of the primary calendar, come 2028.

DNC Chairman Ken Martin took to social media on Saturday to tout the changes as capturing the demographic shifts in the country.

“These states reflect the diversity of America and will help ensure our nominee is best positioned to take back the White House in 2028,” Martin wrote on X.

Ongoing party feud

Iowa and New Hampshire both have overwhelmingly white electorates, and critics have long argued the two states have played outsized roles in shaping presidential elections.

Notching early victories in the party primaries can help a candidate build momentum, and that, in turn, can help presidential hopefuls secure party nominations.

Former Vermont Governor Howard Dean, who led the DNC from 2005 to 2009, told The Associated Press (AP) news agency that the calendar changes will make for a more representative nominating process.

“These states look more like the country,” Dean said, pointing to places like South Carolina and Nevada, “whereas Iowa and New Hampshire don’t”.

But it remains uncertain how the new calendar could affect the growing intra-party feud between progressive and more moderate, establishment candidates.

Democrats in Michigan, one of the states given a boost in the calendar shakeup, narrowly voted earlier this month to select progressive Abdul El-Sayed as their Senate nominee.

Given that Michigan will now have an earlier say in the voting process, some experts have speculated that the swing state could help progressives assert greater influence over the party overall.

But other states given more prominence in the 2028 lineup have a more moderate streak.

South Carolina, for instance, favoured then-candidate Joe Biden in the 2020 primaries over his more progressive opponents, Senators Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren.

“I think our primary voters up north are probably a little different than primary voters in South Carolina,” Boyd Brown, a former DNC member from South Carolina, told AP.

Here is the full list of the six states that will have the first say in Democrats’ 2028 presidential primaries:

• South Carolina: January 22, 2028
• Nevada: February 1, 2028
• New Hampshire: February 8, 2028
• New Mexico: February 15, 2028
• Michigan: February 22, 2028
• Virginia: February 29, 2028

Trump labels US Democratic nominees ‘jihadists’ in inflammatory remarks made in the Oval Office.

United States President Donald Trump has described Democratic candidates in the midterm US elections as “jihadists” in an apparent reference to Muslim Democratic candidate Abdul El-Sayed securing his party’s nomination for the Michigan primary elections last week.

The pronouncements fuel a proliferating wave of Islamophobic discourse among Republican lawmakers and elected officials in the sprint to lock down ballots ahead of November’s midterm elections.

“We have jihadists being elected all over the place, whether it’s communism [or] jihadism,” Trump told reporters in the Oval Office on Monday. “A friend of mine called up, he said, ‘You know […] you should use the word jihadist’, that’s what’s happening. If you take a look at what’s happening in other countries, I’m not really sure that’s the way we want to live.”

Trump also hurled another tirade against people of Somali descent, of which there are upwards of 260,000 across the US. He called them “not smart”, and said they have “no aptitude” and “nothing going” for them to “tell us how to run our country”.

Edward Ahmed Mitchell, the national deputy director of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), a Muslim civil rights and advocacy organisation in the US, said that Trump’s hateful anti-Muslim rhetoric “is putting a target on the back of Muslim elected officials across our nation” and that “this type of dangerous rhetoric is fueling the surge in complaints of anti-Muslim bigotry that our civil rights organization has documented over the past three years”.

Although the president refrained from explicitly naming any individual candidate, hours later, he focused his attention on El-Sayed, who is a son of Egyptian immigrants. The president shared a photo on Truth Social showing the Democratic contender positioned before a gathering that featured two women in headscarves, accompanied by the caption: “They are coming for your home and your belongings.”

Trump also targeted El-Sayed’s victory directly last week, calling him a “hater of Jews” and “hater of Israel” who will bring “filth, crime, death, destruction, embarrassment”.

Several other Republicans also beefed up their anti-Muslim rhetoric, following El-Sayed’s win, parroting remarks that Muslims do not belong in American society. Representative Nancy Mace of South Carolina claimed on social media that “every single Muslim holding public office in America is a Trojan horse, and a threat to both national security and our republic”.

Meanwhile, Alabama Senator Tommy Tuberville labelled El-Sayed a “TERRORIST” and wrote on social media that “Abdulrahman Mohamed El-Sayed is a RADICAL ISLAMIST.”

This outburst occurred just two days after Trump shared a social media post comparing a photo of himself and First Lady Melania Trump with one of El-Sayed and his wife Dr Sarah Jukaku, who is a psychiatrist. The image was captioned: “Two VERY DIFFERENT America’s.”

Speaking on CNN’s State of the Union with host Jake Tapper on Sunday night, the Democratic Senate candidate hit back, saying, “Sarah and I actually like each other”, adding “I don’t know about the first lady and the president, but from what I’ve heard, it’s a bit of a rocky road”.

With less than 90 days to go until the highly anticipated midterm elections come to a head, and with all 435 seats in the House of Representatives and 34 Senate seats up for grabs, Democrats are confronting an ideological schism between moderate leaders and triumphing democratic progressives, some of whom are increasingly being characterised as an endangerment to Washington’s national security establishment altogether.

“People don’t want to have radical lunatics involved in running our country,” said Trump on Monday, “and that’s what we have.”

Republicans in South Carolina will head to the polls on Tuesday to decide who will replace the late Senator Lindsey Graham in the race to represent the state in the United States Senate.

The vote comes less than five weeks after Graham’s unexpected death on July 11 from cardiovascular disease.

During his 23 years in the Senate, Graham developed a reputation as one of the most hawkish voices in Congress, advocating for military intervention in Iran, Iraq and elsewhere. A longtime ally of President Donald Trump, he had sailed to victory in South Carolina’s Republican primary race on June 9.

A crowded field, which includes his sister, Darline Graham, is now running to succeed Graham. The winner will face Democratic nominee Annie Andrews in the November midterms.

Here’s what to know about Tuesday’s primary re-do:

Who is running to replace Graham?

Ten candidates are running to be the Republican candidate.

They include Darline Graham, who has been appointed to finish her brother’s current term in the Senate, which runs through January.

Businessman Mark Lynch, who finished second to Graham in the June primary, is also in the race.

Two current members of Congress, Russell Fry and Ralph Norman, are also competing, as is the former governor of the state, Mark Sanford.

Rounding out the field are lawyer Duke Buckner, biomedical engineer Samuel Shepherd, former Myrtle Beach Mayor Mark McBride, retired Air Force officer Glenda Gail Parker and farmer Danny Lee Ford II.

When do polls open?

Polls are open from 7am to 7pm Eastern US time.

Why is South Carolina holding a special election?

Graham’s death has upended what was expected to be a straightforward race.

Under South Carolina law, if a candidate is elected in a primary but then vacates the race, a special election must be held. Candidates are able to officially enter the race on the second Tuesday after the vacancy occurs, with the filing period open for one week.

Who is leading the race?

Darline Graham was initially seen only as a placeholder for her older brother, but a recent poll has shown her taking a commanding lead in the race.

The Quantus Insights poll found Graham carrying 30.4 percent of the vote, putting her in first place. US Representative Ralph Norman was a distant second at 17.5 percent, with his fellow Congressman Russell Fry taking 16.6 percent.

Former Governor Mark Sanford was in fourth at 15.4 percent.

Who is filling Graham’s seat now?

The US Constitution and South Carolina state law allow the governor to select Graham’s replacement to finish his term.

Outgoing Governor Henry McMaster, a Republican, announced Darline Graham as his pick on July 13, two days after her brother’s death.

She is the first woman to represent South Carolina in the Senate, and she is considered a continuity candidate in Tuesday’s special election, likely to carry forward her late brother’s political platform.

She and Lindsey Graham were said to be very close, as he helped raise her after their parents died. Prior to her appointment to the Senate, Darline Graham served as a former public administrator.

What does this mean for the midterm vote?

A Republican remains favoured to win the open Senate seat in the red-leaning state, but Graham’s death is generally seen as increasing the odds for Democrats.

President Trump’s surprise decision to endorse Darline Graham could prove impactful, though.

The nod likely gave her a bump among Republican voters, but the fact that she has no previous legislative experience could make her more vulnerable in the general election than more tested candidates.

On the Democratic side, Andrews, a paediatrician, has proven an adept fundraiser. She has seized on a measles outbreak in the state, beginning in October 2025, to criticise Republican leadership, as well as Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F Kennedy Jr, a prominent vaccine sceptic.

Andrews has maintained that voters in South Carolina are hungry for change.

“They’re looking for something different, and as a doctor and a mom and someone who represents a generational shift in leadership, that’s exactly what I’m offering,” she told the Charleston City Paper.

A spate of recent polls signals that Democrats are gaining traction in both the races for United States Senate and the governor’s mansion in Texas, turning a reliably Republican state into a battleground ahead of the November midterm elections.

On Friday, the nonpartisan research initiative Texas Pulse, helmed in part by the Texas A&M Bush School of Government and Public Service, released its latest public opinion survey into the state’s midterm races.

It found that James Talarico, the Democratic nominee, is now leading the US Senate race by four points, with 47 percent support. His Republican rival, state Attorney General Ken Paxton, trailed at 43 percent.

Those statistics suggested growing momentum for Talarico, who was tied with Paxton in an earlier Texas Pulse poll from June.

Texas Pulse’s findings echo another poll, released on Thursday, that showed Talarico leading Paxton 48 percent to 45 percent. Another 6 percent of respondents said they were undecided.

That poll, conducted by the research firms YouGov and 254 Labs, suggested that Talarico had a significant advantage among undecided and independent voters in the Lone Star State.

An estimated 57 percent of independent voters preferred the Democratic candidate over his Republican competitor, although 20 percent said they remained undecided.

A Fox News poll from late July similarly found that 68 percent of independents are getting behind Talarico, a 37-year-old state representative.

