vote

After President Trump’s unfounded claim that California’s slow vote count during the June primary indicated cheating by Democrats, state and local elections officials made changes to speed things up — in part to dispel any questions about this month’s crucial midterm elections.

The state of California allocated $29 million for new equipment, election staffing and voter awareness campaigns statewide, about $6 million of which went to Los Angeles County. The county, which opened a massive new ballot processing center in 2024, announced it would shift to around-the-clock ballot counting in the days after the Nov. 3 election and used some of its state funding to purchase a third mail ballot processing machine.

A full analysis of the impacts of those efforts statewide has not been completed, and ballot counting is still underway. But one week after the polls closed, officials in L.A. County and independent election observers say the efforts clearly paid off.

A statewide report on unprocessed ballots as of 5:41 p.m. Tuesday found that L.A. County had processed about 99% of nearly 3.2 million ballots cast in the county, with just 37,800 ballots still to process. That’s well ahead of where it was at the same point after other recent elections.

Kim Alexander, president of the nonprofit, nonpartisan California Voter Foundation, which has for years tracked ballot processing, said that compared to L.A. County having processed 96.9% of ballots a week after the 2024 general election and just 73.3% of ballots a week after the 2022 general election. She said a similar 99.3% of ballots had been counted by the county a week after the June primary — but nearly a million fewer people voted in that election.

Alexander said L.A. County was also well ahead of the state average for ballots processed seven days after an election, which stood at 92.8% processed a week after the June primary, 84.2% processed a week after the 2024 general election, and 71.6% processed a week after the 2022 general election.

On Tuesday, L.A. County, the most populous county in the state, was outpacing other big counties, such as San Diego and Orange counties, which had both processed over 1 million ballots but had 185,000 and 116,660 left to count late Tuesday, respectively. It was also outpacing some of state’s smaller counties, such as Humboldt, which had counted more than 25,000 ballots but had nearly the same amount left to process.

L.A. County Registrar-Recorder/County Clerk Dean Logan said the success of this election was a result of the state funding, which “came very late in the process,” but also years of support from the county — especially for the new $10 million, 144,000-square-feet processing facility.

Before the new facility was opened, the county processed ballots in multiple different locations. “And even on election day, we had to stop processing vote by mail ballots so that we could process the ballots coming in from the vote centers,” Logan said. “Now we have a space that is designed and — provided we have the resources to staff it — we can keep those operations going on simultaneously.”

The county’s purchase of a third mail sorting machine, Logan said, also helped workers to more quickly process the massive influx of ballot envelopes that voters drop off at vote centers or in drop boxes on election day.

Logan said the count this election also may have been quickened slightly by more voters returning their ballots earlier in the process and voting in person.

Alexander called the quickened count, during an election with high turnout and a long and complicated state ballot, “remarkable” — and all the more so given the tremendous amount of pressure the Trump administration was putting on L.A. County.

“I feel this vote count in L.A. and across the state is remarkable in that it appears to be going smoothly and in L.A. clearly very efficiently, but it’s also remarkable given all of the hurdles that we had to overcome to conduct this election,” Alexander said.

The day after California’s primary election in June, President Trump took to social media to allege — with zero evidence — that Democrats were “trying to STEAL THE GOVERNOR OF CALIFORNIA PRIMARY, AND THE MAYOR OF LOS ANGELES, PRIMARY, AWAY FROM TWO GREAT REPUBLICAN CANDIDATES.”

“Votes are all tied up. May not be in for weeks. Under investigation by the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Los Angeles,” Trump wrote. “Why the vote counting DELAY???”

While dismissing such claims as baseless and a threat to democracy, Gov. Gavin Newsom in May acknowledged that the longer it takes to count votes, the “more mis- and disinformation spreads.” That’s why, he said, state lawmakers passed legislation in 2025 to speed up the process.

“We must do all that we can to tabulate votes quickly and accurately,” Newsom said in a letter to elections officials. “Time is of the essence in preventing election lies from taking hold.”

Other states do count votes and call elections faster than California, though California officials say that is for several reasons.

