vote

For the majority of Israelis, the general election on October 27 is a choice between Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and the forces that oppose him, led by former general Gadi Eisenkot. But for the Palestinian citizens of Israel, who make up 20 percent of the population, the upcoming polls present a different dilemma.

As the political mainstream in Israel continues to shift to the far right, Palestinian citizens face growing threats to their political and collective rights. Palestinian communities in Israel experience increased violence, while settlers are encroaching on their boundaries. The recent push to expand policing and militarisation of civilian life is another source of growing anxiety within the Palestinian population.

In this context, the anti-Netanyahu bloc does not seem to offer the prospect of policy reversal or change. Therefore, the question on many Palestinian minds is whether voting in the Israeli elections can make any difference at all.

Recolonisation of 1948 Palestine

Since the Nakba of 1948, the Palestinians who managed to remain in their homes in what was declared as territory of the new State of Israel have had a different fate than the Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza. In 1952, they were granted Israeli citizenship, and in 1966, the martial law under which they were forced to live was lifted.

Although Palestinian citizens of Israel have the right to vote and participate in politics, citizenship has not shielded them from the broader system of dispossession and attempts to reshape their Palestinian identity and national belonging.

Through land confiscation and the regulation of education and culture, the Israeli state has sought to detach Palestinians from their historical roots and collective past, promoting instead a model of the “Arab Israeli” as a citizen whose identity is separate from its Palestinian and Arab national context.

Formal citizenship has not secured substantive equality for Palestinians as they face discriminatory laws, systemic underfunding of basic services, and political and socioeconomic marginalisation.

Instead of engaging in direct violence towards Palestinian citizens – as it has done in the West Bank and Gaza – the Israeli state has instead “outsourced” brutality to criminal networks.

As a result, Palestinian communities have faced killings, shootings, bombings and arson while Israeli law enforcement has largely ignored the problem. More recently, this problem has escalated, as organised crime groups obtained advanced weapons reportedly stolen from Israeli army stockpiles or smuggled across borders. This growing militarisation of organised crime has claimed hundreds of lives.

In parallel, Israeli settlements next to Palestinian communities have expanded, accompanied by accelerated seizure of land. This process of “recolonisation” began in mixed cities, such as Jaffa and Lydd, where religious-nationalist settler groups started establishing themselves in Palestinian neighbourhoods in 2021.

Since October 2023, this process has accelerated. In August, Israel’s Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich unveiled his party’s plan to “Judaise” the Naqab and northern Israel. He proposes to add one million Jewish residents to the two regions, establishing 40 new settlements and dozens of farms, expanding existing settlements, and creating hundreds of thousands of new housing units.

The idea is to extend the model of territorial control from the occupied West Bank into the Naqab and northern Israel, where Palestinian communities are concentrated.

There are also indications that the policing of Palestinian towns and villages could increasingly fall under the National Guard, established under National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir.

The idea of creating the force was prompted by the May 2021 protests, known as the Dignity Uprising, which spread across Palestinian communities in Lydd, Haifa, Umm al-Fahm, and dozens of other towns and villages.

Ben-Gvir has advocated expanding the state’s capacity to suppress such unrest. Although the National Guard’s precise role and operational framework remain under development, its potential deployment against mass protests raises serious concerns about the right to protest and the protection of democratic freedoms.

The government has strengthened settler security squads and integrated them into a broader security framework, raising concerns about the growing role of armed civilian groups in enforcing control over Palestinian communities.

At the same time, Ben-Gvir has widened access to personal firearms, issuing 300,000 gun licences since taking office.

Together, these measures normalise civilian policing and deepen the militarisation of everyday life, reinforcing the unequal distribution of coercive power in a society structured on the dispossession and subordination of Palestinians.

The Palestinian response

Parties seeking to represent Palestinian citizens of Israel, such as the United Arab List (Ra’am), led by Mansour Abbas, have long argued that parliamentary participation and support for the anti-Netanyahu camp can help remove the far right from power and halt its settler-colonial agenda. But the party’s own track record proves this premise wrong.

Ra’am joined the coalition government formed after the elections in 2021, which excluded Netanyahu, but it failed to bring about fundamental changes in the conditions of Palestinian citizens. The coalition was fragile and often rocked by deep ideological contradictions.

In 2022, Mazen Ghnaim, a member of Ra’am, publicly acknowledged that he could not push through policies that would benefit the Palestinian population, despite his party being part of the ruling coalition and despite promises being made that such policies would be accepted. He also lamented the heavy criticism he faced whenever he was visiting Palestinian communities.

Ra’am’s experience in that coalition illustrated the challenge of sustaining Palestinian political participation in a government whose other constituent parties uphold exclusionary nationalist policies.

The problem, therefore, extends beyond Netanyahu himself: Palestinian support for the anti-Netanyahu camp cannot translate into meaningful policies that challenge the broader structures of discrimination and dispossession Palestinian citizens of Israel face.

Voting may offer a way to slow down this project, but it cannot reverse the deeper transformation taking place within Israeli society. The cultural shift towards fascism extends beyond the government and its political leadership, becoming increasingly embedded in social attitudes and everyday life.

That said, I believe another four years of far-right rule would pose an immediate threat to Palestinian communities and their rights. Therefore, I will vote in Tuesday’s election.

But Palestinians need to recognise that electoral participation must be accompanied by a more radical political response capable of confronting the structures and ideologies driving this transformation. This requires, among other things, reforming the High Follow-Up Committee for Arab Citizens of Israel and rooting it more firmly in Palestinian society through popular committees and grassroots organising.

It also demands a broader commitment to democratisation and de-Zionisation across historic Palestine, as part of a larger political project aimed at building a different future through alternative institutions, mechanisms, and forms of collective action.

Whatever the Israeli state might claim, the fate of the Palestinian citizens of Israel is tied to the fate of the rest of the Palestinian population. That is a realisation that Palestinian political leaders must finally embrace.

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeera’s editorial stance.

The political party of Senator Flavio Bolsonaro has acknowledged the result of Brazil’s presidential run-off, despite the right-wing candidate pledging to annul the outcome.

On Monday, Valdemar Costa Neto, the leader of the right-wing Liberal Party, issued a statement saying his political group had accepted the outcome of the vote.

Still, he echoed Bolsonaro’s concerns about the circumstances surrounding the election.

“We recognise the presidential election results,” Costa Neto said. “But we believe the issues raised need to be properly clarified.”

On Sunday, Bolsonaro was defeated by left-wing incumbent President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva by a margin of more than 4.4 million votes.

Bolsonaro has yet to formally concede. In a post-election speech, he called the election results “unacceptable”, citing a last-minute extension to voting hours.

“We will take legal action,” he told supporters. “I will request that these elections be annulled.”

An extension to Sunday’s vote had been sought by the campaigns of both candidates — but for different reasons.

Bolsonaro’s camp had pointed to inclement weather that impeded some voters from reaching polling stations. Parts of southern Brazil, considered a right-wing stronghold, had experienced heavy rains on Sunday.

Lula’s campaign, meanwhile, pushed for longer voting hours after it accused some cities of limiting public transportation on election day.

The left-wing leader’s allies framed those reductions in service as an attempt at election interference, aimed at preventing Lula’s working-class base from voting.

Media reports indicated that Pablo Souza, a transportation official in the city of Salvador, was arrested on Sunday over the matter.

In response to the petitions, Supreme Court Justice Cristiano Zanin agreed to extend voting by two hours.

Whereas polls across the country had been slated to close at 5pm Brasilia time (20:00 GMT), Zanin’s order allowed those that had not already closed to remain open until 7pm (22:00 GMT).

Following his loss, Bolsonaro cried foul, saying that the justice’s decision had disadvantaged his voters.

He pointed to Zanin’s relationship with Lula as support: Lula had appointed Zanin to the high court in 2023, and Zanin had formerly served as the left-wing politician’s personal lawyer.

“With a simple stroke of a pen, at the request of a former partner, [Zanin] changed the rules of the game mid-match,” Bolsonaro said in his address on Sunday night.

But experts signalled they were sceptical of Bolsonaro’s claims of malfeasance.

An analysis by Pedro Burgos, a professor at the Brazilian educational institute Insper, found that the extension resulted in 35,000 additional votes across the country, less than 0.03 percent of the total.

That amount was far short of Lula’s 4.4 million vote advantage. The incumbent won more than 64.25 million votes, compared with Bolsonaro’s 59.83 million.

Still, some right-wing allies rallied to Bolsonaro’s support. US President Donald Trump, who has clashed with Lula in the past, told reporters that the vote seemed “rigged”.

“Elections have to be indisputable and it looked very bad to me,” Trump said on Monday. “It looked like another rigged election, frankly.”

Still, Trump stopped short of suggesting that he would get involved on behalf of Bolsonaro, saying instead he “did not take sides” in the election.

Bolsonaro’s refusal to accept his loss has raised concerns about whether he will abide by the democratic process or follow in the footsteps of his father, Jair Bolsonaro, who served as Brazil’s president from 2019 to 2023.

After his defeat to Lula in the 2022 election, the ex-president refused to acknowledge the outcome.

Instead, he and his allies sought to overturn the results, including through a legal challenge, and prosecutors accused him of plotting a coup to prevent the legal transfer of power.

Jair Bolsonaro is currently serving a 27-year prison sentence on coup-related charges.

Separately, he was also barred from serving in public office for eight years, after a court found he had misused his public office to spread misinformation about the election.

Flavio Bolsonaro, along with his siblings, has sought to have his father released. The family has denounced the elder Bolsonaro’s trial as a case of political persecution.

Still, it is unclear whether Flavio Bolsonaro will continue with his legal challenge over Sunday’s election.

The Brazilian news outlet Folha de S Paulo reported on Monday that legal advisers and political allies have convinced Bolsonaro to abandon his quest to have his loss annulled, citing the large margin of Lula’s victory and its validation by the Supreme Court and election authorities.

Bolsonaro also announced on Monday that federal police asked him to hand over his passports amid speculation that he could leave the country following his loss.

He said that he would comply with the order and had no plans to leave.

“To withstand the chaos, I’m going to organise the opposition,” the right-wing politician said.

NEW YORK — Democrats and outside watchdogs are planning a massive presence at the polls on Election Day driven by concerns that President Trump will further leverage the vast resources of the federal government to interfere with a midterm that could hobble his final two years in office.

They won’t be the only ones there. A sprawling election protection effort on the left that is expected to deploy tens of thousands of monitors will be met by the largest-ever monitoring program by the Justice Department and still more observers from Republican-aligned groups. The result could be unlike anything seen at the polls in modern times.

The effort among Democratic and nonprofit groups includes training volunteers to stand watch outside polling places and report activities they consider concerning. The network includes traditional government watchdogs such as Common Cause and the American Civil Liberties Union plus a flood of volunteers assembled by state Democratic parties, congressional leaders, national activist groups and organizations focused on protecting democracy.