While polls can vary dramatically in the months leading up to an election, the latest survey results are likely to serve as a bellwether for Democratic odds in November’s midterms.

The left-leaning party is hoping to wrest both chambers of Congress from Republican control.

Should Democrats succeed in doing so, their majorities could serve as a bulwark against President Donald Trump’s legislative agenda during the final two years of his presidency.

But analysts believe the Senate may be more difficult to flip than the House of Representatives. While all 435 seats in the House are up for grabs in November, only a third of the Senate is on the ballot.

That makes every Senate race critical to either party maintaining — or retaking — control of the upper chamber.

Cost of living concerns

Texas has long-established bona fides as a Republican stronghold. No Democrat has held statewide office in Texas in more than three decades.

But the open Senate seat in Texas has created an unusually competitive race for Democrats.

Paxton, the Trump-endorsed candidate, defeated the incumbent Senator John Cornyn in the Republican primary in May.

But the longtime state attorney general has generated concerns among Republicans about his ability to appeal to centrist voters.

Paxton’s career in politics has been riddled with corruption scandals. During his tenure as the state’s attorney general, he has faced allegations of abuse of office and misconduct involving a political donor, the latter of which resulted in his impeachment — though he was not removed from office.

He also faced a separate, nearly decade-long securities fraud case that was dismissed last year. His support for the attack on the US Capitol on January 6, 2021, and accusations of adultery have also been sources of criticism.

A Texas Public Opinion Research poll, released last week, found Paxton trailing Talarico by five points, 45 percent to 40 percent.

Notably, that poll suggested that the Democrat leads by 34 percentage points among self-described moderates, with 54 percent support to Paxton’s 20 percent.

Experts like Evan Roth Smith, the lead pollster for Texas Public Opinion Research, credit that upward momentum to a solid campaign pitch.

“Talarico is up because he’s running the race every Democrat in this country should be running. When they go on TV, podcasts and talk to reporters, they should focus on affordability. If we can win on affordability, we can win elections,” Smith told Al Jazeera.

Talarico, a former educator with a seminary background, has largely concentrated his campaign on cost-of-living and economic issues, proposing to raise the federal minimum wage.

He also recently unveiled a plan late last month to end tax breaks for tech companies building data centres.

Paxton’s economic agenda, meanwhile, has focused on tax breaks, including a $25,000 tax deduction for out-of-pocket medical expenses and a $50,000 deduction for first-time homebuyers.

But Texas’s Senate contest is not the only statewide race generating attention for its competitiveness this election cycle.

The gubernatorial race is also getting tighter between Democratic state Representative Gina Hinojosa and Republican incumbent Greg Abbott. That race is neck and neck.

Abbott’s lead has shrunk from six points to a single point, with Abbott at 46 percent and Hinojosa at 45 percent, according to Friday’s Texas Pulse poll.

The Texas Public Opinion Research poll has Abbott leading by three points, with 45 percent support compared with 42 percent for Hinojosa. A wild card, however, remains in the 10 percent of respondents who identify as undecided.

Detroit, Michigan – The sighs in the audience were audible as United States Congresswoman Haley Stevens closed in on Abdul El-Sayed’s lead in the Michigan Democratic primary for the US Senate.

El-Sayed, a public health advocate, took the stage after midnight as uncertainty had dampened the once-celebratory mood among supporters in Detroit early on Wednesday.

“I wish I could tell you that I was declaring victory right about now. It turns out it takes a long time to count some votes in Michigan. It’s a big state,” he joked.

The progressive candidate went on to remind the crowd of what his campaign was up against: tens of millions of dollars in campaign spending by the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) and other special-interest groups.

“I want you to remind them that if we come through this, when we come through this, inshallah [God willing]”, he said, “that we’ll have taken $70m on the chin and kept fighting back.”

Stevens, a four-term congresswoman, continued to shrink El-Sayed’s lead as the votes came in, bringing the margin between them down to less than 1 percent.

The final results arrived later on Wednesday morning, long after the sun had risen on a new day. El-Sayed had won by a razor-thin margin.

He had fended off not just Stevens but also the pro-Israel groups and Democratic power brokers in Michigan, including top officials from the party, like Governor Gretchen Whitmer, who had endorsed his opponent.

The result appeared to stun the US political system, dealing yet another setback to the pro-Israel Democrats and sparking a response from President Donald Trump, who was quick to label El-Sayed as a “Communist loser who hates Jews and Israel”.

But the message from the vote results was clear: Campaign spending and big-name endorsements may no longer be enough to secure victory within the Democratic Party.

‘It’s not just the status quo anymore’

El-Sayed’s supporters say the delayed celebrations and the smaller-than-expected margin of victory should not diminish the significance of the elections.

Democratic state legislator Alabas Farhat said El-Sayed’s victory sends a message that, if candidates run on an anti-war platform and are willing to take on special interest groups like AIPAC, people will vote for them.

“It’s not just the status quo anymore and these establishment politicians who are used to coasting through these elections,” Farhat told Al Jazeera.

“It’s now folks who want to come in and disrupt and deliver big, bold agendas and relief for the working families of Michigan and anywhere else.”

Stevens had overwhelming support from the Democratic Party establishment. She was backed by Whitmer, former Senator Debbie Stabenow, Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer and retiring Senator Gary Peters, whose seat she was running for.

Defeating Stevens allows El-Sayed to compete in November’s general elections against former Republican Congressman Mike Rogers, who is backed by Trump and will likely receive support from pro-Israel groups.

AIPAC has already indicated it will continue its spending in Michigan to beat El-Sayed in the general election. “Our members remain determined to ensure that voters reject Dr El-Sayed and his radical anti-Israel agenda in November,” the group said in a statement on Wednesday.

The pro-Israel lobby group also downplayed El-Sayed’s victory, highlighting wins by other pro-Israel candidates, including in Missouri, where Congressman Wesley Bell comfortably won against his progressive challenger, former Congresswoman Cori Bush.

“While disappointed that some of our AIPAC-backed candidates did not prevail, our community is proud to support pro-Israel Democrats and Republicans who stand for our values, and we are encouraged that voters in races across this primary season continue to broadly choose leaders who support a strong US-Israel partnership,” AIPAC said.

Even with polls showing that the general election is up for grabs, analysts are emphasising the historic nature of El-Sayed’s primary victory.

Progressive Senator Bernie Sanders called El-Sayed’s win the “most extraordinary victory” in modern US politics.

“Have you ever heard of a candidate in a major race getting outspent nine to one, taking on the entire establishment and winning?” Sanders said on the Pod Save America podcast.

“I cannot recall somebody having done that.”

Left-wing victories

El-Sayed was not alone in security victories in the state’s primary races. The overall result in Michigan is seen as another major achievement for the progressive left in this election cycle.

In Tuesday’s election, progressive state legislator Donavan McKinney defeated pro-Israel incumbent Shri Thanedar in a US House Democratic primary. In a district north of Detroit, left-wing climate organiser William Lawrence also won a Democratic primary for Congress by 15 points.

Across the US, from California to Colorado to Pennsylvania to New Jersey to New York, progressives have won similar races, ousting several incumbents and claiming open seats in safe Democratic districts.

What makes El-Sayed’s win significant is not only the spending and endorsements he faced, but also that he won a state-wide race in a swing state that voted for Trump less than two years ago. Michigan is home to more than 10 million people.

Progressive Pennsylvania State Representative Chris Rabb, who is on his way to Congress after winning a competitive primary for a heavily Democratic seat in May, said left-wing candidates are prevailing because they are able to engage voters with a compassionate and substantive approach.

He said El-Sayed’s victory sends a message to the Democratic establishment: “They’ve got to take a look at the electoral calculus going forward.”

“The things that used to work are old and are arcane and do not reach the types of people that will come out who won’t vote for normal traditional Democrats,” Rabb said. “But he’s bringing out folks who haven’t come out in a long time or ever.”

He added that El-Sayed’s ability to broaden the Democratic base will help him defeat Rogers in November.

El-Sayed’s campaign slogan is, “Money out of politics. Money in your pockets. Medicare for all.”

His platform is focused on affordability and expanding access to healthcare. But AIPAC’s involvement in the race and the polarisation over Israel made the conflict in the Middle East a key issue in the election.

Russell Ellis, the social media commentator known as Jolly Good Ginger, said voters across the US are showing that they are “fed up” with Israel and AIPAC.

“The amount of voters that are drawing a red line at sending bombs to continue a genocide is much larger than people are accepting that it is. It’s massive,” he told Al Jazeera.

“I think most Americans can agree that we can’t support genocide, and that using American taxpayer dollars and American bombs to commit genocide in Gaza, in Sudan, in Congo, anywhere is unacceptable.”

‘We want to fund healthcare, not warfare’

Despite his criticism of Israel, El-Sayed always brought the political conversation back to Michigan.

The US has spent billions of dollars on military support for Israel, its Middle East ally, and even more on the war with Iran – a conflict that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has been seeking for decades.

El-Sayed has argued that the money spent on war should go to help communities across the US and Michigan.

His supporters say the progressive wins in Michigan show that this approach is resonating with voters.

“Today’s historic victories in Michigan prove that Palestine will win at the polls again and again,” Iman Abid, the political director of the US Campaign for Palestinian Rights Action, said in a statement.

“AIPAC can try dumping millions of dollars into propaganda, but at the end of the day, American voters don’t want our tax dollars to go toward bombing families abroad. We want to fund healthcare, not warfare.”

Sally Howell, a history professor at the University of Michigan-Dearborn who pioneered academic research about the Arab community, said El-Sayed’s win represents “genuine change” for Michigan.

“It tells us that voters are very frustrated with the establishment – the establishment in Washington and the establishment in the Democratic Party,” Howell told Al Jazeera.

“They want leaders who are going to bring change, not more of the same.”