California counts far more ballots than any other state, provides voters with more options for voting than other states, provides a grace period for counting ballots postmarked by election day but received in the days that follow, and provides opportunities for voters whose ballots have an issue — such a signature discrepancy — to cure them in the days after an election.

None of those explanations have convinced Trump, however. And his comments criticizing California were not just bluster.

Instead, they were part of a much larger, highly-coordinated effort by his administration to wrest control over voting processes in the state to institute stricter rules and new federal oversight for mail ballots, stricter requirements around voter ID and proof of citizenship and stricter rules for when ballots must arrive to county officials in order to be counted, Alexander said.

Federal courts, including the Supreme Court, shot down all of those efforts. The Supreme Court also rejected federal demands that California and L.A. County halt the counting of 20,000 ballots the Trump administration alleged could be from noncitizens — but not before Justice Department officials sent letters to county elections officials across the state, threatening them with criminal prosecution if they counted those ballots. Litigation was playing out right up until election day.

Logan said the judicial branch played a pivotal role in defending California’s elections from the Trump administration, and prevented an election disaster. He and other county officials said in court filings that, had they been forced to begin segregating the 20,000 flagged ballots in the midst of the election, “chaos” would have ensued.

Logan also said that the success of this election “is not guaranteed going forward,” and should be understood by state and county officials as further proof that investments in elections in L.A. County and across the state are not only beneficial but critical moving forward — particularly ahead of 2028, when the Trump administration can be expected to target California once more.

“We will continue to be a target of the administration,” he said.

A week after polls closed, Jose Ugarte and Estuardo Mazariegos are still locked in a tight race to see who will succeed Curren Price for the Los Angeles City Council’s 9th District seat.

Ugarte was leading Mazariegos by just 156 votes, 19,200 to 19,044, according to the latest tally released by the Los Angeles County Registrar-Recorder Tuesday night.

Tuesday was the last day for mail-in ballots to be counted, said Mike Sanchez, spokesperson for the office. Sanchez said he couldn’t estimate how many votes remained to be counted.

Because of the Veterans Day holiday Wednesday, the next vote tally will not be released until Friday, he said.
District 9 encompasses South L.A. neighborhoods, the Convention Center and USC.

The current councilmember, Price, must leave office because of term limits and is currently facing charges of embezzlement and conflict of interest and he has denied wrongdoing. Price has endorsed Ugarte, whose platform includes protecting city residents from federal immigration enforcement and the Trump administration. Mazariegos is backed by the L.A. chapter of the Democratic Socialists of America. He has worked as a community organizer for decades and said he’s running to improve quality of life in the city, including by making housing more affordable and spending money on basic services other than policing.

Mazariegos’ campaign made claims this week against the Ugarte campaign and shared images of unsealed and sealed ballots, alleging the ballots were collected during “an Ugarte canvassing operation.”

“Taking people’s ballots, filling them out, and not following legal voter assistance guidelines in a district that has faced so much disenfranchisement is disgusting,” Mazariegos said in a statement.

Among their claims, the campaign shared a photo of a USC student volunteering for Ugarte’s campaign delivering a stack of ballots to a drop box.

The registrar-recorder’s office forwarded the complaint to the district attorney’s office for review, Sanchez said. Sanchez said the photo of the student, which circulated online, didn’t raise alarms because California law allows voters to authorize another person to return their completed ballots.

The district attorney’s office said it was looking into the matter.

Ugarte said in a statement that the allegations made by Mazariegos’ campaign “are categorically false and defamatory.”

The 9th District seat is one of two council races determined in the Nov. 3 election. Barri Worth Girvan declared victory in the west San Fernando Valley’s 3rd District seat Friday night, after the latest vote tally showed her widening her lead over rival Tim Gaspar, with 51% of the vote to Gaspar’s 48%.

“I will bring competence, transparency, follow-through, and ethical leadership to City Hall, which Angelenos deserve and too often do not get,” Worth Girvan said in a statement.

Worth Girvan will replace Councilmember Bob Blumenfield, who is leaving office because of term limits. The 3rd District seat includes Woodland Hills, Reseda and Canoga Park.

Before entering the race, Worth Girvan was L.A. County Supervisor Lindsey Horvath’s district director for three years, handling constituent services on the Westside and in the Valley, and has spent nearly 20 years working in public service. Gaspar is a former insurance company owner who had been backed by business groups.