The Democratic National Committee created a first-of-its-kind cybersecurity unit staffed by former CIA and FBI officials to monitor and report online misinformation, including artificial intelligence deepfakes, said Jane Kleeb, vice chair of the DNC.

That’s as Democratic mayors, attorneys general and secretaries of state host tabletop exercises simulating worst-case scenarios, such as a surge of Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials at voting locations or the seizure of ballots and voting equipment.

On Capitol Hill, Democratic leaders have assembled a legal team that rivals that of any presidential campaign.

“We’ve never done this before,” Kleeb said of the party’s sweeping efforts. But “we’ve never had to deal with the president of the United States saying that he may seize ballots, put ICE agents outside polling locations and other kinds of very clear direct threats to the voting process.”

The Department of Justice has already filed lawsuits in California and Alaska that could affect ballot counting or certification.

While Trump continues to make baseless allegations of cheating in the election, administration and military officials have said they have no plans to deploy immigration agents or troops to polling sites.

White House spokeswoman Lauren Bis blamed “radical Democrats” for creating fears about election security by refusing to enact voter ID requirements and other Republican-backed measures.

“President Trump has done more than any other president to ensure we have free and fair elections,” Bis said.

Tens of thousands of volunteers trained to observe

State Democratic parties have trained an estimated 10,000 volunteers to observe polling places and report anything potentially concerning they might see from federal agents. Common Cause has trained roughly 16,000 more volunteers to stand watch at voting precincts, said Suzanne Almeida, vice president of states for the group.

She said a broader Election Protection coalition involving 300 other groups has trained tens of thousands more.

Smaller pockets of volunteers from other groups also are preparing to show up, including roughly 100 organized by Senate Democrats and hundreds more from a Democratic-allied group called Save America, which is training clergy members, veterans, teachers and other local community members. National groups such as Indivisible and MoveOn are activating their own expansive networks.

There are so many organizations working to protect the voting process — including many that cannot legally coordinate with each other — that some officials involved worry about unintentionally creating chaos outside polling locations.

Almeida said Election Day confusion is possible in some precincts but the nature of the threat requires a collective effort.

“It will actually take all of us if some of the threats we are most worried about come to pass,” she said.

Trump administration sends its own team

Harmeet Dhillon, a Trump appointee who leads the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division, was asked on CBS’ “60 Minutes” whether the Republican administration is planning to send ICE agents to polling places.

“There is no plan to do that,” she responded.

Still, the Justice Department is planning its largest-ever election monitoring effort, with about 1,000 department staff expected to observe voting and ensure federal laws are being followed, spokesperson Kiersten Pels said. That comes after a primary season in which the department said it deployed more than 100 election monitors across hundreds of polling locations.

At least one of those placements sparked tensions with local officials. Wyoming Gov. Mark Gordon, a Republican, said the behavior of two monitors during that state’s primary was “a bit aggressive” and “irregular.” A Laramie County clerk said the Justice Department monitors arrived at the polls intending to interview voters, but her office didn’t allow it.

The department disagrees that the monitors did anything improper, Pels said. She added that the monitors are trained to comply with federal law governing conduct at polling places and won’t “interfere with the voting process.”

Democratic lawmakers and voting rights advocates have raised concerns that the Trump administration’s monitors could intimidate voters or abandon the duty they’ve had for decades to protect against civil rights violations.

The department plans to send them to every state, focusing on high-population areas, jurisdictions that have had problems in the past and districts with close elections, according to a senior department official who briefed reporters on the condition of anonymity.

The Republican National Committee said its operation involves deploying “election integrity deputy state directors” in 22 states, among them Arizona, Michigan, Georgia and North Carolina.

Those workers are the “eyes and the ears of the RNC in the field” who recruit volunteers and organize trainings, said Ally Triolo, the RNC’s election integrity communications director. Their mission is to surface anything that seems unlawful.

At the same time, the RNC has enlisted nearly 22,000 poll workers and is recruiting poll-watching volunteers for competitive districts. The poll watchers will “observe the process and help ensure election rules are followed in accordance with the law,” Triolo said.

Local election officials prepare for increased attention

While federal monitors have quietly observed elections for decades, largely without incident, some election officials are taking precautions.

Chris Swope, the city clerk in Lansing, Michigan, said he preemptively contacted law enforcement and his attorney in case federal monitors violate election law, although he expects them to abide by the rules.

The Democratic Mayors Association issued guidance to local Democratic officials with detailed instructions about what to do if federal agents appear at polling locations.

It notes that federal law prohibits the presence of federal immigration agents, the FBI or other investigative personnel. It also issued a reminder that federal agents are not allowed to be armed at the polls, nor are they allowed to interact with voters or handle ballots or election equipment.

Justice Department officials have said their monitors won’t be armed and will not interfere with voting. Asked about department monitors being sent to Georgia, Trump told a reporter recently: “They’re not going to do anything other than watch.”

Some of the poll observations have already begun. Mary Corcoran, Save America’s executive director, said her group’s volunteers have been monitoring precincts during early voting in Georgia, Michigan, North Carolina and Ohio to help give voters a sense of security.

“The fear is the point, and we must do something about it,” she said. “Left unanswered, fear does the work of keeping people home without a single agent setting foot at a polling place.”

Peoples and Swenson write for the Associated Press. AP writers Jacqueline GaNun in Lansing, Mich., Mary Clare Jalonick in Washington and Jessica Hill in Las Vegas contributed to this report.

WASHINGTON — In September, just weeks before Americans were set to vote in this year’s midterm elections, a sudden panic over the dangers posed by artificial intelligence caught the White House off guard. A whistleblower had gained viral attention warning the technology could soon pose an existential threat.

President Trump was quick to dismiss concerns, evoking urgency in the U.S. race to achieve global dominance in superintelligence. He rejected calls to negotiate guardrails on the most advanced AI models with China’s leader, Xi Jinping, weeks later, during a prime opportunity to do so in Washington.

Privately, the president expressed concern that public hysteria over AI could jolt markets that have become excessively concentrated in AI-related stocks. He had already seen fresh polling that showed widespread bipartisan opposition to the boom in construction of AI data centers, a push by Trump that has cannibalized chips and energy from other sectors of the economy, driving up costs.

Now, on the campaign trail in the final days before the vote, Trump is vowing to expand a “golden age” of prosperity through the end of his presidency. But experts say his policies on AI have set the U.S. economy up for a period of tremendous risk over the next two years.

Some of the world’s leading financiers are sounding increasingly alarmed about an AI bubble. Ray Dalio, founder of Bridgewater Associates, has warned that AI stocks have become detached from financial fundamentals, pushing markets to precarious highs. Ken Griffin, the world’s richest hedge fund owner, said last week that AI is “almost certainly” fueling a market bubble that could be on the verge of a burst.

Economists warn that Trump has overseen fiscal policy that would give the federal government fewer tools than it has had in the past to respond to a crisis.

“Trump could easily run into a financial crisis before his term is up,” said Kenneth Rogoff, an economist at Harvard. “It is entirely plausible to have a 30% — or more — drop in the stock market, and in the context of an economy so dependent on AI, this in turn could easily lead to a recession and widespread financial distress.”

Spending on data center infrastructure last winter and spring accounted for nearly all U.S. economic growth, according to independent analyses. Without it, growth would have slowed to a mere fraction of a percentage point, leaving the economy nearly stagnant and flirting with recession.

The Nasdaq 100 has about 70% of its index weight in companies that depend on AI, from semiconductor manufacturers and Big Tech giants to cloud platforms and software providers. Anthropic, one of the top AI industry leaders, plans an initial public offering next month, while its chief rival, OpenAI, expects to go public next year.

From left, Chris Painter, president of the Model Evaluation and Threat Research, Marius Hobbhahn, CEO of Apollo Research, Paul Ohm, professor of law at the Georgetown University Law Center, Kurt Gaudette, senior vice president of Dragos, and Daniel Kokotajlo, executive director of the AI Futures Project, are sworn in to the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Subcommittee on Disaster Management, District of Columbia, and Census hearing titled “Rogue AI: Securing the Homeland Against AI Agent Attacks,” in Dirksen Senate Office Building on Wednesday, September 30, 2026.

(Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Images)

“Because government finances are already strained, with the national debt on a patently unsustainable trajectory, there is no guarantee of a sharp drop in long-term borrowing rates for the government,” Rogoff continued. “So the options for bailing out the financial sector, or fighting recession, could be much more constrained than during the global financial crisis.”

While doubling down on the promise of an untested, frontier technology, Trump’s other economic policies may be hobbling its growth. Tariffs have raised the costs of imported chips, servers, networking equipment, metals and electrical components, and visa restrictions have tied the hands of industry leaders trying to secure the world’s best talent. Runaway federal deficits have driven long-term bond interest rates, adding pressure on AI firms already strapped with debt.

Servaas Storm, an economist closely following the AI sector at the Delft University of Technology, said the industry is already facing severe financial headwinds that could precipitate a panic.

Prices for energy, chips and minerals are driving up the cost of doing business, while early AI adopters such as Microsoft, Meta and Walmart are scaling back its use as employees spend too much time correcting errors, cleaning up low-quality output and addressing security lapses.

Slower adoption could further complicate the search for revenue, particularly for companies already struggling to monetize the technology. For now, hyperscalers are shouldering the cost of financing frontier AI labs that, as Storm put it, “do not have a credible path to profitability.”

“There is indeed an AI bubble in the stock market and in data center construction, which could pop rather soon, as rising debt loads and elevated interest rates could prove too much to sustain it,” Storm said. “That moment is not imminent, but it is approaching — and it will very likely happen before the end of Trump’s presidency.”

An economy already under duress from Trump’s other economic policies — from tariffs and tax cuts to the Iran war — could precipitate further pain, said Darrell Duffie, a finance professor at the Stanford Graduate School of Business.

Leading AI companies are already running “day-after” drills in anticipation of an AI-related crisis within the next year, according to Axios.

Americans head into election day deeply pessimistic about the economy, with 77% rating it fair or poor, according to a Fox News poll. A separate CNBC survey found that just 34% approve of Trump’s handling of the economy, while 35% of Republicans disapprove — a record high within his own party.

Inflation has fallen sharply from its 9% peak in 2022, during a pandemic-era surge, reaching 2.9% by the end of Biden’s presidency. Under Trump, it has climbed once again to 3.7%, driven by rising energy, transportation and housing costs — among the top concerns for voters entering next month’s vote.

Persistent inflation has forced the Federal Reserve to keep interest rates elevated, squeezing borrowers. And those rates — paired with high government spending and concerns over mounting deficits — have pressured the bond market, pushing 10-year Treasury yields to levels not seen since the early 2000s.