BREAKINGBREAKING,

Progressive advocate overcomes more than $60m in spending to defeat pro-Israel Congresswoman Haley Stevens.

Abdul El-Sayed, a progressive public health advocate, has won the Democratic nomination for the United States Senate, overcoming more than $60m in campaign spending, mostly from pro-Israel groups, NBC has projected.

The result on Tuesday represents an enormous blow to the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), which led the way in the effort to defeat the pro-Palestinian El-Sayed, backing his opponent, US Congresswoman Haley Stevens, with more than $30m.

El-Sayed will face former Republican Congressman Mike Rogers in November. The race is considered one of a handful of competitive Senate contests in the November midterms and could determine which party controls the chamber for the rest of President Donald Trump’s term.

If El-Sayed – who is of Egyptian descent – wins in November, he would become the first Muslim senator in US history.

Tuesday’s result in Michigan – a swing state that voted for Trump in 2024 – will have major implications for the Democrats’ policies on conflicts in the Middle East.

El-Sayed recognises Israel’s atrocities in Gaza as a genocide and argues that money spent on conflicts that benefit Israel should be invested in local communities in the US to address healthcare, housing and infrastructure problems.

More to come…

Dearborn, Michigan – Yemeni-American activist Samraa Luqman has no regrets about voting for President Donald Trump in 2024.

While the United States president has been a disappointment to Arab Americans in Michigan with his pro-war and anti-immigration policies, she stressed that it was untenable for the community to vote for Democrats as Israel’s genocide unfolded in Gaza.

“There had to be accountability for the genocide. We’re OK with what we voted for,” Luqman told Al Jazeera.

“I said from the beginning, I’m willing to live through another four years of Trump, that we expected him to be bad on our issues, but it was a pill we were willing to swallow in order to hold the Democratic Party accountable.”

Luqman is not alone.

Despite Trump’s staunchly pro-Israel policies and unpopular war on Iran, many say supporting Democratic nominee Kamala Harris in 2024 was out of the question, and it was the right choice for the community to break with the Democratic Party.

“I could not – with a good heart, good conscience – tell someone to vote for Kamala Harris or Donald Trump”, but the approach of “lesser of two evils” no longer works to sway Arab voters, Hussein Dabajeh, a prominent political strategist in the Detroit area, home to large Arab and Muslim communities, told Al Jazeera.

Democrats’ popularity amongst Arab Americans nosedived in 2024 as President Joe Biden ignored calls to compel a ceasefire in Gaza and continued to provide Israel with weapons and military aid as it killed tens of thousands in Palestine and Lebanon.

Then, Vice President Harris refused even to consider an arms embargo against Israel.

As a result of these policies, many Arab Americans, who had been reliable Democratic voters for years, ditched the party and refused to support Harris in her presidential bid.

Trump swept in, presented himself as a “peace” candidate, and his campaign forged ties with Arab community advocates.

Trump’s policies

At a rally in Michigan ahead of the 2024 vote, Trump brought local Muslim imams to the stage and praised the community.

The Republican leader also visited the predominantly Arab and Muslim Detroit suburb of Dearborn ahead of the election.

Trump ended up winning Michigan as many Arab voters in the Dearborn area refused to back Harris. Some voted for him, while others voted for a third party, left the top of the ticket blank, or skipped the election altogether.

According to an Al Jazeera analysis of election results in heavily Arab precincts in east Dearborn, about 45 percent of the votes went to Trump, 29 percent to Green Party candidate Jill Stein, and 16 percent to Harris.

As president, Trump allowed Israel to continue its attacks on Gaza and Lebanon and launched an unprovoked war against Iran that has sent petrol prices soaring.

He has also intensified the crackdown on Palestinian rights advocacy at home with a campaign to deport noncitizen student activists critical of Israel.

In February, he also terminated immigration protections for Yemeni nationals, sowing fear and uncertainty in a community where many leaders had endorsed him in 2024.

Asked how Arab Americans feel about Trump now, Dabajeh said: “They hate him. There’s no other way of putting it. I don’t think there is a single person I know that voted for Trump from the Arab and Muslim community specifically that looks at what Trump is doing and is happy with what he’s doing, or what he’s done.”

‘The genocide matured us’

Many Arab Americans stress that withholding support for Harris in 2024 was not out of love for Trump.

“No one understands the horrors of Trump’s policy more than us. We were his first victims in 2017,” said Amer Zahr, a comedian and Dearborn Board of Education trustee.

Shortly after starting his first term in 2017, Trump implemented a travel ban on several Muslim-majority countries.

“No one is more aware of the harm that Trump can cause than we are,” Zahr added. “But the genocide matured us in a way that we finally got to the point where we were willing to tell politicians ‘no’.”

As the election season returns to Michigan, Arab Americans once again find themselves at a political crossroads.

The community is rallying behind Democratic Senate candidate Abdul El-Sayed – who had previously endorsed Harris – but some are keeping their political options open.

Luqman, the Yemeni activist, said she will certainly vote for El-Sayed and Congresswoman Rashida Tlaib – who are outspoken critics of Israel – in the Democratic primary on Tuesday and in the general elections in November.

Luqman said Democratic voters’ support for progressive candidates will help the party regain credibility with Arab voters.

“Those are things that do bring the Democratic Party a little bit of relevance and credibility within our community,” Luqman told Al Jazeera.

“It has kind of brought the community back to centre, whereas they were kind of swinging to the right by a large margin.”

Palestine or bust

While some political commentators have been questioning why US support for Israel has become a decisive issue in US politics, particularly Democratic primaries, the answer in the Arab community is clear.

Advocates say domestic policy takes a backseat when their loved ones are being killed, and their hometowns are being wiped out by their own tax dollars via military aid to Israel.

“Gaza and Palestine and Middle Eastern issues have now become the forefront, the top of everybody’s issues, and it’s become a red line for my community,” Luqman said.

“So if you’re a Republican or Democrat and you hate AIPAC and you value Palestinians’ rights to self-determination, then you’re going to be getting our vote, regardless of what party you’re in,” she said, referencing the powerful American Israel Public Affairs Committee lobby group.

Zahr echoed that message.

“People want us not to be single-issue voters. In other words, they want us to forgo our main issue, get screwed on it, watch our families die because Trump’s bad, and accept all that,” he said.

“Well, we said ‘no’. The blood of the children of Gaza had to mean something.”

Zahr emphasised that Arab Americans are not alone in centring Palestine in their electoral choices, pointing to the defeats that pro-Israel incumbents have suffered across the map in this primary season.

“You’ve gotten to a point where if somebody says, ‘Stop bombing hospitals’, everyone knows you’re talking about Israel. That’s because of Israel. That’s not because of us. That’s because of what Israel did,” he told Al Jazeera.

“And so, people are keying into the truth. And when you learn the truth, something that comes along with that is you learn that you’ve been lied to, and you get angry. A lot of righteous anger is pushing a lot of this.”

Dabajeh, the political strategist, said that while Arab voters care about the economy, affordability and infrastructure – like all Americans – they cannot overlook US policy on Israel.

“Are we supposed to call our family members overseas and be like, ‘Listen, khalto [auntie], this guy over here that’s running for office might kill some of your neighbours, might kill some of your kids, but don’t worry about it, he’s going to take care of the flooding in our homes’?”

“It’s not going to work. We can’t do that.”

Islamophobia and racism

Republicans tried to court Arab and Muslim voters in 2024 and capitalise on the discontent over Gaza policies, but now, many conservatives have returned to demonising the community as an electoral strategy.

Weeks after he was elected, Trump endorsed Randy Fine, a Florida politician with a history of anti-Muslim statements, for Congress. Fine would go on to win and call for the “destruction” of all Muslims.

Meanwhile, Republican governors in Florida and Texas have designated the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) as a “terrorist” group.

In Michigan, Republican Congressman John James, who is running for governor, has also pledged to blacklist the group.

Luqman said James had spoken to community members and promised to engage voters in Dearborn before that announcement.

“There was a really big opportunity for the Republican Party to solidify the swing of the pendulum, if you will, and they lost that option. They really missed that opportunity,” she said.

Democratic socialists face mixed understanding, with 49 percent of Americans saying they grasp their policies, poll shows.

Leftist candidates in the United States aligned with the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) movement have been defeating centrist Democrats in primary elections this year. However, large swaths of the country still don’t know what ⁠the movement stands for, according to a new Reuters/Ipsos poll.

Members of the DSA, an activist organisation whose stated mission is to support workers gaining power through democratic means, feature prominent politicians such as New York Mayor Zohran Mamdani and New York Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. Other Democratic Party DSA members have also won in recent political races across the US.

The three-day Reuters/Ipsos poll, which concluded on Sunday, found that 49 percent ‌of Americans say they understand democratic socialist policies while 47 percent say they do not, underscoring the challenges ahead for America’s anti-establishment left.

Asked if democratic socialists have good ideas or not, some 27 percent of respondents said they have at least some, while 51 percent said there were few, if any, and 20 percent said they weren’t sure.

People have a similar assessment of the ideas of MAGA Republicans, President Donald Trump’s “Make America Great Again” political base. Some 27 percent of poll respondents said MAGA Republicans have at least some good ideas, while 57 percent saw few or no good ideas from ⁠MAGA and 13 percent weren’t sure.

Prominent DSA member Mamdani, who was elected in 2025, endorsed other DSA members in New York City who went on to win their respective primaries in June. Other wins by DSA members include races in Colorado and in California.

Trump has ‌seized on the movement’s rise to try to falsely paint all Democrats – including those unaffiliated with the democratic socialist movement – as “hardcore, godless communists”. The administration released a 100-page report earlier this month tying left-wing advocacy groups in the US to Cuba – often relying on circumstantial and ideological links, rather than direct connections.