Randall Winston has declared victory in his campaign for Seat 6 on the Los Angeles Community College District Board of Trustees, in what was the closest of three races in last week’s election for the seven-member board.

Second-place finisher Gabriel Buelna has conceded.

According to the count released Monday, Winston had 38.7% of the vote and Buelna had 31.7%, followed by community college professor Roberto David LaCarra in third place and realtor Tonia Arey in fourth.

To win a seat on the seven-member board, candidates need only a plurality of votes, not a majority.

Winston declared victory in an email to supporters over the weekend.

“You voted and told your friends and family why this race mattered,” Winston told supporters on Saturday. “Because of you, the Los Angeles Community College District will have a trustee who believes our colleges are where this city builds opportunity.”

In a brief interview Monday, Buelna said he called Winston to concede and wished him the best in his new role.

Seat 6 turned out to be the most contentious of the races for the Board of Trustees, which oversees the largest community college district in the country with some 200,000 students, most of whom are low-income.

During the campaign, Buelna and Arey accused Winston of misleading the public by describing himself as an architect and an educator, when his full-time job is deputy mayor of infrastructure and climate resilience under Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass.

Winston responded by saying his first professional degree is in architecture, he is licensed in the field and he will be teaching a leadership class at West L.A. College this fall.

Helping boost him to victory was a key endorsement from the community college district’s faculty union, which put significant financial resources behind his candidacy.

Between Sept. 20 and Oct. 17, the union contributed $800,000 to a committee supporting Winston and the two other winning candidates, helping produce slate mailers that hit the doors of voters, according to campaign filings.

James McKeever, president of the faculty union, AFT Local 1521, declined to discuss many details of the union’s decision, but told The Times that the executive board wanted to go “in a different direction” and saw Winston as the best candidate.

In the race for Seat 2, incumbent Steve Veres held a 40.91% to 33.48% lead over educator Adriana Cabrera, who was in second.

Cabrera did not return emails seeking comment, and Veres said she had not called to concede. As of Monday afternoon, Veres had nearly 97,000 more votes than Cabrera with an estimated 44,000 more ballots to be counted county-wide, according to the Los Angeles County Registrar-Recorder/County Clerk.

In Seat 4, Darryn Harris, a government and community affairs officer for St. John’s Community Health, has the biggest lead of all.

According to the latest numbers, Harris had 57.3% of the vote in a seven-person race. Healthcare workforce specialist Elaine Alaniz was in second place with 14.4%.

WASHINGTON — Rep. Jim Jordan of Ohio won the race Tuesday to serve as House Republican leader as the GOP prepares for its new role in the minority.

Jordan, who serves as chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, defeated Rep. Steve Scalise of Louisiana in a secret ballot election of Republicans who will serve in the next Congress. The vote was 106-73.

Jordan, 62, is a co-founder of the ultraconservative House Freedom Caucus and served as its first chairman. His candidacy appealed to those looking for new leadership in the wake of last week’s election debacle and to those who like his hard-hitting political style.

Jordan as minority leader will inherit a historically small House Republican conference that is only beginning to grapple with its loss of power as President Donald Trump serves out his final two years in office. Leading the party back to the House majority in 2028 is sure to be a stiff climb, given the scope of Democratic victories in the midterms.

Jordan warned of the coming Democratic efforts on oversight, with numerous investigations of the Trump administration expected.

“Our job cannot be merely to spotlight how radical this new Democratic Party is — offense, not defense, wins elections,” Jordan said, a nod to his pugnacious reputation in committee hearings.

Trump said he was staying out of the race.

Scalise and Jordan were a familiar match-up

Scalise and Jordan had faced off before, both running to serve as House speaker after Kevin McCarthy was ousted from the job a little more than three years ago. Neither was able to rally the support necessary to secure the position, which eventually went to Mike Johnson, who is stepping aside from the leadership in the new Congress.

Scalise, 61, has held key GOP leadership positions going back to 2014, serving as party whip and then as majority leader. In 2017, he was critically wounded when a gunman opened fire at a baseball practice where several Republican lawmakers and staffers were preparing for an annual charity baseball game against Democrats. In 2023, he was stricken with multiple myeloma, a blood cancer that was successfully treated.