“Financial crises, by their nature, are virtually impossible to predict,” Duffie said, asked whether he shared concerns of a potential AI bubble.

“If we know we are going to be in a crisis soon,” he added, “markets advance the crisis to now.”

The two leading candidates condemn recent deadly Black Sea drone strikes but differ on the Ukraine war more broadly.

Bulgarians are voting in a presidential election amid the spread of Russia’s war on Ukraine to the waters off Bulgaria’s Black Sea coast.

Ahead of Sunday’s vote, President Iliana Iotova, 61, and ex-caretaker Prime ⁠Minister Andrey Gyurov, 50, were leading a field of 27 candidates in the polls.

⁠The presidency is a largely ceremonial post in Bulgaria. While major policies must be approved by Parliament, direct election gives the president greater political authority. The president leads the armed forces and can veto legislation, sign international treaties and appoint ambassadors.

The election has also gained attention after a series of drone attacks on merchant ships off Bulgaria’s coast that likely killed some two dozen international seafarers.

The drone strikes ‌sparked international condemnation and concerns about the growing reach of the war in Ukraine, prompting Bulgaria to seek allied assistance to bolster its maritime security.

The Bulgarian government has stopped short of explicitly blaming Russia for the attacks, but Prime Minister Rumen Radev said the outcome of the strikes “benefits the Russian Federation”.

Relations with Russia, West at stake

The two leading candidates for president have both condemned the strikes, but they differ on the broader war in Ukraine.

Gyurov, who served as caretaker prime minister this year, is backed by ⁠pro-Western, reformist parties and has long expressed support for Ukraine. He ⁠signed a security cooperation agreement with Kyiv during his time as premier.

“I want Bulgaria to have a voice of its own in Europe, a reliable NATO ally that defends its interests through preparedness, strong diplomacy and ⁠a clear position,” he said at a rally on Thursday.

Iotova, a former vice president, became acting president in January after Radev resigned to ⁠enter the parliamentary race, which he won on what many ⁠political analysts considered a Kremlin-friendly ticket.

Radev supports Iotova, and they both call for a diplomatic end to the war.

“My opponents argue that there must be ‌a war of attrition,” Iotova told a rally on Thursday. “The truth is, we are all the ones who are most exhausted.”

While there is a broad consensus among the parties in Parliament on the country’s pro-Western path, widespread pro-Russian sentiments based on traditional historical and cultural ties with Russia have divided society, particularly since the start of Moscow’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine.

Dobromir Zhivkov, managing director of the Market Links polling agency, said Iotova is among those who advocate that Bulgaria take a more neutral position.

“They call for an end to aid for Ukraine and a halt to arms deliveries to Ukraine; we often hear them use Kremlin rhetoric and terminology borrowed directly from Kremlin propaganda,” he told The Associated Press news agency earlier this week.

Run-off vote expected

Candidates are also addressing public fears about the steep rise in energy prices and surging inflation, with many Bulgarians in rural areas struggling to make ends meet.

Polls by Alpha Research give Iotova 41 percent of the vote and ‌Gyurov ‌28 percent.

Voting starts at 7am (05:00 GMT), and polls close at 8pm (18:00 GMT).

Analysts expect none of the 27 candidates to secure the outright majority needed to win in the first round, however.

Turnout must also be above 50 percent of the 6.6 million registered voters, and Sunday’s turnout is expected to be less than 40 percent, which means a likely run-off on November 1.

THE mission to find the next James Bond has been narrowed down to four actors as producers ponder the final decision this week.

The replacement will fill the boots of Daniel Craig and fans are scrambling to work out who’s taking over.

After five appearances as 007, Daniel Craig hung up his tuxedo for the last time following his final performance as the secret agent in the 2021 blockbuster, No Time To Die.

Since then, fans have been left wondering which actor is up to scratch to take over.

Amazon MGM Studios, who own the franchise, are said to be keen on four actors for the job.

According to The Wrap, Callum Turner, Josh O’Connor and Jack Lowden have made it to the final round of screen tests, alongside a fourth, currently unnamed actor – thought to be Heartthrob star Jack Barton.

BOOTED OUT

Hollyoaks icon reveals real reason she was sacked & how final scenes were faked

PERFECT HARMONY

Olivia Rodrigo and Chappell Roan team up for collaboration to rework track

So, who do you think should be the next James Bond? VOTE NOW

Love to debate? Join Sun Club for just £1.99 a month for the boldest opinion on the issues shaping Britain.

NEW YORK — The reports erupt on social media every election year: Voters say they tapped a candidate’s name on a touchscreen voting machine, only for the wrong person to light up as their selection.

With some trial and error, and occasionally help from poll workers, the voters are generally able to cast their intended ballots. Nevertheless, some come away from the experience assuming the worst — that the anecdotal issues are proof of a partisan election-rigging scheme.

As early voting in November’s midterm elections gets underway in most states, with soaring turnout in many of them, the claims have returned in force, with voters — especially Democratic ones — in Kansas, Ohio, South Carolina, Tennessee and Texas documenting difficulties with the ballot marking devices.

Many voters have described their experiences on social media, with some falsely interpreting the troubles as attempts at election tampering to favor Republicans. The claims come as an AP-NORC poll shows many Democrats have lost trust in election results over the last four years, with many seeing the president interfering with the vote as a major concern.

Election officials say the touchscreen challenges are almost always the result of user error or an easily fixed screen miscalibration, and say the number of complaints this year isn’t higher than it has been in years past, despite the outsized attention on social media. They emphasize that voters can select a candidate as many times as needed, consult a poll worker for help and review selections before submitting their ballot.

Elections in the U.S. are decentralized, with thousands of election jurisdictions controlling the vote, each with different rules set by state and sometimes local governments. That structure makes the nation’s voting process extraordinarily complicated. It also shields it from widespread fraud.

“Almost all of the claims of vote flipping are understandable human error,” said David Becker, executive director of the Center for Election Innovation and Research, who noted disinformation purveyors often seize on well-meaning concerns to sow doubt in the voting process. “Is there one of us who hasn’t had a butt dial or mistyped something on our phones? It is not nefarious.”

Many voters, including Dolly Parton’s sister, report issues

The complaints about touchscreen machines switching votes have gathered tens of thousands of likes, shares and views on social media in recent days, popping up in various high-population areas across the country, including Tennessee’s Williamson and Davidson counties, homes to Franklin and Nashville.

Stella Parton, the sister of the late country singer Dolly Parton, wrote in a Facebook post on Wednesday that at her polling place near Nashville she had to “go back three times and correct my vote” because it kept defaulting to Republican Sen. Marsha Blackburn.

She added: “I’m putting this out here because when we vote, we take it seriously but we try not to hold up the long lines. Do it anyway. Don’t let them rig this election.”

Chad Gray, election administrator in Williamson County, said officials there had found no discrepancies in the voting equipment. If problems or questions do arise, he said, people from each party will examine the devices and make sure they are working properly.

Tennessee Elections Coordinator Mark Goins told WSMV in Nashville that the issues reported in his area were “not a vote-flipping situation.” “It’s more like an unintended touch that they may not even realize,” Goins said.

Another Facebook user explained in a video that when his mother-in-law attempted to vote for Democratic candidates in Kendall County, Texas, the machine kept selecting Republicans. He said she was ultimately able to vote as desired and contended that it could have been user error, but still concluded people were “jacking with our elections.”

Staci Decker, elections administrator in Kendall County, said “100% of the time” the issue can be attributed to a voter tapping the wrong part of the box onscreen or from voters tapping the screen too hard, causing it to become miscalibrated. She said her policy is for staff to recalibrate the screens every few days to ensure the accuracy of the touchscreen.

“This is part of an attempt at every election (especially the bigger ones) to scare voters away,” Decker said in an email. “Every single piece of equipment used in our election is tested before it can be used in an election.”

Reports of voting machine errors common during high-turnout elections

In South Carolina, where an X user said a machine made it hard for her to vote for Democratic Senate nominee Annie Andrews, state election officials haven’t seen any unusual increase in reports of voters having trouble making selections, said Sydni Bain, a spokesperson with the state’s election commission.

“We commonly receive some of these reports during elections, particularly statewide elections with high turnout,” she said. “We encourage all voters to be careful in making their selections and to review their ballot before it is cast.”

In Bexar County, Texas, where an X user reported having to tap the screen forcefully to get the machine to register her choice of Democrat James Talarico instead of Republican Ken Paxton for Senate, election officials said they couldn’t confirm any equipment issues.

“This could possibly be user error,” said John Moreno, the county’s assistant public information officer. “If a voter has concerns about their ballot, they should bring it to the attention of the on-site judge.”

Kristin Miles, president of the Texas Assn. of County Election Officials and election administrator in Bastrop County, said “vote-switching” claims come up every election cycle.

“Nearly every case comes back to the screen calibration on older touchscreen machines, not a change to anyone’s vote,” she said.

Officials emphasized that machines are tested before each election and that in most jurisdictions, there is a postelection audit that consists of a manual hand count of a sample of paper ballots.

Voting machine company explains what to do if you encounter problems

Voters across the country cast ballots in various ways, including with ballot marking devices that print a paper record or with paper ballots they fill out by hand.

The counties where most of the recent vote-flipping social media reports are concentrated use ExpressVote ballot marking devices from a company called Election Systems & Software. The machines let voters make their selections on a touchscreen. Then, a paper record is typically printed for review before the votes are tabulated.

Katina Granger, senior manager of public relations for the Nebraska-based ES&S, said the company works closely with election officials and provides technical support when needed but has not been made aware of any widespread issue with voting machines this cycle.

She said when a voter is having difficulty, they should ask a poll worker for assistance. If they’ve already printed a ballot that doesn’t reflect their intended selections, “they should notify a poll worker rather than cast it so the jurisdiction can follow its procedures for replacing the ballot.”

Swenson and Goldin write for the Associated Press. AP writers Anna Wilder in Austin, Texas, and video journalist Kristin M. Hall in Nashville contributed to this report.

In just 11 days, millions of Americans will head to the polls to vote on key local races and decide the fate of Congress.

Perhaps no voting bloc will be more crucial in swinging the balance of power than Latinos.

In 2024, after decades of reliably supporting Democrats, the electorate of roughly 36.2 million people (about 15% of all total voters) shifted massively to the right and supported Donald Trump at previously never-before-seen rates. After the election, armchair pundits and paid professionals proclaimed that Ronald Reagan had been right all along. Latinos were Republican. They just needed to realize it.

It didn’t take long for that narrative to start crumbling. A year after Trump’s reelection, Latinos in California helped pass Proposition 50, which allowed Democrats to redraw the state’s congressional map in their favor to counter a successful effort by Texas Republicans to do the same — coincidentally, the Texas gerrymander was at least partially motivated by said gains with Latino voters.