Democratic socialists advocate pursuing progressive policies through elections. In contrast, communism seeks to abolish private ownership of property ‌and ‌create a classless society – ideas that the democratic socialists seeking election reject.

The Reuters/Ipsos poll, which was conducted online, surveyed 1,248 US adults nationwide and had a margin of error of three percentage points.

A lower court blocked the mail-in ballot restrictions, ruling Trump lacked authority to change state election rules.

The administration of United States President Donald Trump has asked the Supreme Court to allow it to move ahead with sweeping restrictions on mail-in voting ahead of November’s midterm elections, as it continues its push to reshape how federal elections are run.

In an emergency filing on Monday, the Justice Department asked the country’s highest court to pause a lower court ruling that blocked parts of Trump’s March executive order in 23 Democratic-led states and Washington, DC. The pause would remain in effect as the legal challenges play out, per the request.

The executive order directed federal agencies to help create state lists of eligible voters and required the US Postal Service to deliver mail ballots only to people on those lists. It also instructed the Justice Department to prioritise investigations into election officials accused of issuing ballots to ineligible voters.

US District Judge Indira Talwani blocked the order in June, ruling that Trump lacked the authority to unilaterally change how states administer federal elections. She noted that under the Constitution, states oversee voter-eligibility requirements.

Over the weekend, the First US Circuit Court of Appeals declined to pause that ruling, prompting the administration to take the issue to the Supreme Court.

In its request to the top court, the administration argued that the order amounted to “general policy guidance” rather than a directive dictating how states should administer elections.

Solicitor General John Sauer wrote: “The injunction is especially indefensible because the agencies are still deliberating over how (if at all) to implement the Order, yet the district court preemptively decided that whatever the agencies may choose to do will necessarily be unlawful.”

He urged the Supreme Court to act quickly as the new policy would have to be in place by August to be effective by the midterm election in November.

Trump has long claimed, without evidence, that widespread voter fraud undermined the 2020 presidential election and has repeatedly questioned the security of mail-in voting, despite studies showing that such fraud is rare.

He has promised to end the widespread use of mail ballots before the midterms, which will determine which party takes control of the US House of Representatives and Senate.

Voting rights advocates say restricting mail-in voting could disproportionately affect Democratic voters, who have historically been more likely than Republicans to cast their ballots by mail.

Arizona voters head to the polls on Tuesday to choose party nominees in races that could help determine who controls the US House of Representatives and whether Republicans can flip one of the country’s most competitive Democratic governorships.

Once considered reliably Republican, Arizona has swung between the two parties in recent election cycles. Democrat Joe Biden narrowly won the state in 2020, while Donald Trump reclaimed it in the 2024 presidential election.

The biggest contest is the Republican primary for governor, where four candidates are competing to challenge Democratic Governor Katie Hobbs in November. The results will also set up key congressional races in one of the country’s most closely watched battleground states.

Here’s what to know.

When will polls open and close?

Polls will open at 6am (13:00 GMT) and most will close at 7pm (02:00 GMT on Wednesday). Anyone in line by 7pm may vote.

Who can vote?

Registered Democrats and Republicans can vote only in their own party’s primary, while independent voters can choose whether to vote in either the Democratic or Republican contest.

There are about 4.3m registered voters in Arizona, including roughly 1.5m Republicans, 1.2m Democrats and 1.5m independents or voters not affiliated with either major party.

What races are on the ballot?

Arizona voters will choose party nominees for governor, congressional seats, state offices, including secretary of state, attorney general, treasurer and state superintendent of public instruction, and all 30 seats in the state Senate and all 60 seats in the state House of Representatives.

Who is running for governor?

One of the most anticipated races is the Republican primary for governor, where four candidates are competing to challenge Democratic Governor Katie Hobbs in November. Hobbs, who is running for her second term, is one of only two Democratic governors seeking re-election this year in states Trump carried in 2024.

While four Republicans are on the ballot, the race has largely become a showdown between Andy Biggs and David Schweikert, two longtime congressmen who represent competing visions for the future of Arizona’s Republican Party.

Biggs, a former chair of the conservative House Freedom Caucus, is closely aligned with Trump and has built his campaign around the president’s agenda. He was among the Republicans who sought to block Congress from certifying Biden’s 2020 election victory and has long been associated with the party’s most conservative wing. Trump endorsed Biggs after previously backing another Republican candidate who later dropped out of the race.

Schweikert has also supported many of Trump’s priorities in Congress, but has cast himself as a more pragmatic conservative. Representing one of Arizona’s most competitive congressional districts, he argues Republicans have lost ground in the state by nominating candidates seen by voters as too extreme.

What are the congressional races to watch?

The primary will also decide who will compete for Arizona’s open 1st Congressional District, a seat left open after Representative David Schweikert decided to run for governor. Covering Scottsdale and northeastern Phoenix, it is expected to be one of the state’s most competitive races in November and could play a role in deciding which party controls the House.

Republicans are choosing between state Representative Joseph Chaplik, former NFL kicker and sportscaster Jay Feely, who has Trump’s endorsement, and technology executive John Trobough.

On the Democratic side, doctor and former state Representative Amish Shah, who narrowly lost to Schweikert in 2024, is competing against former news anchor Marlene Galan-Woods. The registered Republican until 2018 is the widow of former Arizona Attorney General Grant Woods, a prominent Republican who later became a vocal Trump critic.

She is being backed by the national party, which backed Shah in 2024. Publisher Rick McCartney and entrepreneur Jonathan Treble are also on the ballot. Another closely watched House race is in Arizona’s 6th Congressional District, where Republican Representative Juan Ciscomani is seeking a third term against Democrat JoAnna Mendoza, a Marine Corps veteran. Both are unopposed in Tuesday’s primaries and will face each other in November in what’s expected to be one of the Democrats’ best opportunities to flip a Republican-held seat as they try to regain control of the House.

How are Israel and Gaza shaping the Arizona primaries?

The Democratic Party’s growing divisions over Israel’s war in Gaza are becoming apparent in some of Arizona’s congressional primaries, where candidates have clashed over US support for Israel and the direction of the party’s foreign policy. Two races in particular illustrate those tensions.

In Arizona’s 4th Congressional District, which is considered reliably blue, Representative Greg Stanton faces a primary challenge from progressive candidate Kai Newkirk. He has made US support for Israel a central issue in his campaign, arguing that Stanton has been too supportive.

Stanton, a staunch supporter of Israel who has been endorsed by AIPAC, recently voted against a proposal to restrict US military aid to Israel. According to Track AIPAC, an advocacy group that monitors pro-Israel political spending, Stanton has received about $322,000 in donations linked to AIPAC and other pro-Israel groups.

In the neighbouring 3rd Congressional District, Representative Yassamin Ansari has dramatically changed her position on Israel since first running for Congress, reflecting the changing dynamics within the broader Democratic Party.

Ansari received support from Democratic Majority for Israel in her closely fought 2024 primary, but has since become a sharp critic of Israel’s war in Gaza and said she will no longer accept backing from the group or AIPAC.

When will the results be announced?

Polls close at 7pm on Tuesday (02:00 GMT on Wednesday) across most of Arizona, although no results can be released until 8pm local time (03:00 GMT on Wednesday). Because Arizona conducts most voting by mail or through early voting, counties typically report a large share of ballots shortly after polls close.

More than 755,000 ballots had already been cast before election day.

Most races are expected to become clearer during the first few hours of counting, although close contests could take longer if additional mail ballots need to be processed.

Political analyst Eric Ham argues President Donald Trump’s renewed focus on election security and his push for the SAVE Act are attempts to expand federal authority over US elections ahead of November’s midterms.

United States President Donald Trump has delivered an extraordinary primetime speech, alleging government “cover-ups” and “vulnerability” in the nation’s electoral system.

But experts were quick to point out that Trump failed to present any conclusive evidence that past presidential elections had been swayed by malfeasance.

In many ways, Trump’s speech on Thursday revisited any themes familiar to the Republican leader.

He made broad accusations about a “deep state” conspiracy involving his Democratic predecessors, Barack Obama and Joe Biden, and he lashed out at familiar foes, including the news media and China.

For years, Trump has spread baseless claims that his loss in the 2020 presidential election was “rigged” and “stolen”.

Trump stopped short of repeating his false claim that he had, in fact, won that race. But in his remarks, he sought to raise suspicion about the election’s outcome, pointing to declassified government documents.

Those files, however, painted a more nuanced picture than Trump portrayed, and they failed to substantiate his claims of a conspiracy.

After the speech, Democrats criticised Trump for attempting to mislead the public and reduce confidence in US electoral systems, with months to go until the November midterm election.

Here are the key takeaways from his address:

Trump claims China compromised election data

One of the biggest accusations of the night was levied against China, the US’s geopolitical rival.

“Starting during the 2020 election cycle, the People’s Republic of China carried out what is believed to be the largest compromise of election data in history,” Trump said near the outset of his speech.

He claimed that Beijing, through “illicit” means, had acquired 220 million US voter files, including names, addresses and party preferences.

“Think of that: Tens of millions of voters’ data in 18 states have been bought, stolen or hacked by China,” Trump said.

A spokesperson for China’s embassy denied such claims, saying the country “has never and will never interfere in the presidential elections of the US”.

Trump, however, did not say that the information had been used to influence any election.

But critics pointed out that such voter information is already publicly available. Some states even sell that public data, for prices ranging from $0 to $37,000, as the US Election Assistance Commission explained in a 2020 report.

The documents declassified by the White House also appeared to indicate Beijing was, at least in part, drawing from publicly available data. It did, however, express curiosity at China’s increasing interest in such information.

“While the PRC [People’s Republic of China] government has historically demonstrated interest in US elections, this is a newly-identified interest for this individual actor,” a heavily redacted assessment said.