Latinos also helped Democrats pick up governorships in Virginia and New Jersey in 2025 — with two-thirds of their votes going for Abigail Spanberger and Mikie Sherrill, respectively.

Whatever gains Republicans made with Latino voters appear to have vanished. Recent polls show the demographic to be experiencing buyers’ remorse, citing the increased cost of living, the Trump administration’s heavy-handed immigration enforcement tactics, involvement in wars abroad and a stagnating economy as reasons for the disillusionment.

President Trump’s approval rating among Latinos dipped to 27% in an early October NBC News survey. That same poll found that Democrats have a 24-point lead on whom Latino voters want to see in control of Congress.

But don’t expect this whiplash back to the left to be permanent.

“It’s not a realignment, it’s a de-alignment,” said Mike Madrid, a former Republican political consultant and author of “The Latino Century: How America’s Largest Minority Is Transforming Democracy.”

“Latinos are completely moving away from both parties and that’s what’s created this dramatic swing of 25 points towards Trump in four years and then massive swings back.”

So how will the Latino vote shake out in two weeks? Below are five races we are keeping tabs on.

L.A. mayoral race

You don’t need to go outside the city limits to find proof that Latino voters aren’t political ideologues.

During the 2022 mayoral primary, billionaire Rick Caruso won the largest share of the Latino vote (34%). A few months later, Karen Bass became mayor, winning 51% of the Latino vote.

Bass once again won the Latino vote during the 2026 primaries, carrying 35 Latino-majority neighborhoods in the June 2 election — compared with seven for her current challenger, Councilmember Nithya Raman.

Four months, much campaigning and the botched response to a massive warehouse fire in heavily Latino Boyle Heights later, Raman — a democratic socialist — now has a 24-point lead among Latino voters, according to an October Berkeley IGS/L.A. Times poll.

Notably, 34% of Latinos remain undecided heading into the Nov. 3 election.

“Latinos are about a third of the voters in L.A.,” Fernando Guerra, a professor of political science and Chicana/o studies at Loyola Marymount University, told The Times this month. “While they show preferences, they are not deeply committed to either candidate, so they are the quintessential swing voters who decide late.”

Will the embattled incumbent keep her job, or will Los Angeles become the next big city to elect a mayor backed by the Democratic Socialists of America? Latino Angelenos will decide.

California 22nd district

Will Democrats’ Proposition 50 redistricting gambit pay off? Voters of this newly reconfigured Central Valley district populated by blue-collar and agrarian Latinos will decide.

Republican David Valadao is the incumbent and is being challenged by activist and educator Randy Villegas. In 2024, voters in the district backed failed Republican Senate candidate Steve Garvey.

Political forecasts have Villegas — a progressive populist — with a narrow lead over the incumbent.

Part of his appeal, Madrid said, was his messaging.

“[His message is] the establishment’s not working and that institutions aren’t working,” Madrid said. “It’s a much more populist message. I don’t believe this is ideological one bit.”

Colorado 8th district

It doesn’t get more battleground than this congressional district located in the Denver suburbs. It is the center of Latino voting power in Colorado — Latinos account for 40% of the total electorate. .

The incumbent is Republican Gabe Evans and Trump carried the purple district by less than two percentage points.

Evans currently has a slight lead over Democratic candidate Manny Rutinel, an attorney and economist. Rutinel’s messaging has focused on the rising cost of living and the Republicans’ immigration policies.

It could get him elected. A local survey found that 56% of Latino voters in Colorado approve of Democrats in Congress, while 39% said they do not approve.

Florida 27th district

Will disassociating from Trump help this Republican incumbent keep her job?

Journalist-turned-Congress member María Elvira Salazar, a Cuban American, made headlines in September after releasing a political ad calling out the president’s immigration enforcement, alleging that Trump, who carried the majority Latino district by 15 points in 2024, had betrayed her constituents.

Elvira Salazar currently holds a narrow lead over her Democratic rival Elliott Rodriguez, who is also Cuban American.

“She’s trying to show distance and trying to show an independent streak,” Madrid said of the three-term incumbent. “She’s trying to say, ‘I’m not that.’ And you can’t do that on the economy as a Republican, because that changes all the time. What you can do as a Latino in a Latino district … is say your policies have gone too far.”

Texas

Okay, I’ll admit that I’m cheating with this one. But there’s just so much going on in Texas that it deserves its own section. The Lone Star State is ground zero for this supposed great political de-alignment.

In 2025, at the behest of Trump, Texas Republicans undertook an unprecedented mid-decade congressional redistricting in hopes of gerrymandering a map that would give the party an advantage in the 2026 midterm elections. They factored in the historic gains with Latino voters.

“They drew those districts based on what they thought were the 2024 numbers,” said Matt Barreto, a professor of political science and Chicana/o & Central American studies at UCLA. “And now those 2024 numbers are evaporating.”

The plan appears to be backfiring spectacularly, at least in south Texas.

Trump won Texas’ 15th congressional district in 2020 and 2024, and in 2022 the majority Latino electorate voted for Republican Monica De La Cruz. But polls now show that Democratic candidate and singer-turned-politician Bobby Pulido has a seven-point lead. Pulido, who bills himself as a moderate, has focused his messaging on affordability and the rising cost of living.

A similar situation is taking place in the Latino-dense 34th and 35th districts, where Republicans Eric Flores and Carlos De La Cruz, respectively, are hoping to take advantage of the redrawn Republican-friendly boundaries to flip those seats red. Both face uphill battles as polls show them neck-and-neck with their Democratic opponents.

“You now have these two districts, Texas 9th and 35th, that are 51% Latino, but now Latinos are telling us they have lost confidence in the Republican Party,” Barreto said. “What we’re seeing is very strong evidence that Latinos are shifting back even more so against Trump and Republicans because they did not deliver on any of their promises from 2024.”

In the statewide Senate and gubernatorial races, Democrats are feeling hopeful. Democratic challenger James Talarico currently has a slight lead on his Republican opponent Ken Paxton. Among Latinos, that lead was clocked at a whopping 30 points in an October Fox News survey.

But what has been Talarico’s key to connecting with Latino voters?

“He’s turning away from race and ethnic-based politics to class consciousness,” Madrid said. “[He’s acknowledged] that Latinos have had their futures taken away from them.”

The seminary student and educator has also been critical of his own party — calling it out for ineptitude, leaving voters behind — and arguing that anti-establishment messaging is enticing to Latinos who have been spurned by both major parties.

If Texas gets its first Democratic senator since 1993, it’ll be thanks to the Latino vote.

Texas Latinos’ faith in the ruling party is so low that even the state’s governor, Republican powerhouse Greg Abbott, finds himself in a tight race with Democratic challenger Gina Hinojosa. Roughly 56% of Latinos were in favor of Hinojosa over the incumbent, an October poll found.

“Latinos are the only voters voting rationally in a broken system,” Madrid said. “We’re shifting by 25 points. If you don’t pay attention to our priority issues, we’ll vote you out, that’s how the system was designed.”

Latinos appear to be swinging back to the left, but Democrats shouldn’t take those gains for granted, Madrid said.

“The Democratic Party has done nothing to win these voters back. They’re just not Republicans,” Madrid said. “And for the moment, that’s good enough.”

(Jackie Rivera / For The Times; Martina Ibáñez-Baldor / Los Angeles Times)

Join De Los for a Día de Muertos event at Hollywood Forever

Dia de los Muertos at Hollywood Forever

(Diana Ramirez / De Los)

This Saturday, join De Los at Hollywood Forever Cemetery to celebrate Día de Muertos. We’ll have an altar set up from noon to 8 p.m. where visitors can write ofrendas that will be displayed throughout the event.

There will also be a photo booth run by Las Fotos Project on site from 2 to 6 p.m.

This is an all-ages event and will feature performances by música Mexicana act DannyLux, soul singer Trish Toledo, psychedelic cumbia group Tropa Magica and indie rock band Los Shadows.

Registration and event information can be found here.

If you’re looking for more places to partake in Día de Muertos festivities this year, check out De Los’ list of 50 ways to celebrate the holiday throughout Southern California.

Stories we read this week that we think you should read

Unless otherwise noted, stories below were published by the Los Angeles Times.

Politics and immigration

Arts and entertainment

Southern California

Assemblyman Burt Margolin (D-Los Angeles) was so concerned about reelection in his heavily Democratic 45th District that he scheduled his wedding and honeymoon in Hawaii in the midst of the campaign.

Margolin was married Sept. 27 to Dr. Laurie M. Post, a Beverly Hills clinical psychologist and daughter of motion picture director Ted Post. The couple is honeymooning in Hawaii, according to Margolin.

The 35-year-old assemblyman, elected in 1982 and reelected in 1984 with more than 60% of the vote both times, said that his marriage and honeymoon a month before the election does not mean that he is overconfident.

‘Do What Is Necessary’

“The key point is that I am not taking anything for granted,” he said in an interview. “I will be back in time to do what is necessary to win reelection. If my opponents mount a campaign, I will be in a position to respond.”

Less than a month before the Nov. 4 election, Margolin could probably just as well spend the rest of the month in the islands.

Jana Olson, the Republican candidate for Margolin’s job, is not optimistic about her chances of defeating him. “The race probably is not winnable, based on the way the district is laid out,” said Olson, a 28-year-old Toluca Lake businesswoman, adding that she expects to raise only $5,000 for the campaign.

By contrast, Margolin has amassed $55,000, none of which is as yet earmarked specifically for his reelection.

Olson’s pessimism is based on, among other factors, the registration figures. Of the 151,846 voters registered as of Sept. 23, 88,630 (58.4%) are Democrats, compared to 45,509 (30%) Republicans.

Long a Democratic stronghold, the 45th Assembly District extends from Hancock Park on the south to Burbank on the north, and includes the Fairfax and Pico-Robertson areas and portions of West Hollywood, Hollywood, the Hollywood Hills, Los Feliz, Universal City, Studio City, Toluca Lake and North Hollywood.

The district has served as the launching pad for and seemingly private reserve of the so-called Berman-Waxman organization, a Democratic political alliance named after U.S. Reps. Howard L. Berman (D-Panorama City) and Henry A. Waxman (D-Los Angeles).

In 1968 Waxman was the first member of the organization to win the 45th District seat. He was followed by Herschel Rosenthal, now a state senator, who was succeeded by Margolin.

Margolin was an aide to both Waxman and Berman before winning his first election in 1982. He is a member of the organization and Waxman’s father works as an aide in Margolin’s office, which is just down the hall from Waxman’s district office in the Miracle Mile.

A Progressive Liberal

A self-described progressive Democrat, Margolin said it is not easy for someone of his political background (generally liberal on issues, including opposition to the death penalty) to score victories against the conservative Administration headed by Gov. George Deukmejian.

“Obviously, it is more difficult to get what you want,” he said, “but it is not impossible. I have managed to get results, although they are more modest because of the governor.”

Medi-Cal Improvement

He mentioned a bill, enacted into law, that established perinatal care for low-income women under Medi-Cal. “That is the only significant increase in Medi-Cal to get by the governor,” he said.

He also authored the so-called “bottle bill” that eventually became law and established deposits for beverage bottles and cans to encourage people to return them for recycling rather than discarding them as litter.

Olson said that she “leans to conservatism” and would bring a sense of fairness, sound business practices and help to the “truly needy” if she is elected.

“I oppose rent controls because they create an artificial market whereby rents are forcibly increased,” she said. “I favor free-market principles, whereas my opponent is very liberal on all the issues.”

Like Olson, the other two candidates in the race are not optimistic about their chances. Both Sylvia F. Kushner, the Peace and Freedom Party candidate, and Donald P. Meyer, the Libertarian Party candidate, said in interviews that they do not expect to win.

Kushner, 75, a human rights organizer, said she entered the race to support programs for low-income people and senior citizens and to register her opposition to the country’s foreign policy.

“We need a state jobs program, improved health care programs and state-supported housing for low-income people,” she said. “I have also been in the peace movement for many years.”

Meyer, 36, a courier with a bachelor’s degree in psychology from the University of Minnesota, said he would like to see government reduced to the smallest possible size.

“I am opposed to most taxes,” he said. “Government should exist to prevent people from taking your money, rather than assuming the role of taxer.”

United States President Donald Trump has long touted himself as a political outsider, someone who would expose the elites’ abuse of power and shift government focus from far-off conflicts to problems at home. Phrases like “drain the swamp” and “America first” have proved to be powerful rallying cries, sparking a whole cadre of “Make America Great Again” (MAGA) Republicans.

Halfway through his final term as president, though, Trump has backpedalled on many of those ideas, cosying up to the ultra-wealthy, sidelining investigations into convicted sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein, and launching an ongoing war with Iran.

That about-face appears to be having a real impact on Republicans running in the US midterm elections in November, said Rina Shah, a geopolitical adviser and strategist and a former senior GOP congressional aide.

“In competitive races, some are quietly distancing,” Shah said, adding that they are “talking about gas prices, local issues, or [saying] ‘I’m focused on my district’ – because the Iran war and the Epstein drip are already showing up in attack ads and soft polling.”

Here’s what you need to know about whether the Republican Party has softened its stance on these issues.

Which Republicans have broken with Trump over the Epstein files?

During his 2024 presidential campaign, Trump said he would declassify troves of files kept by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) about Epstein and his global network of contacts. Trump’s future cabinet members, too, were enthusiastic about this, with Kash Patel, now head of the FBI, saying it was time to “put on your big boy pants and let us know who the pedophiles are”.

Yet a few months after taking office, Trump began dragging his feet, sparking a backlash from influential MAGA figures. Trump began calling the entire issue a “hoax” and saying Republicans were being duped by Democrats into calling for an investigation into Epstein’s network.

Congress did eventually force the release of the files, with help from a handful of Republicans who broke with Trump. The Trump administration has released batches of the heavily redacted files, but has continued to withhold some. Meanwhile, all the Republican lawmakers who voted to mandate releases have paid a price for their insubordination, with three even losing their offices.

US Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene left her Georgia seat in January 2026, after publicly clashing with Trump over Epstein. Nancy Mace, a Republican from South Carolina, lost her bid to become the party’s candidate in her home state after Trump refused to endorse her. Colorado’s Lauren Boebert barely won the primary in her own contest after angering Trump by supporting calls for transparency from Thomas Massie, another Republican bent on exposing what the files held. Massie, of Kentucky, also drew Trump’s ire, which likely cost him the primary.

No more foreign wars?

Trump had long said he would be reducing foreign military involvement, breaking with the interventionist tendencies of other recent Republican presidents. Now he and his party face tough questions about the US-Israel war on Iran, which influential figures in the MAGA movement like political commentator Tucker Carlson have called a mistake, saying, “This is Israel’s war. This is not the United States’ war.”

Amongst disgruntled MAGA supporters, a narrative has emerged of Trump using the war to also distract from the Epstein issue. Massie, the former congressman, summed up the sentiment by saying, “Bombing a country on the other side of the globe won’t make the Epstein files go away.”

Trump has tried to downplay the war’s impact, but voters, even in the Republican Party, think he broke his own promise, driving the overall approval rating for the ratings-obsessed president down to record lows. “Seven months into an open-ended campaign with shifting goals,” said Shah, “that promise looks different to a lot of his voters.”

Few Republicans, however, have responded to that public sentiment with their votes in Congress, where Democrats have tried repeatedly to curtail Trump’s war on Iran by passing resolutions pointing out he failed to get the body’s approval.

In September, just seven Republican House members joined Democrats to pass an anti-war bill. In the Senate, similar efforts have been supported by just a handful of Republicans. Trump called the Republican lawmakers supporting the anti-war bills “unpatriotic,” and said, “They should be ashamed of themselves.”

As with the Epstein files, Trump took action against rebellious Republicans over the Iran war, for instance backing a rival of Senator Bill Cassidy, who voted in favour of the anti-war bill, in a primary in Louisiana that the Republican senator ended up losing.

What happened to Trump’s promise to “drain the swamp”?

One of Trump’s most appealing promises had been to purge the government of a “deep state” establishment he says is running the country without being accountable to the public on social issues, and fiscal and foreign policy.

In a way, Trump did keep that promise. An entire federal government division – the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) – forced tens of thousands of federal workers out of their jobs and dismantled institutions like the US Agency for International Development (USAID). The military threw out notions of racial, gender, and economic diversity. Everything from universities to the Smithsonian Institution was subjected to a campaign against an unqualified, diversity-obsessed elitist class.

But lobbying groups, including some supporting foreign governments, have been given a free hand, and ethics rules and watchdogs who would tackle political corruption have been weakened, said Shah, the Republican strategist.

At his presidential inauguration, Trump literally surrounded himself with the wealthiest people in the world, some of whom have gone on to play some part in his administration.

When federal prosecutors charged 28 California immigrants with illegally registering to vote, they invited friendly media outlets to document the early morning arrest of one suspect.

At a news conference in Los Angeles this week, First Assistant U.S. Atty. Bill Essayli intoned that the defendants’ alleged crimes proved President Trump’s long-held conspiracy theory that voter fraud threatens democracy and that noncitizens are voting by the boatload. Mug shots of the accused — lawful permanent residents, some of whom said they didn’t recall registering to vote — were displayed as if they were part of a Mafia-like conspiracy.

It all felt staged for maximum humiliation.

So what happened to a Costa Mesa woman who registered her dog to vote and attempted to cast ballots for it in two elections?

There was no perp walk for Laura Lee Yourex, who pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor. No melodramatic news conference from Orange County Dist. Atty. Todd Spitzer.

Nah, Spitzer dismissed Yourex’s case after she paid $1,500 for four electronic billboards along the 22 and 55 freeways. They feature a photo of her late boxer Maya Jean sporting an “I Voted” sticker alongside a warning — “Don’t be a dog. Voter Fraud is a Crime” — and the district attorney’s election fraud hotline number.

Yourex’s attorney has said she was trying to expose flaws in the state’s voter registration system by showing that even a dog could cast a ballot, a gimmick for which Spitzer had little sympathy.

He’s usually the modern-day equivalent of a hanging judge, the type of hard ass who wants his prosecutors to not only throw the book at defendants but also to bury them with a library. In an email, he told me that his office has successfully prosecuted two other voter fraud cases during his eight years in office and is pursuing three current ones. But as serious as voter fraud is, Spitzer has never preened in these cases the way Essayli has.

The Republican stalwart declined to comment on Essayli’s approach, saying he’s “not privy to any of the evidence in those cases.” When I asked why he chose a chuckle-inducing billboard as Yourex’s punishment, he argued that it successfully “address[ed] the harm that is done when engaging in this type of criminal behavior.”

Leave it to the Trump administration to make Spitzer — whose campaign slogan for his 2022 reelection was “#NoLAinOC” — come off as a big ol’ liberal softy. But when it comes to voter fraud, at least he’s meting out penalties that fit the crime, while Essayli is once again making Trump his North Star, not the Constitution.

The defendants charged with voter fraud deserve punishment, if they are indeed guilty. But as my colleagues Brittny Mejia and Kevin Rector reported, citing election experts, cases of noncitizens registering to vote are often a result of administrative error or confusion on the part of immigrants, for example, if they accidentally check a box at the DMV.

Essayli’s record as Trump’s top lawman in Southern California — he can’t even call himself the region’s U.S. attorney, since he hasn’t been confirmed by the Senate — is so laughable that I wouldn’t believe him if he claimed that water is wet.

His prosecutors have gone after activists involved in protests against Trump’s masked deportation goons with shoddy charges that were dropped, rejected by grand juries, ridiculed as “amateur hour” by a federal judge or resulted in not guilty verdicts. He’s a lackey who silently stood and watched last year as FBI agents tackled Alex Padilla during a news conference in Los Angeles just because the U.S. senator dared to challenge then-Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem’s ludicrous defense of mass immigration raids. He’s a coward who regularly declines to talk to press outlets — including The Times — that don’t think Trump is the greatest president in history.

Unsurprisingly, my request to interview Essayli — or at least receive emailed answers to questions including whether every felony defendant gets arrested with a phalanx of armed officers surrounding their home, whether that’s occurred in other voter fraud cases and whether his office regularly releases mug shots of felony defendants — went unanswered.

Orange County Dist. Atty. Todd Spitzer said his office is pursuing three voter fraud cases.

(Allen J. Schaben / Los Angeles Times)

Mejia and Rector spoke to some of the accused immigrants and their families swept up by “Operation Protect the Vote,” who were bewildered as to what they had done wrong and why the U.S. Justice Department was swinging such a heavy hammer against them. They shouldn’t be.

What Essayli is doing in the name of rooting out voter fraud isn’t about upholding the law. It’s about validating Trump’s xenophobia. The show trials the defendants will probably face are not about getting rid the worst of the worst, as Trump long claimed. It’s about casting suspicion on all immigrants, legal and not.

What’s especially ironic — no, disgusting — about Essayli’s claims that immigrants who wrongly register to vote are disenfranchising American citizens is that the portrait of this country’s biggest election scofflaw hangs in every federal courthouse. It was Trump who wanted Congress to stop the electoral college from formalizing his 2020 loss to Joe Biden, claiming that Democrats stole the White House from him, and provoked a mob to storm the U.S. Capitol.

But facts have never stopped Essayli from making a pendejo out of himself. His pathetic, dangerous charade reminds me of an infamous voter fraud case from 30 years ago. I wrote about it this summer when Trump first announced he was going to sic the Justice Department on noncitizens who were supposedly voting en masse.