“The US voter registration information is available for public download, with 2021 voter registration information available for some states.”

Trump claims a ‘deep state’ cover-up, vows retribution

In Thursday’s speech, Trump returned to a conspiracy theory that helped define his first successful bid for public office in 2016: that so-called “deep state” actors had sought to undermine his presidency.

He claimed there was a “shadow government” with “rogue bureaucrats” who attempted to cover up Chinese efforts to influence the 2020 vote.

They even sought to suppress information from his daily presidential brief, Trump alleged.

“ These were briefings I would get almost every day. Everything was kept out that was of importance,” he said.

Experts, however, have noted that presidential briefs are usually heavily curated to contain intelligence perceived to be of high importance.

An intelligence community report compiled in January 2021 assessed with “high confidence” that China had considered launching an influence campaign in 2020 — but that it eventually decided against it.

The report was declassified in March 2021. It contained a minority opinion that indicated China “took at least some steps” to undermine Trump’s re-election chances “primarily through social media and official public statements and media”.

The publication of the report would appear to contradict Trump’s claims of a “cover-up”.

Still, in his speech, Trump said he had instructed his top law enforcement officials to “fire those involved in the cover-up and to file criminal charges, if appropriate, against these people”.

Trump says public ‘blatantly lied to’ about election security

Critics had warned that Trump could use Thursday’s speech to undermine confidence in US elections by spreading falsehoods.

Some television news outlets, including ABC, NBC and CNN, even opted not to air the speech in full on their main broadcast channels.

The timing of the speech is significant, as it comes less four months ahead of the midterm elections, which decide control of Congress.

Trump did indeed spend part of his speech voicing allegations that American voters had been deceived by the same “deep state” actors he accused of targeting him.

“For many years, Americans were blatantly lied to about the security of our election infrastructure, including voting machines and ballot counting systems,” Trump said.

“They’re vulnerable, and they’re easily compromised, and people within our government knew that.”

But the declassified documents released by the White House did not appear to contain any major revelations about such claims. Potential vulnerabilities have long been known, and local and federal officials have sought to address them.

The fact that elections are administered on the state and local level has also been cited as a barrier against any widespread tampering.

Given the decentralised nature of US election administration, the US intelligence community has long assessed that large-scale voting manipulation would be all but impossible.

After Trump’s speech, Democrats dismissed Trump’s remarks as distortions designed to disincentivise voters from participating in elections.

“President Donald Trump continues to lie, distort the truth to try to sow doubt and suppress the 2026 election,” US Representative Jason Crow said in a video statement. “He doesn’t want Americans to vote. He doesn’t want their voice to be heard.”

Trump rehashes Michigan investigation

Trump made a gesture at unity in Thursday’s speech, arguing that election security should not be a “partisan issue”.

“It should cause to unite us, not to divide us,” he said at one point.

But the Republican leader fired off dubious claims against targets big and small.

He called for broadcasters that did not air his speech to lose their licenses. He berated California as “worse than any third world country”. And he rehashed a incident in the swing state of Michigan that took place well before the 2020 election.

The case involved allegations of fake voter registration forms. But the forms were not processed and did not have any bearing on that year’s election; they were flagged months before the vote took place.

The state Attorney General’s Office probed the incident, as did the Federal Bureau of Investigation.

Neither found evidence that fraud had been successfully committed. It is believed that the forms were not part of an election scam but rather an attempt to meet workplace quotas.

Still, Trump portrayed the incident as a significant breach in Thursday’s speech.

“It was pay, play, and cheat,” he alleged, proceeding to blame former President Biden for failing to pursue the case. “The Biden Department of Justice slow-walked the investigation and killed it.”

He added that he had instructed the FBI to re-open its investigation, although the declassified documents the White House released did not appear to provide new evidence in the case.

Speech sought to cast doubt, but contained few revelations

Trump’s speech had been hyped as a major moment in the president’s second term.

On Tuesday, when the primetime address was first announced, Trump said it would contain “really big news”. His press secretary, Karoline Leavitt, warned reporters earlier in the day that the speech would “shock”.

But Democrats and election experts have argued that the speech was underwhelming — and would mostly serve to fire up Trump’s Republican base.

Indeed, Trump opened his remarks on Thursday with a resume of his second-term accomplishments, from border security to efforts to combat crime.

And he closed his speech with an appeal to pass the SAVE America Act, a piece of legislation he has repeatedly championed to heighten voter requirements.

The bill would increase voter identification standards, requiring proof of citizenship in the form of documents like birth certificates and passports that some US citizens may not have.

Rights groups have argued the requirements could disenfranchise some citizens.

Speaking to Al Jazeera, political analyst Eric Ham said the speech was yet another push in Trump’s effort to bring elections under federal control.

“This is something that the president has had an ambition of doing for quite some time, and I think what we saw tonight was another shot across the bow at trying to fundamentally change elections,” Ham said.

Hakeem Jeffries, the top Democrat in the House of Representatives, also decried the speech as a distraction from Trump’s political woes ahead of the midterms.

“Donald Trump is a feeble, unhinged conspiracy-peddling 80-year old failed President,” Jeffries wrote on social media. “The economy is a disaster under this guy and the American people know it.”

It was a Capitol Hill mystery. For nearly a month, United States Senator Mitch McConnell was not seen or heard from in public.

Little was known about the 84-year-old’s condition, other than that he was hospitalised on June 14. Conspiracy theories began to bubble online. One prominent right-wing influencer, Laura Loomer, even spread rumours that the Republican leader was brain-dead.

But after weeks of silence, McConnell confirmed on Sunday that he was on the mend after suffering a fall.

Still, the Kentucky Republican has increasingly appeared frail on Capitol Hill, freezing in front of cameras and walking unsteadily when not in a wheelchair.

Members of Congress are typically on the older side. The average age for a US senator is around 65.

McConnell’s poor health — and the sudden passing of his Senate colleague Lindsey Graham, 71, on Sunday — have reignited the question: What would happen if McConnell were unable to serve the remainder of his term?

The answer is the subject of intense scrutiny, as Republicans seek to preserve their majority in the Senate.

Who is Mitch McConnell?

A seven-term senator from Kentucky, McConnell is the longest-serving party leader in the history of the Senate.

He first entered the Senate in 1985, and in 2007, he became the head of the Republican Party in the chamber, a position he held until 2025.

He continues to serve as a senator, though he is not seeking re-election in November’s midterm elections. His term ends in January.

What is wrong with McConnell’s health?

On Sunday, McConnell said in a statement that a fall on June 14 rendered him “briefly unconscious” and landed him in the hospital. The senator also said he had dealt with a mild case of pneumonia.

But McConnell has long struggled with health and mobility challenges. As a toddler, he survived a severe bout of polio, though it left one of his legs partially paralysed.

McConnell indicated his condition was improving, but that he would not return to the Senate yet.

“With signs of continued progress, I’ve been able to move from hospital care to a rehabilitation center where I’ll keep regaining my strength,” he wrote.

His statement was accompanied by a smiling photo of the senator in a hospital bed, with what appeared to be a copy of Sunday’s Washington Post newspaper.

Has McConnell been hospitalised before?

This is not the first time the senior senator’s health has been a source of concern in recent years.

As recently as February, the veteran lawmaker was hospitalised for flu-like symptoms.

Also, in 2019, McConnell tripped and fell in his Louisville home, fracturing his shoulder.

According to reporting from the Louisville Courier Journal, he also collapsed three times in 2023, suffering a concussion and a broken rib that ultimately led to him using a wheelchair.

It was during that period that McConnell had several instances where he inexplicably appeared to freeze while speaking in public, prompting questions about his fitness to serve.

Why does his presence in the Senate matter?

Republicans have a controlling majority in the Senate — but only by a few seats.

With McConnell absent, the number of Republicans available to vote shrinks from 53 to 52 in the 100-seat Senate.

That could influence the outcome of divisive bills, when every Republican vote matters.

McConnell’s absence has already helped Democrats pass a resolution against President Donald Trump’s war on Iran, with four Republicans crossing party lines to vote for it.

McConnell also sits on the all-important Senate Appropriations Committee, which helps decide discretionary government spending.

The US government has a looming funding deadline on September 30, and McConnell’s continued hospitalisation could muddle efforts to pass funding measures.

What does McConnell’s absence reveal about Republican Party unity?

The Republican majority in the Senate has weakened over time, according to Stephen Voss, a political science professor at the University of Kentucky.

Moderates like Susan Collins and Lisa Murkowski — alongside wild cards like Rand Paul — have shown willingness in the past to join with Democrats during critical votes.

But that small proportion of “swing” Republicans has grown during the midterm primary season.

A number of lame-duck Republicans have lost their re-election bids to party rivals, backed by President Trump. That makes them more willing to buck their party leadership from time to time.

“McConnell’s absence could become inconvenient depending on what sort of policy battles we see in coming months,” said Voss.

What has been the reaction to McConnell’s absence?

News of McConnell’s hospitalisation sent alarm rippling through the US political sphere.

Republican leaders attempted to reassure the public that the senator would soon return to his post. But as the weeks stretched on, questions about McConnell’s condition mounted.

Ultimately, on July 8, Kentucky Governor Andy Beshear sent a letter to McConnell’s office, requesting an update on the senator’s health status.

Beshear has since called McConnell’s written statement on Sunday a “step in the right direction”, but he continues to push for more transparency, suggesting the Republican senator release a video update instead.

Some critics have called on McConnell to step down altogether, questioning his fitness for office. They include Democrat Charles Booker, who is running to succeed McConnell in the midterm elections.

Tres Watson, a Republican strategist and host of the Kentucky Politics Weekly podcast, sees no reason to doubt McConnell’s ability to serve, despite the recent health scares.

“I’ve been around the senator several times in the last year. His brain is functioning fine, his wit is there, his intellect is there, but the body is failing him, and he made the understandable decision not to run for another term,” Watson said.

What happens if Mitch McConnell is unable to serve the rest of his term?

If McConnell were to vacate his senate seat before his term ends, it may be tempting for Democrats to think Beshear, the Democratic governor of Kentucky, could appoint someone from his own party.

That’s not the case, however, because of a recent change in state law. Kentucky is now one of four US states where the governor does not have authority to fill Senate vacancies.

In 2024, Kentucky’s Republican-controlled legislature passed a law requiring Senate vacancies to be filled by a special election, which must be called by the governor.

But experts say holding a special election this year would be fraught with challenges, one of which is timing.

The new law says the governor must give 63 days’ notice before the special election. Senate hopefuls would have to file their candidacy no later than 56 days prior to the vote.

Even if McConnell’s Senate seat were vacated immediately, the earliest a special election could occur is September.

But experts say that cobbling together a special election would not make sense, since November’s midterm elections are barely three and a half months away. McConnell’s Senate seat is up for grabs in that race.

“Setting up the process would take time, so we wouldn’t get a senator in office very quickly, even if this process kicked off soon,” said Voss, the political science professor. “The probability that we’d get a replacement ahead of time is pretty low.”

Watson, the Republican strategist, agrees. He questions the efficiency of rushing to hold a special election, when the midterms are on November 3.

“We’re getting pretty close to Election Day,” Watson said. “They’re not going to put the commonwealth through the expense of having another special election just so someone could be a US senator for effectively one month.”

Could there be challenges to filling McConnell’s seat?

Yes, a significant challenge could be litigation. Kentucky’s 2024 law is largely untested, and it would almost certainly attract legal challenges.

“I think there’s a decent chance the issue could end up in the courts,” said Joshua Douglas, a University of Kentucky law professor who teaches election law.

Douglas believes there may be a contradiction between the new law and parts of the Kentucky Constitution.

“The 17th Amendment says the legislature may authorise the governor to appoint a temporary replacement, Section 152 of the Kentucky Constitution says the governor appoints one, and the Kentucky legislature now says there must be a special election after the new law,” Douglas said.

Voss explained that the legal challenges could delay any special election to fill McConnell’s seat.

“This is the sort of thing that lawyers know how to tie up in litigation,” Voss said. “There would be people involved who know how to slow walk the process.”

Why can’t the governor pick McConnell’s replacement?

The 2024 law stripped the governor’s authority to select a temporary replacement for a US Senate seat.

Governor Beshear vetoed the bill, but the state legislature, which has a Republican supermajority, overrode his opposition.

The measure is part of a broader strategy of Republican lawmakers to shift powers away from the governor since Beshear’s election in 2019.

“We’ve seen an overall attempt by the Kentucky General Assembly to shift power from the executive to the legislative branch,” Voss said.

But the 2024 law was not the legislature’s first attempt at limiting the governor’s ability to fill Senate vacancies.

Initially, in 2021, Republican lawmakers passed a bill that required the governor to choose a temporary replacement from a list of three provided by the executive committee of the former senator’s party. After filling the vacancy, a special election would be held.

According to Watson, Republicans passed a new version because they were concerned about legal challenges to the 2021 law.

Republicans in the state argue that the 2024 update is more democratic and aligns with the process for filling other vacancies.

Beshear is the only Democrat to hold a statewide office in Kentucky. The state has not elected a Democrat to the US Senate since 1992.

Who is running to replace McConnell in the midterms?

In the general election, Democrat Charles Booker, a former state legislator, is running against Republican Representative Andy Barr to succeed McConnell.

United States President Donald Trump is promising “really big news” in a rare primetime address on Thursday night, though he won’t say exactly what it is.

The surprise speech was announced on Tuesday. But when pressed by reporters about what he planned to talk about, Trump only revealed that the speech would be about elections and “a couple of other things”.

“It doesn’t get bigger, because without free and fair elections, you don’t have a country,” he told journalists in the Oval Office on Tuesday.

Asked to elaborate, Trump said he wanted to “save it” for the speech.

“We’ll be discussing other things, too,” he added. “It’s going to be a very big announcement.”

The White House has since confirmed that the address will focus on elections, including information related to the 2020 presidential election, which Trump has falsely claimed he won.

The speech is also expected to discuss what the White House describes as vulnerabilities in US voting machines.

Here’s what we know about the upcoming primetime presidential address.

When is Trump’s speech?

Trump is expected to speak from the White House on Thursday at 9pm US Eastern Time (01:00 GMT Friday).

How can you watch it?

Major US television networks are expected to carry the address live. The Trump administration has requested airtime from major broadcasters.

It will also be livestreamed on WhiteHouse.gov and on the White House’s YouTube page.

Why is the timing significant?

Trump’s speech comes three and a half months before the November 3 midterm elections.

At stake is control over the US Congress. Currently, Trump’s Republican Party holds slim majorities in both of Congress’s chambers.

But Democrats are seeking to tip the balance in their favour, leveraging backlash to Trump’s second term.

Critics fear Trump may use his primetime address to erode voter confidence in the upcoming elections, or to assert federal influence over election administration, which is run at the state and local level.

There is also speculation that Trump may be angling to fire up his base amid drooping poll numbers. The research firm YouGov suggested this month that more than 57 percent of US voters disapprove of the president’s second-term performance so far.

What is Trump expected to talk about?

So far, much remains unknown about Thursday’s speech.

Administration officials say Trump will discuss newly declassified intelligence connected to its investigations into the 2020 presidential election.

They have also suggested that Trump will discuss alleged vulnerabilities in voting machines that could allow foreign cyber intrusions.

Trump has revealed little else. When asked this week whether the speech would focus on voting machine integrity, he replied simply: “It will concern that subject.”

What happened in the 2020 elections?

Trump was a first-term incumbent when he ran for a second term in the 2020 presidential election.

He faced Democratic nominee Joe Biden, who had previously served as vice president under Barack Obama.

Biden defeated Trump, winning both the Electoral College vote – which determines the presidency – and the popular vote, an important symbolic metric.

The Democrat scooped up 306 Electoral College votes and more than 81 million individual ballots, compared with 232 Electoral College votes and 74 million ballots for Trump.

Critically, swing states like Georgia, Michigan and Arizona voted in Biden’s favour.

After the election, Trump repeatedly rejected the results, and his supporters attacked the US Capitol during the Electoral College certification on January 6, 2021.

What is Trump’s history of questioning US elections?

Trump has spent years casting doubt on the integrity of US elections, even before 2020.

Before the 2016 election, he refused to say whether he would accept a loss to Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton.

After winning his first term in office, he created a presidential commission to investigate his claims that he lost the popular vote due to widespread fraud. The commission was disbanded after finding no evidence to support those claims.

After losing the 2020 election, Trump repeatedly alleged that the vote had been stolen despite numerous investigations finding no evidence to support those claims.

In Georgia, he urged the state’s secretary of state to “find 11,780 votes”, the number needed to overturn Biden’s victory there.

Trump and his allies later faced two indictments – one on the state level, one on the federal level – over allegations they attempted to overturn the 2020 election results.

The federal case was dropped when Trump was re-elected in 2024, in accordance with Department of Justice norms not to prosecute a sitting president.

The state-level case, meanwhile, fell apart after Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis was disqualified from prosecuting the case.

Trump, however, has continued to assert he was the rightful winner of the 2020 race, despite there being no evidence to support the claim.

The Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA), a federal cybersecurity watchdog, has called the 2020 election “the most secure in American history”.

Investigations, including several by Trump allies, have produced no evidence that vote-machine rigging or foreign cyber intrusions changed the outcome.

What has the administration done lately to advance Trump’s 2020 claims?

In January, FBI agents descended upon Fulton County, Georgia, to execute a search warrant to collect election materials related to the 2020 race.

Officials in Fulton County, which contains the state capital, Atlanta, have protested against the search and called for the return of the confidential election materials.

They have also claimed they were not given an inventory of what was taken.

An FBI memo obtained by US media this month indicates the agency has diverted hundreds of agents to the case, which officials say is about “irregularities that occurred during the 2020 presidential election”.

Trump has called on Bill Pulte, the acting director of national intelligence, to declassify documents related to the 2020 vote.

What do Trump’s claims have to do with the midterms?

Trump appears to be ramping up his election fraud claims as the November midterms approach.

According to a review published by the Reuters news agency in May, Trump claimed the 2020 vote was stolen more than 107 times over the preceding six-month period.

Already, Trump has suggested that California’s primary vote in June was “rigged”.

Just last week, he invited defeated Los Angeles mayoral candidate Spencer Pratt to the White House after crediting Pratt’s loss to voter fraud. “What they did to that guy was unbelievable,” Trump told Fox News on Sunday.

Trump has expressed fear he could be impeached if his party does not retain control of Congress in the midterms. Major Democratic victories in the midterms could also stymie his legislative agenda for the final two years of his presidency.

What has Trump done to advance his election reform agenda?

Since returning to office in 2025, Trump has pushed to overhaul voting procedures.

Under the US Constitution, election administration falls to the states. It is not within the federal government’s control.

But critics say Trump is attempting to nationalise the election and tighten voter access.

Trump has championed election restrictions like those in the SAVE America Act, a bill that would require voters to produce in-person proof of citizenship, like a birth certificate or passport.

Already, non-citizens are barred from voting. But opponents argue that the SAVE America Act would present a hurdle to legal voters who do not have access to such documents. Many states allow voting with other forms of identification, like a state driver’s licence or a Social Security number.

Trump has also sought to limit the use of mail-in ballots through bills like the SAVE America Act and executive orders. But federal courts have repeatedly blocked his attempts.

In June, for instance, the Supreme Court ruled that states can continue to count mail-in ballots after election day, so long as they are postmarked on or before that date.