Back then, Loretta Sanchez forever changed O.C. politics when she beat Republican Rep. Bob Dornan by fewer than 1,000 votes. Like Trump, Dornan claimed he lost because of immigrants who illegally voted. Like today’s GOP, sympathetic prosecutors and lawmakers at the local and federal levels spent way too much time and taxpayer money looking into the baseless allegations.

Just as Operation Protect the Vote has already shown this year, with only 28 charged out of about 23 million registered voters in California, Sanchez’s 1996 victory was not achieved through a vast immigrant voting conspiracy.

At least in the Dornan fiasco, Republicans finally dropped their investigation and moved on. The few immigrants who did vote improperly had their ballots tossed but otherwise faced no legal problems.

I doubt Trump and Essayli will give up so easily. That would require humility, mercy and the ability to admit they’re wrong.

But hey, if a dog can cast a vote in California, I guess anything’s possible.

LEWISTON, Maine — Maine Republican Susan Collins has promoted her reputation as one of the most independent U.S. senators and she is using the waning days of the election season to sell that message to voters by campaigning with a former colleague who has endorsed her.

Collins is trying to fend off a challenge from Democrat Troy Jackson, a onetime state Senate president, and on Wednesday she made appearances with Joe Manchin III, a West Virginian who was a Democrat then became an independent late in his career before retiring.

After stopping for breakfast at Simones’ Hot Dog Stand in Lewiston, Collins spoke of how she and Manchin were “part of every piece of bipartisan legislation that passed and became law” during their time together in office.

Manchin said to lose Collins would be “to lose the soul of the Senate.” He praised her independent streak, her willingness to buck Republican President Trump and her record of fighting for Maine’s interests.

“This is a true blue-blooded Maine person who knows exactly where she came from,” Manchin said.

They planned a stop later at a New Balance shoe facility in Norway. Jackson, 58, is scheduled to campaign Thursday in Portland with Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, the progressive congresswoman from New York.

Collins, 73, is in what may be her toughest reelection fight as she seeks her sixth term.

It’s only the second time that she has sought reelection in a midterm with a sitting Republican president, and the national trends are much less favorable to the GOP than they were the last time she did so, in 2002. Trump’s approval has fallen well below where it was when he took office last year, and a recent poll from the Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research found that a strong majority of voters want change in Washington.

Collins has been working to persuade voters that she is independent of Trump and willing to break with him. In Manchin, she enlisted a politician who was one of the most moderate voices in the Senate. Manchin said in 2023 that Trump would “ destroy democracy in America” if he was elected to a second term.

Among the few dozen Collins supporters at the Lewiston event was Mike Marcotte.

“I may not have always been a fan of her complete package of votes, but when I look at the vitriol that’s in the U.S. Senate right now, we need more people like Susan Collins,” he said.

Jackson got a late start on campaigning after the party’s initial nominee exited the race but trails Collins in the money race by less than $3 million after an aggressive quarter in which he raised more than $20 million. Jackson has campaigned relentlessly and his events have drawn hundreds. Collins has largely stuck to smaller appearances.

Some of Jackson’s backers demonstrated across the street from the hot dog stand. A few held signs bearing the face of Brett M. Kavanaugh, the U.S. Supreme Court justice whom Collins voted to confirm and whose vote eventually helped overturn the constitutional right to abortion.

“Someone needs to stand up and be a check on Donald Trump and his harmful policies,” said David Sysko.

Collins has broken with Trump and Republicans over the years. She voted to convict him at his impeachment trial in 2021. Increasingly during the campaign, she has worked to distance herself from the president as Democrats argue that she is too close to him.

Collins said in early October that she is “not exactly his favorite senator,” and that she did not expect Trump to campaign in Maine. He has steered clear of the state with the Nov. 3 election nearing.

Pinning Collins to Trump is central to the Democrats’ strategy. In one ad, a nurse says the state is in a healthcare crisis “because of Susan Collins and Donald Trump,” citing Collins’ vote for Trump’s push for Medicaid cuts. Collins did vote to advance the bill but ultimately voted against it.

Trump also was a major focus of four contentious debates between the candidates this month, where Collins sought to distance herself from the president and Jackson repeatedly accused her of doing Trump’s bidding.

Asked at the final debate to name a time in which she bucked her own party and succeeded, Collins gave the example of rallying support against Trump’s nomination of Pete Hegseth, who was confirmed as Defense secretary.

Democrats seized on the moment and released a statement that said the exchange “underscores a central question in the Maine Senate race: Does Collins, a Republican in a state that disapproves of President Donald Trump and has grown bluer in recent years, stand up to her party enough to earn the independent streak she has staked her career on?”

Jackson has characterized Collins as out of touch with the struggles of working-class people in Maine. He has described Collins as a “rubber stamp” for the president and criticized her votes on Kavanaugh and Robert F. Kennedy Jr., Trump’s second-term Health secretary. Collins has said she does not regret either vote.

Republican ads against Jackson, a logger from northern Maine, have focused more on accusations of his having a volatile personality and behaving like a bully with female colleagues. Jackson has denied those accusations.

Collins distanced herself on Wednesday from a Republican super PAC attack ad that she said “should be taken down.”

The senator was a top target of Democrats in 2020 when she defeated challenger Sara Gideon by nearly 9 percentage points. Collins is the only Republican senator from New England, a distinction she has had since January 2013.

Whittle writes for the Associated Press.

In what may be one of the most comical self-owns in recent politics, the esteemed attorneys of the U.S. Department of Justice announced Monday that despite the extravagant and terrifying misuse of their investigative power under the Trump administration, they have so far been able to identify only 28 people in all of California who may have voted illegally.

“The announcement today by the United States DOJ makes the point that there is no widespread voter fraud,” California Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta said after the news conference announcing the results of “Operation Protect the Vote.”

Twenty-eight people out of about 23 million registered voters in the state — and not all of them even tried to vote, according to the feds. That’s about 1 in 820,000 folks allegedly registering or voting illegally, a rate that roughly matches how often people in the United States get struck by lightning in a given year.

So much for Trump’s endless claims that there is a vast, organized conspiracy between Democrats and undocumented people to have them vote in large numbers to steal elections. I’ll point out here that none of those charged Monday have been accused of colluding with one another or with Democratic overlords.

All the power of the government — investigative, technological, legal — has been thrown at finding these mysterious, diabolically clever ballot baddies. And now, thanks to Bill Essayli, first assistant U.S. attorney for the Central District of California, and his colleagues across this great state, we now know that all 28 of them will be held accountable, if the government can prove wrongdoing. And let’s be clear — people who vote illegally should be held accountable.

But wait, there’s more, because this election-stealing plot by immigrants certainly doesn’t stop at the state line. Seamus Hughes of Court Watch, an excellent site that tracks federal litigation, reported Monday that since the start of this administration, 169 people have been charged federally with illegally registering or voting.

That number includes the new California cases, so it means an additional 141 potentially illegal voters have been charged across the U.S. — all told about 1 in 1.25 million registered voters being accused of illegally registering or voting, making this crime slightly less likely than guessing a six-digit pin code on the first try.

There. Is. No. Election. Stealing.

But that’s where the funny part ends, because this attack on California elections is serious and just getting started.

The federal government, you’ve probably read, is suing California, claiming it gave the state a janky thumb drive with 20,000 names of registered voters that it sort of strongly suspects maybe aren’t legal voters. Important note here: The government has been very careful not to claim that these people voted illegally, just that it might be so based on questionable data, which I’ll get to in a minute.

The feds gave the state a silly 48-hour deadline to agree to change constitutional law, dump common sense and sequester these 20,000 ballots, if they were even returned, to double-check they were cast by valid voters.

When California rightfully refused — because elections are run by states, not the federal government — the federal government sued on the thinnest of legal grounds. It basically claimed that voting illegally is illegal, and if California doesn’t do exactly what Trump wants, it could be violating the Supremacy Clause of the Constitution by impeding the feds from enforcing the crime of voter fraud.

First Assistant U.S. Atty. Bill Essayli speaks at a news conference Monday at which officials announced that 28 people in California had been charged with voter fraud.

(David Butow / For The Times)

Which is basically arguing that if the state government fails to stop voter fraud using the flawed methods Trump likes, then the state is somehow stopping federal authorities from prosecuting voter fraud themselves. But didn’t they just enforce it with 28 cases?

Get ready, because “state-facilitated voter fraud,” is a new right-wing thing.

California is “being complicit in non-citizens voting in our elections, and as they were warned last week, not only is it a civil violation, but they could also face criminal consequences,” Essayli said, which if it happened would give Trumped-up charges a whole new meaning.

Essayli said state officials are not being “good faith actors,” but I’ll argue that shoe is on the other foot. The list of 20,000 alleged, suspected, maybe-maybe-not illegal voters was likely drawn from the Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements (SAVE) program, created by Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency, if you can remember that unfortunate relic.

It sought to draw data from more than a dozen government databases that were not only not compatible with such information sharing, but which had been kept separate until now for privacy reasons. Americans in general did not want the government collecting unified, know-all records of every citizen.

Luckily for us, I guess, the SAVE system can’t actually create reliable, unified records. It confuses people, convolutes them, merges records of people with similar names, and in general has been deemed unreliable by data experts.

In September, the good folks at the UCLA Voting Rights Project joined with the Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights to sue the federal government over its use of that system to target naturalized citizens for removal from voter rolls. Turns out, the government appears to be targeting immigrants who are now citizens with these voter fraud accusations.

As I wrote about a few weeks ago, naturalized citizens make up about 1 in 10 eligible voters, and nearly a quarter of them live in California. But they also live in swing states such as Michigan, where Democrat Abdul El-Sayed may draw such voters, and in other places such as Georgia and Nevada where races might be decided by only a few votes.

These arrests and lawsuits while voting is already underway in the midterms are a not-subtle form of voter suppression. Imagine being a naturalized citizen in the Central Valley, where ICE is driving rampant fear and where Republican Rep. David Valadao is running against Democrat Randy Villegas in California’s 22nd Congressional District — one of the nation’s most closely contested races.

Would you consider sitting this election out just in case your ballot draws the frightening eye of the federal government? Even knowing that your vote is legal, what if you lived in a mixed-status household? Would it be worth risking voting if it meant a knock at the door from immigration checking on your status, and maybe finding that family member who lacks it?

Why take the risk?

“Basically, what they’re doing now is just completely harassing and intimidating naturalized citizens who are legally eligible to vote through these actions,” said Matt Barreto, co-founder of the Voting Rights Project.

And if the vote isn’t suppressed enough to give Trump the results he wants, these prosecutions and lawsuits feed the beast of conspiracy, giving Trump fodder to claim the results are fake, the election stolen.

And round and round we go, reckoning with Trump’s claims that lightning is striking everyone, everywhere, all at once, because the vote didn’t go his way.

Lawmakers adjourn second session as one party tells members to abstain over unclear commitment.