Trump has also faced legal challenges against his attempts to compel states to hand over their voter rolls and create a national voter file. And he has threatened to withhold funds – including from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) – if states fail to comply with his demands.

Earlier this month, his administration issued letters to election officials nationwide, warning that they “could be criminally prosecuted” if there are instances of non-citizen voting.

But non-citizen voting is exceedingly rare, as is voter fraud overall.

How have Democrats responded to Thursday’s upcoming speech?

Democrats have warned against giving Trump airtime for his unsubstantiated claims.

“Trump is going to use a primetime address to stoke misleading claims about our elections in order to justify interfering in our midterms,” Senator Mark Warner wrote on social media on Wednesday.

“It’s on all of us to follow the facts and not accept his constant stream of misdirections and lies.”

Another senator, New Mexico’s Ben Ray Lujan, pointed to Trump’s second impeachment as evidence of his willingness to subvert elections.

“This is the same man who was impeached after inciting an insurrection to overturn the election,” Lujan said, calling Trump “corrupt”.

The US president suggests he is considering a potential candidate to fill the late senator’s seat in South Carolina.

The disadvantage that the Republican majority in the United States Senate has suffered from the death of Lindsey Graham is likely to be short-lived.

Currently, Republicans hold 52 seats in the 100-member chamber, after losing Graham to a “brief and sudden illness” late on Saturday, according to his office.

But South Carolina’s election laws give Republican Governor Henry McMaster the authority to immediately appoint a replacement to fill Graham’s seat.

“In case of a vacancy in the office of United States Senator from death, resignation or otherwise, the Governor may fill the place by appointment,” the law says.

Graham’s term was set to expire in January. He was running for re-election in the November midterm vote.

A primary will be held next month to determine who will take his place as the Republican nominee. The first round of voting is set for August 11, and if no candidate wins a majority of the votes, a run-off would take place on August 25.

McMaster has released a brief statement mourning Graham, without mentioning plans to replace him. The law does not set a timeline for the appointment, but the governor is likely to fill the seat quickly to ensure that President Donald Trump’s agenda is not disrupted in the Senate.

Graham was one of Trump’s closest allies on Capitol Hill.

In his statement, McMaster called the late senator the “fiercest of fighters for South Carolina and America and a loyal and steadfast friend”.

“We grieve with Darline, his family and his devoted staff,” McMaster said, referring to Graham’s sister. “May God hold him gently in the palm of his hand. We shall not see his likes again.”

It is so far unclear who McMaster might select as Graham’s replacement. The governor might appoint a placeholder candidate who would fill the seat without seeking a full term in November’s midterms, to avoid influencing the election process.

He may also opt for someone who would run for the full term, which would give his pick the incumbent status that would boost their profile — and therefore, their chances at the ballot box.

Other governors have faced similar dilemmas. In California, for instance, Democratic Governor Gavin Newsom pursued both paths in separate appointments in recent years.

When Kamala Harris vacated her Senate seat to serve as US vice president in 2021, Newsom picked state legislator Alex Padilla to replace her. Padilla won a special election for the seat the following year.

But in 2023, when Senator Dianne Feinstein died, Newsom appointed political operative Laphonza Butler, who did not end up running in the 2024 election.

In Graham’s case, however, the White House might weigh in. Trump has suggested that he is considering backing a candidate to replace the senator.

“I have somebody that I think would be great, but I don’t want to say it now because it’s just too soon with Lindsey,” the US president told NBC News.

“I don’t want to even talk about anybody, but I do have somebody that I think is really good.”

South Carolina, a southern state on the US’s Atlantic coast, has been a Republican stronghold for decades. Trump won the state by nearly 18 percentage points in 2024.

But polls have suggested that Graham was not cruising to re-election. His Democratic opponent, paediatrician Annie Andrews, was closing the gap on him.

A June poll by Impact Research showed the late senator leading by only three percent.

Graham had become a polorising figure even within the Republican base, due to his staunch devotion to Israel and support for the US-Israeli war on Iran.

On Sunday, Andrews praised Graham without mentioning elections or politics.

“I hope that South Carolinians will join me in setting partisanship aside and offering gratitude to Senator Lindsey Graham for his service to the great state of South Carolina,” she said in a statement.

The dismissals leave the federal election body vacant as Trump presses for broader changes to US voting rules.

President Donald Trump has removed the last remaining members of an independent federal commission that helps support United States elections, leaving the bipartisan body with no sitting commissioners.

The White House confirmed the news on Friday, with only months to spare before November’s midterm elections.

“The President, and head of the Executive Branch, reserves the right to remove individuals that may not be totally aligned with the important task of securing America’s elections,” the White House said in a statement.

It added that the administration had been “working across all agencies and local partners to safeguard elections from fraud and abuse” in the run-up to the midterms.

The decision concerns the Election Assistance Commission (ECA), an independence office created by Congress in 2002 to support state and local election officials. Among its duties are creating non-binding election guidelines, certifying voting systems and maintaining the national mail voter registration form.

Four commissioners typically helm the agency. But on Thursday, the two Democratic appointees — Thomas Hicks and Benjamin Hovland — were fired by email, according to the news agency Reuters.

The lone remaining Republican, Christy McCormick, resigned. A fourth commissioner, Republican appointee Donald Palmer, had already left in April.

The commission is required by law to be made up evenly of Democrats and Republicans, and it was put in place to help after the disputed 2000 presidential election.

Trump’s decision to fire the remaining commissioners has further raised concerns that he may seek to intervene in the upcoming midterm elections, which will decide control of Congress for the rest of his term.

Under the US Constitution, election administration is the responsibility of the state, not the federal government.

The Election Assistance Commission had previously declined to implement part of Trump’s March 2025 executive order that called upon it to require proof of citizenship on the national mail voter registration form.

A federal judge later blocked that part of that executive order, ruling the president had exceeded his authority. Trump has appealed the ruling.

Voters are already required to affirm their citizenship before voting, as non-citizen voting is illegal in the US. Instances of non-citizen voting are rare.

The firings are the latest in a broader effort by the president to reshape how elections are conducted.

The Trump administration has pushed to tighten vote-by-mail rules and threatened to withhold some federal funding from states that refuse to adopt new election requirements. Many of those efforts have been challenged in court.

Earlier this week, the administration also sent out letters warning election officials that they could face prosecution if they fail to remove noncitizens from voter rolls.

Trump has defended the actions as necessary to protect election integrity. He has repeatedly claimed that his loss to Democrat Joe Biden in the 2020 election was the result of fraud, a claim not backed by evidence.

The latest firings come after the US Supreme Court last month expanded the president’s power to fire members of independent agencies, even without cause.

The court ruled six to three in Trump’s favour, arguing that “neither Congress nor the courts may saddle” the president with executive-branch leaders he does not approve of.

The president is allowed by law to appoint replacements to the commission. It is not yet clear whether Trump plans to nominate replacements or leave the seats vacant.

Monday’s accusations are the latest in a long string of controversies surrounding the Maine Democratic Senate candidate.

Leading US Democrats are withdrawing their support from Maine Democratic Senate candidate Graham Platner after a former girlfriend accused the politician of sexual assault.

In an exclusive interview with media outlet Politico published on Monday, Jenny Racicot alleged that Platner forced her to have nonconsensual sex in late 2021. She alleged that Platner had entered her Maine home uninvited while intoxicated and forced himself on her, despite her repeatedly telling him to stop.

Platner, whose status as a progressive outsider has gained him popularity, has denied the allegations.

Following Politico’s interview, top US Democrats and Democratic-leaning political groups have pulled their endorsements of Platner.

“I’ve been very clear that sexual assault or violence against women is a red line,” California Democrat Ro Khanna, a member of the US House of Representatives, said. “These allegations are very serious and credible. Graham Platner should drop out from the race. I am withdrawing my endorsement.”

Arizona Senator Ruben Gallego also announced he was pulling his endorsement, while the Maine Democratic Party called on Platner to withdraw his candidacy.

Democratic-leaning political group End Citizens United pulled its endorsement as well, calling the allegations “profoundly disturbing and disqualifying”.

“The conduct described is fundamentally inconsistent with the standards we expect from the candidates we support,” End Citizens United said in its statement.

Hasan Piker, a leftist commentator and streamer who has backed Platner, seemed to reverse his position on Monday following the Politico report. “If new evidence presents itself, I’m going to change my perspective – it’s that simple,” Piker said during a livestream on Twitch.

“This is a clear-cut instance of verifiable sexual assault allegations. It’s completely irredeemable,” he added.

Platner won Maine’s Democratic primary in April, defeating a centrist Democrat from the party’s establishment wing. The race is a must-win for Democrats, facing off against incumbent Republican Susan Collins. Maine state law allows Platner to be replaced on the ballot if he withdraws by July 13. The replacement candidate must be named by July 27.

In a video released on social media, Platner denied the latest allegations but said he was rethinking his campaign.

“Regardless of the inaccuracy of the reporting but mindful of the political reality it will inflict, we’re taking the time to reflect on the best path forward,” he said in the video.

Racicot’s accusations are the latest in the long string of controversies surrounding Platner. A Marine veteran who also worked for a private security contractor, he has a chest tattoo resembling a Nazi symbol – which he denied knowledge of and later had covered up. He has also had a history of controversial statements on social media, as well as reportedly sexting with other women shortly after getting married.

Over the past year, it may have appeared that the pro-Palestine protest movement in the United States has lost momentum in the face of smears, crackdowns, indifference and fatigue.

But a string of electoral wins by critics of Israeli abuses appears to indicate that activism’s success can only be measured in the long term.

In New York, Darializa Avila Chevalier, an activist who participated in the pro-Palestine protests at Columbia University, won a Democratic congressional primary against a five-term incumbent.