Egypt’s parliament has delayed a vote on authorising its armed forces to support Saudi Arabia, which has come under increasing attack from the Iran-aligned Houthis in Yemen.

The vote has been adjourned to October 26, the House of Representatives said on Monday. The move prolongs the debate over Egypt’s role in the Yemeni conflict.

The opposition Egyptian Social Democratic Party said it had told its lawmakers to abstain.

The party said parliament had not been given enough information about the mission’s objectives, duration, cost, or the risks to Egyptian troops.

However, the party, which holds nearly a dozen seats, said most of its lawmakers support the measure, according to two members of parliament who spoke to the AFP news agency.

The parliament has been tasked with authorising President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi to approve any request from Saudi Arabia for defence assistance amid attacks on the kingdom by Yemen’s Houthis.

The call for support came after the Iran-backed rebel group attacked Riyadh’s international airport and the state oil company Saudi Aramco last week. Saudi authorities say 13 people were killed in the October 10 attack on the airport.

El-Sisi said on Saturday that Egypt would take “any measure” needed to protect its Gulf allies.

“I’m not talking about confronting or attacking anyone,” el-Sisi said. “We’re talking only about defence.”

After approval from the National Defence Council, chaired by el-Sisi, Egypt’s constitution requires a two-thirds parliamentary majority to send troops on a combat mission abroad. The council gave its approval on Sunday.

Egypt’s rocky economy

The Grand Imam of al-Azhar urged Arab and Muslim leaders on Sunday to mediate Egypt’s parliamentary decision and avert further bloodshed.

Saudi Arabia holds an important role in financing Egypt’s rocky economy. It is due to deposit $5.3bn into Egypt’s central bank this month, plus $267.39m in interest.

Egypt’s EGX30 stock index fell early on Monday amid concerns about possible military involvement but recovered to close 0.4 percent higher.

Nematallah Choucri, head of research at HC Securities, told the Reuters news agency that geopolitical developments are the main driver of recent market losses.

Egypt is also affected by the shortage of oil and gas exports from the Middle East due to the United States war on Iran and fighting in Yemen.

Egypt’s economy is heavily dependent on remittances from Egyptians working in the hydrocarbons industry in Saudi Arabia.

Suez Canal threat

Political analyst and Gulf studies expert Thomas Bonnie James told Al Jazeera that the Houthi security threat to Saudi Arabia also threatens the Suez Canal, which Egypt’s foreign minister says has lost about $11bn since the Houthis launched attacks in the Bab al-Mandeb strait in solidarity with Gaza in 2023.

James also said Egypt does not want to be seen as the regional ally that “stood aside while others defended the kingdom”.

Turkiye and Pakistan have made their own pledges after activating the Mecca defence pact with Riyadh, signed in August, amid the deteriorating security situation in the Middle East.

Lawyers for Janie and Joey Buss, two of the co-trustees of the Buss Family Trust that owns part of the Lakers, filed a response to Jeanie Buss’ petition Friday with intention to move forward with the proposed sale of the family’s remaining shares of the team.

While Jeanie is trying to block her five siblings from selling the team, the new response filed in L.A. Superior Court states that Janie and Joey, the two other co-trustees of the family trust, were authorized and required to implement the vote after a majority of the living siblings opted to terminate the trust in August. The vote of five siblings to sell the shares triggered the termination clause in the trust, and the filing argues that the trust doesn’t grant trustees discretion to disregard a valid vote to terminate.

The filing, which follows formal opposition filed on behalf of five Buss siblings last week that defended their right to vote to sell the team, asks the court to dismiss Jeanie’s petition or deny it in its entirety.

Jeanie argued that her siblings could not terminate the family trust and sell the remaining 17.82% of the team without her approval, citing a 2017 court order that instructed trustees to “take reasonably available steps” to support Jeanie’s annual election as Lakers controlling governor. The court order, obtained after Jeanie’s older brothers Jimmy and Johnny Buss tried to oust her from the organization, installed Janie and Joey as co-trustees.

But the court order did not prohibit a sale or termination of the trust, lawyers for Janie and Joey argue. While the order named “voting the trust’s shares” as a reasonable action, it did not require the trust to hold a 15% stake in the team to reach the NBA’s eligibility threshold for minority owners to serve on the league’s board of governors, the filing states.

Jeanie was selected by her father Jerry Buss to serve as the team’s controlling governor after his death in 2013.

Since the family patriarch bought the team, the Forum and the Kings for $67.5 million in 1979, the Lakers have become one of the most valuable brands in sports. Mark Walter, who purchased controlling ownership from the Buss siblings in 2025, sold his shares to venture capitalist Joshua Kushner and former Disney chief executive Bob Iger 14 months later at a record $12.5 billion valuation.

Using a tag-along provision secured during the sale to Walter, the five Buss siblings hope to maximize value for all six beneficiaries, including Jeanie, the new filing reports. Selling the 17.82% stake in the team would be worth about $2.2 billion.

A hearing is scheduled for Dec. 8. The Lakers open the regular season on Oct. 21 against the Golden State Warriors at Crypto.com Arena. Jeanie was seen at the Lakers’ home preseason opener on Oct. 8, sitting courtside on the baseline.

Los Angeles County voters are concerned about a host of voter fraud issues that could disrupt the Nov. 3 general election, even though they have a high degree of confidence in local elections officials, according to a new poll funded by the nonprofit California Community Foundation.

Nearly three-quarters of respondents expressed concern that false rumors and misleading information online could confuse voters or make them believe that their vote won’t count, the poll found. Other top concerns included politicians interfering with the election and mail-in ballots getting lost, stolen or delayed.

Still, most of the voters surveyed expressed confidence in the county’s handling of election proceedings, with 68% saying L.A. County does an excellent or good job at running elections and counting ballots.

Once presented with information about how the county handles elections, that number rose to 72%. Around three-quarters of respondents also believe that the upcoming election will be fair, secure and accurate, the poll found.

The online poll was conducted from Sept. 30 to Oct. 6 by Tulchin Research, a San Francisco-based public opinion firm. It surveyed 500 voters in L.A. County considered likely to cast ballots in the Nov. 3 election and has a margin of error of 4.4%.

“Voters feel good about the local officials running their elections. So, reinforcing the fact that that is who’s in charge of the election and how the process works is reassuring to folks,” said Ben Tulchin, the polling company’s president. “It … reduces their anxiety about some of the outside criticism that California, L.A. County faces.”

The poll was funded by the California Community Foundation, which awards millions of dollars in grants to local charitable groups, to support the “A Count You Can Trust Coalition,” an initiative aimed at enhancing trust in local elections.

Recent polling has suggested that potential federal interference in the Nov. 3 election is a top concern statewide for California voters. The local poll was administered to shed light on how L.A. County voters feel, said former Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, who co-chairs the A Count You Can Trust group with Miguel Santana, who leads the California Community Foundation.

“This is the epicenter of the California vote,” Villaraigosa said. “The concern is not as great as it is statewide. Here in L.A. County, people seem to trust the vote to a greater degree.”

A recent poll by the UC Berkeley Institute of Governmental Studies, co-sponsored by The Times, found that 61% of California voters identified interference by the Trump administration as a “major concern.” President Trump has fueled doubts over election integrity, spreading unverified claims of widespread voter fraud in blue states such as California.

Young voters and Latino voters expressed the lowest levels of confidence in how the county runs elections, the new poll found. The findings suggest those demographics need “a lot more reassurance” that elections are safe and that their votes matter, Tulchin said.

“It’s not surprising at all, and it means we’ve got work to do,” Villaraigosa said. “We got a lot of work to do to communicate to those people and to make it clear that, in fact, this vote can be trusted.”

Villaraigosa said he plans to focus his efforts on social media engagement and creating video content with poll workers to speak on how vote-counting works in the county.

The poll also asked respondents whether “things in Los Angeles County are going in the right direction or do you feel things have gotten pretty seriously off on the wrong track?” Most — 62% — said wrong track, and 26% said right direction.

Among voter concerns in the upcoming election, 18% listed the economy, the cost of living and inflation as their biggest worry, followed by election integrity, fraud and interference at 17% of respondents. Concerns about Republicans and Trump “winning or retaining power” came in third, with 16% of respondents saying that is their biggest concern.

Homelessness and immigration, two issues that have been prominent the L.A. mayoral race between incumbent Karen Bass and Councilmember Nithya Raman, ranked low in the list of concerns for the surveyed voters. Tulchin noted that the focus of the survey was on election integrity, which could have had an effect on what issues were top of mind of respondents.

The survey findings indicate that L.A. County voters seem to trust the county more than voters statewide. Still, just over 30% of surveyed voters have a fair or poor view of how the county runs elections, Villaraigosa said.

“They’re concerned, but what we found in this poll is that there are a number of people who, while concerned, do trust this county,” he said.

The President’s ally says conservatives “cannot give an inch” in Latin America as he accepts an award in Washington.

Argentine President Javier Milei has urged his ally, US President Donald Trump, to come out of the United States midterm elections in a stronger position, calling the vote important for the West as a whole.

Milei made the appeal on Wednesday at a Hispanic Heritage gala in Washington, where a Hispanic association gave him an award, ahead of November’s vote.

Conservatives, he said, “cannot give an inch in our reconquest of the hemisphere”, according to Agence France-Presse (AFP).

Milei flew into the US capital on Wednesday for meetings with investors and the gala. He is due to address the US Chamber of Commerce on Thursday.

Milei’s lifeline

Trump firmly backed Milei a year ago, when his government also faced crucial legislative elections. He has called Milei his “favorite president”.

That backing, together with a currency swap agreement with the US Treasury, helped Milei to success in those polls, analysts have argued.

The centrepiece of the package, announced by Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, was a $20bn swap with Argentina’s central bank, in which the US exchanged dollars for pesos. The swap came shortly after Milei’s party lost a key provincial election.

Trump made clear at the time that the support hinged on a Milei victory. “I’m with this man because his philosophy is correct,” he said ahead of a White House lunch with the Argentine leader. “If he wins, we’re staying with him. And if he doesn’t win, we’re gone.”

Trump also warned that the US would not be “generous” if Milei lost. The remarks unsettled Argentine markets, with the main stock index giving up earlier gains and falling about 2 percent, The Associated Press reported.

The package drew criticism in the US. Democratic lawmakers accused Trump of prioritising a foreign bailout while the US government was shut down.

Prime Minister Mark Carney’s Thanksgiving message comes a week ahead of Alberta’s vote on a separatism referendum.

Prime Minister Mark Carney has used his Thanksgiving message to Canadians to call for national unity, a week before the oil-rich province of Alberta is set to vote on a proposal to secede from Canada.

“We can’t build big things on fault lines,” Carney said in his video message on Monday, warning that Canada faces threats to its economy, security and way of life.

“We have to be strong, and we are stronger together.”