“It’s just so satisfying to feel like the tide is finally turning,” said Maryam Alwan, who participated in the Columbia protest in 2024.

“Public opinion has shifted to a point where it’s unavoidable and undeniable, and I think we’re finally starting to see the ripple effects of movements like the encampment that happened two years ago.”

Avila Chevalier’s win was one of several victories for pro-Palestine candidates in New York last week.

Last year, Zohran Mamdani was elected mayor of New York City, in part thanks to the efforts of young pro-Palestine activists who powered his campaign.

In Colorado on Tuesday, Melat Kiros, who was fired from her law firm in 2023 for a letter defending Palestinian rights supporters from accusations of anti-Semitism, ousted a House member who had been in Congress for nearly 30 years.

Candidates backed by supporters of Palestinian rights also won key races in Pennsylvania and New Jersey.

Columbia case

Avila Chevalier’s victory especially stands out in the context of the long-term impact of the student protests.

The democratic socialist nominee, who is likely to cruise to victory in a safe Democratic district in November, will represent large parts of Columbia University’s campus, where it all started.

Witnessing horrific atrocities in Gaza that were partly funded by their own government, students at Columbia set up the first encampment in support of Palestinians, kick-starting a national movement.

Students nationwide then turned their campuses into a front line for political activism against Israel’s genocidal war on Palestinians.

Dozens of encampments sprang up on campuses across the country in 2024 and chants of “free Palestine” rang out in schools from Seattle to Miami.

The students demanded an end to their own schools’ complicity in Israel’s abuses. They called for divestment from Israeli companies and weapons manufacturers.

A security crackdown soon ensued, leading to the arrest of hundreds of students and the removal of encampments.

Avila Chevalier herself was arrested in 2024 as an alumna taking part in the protests.

Many students faced academic disciplinary action and others were charged with alleged crimes related to the protests as politicians from both major parties portrayed the movement as anti-Semitic.

Then, Donald Trump returned to the White House in 2025 and went after student activists who were not US citizens, pushing to deport them.

With the encampments removed, the protests getting quieter and the activists going on the defensive to preserve their own personal reputations, safety and freedom, it appeared that the pro-Israel camp successfully suffocated the student movement.

‘New wave of hope’

But the story is not over yet, activists say, and the recent elections show it.

“There’s no words to describe the joy and satisfaction that comes from seeing Darializa, a former leader and organiser of the encampment, represent the school that arrested her,” Alwan said.

She added that while students may not have succeeded in securing divestment despite rallying and suffering personal costs, change is proving to be a “gradual process”, and public opinion is now more aligned with the protesters.

“We’re experiencing a new wave of hope,” Alwan told Al Jazeera.

Cameron Jones, who participated in the protests at Columbia, said Avila Chevalier was always supportive of younger activists and unafraid to speak up for Palestinian rights, even when it wasn’t popular.

“It’s really inspiring to see how, even though we have faced such immense repression and have been organising in such a hostile environment, the power of the people is still able to overcome all the barriers that are being set by the federal government, Columbia, the media,” Jones said of Avila Chevalier’s win.

The Columbia protests were part of Avila Chevalier’s political identity as she launched her campaign last year.

One of her criticisms of her now-defeated opponent, Congressman Adriano Espaillat, is that he did not adequately support Columbia activist Mahmoud Khalil as he was targeted for deportation by the Trump administration.

Heba Gowayed, a sociology professor at the City University of New York (CUNY), said the recent electoral wins for pro-Palestine candidates would not have been possible without the student protests of 2024.

“When we think about social movements, we think about them as bursts of action, as temporally limited things,” Gowayed told Al Jazeera.

“And when the students are dispersed and the students are expelled and the university doesn’t divest, we see that as the loss of a movement.”

She added that there have been many articles declaring the defeat of student protests and claiming they have petered out and questioning the lack of campus activism in the Trump era after the crackdown.

“But here we have Darializa’s win, Mamdani’s win and the win of the entire socialist slate,” she said. “This does not happen if those students don’t encamp; it just doesn’t happen.”

President Donald Trump has sought to limit mail-in voting and has ordered his administration to impose limits on the practice.

A federal judge in the United States has blocked proposed restrictions on mail-in voting that were championed by President Donald Trump.

On Wednesday in Washington, DC, District Judge Emmet Sullivan sided with the NAACP, a civil rights organisation, in its case against the US Postal Service (USPS).

Sullivan found that the restrictions would likely violate a 2021 settlement requiring expedited handling for mail-in ballots.

He therefore granted the NAACP’s motion to enforce compliance with the settlement, dealing another setback to the Trump administration’s efforts to reshape the US voting landscape.

“NAACP has plausibly suggested — and the Postal Service has not disputed — that the Proposed Rule is already having a ‘real impact on present day affairs’,” Sullivan wrote in his ruling.

The case revolves around a rule the Postal Service put forward in May that would require states to provide lists of absentee and mail-in voters. Ballots that do not conform to the list would be returned.

The proposed rule would also require a new envelope design for mail-in ballots, governing logos and barcode placements. Failure to comply would result in the Postal Service refusing to deliver the ballots.

The NAACP argued that the proposal would run afoul of a 2021 legal settlement that forces Postal Service officials to take “extraordinary measures” to ensure timely delivery of ballot mail.

The settlement “stipulated that the Postal Service agreed ‘to prioritize monitoring and timely delivery of election mail’”, Sullivan wrote in Wednesday’s ruling.

The decision comes less than five months before the November 3 midterm elections, which will decide whether Trump’s Republican Party retains control over both chambers of Congress.

Trump has expressed fears that he may be subject to a third impeachment if Democrats flip the legislature.

He has also spread unfounded theories that US elections are vulnerable to “vote rigging”, pointing to commonplace election tools like mail-in voting and electronic voting machines.

Elections are administered by state and local election officials, as established in the US Constitution. But the Postal Service’s proposed rule came as the result of efforts under the Trump administration to impose new limits on voting.

In March, Trump issued an executive order called “Preserving and Protecting the Integrity of American Elections”. In it, he directed the Department of Justice to take action against states that “fail to comply” with certain standards for mail-in ballots.

He also accused states that accepted absentee or mail-in ballots after Election Day of violating the law.

But in another blow to Trump, the Supreme Court on Monday upheld a state law that allows mail-in ballots to be counted even if they were received after Election Day, so long as they were postmarked on or before that date. The president’s executive order has also been blocked by lower courts.

Civil rights advocates applauded the court’s Wednesday decision and warned against Trump’s efforts to limit mail-in voting.

“The court today correctly recognized that USPS’s plan to create roadblocks to mail-in voting was inconsistent with its commitment to timely deliver election mail,” said Allison Zieve, director of the Public Citizen Litigation Group, which argued on behalf of the NAACP.

“USPS’s plan was unwise, unlawful, and a threat to the millions of voters who rely on mailed ballots to participate in our democracy.”

Sam Spital, the associate director-counsel of the Legal Defense Fund, which also argued for the NAACP, called the Postal Service’s proposed plan “a blatant attempt” to disenfranchise voters who rely on mailed ballots.

“Today’s decision recognizes that USPS cannot disregard its legal obligation to timely deliver mail-in ballots to all voters,” Spital said.

Former lawyer Melat Kiros, 29, has criticised the Democrats for their support of Israel during its genocidal war on Gaza.

Democratic ⁠socialist Melat Kiros has defeated 15-term United States Representative Diana DeGette in the Democratic primary in a Denver-area district in Colorado, according to US media projections, the latest victory of ‌a leftist over an establishment Democrat.

The race on Tuesday was called ⁠by multiple media outlets after 78 percent ⁠of the votes were counted and Kiros had a nearly 7,000-vote lead over DeGette.

Kiros, who moved to the US from Ethiopia as a ⁠baby, had faced controversy over her criticism of Democrats who support Israel and her alliance ⁠with socialist political commentator Hasan Piker.

She is now favoured to win November’s election in the overwhelmingly Democratic district.

Kiros, a 29-year-old former lawyer, was fired from her job after refusing to remove a post that criticised law firms for their stance on Israel and Palestine and has called Israel’s actions in Gaza genocide.

Kiros is ‌the latest democratic socialist to oust an incumbent Democrat this summer.

In New York City, three candidates with ties ‌to ‌the Democratic Socialists of America and endorsed by Mayor Zohran Mamdani won their primaries.

Also on Tuesday, Colorado ‌Attorney General Phil Weiser beat ⁠US ⁠Senator Michael Bennet for the Democratic nomination for governor, ⁠US media projected.

Weiser outraised and outspent Bennet in a race ⁠that was largely about who was best positioned to defend Colorado against President Donald Trump, who froze federal funds ‌to the state and vetoed a major drinking water project in Colorado, where voters have trended Democratic in elections over the past 20 years.

The attorney general argued that he ⁠stood up to ⁠the Trump administration in court, where he fought against the funding freeze and the president’s attempt to ⁠end birthright citizenship.

Weiser is expected to be elected ⁠governor in November.

State Representative Manny Rutinel ⁠also won the ⁠Democratic nomination to challenge Republican US Representative Gabe ⁠Evans in a battleground district that Democrats consider a top ⁠pickup opportunity in the November 3 midterm elections, according to projections.

Rutinel, a progressive candidate, defeated moderate former state Representative Shannon Bird in ‌a campaign that focused heavily on immigration. The district in Denver’s northern suburbs and nearby rural area is nearly 40 percent Latino.

Evans narrowly won his ‌seat in 2024 but has a significant cash advantage over Rutinel, ‌reporting $3.4m on hand in campaign funds to Rutinel’s $910,000.

Trump’s Republican Party now holds a slim majority in the US House of Representatives and Senate. Democrats need to net three ⁠seats to win control ⁠of the House in November and four to win the Senate.