His comments come as Albertans head to the polls on October 19 to decide whether to begin the process of seeking independence. The initial referendum is non-binding, but it proposes to hold a binding vote in the future to decide whether Alberta should secede.

The question facing voters is: “Should Alberta remain a province of Canada, or should the Government of Alberta commence the legal process required under the Canadian Constitution to hold a binding provincial referendum on whether or not Alberta should separate from Canada?”

The vote follows a growing push by a vocal group of separatists, fuelled by longstanding grievances over federal energy and environmental policies.

The secessionist movement has accused the Canadian government of unfairly targeting Alberta’s oil and gas industry, the cornerstone of the province’s economy.

The movement is also being watched south of the border, as Canada’s relationship with the United States under President Donald Trump has become strained.

An investigation by The Globe and Mail earlier this month revealed that US Republican operatives met with secession organisers in Alberta to talk about campaign strategies. Separatist leaders had reportedly offered access to the province’s water and oil royalties in exchange for US support for independence. Separatist leaders have disputed those claims.

Carney’s comments also come after another secessionist movement, the Parti Quebecois, won the most seats in a provincial election in Quebec last week, allowing it to return to power after more than a decade.

The Parti Quebecois, however, only won 59 seats out of a total of 129 in Quebec’s National Assembly, leaving it short of a majority government.

Still, following that victory, US tech entrepreneur Elon Musk, considered the richest man on the planet, applauded the results. He has been known to use his wealth and influence to support political causes, particularly on the far right.

“Good. Quebec should separate,” Musk wrote on social media. “They would be better off. Alberta and Saskatchewan should separate too.”

Carney, who grew up in Alberta, said he was filming the message from a classroom at his former school, St Francis Xavier High School in Edmonton.

“I’m back home a lot these days because we are building big things again in Alberta: thousands of new homes, high-speed rail, a new pipeline to the West Coast that will create lasting opportunity and prosperity for hundreds of thousands of people in this province and across the country,” he said.

Despite the secessionist movement’s growing visibility, polls suggest most Albertans oppose independence.

SACRAMENTO — The California Secretary of State has mailed a thick “Official Voter Information Guide” to every registered voter. It’s jam-packed with helpful material. But one bit should be totally ignored.

It tells voters to fill out their ballot immediately — ”today” — and return it right now. Don’t take any time, in other words, to think about what you’re voting on.

Here’s what it says in bold ink on the cover of the 173-page guide: “Don’t Delay, Vote Today! Return your ballot as soon as you receive it.”

That’s not just a throwaway line. It’s repeated throughout the guide.

Under “Quick Facts” for the Nov. 3 election: “Return your ballot by mail as soon as you receive it.”

Who’s writing this stuff? Officially it’s from Secretary of State Shirley Weber. But is some high school freshman who hasn’t taken a civics course the actual author? Isn’t Weber or anyone in the vast bureaucracy proofreading with raised eyebrows?

Doesn’t anyone realize there are 14 complex propositions on the state ballot that voters may want to mull over for more than two seconds? They aren’t all what they seem. Some require reading between the lines.

Proposition 1, for example, is an expensive $11.25-billion bond issue for affordable housing — mostly rentals — requiring at least $500 million in annual state costs for 25 years. That cuts into spending for other services such as education and healthcare. Is the new borrowing actually worth it?

Proposition 39 is relatively easy but needs some thought. It would require everyone to show a government ID before they’re allowed to vote. Is that really needed when there is scant evidence of voter fraud? And it would invariably slow vote counting even more.

Proposition 40 would impose a one-time 5% tax on billionaires’ wealth. Should we set the precedent of taxing people’s wealth? Who’s next? We’ve already got the nation’s highest state income tax.

Proposition 45 would substantially alter the landmark California Environmental Quality Act. It has been terribly abused, stymying housing development. But the Legislature and Gov. Gavin Newsom recently have streamlined CEQA to expedite home construction. This business-backed proposition is geared more toward easing infrastructure projects. Does it go too far?

Then there are some low-profile propositions that are just mind-numbing.

Not to mention some crucial congressional races that may determine control of the U.S. House.

We’re at the peak of campaign season. TV ads are running practically nonstop. Mailboxes are overflowing with political pitches. There are local candidate debates. And newspaper endorsements.

Let the election season play out. Don’t interfere with the political process.

I intend to do what I’ve always done: Wait until the last minute to vote. Something could happen to change my mind on an issue. I’ll take the filled-out ballot to a post office — or maybe a secure official drop box — a couple of days before the election.

Maybe I shouldn’t take the Secretary of State so literally. But since her “give me your vote now” admonition is featured in an official government publication, some voters are likely to accept it and obey.

This is what Weber apparently really means, as also stated in the guide: “Mail your ballot back as soon as possible. … To be counted, [it] must be postmarked no later than election day. We recommend mailing it at least seven days before election day.”

OK, that’s all she should say. End of lecture.

Still, I resent being urged to mail back my ballot a full week before the election. I’ll take my own sweet time that’s allowed by the law, thank you.

I queried the Secretary of State’s press office about the “vote now” edict but didn’t get a straight answer.

“Of course we absolutely encourage voters to carefully review the [guide] contents … and other trusted sources to make a decision that is best for them,” some unnamed spokesperson emailed. The top cause for ballots being rejected is their late arrival, the aide added.

The Postal Service has slowed its deliveries of all mail, especially in rural areas. Plus, President Trump tried to inject mail voting with crippling rules, but the Supreme Court stopped him.

The secretary’s office also emailed me that “when voters return their ballots early, it ensures more time for the ballot [counting] process.”

“It’s not good policy for the SOS to urge voters to vote the minute they get their ballot,” veteran Democratic strategist Garry South told me. “A lot can happen in the last month. And with a ballot that seems like it’s several feet long, I suspect it’s being done to deal with the criticism of how long it takes to count the votes in California.

“But the goal should be for voters to make considered and informed choices, not just to rush into marking their ballots.”

Dan Schnur, a former Republican operative who teaches political communication at USC and UC Berkeley, said: “Weber is under fire for taking too long to count votes. …. But the answer is for her to count faster, not to push voters to rush their decisions.”

Kim Alexander, president of the nonpartisan California Voter Foundation, points out that vote counting, in fact, has sped up during recent elections. And this year, the Legislature appropriated $29 million to speed up counting much more.

But “I don’t agree with the message” in the voting guide, Alexander said. “It’s a long ballot. People need to take some time to decide.”

Voting is a very personal exercise. It’s my duty not only to vote, but to try to get it right.

It’s not my duty to make vote-counting easier for election officials. It’s their duty to count — more swiftly.

What else you should be reading

The must-read: What Steve Hilton doesn’t get about Xavier Becerra’s parents
CA vs. Trump: FBI whistleblower alleges Trump ordered investigations of L.A.-area immigration protesters.
The L.A. Times Special: Hilton warm on tax cuts, tepid on Trump, cold on offshore wind during gubernatorial town hall

Until next week,
George Skelton

—
Was this newsletter forwarded to you? Sign up here to get it in your inbox.

Main opposition Congress party announces rally to the top court to demand removal of the chief election commissioner.

The claim marks the first time a UK prime minister has publicly acknowledged Russia’s interference in the vote to leave the EU.

UK Prime Minister Andy Burnham has said it is “clear” that Russia interfered in the country’s 2016 Brexit vote, warning French and German voters of the same threat.

“I asked the question coming to Downing Street: Was there interference in the 2016 referendum from Russia? And I’ve had the clear answer that yes, there was,” Burnham said in an interview with The Rest Is Politics podcast released on Sunday.

Burnham’s comments mark the first time a UK prime minister has publicly acknowledged that Russia interfered in the UK’s vote to leave the European Union. Burnham did not provide evidence for or details on the claim.

He said that “these things are important now to put clearly on the record, and, I believe, help voters in Germany and France understand that some of this politics is instigated via our enemies, namely Russia.”

Burnham said he spoke with German Chancellor Friedrich Merz about possible links between Russia and the far-right Alternative for Germany party when the two leaders met last week in Berlin.

In his address to the United Nations General Assembly in September, Burnham also condemned Russia’s attempt to interfere in the UK’s 2019 general election.

According to a 2020 report by Parliament’s Intelligence and Security Committee, the UK government had failed to ask for a deep assessment of Russia’s interference in the 2016 referendum. The report did confirm that Russia had meddled in the 2014 Scottish independence referendum, however.

Russia has repeatedly denied meddling in Western democracies or interfering in another country’s elections or referendums, casting the UK as being gripped by “anti-Russian hysteria”.

UK reconsiders Brexit

Last month, Burnham argued that the UK should reconsider options for a future relationship with the EU, including rejoining the bloc, reigniting the decisive debate more than a decade after the historic vote.

He said that the UK’s departure from the bloc had failed to fulfil Brexit supporters’ pledge of “taking back control”, and instead has made the UK weaker economically and on immigration.

The five Buss siblings who voted to sell the family’s shares of the Lakers filed their formal opposition to team governor Jeanie Buss’ attempts to block the sale on Wednesday, calling Jeanie’s petition “legally and factually baseless” in a statement provided to The Times.

“While discussions among the siblings continue, their focus remains on facilitating the proposed transaction and the Trust’s participation in it, while ensuring that all beneficiaries, including Jeanie, are treated equally,” Jimmy, Johnny, Janie, Joey and Jesse Buss said in the statement.

“Today’s filing is a necessary step to protect those interests and ensure the transaction proceeds on schedule.”

The five siblings voted in August to include the family’s 17.82% of the team in the sale from Dodgers controlling owner Mark Walter to Joshua Kushner and Bob Iger. Jeanie immediately opposed her siblings’ vote, saying that the transaction would breach the family trust that states she and her co-trustees Janie and Joey must take reasonably available actions to maintain Jeanie’s role as the controlling governor of the team “on an annual basis during [her] lifetime.”

If the Buss Family Trust sells its remaining shares, Jeanie would be ineligible to serve on the board of governors because the NBA requires governors to own at least 15% of the franchise. Although the Buss family ended its more than 40 years of majority ownership of the team in 2025 by selling to Walter at a then-record $10-billion valuation, Jeanie was to remain the controlling governor for at least five years.

Jeanie and her attorneys filed a petition in L.A. Superior Court about two weeks after her siblings’ vote in which she argued their plan was void.

The siblings’ formal opposition claims Jeanie is attempting to prevent the sale “in order to protect her own personal interests” and her actions “constitute a breach of her fiduciary duties as a trustee.” The siblings believe that with five votes to sell, they have the right to proceed with their plan to sell the shares and distribute the proceeds because they have a two-thirds majority of the living children, as outlined in the trust.

With the latest sale from Walter to Kushner and Iger valued at $12.5 billion, a 17.82% share would be worth approximately $2.2 billion for the Buss siblings.