“Overcoming adversity is nothing new to me,” Scalise said in his pitch to colleagues.

He also emphasized his fundraising prowess, noting he raised $67.9 million for this year’s midterms, with about a third of that going directly to individual House campaigns and the National Republican Congressional Committee.

But the majority of Republicans opted for Jordan, who emphasized his experience battling with Democrats in committee rooms.

“I am battle-tested on the oversight front and I know the Democrats’ playbook,” Jordan said.

Other positions are also up for grabs

In addition to the race for minority leader, Reps. Tom Emmer of Minnesota and August Pfluger of Texas are vying to serve as Republican whip, the No. 2 position in the leadership hierarchy. Three candidates are seeking to serve as conference chair: Reps. Lisa McClain of Michigan, Erin Houchin of Indiana and Greg Steube of Florida.

The Republicans who will serve in the next Congress will hear from the candidates in the morning, followed in the afternoon by voting through secret ballot.

Democrats will hold their leadership elections next week.

Rep. Hakeem Jeffries of New York is expected to become the next House speaker, the first African-American to hold the job, and Rep. Katherine Clark of Massachusetts is expected to become the next majority leader. She would be the first woman to hold that position.

Freking writes for the Associated Press. AP writer Joey Cappelletti contributed to this report.

RUSSELL Brand’s wife Laura Gallacher has continued to stand by her husband despite him being jailed for ten years and six months for rape and sexual assault.

The mum-of-three travelled more than 4,000 miles from the couple’s home in Florida to support the disgraced comedian throughout his trial at Southwark Crown Court.

She was also the only person to give evidence in his defence, describing him as an “amazingly attentive husband” and a “wonderful father”.

Laura, 39, told the court she felt “entirely cared for” by Brand and said she loved him very much.

Prosecutors warned jurors the man Laura knew at home was “a completely different person” from the one at the time of the offences.

Brand, 51, was convicted of one count of rape and three counts of sexual assault before being handed his lengthy prison sentence yesterday.

FAMILY FEARS

Brand ‘brainwashed wife Laura as family say they’re concerned about her’

WIFE ORDEAL

I watched Brand’s trial destroy his wife…her shock appearance floored me

Laura was visibly devastated as he learned his fate, shaking and fighting back tears in court.

She was also heard telling him “I love you” as he prepared to learn his sentence, before leaving court surrounded by supporters.

Relatives worry that Laura has been so “brainwashed” by rapist Brand that she refuses to accept the evidence against him.

The couple first met in 2006 when she was 19 and he was 31.

They rekindled their romance in 2015 after Brand’s brief marriage to pop star Katy Perry had ended, and married two years later.

Brand was jailed for ten years and six months.

So is Laura wrong to stand by him? Have your say in our exclusive poll and fill out the form below for a chance to win a £100 voucher.

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

Age: 32 Country: Spain

Club: London City Lionesses Position: Midfielder

Putellas showed again this year why she is one of the most influential footballers in the world.

After 14 years with Barcelona, she delivered a spectacular final season with the club – helping them win four major trophies.

Her 14 goal contributions in 11 Champions League appearances helped her childhood club win the competition for the fourth time, and she remained a decisive figure bringing experience and leadership when it mattered most.

Putellas delayed announcing her move to London City Lionesses to avoid creating a distraction, but in July 2026 she completed that transfer, saying the club’s “women-only identity and ambition” were important factors.

Internationally, Putellas was instrumental in Spain retaining the Women’s Nations League in late 2025, scoring three goals against Sweden in the semi-finals before being named player of the finals as Spain defeated Germany 3–0.

Last month she was awarded a record-equalling third Ballon d’Or.

A bipartisan plan to speed the federal approval process for major energy and infrastructure projects received the endorsement of President Trump on the eve of a key Senate vote on the bill.

“This Landmark Permitting Reform Legislation will codify our America First Energy Agenda, and ensure that we can build Pipelines, Mines, and Power Plants faster than ever before, lowering Energy Costs for American Families, and creating High Paying American Jobs,” Trump said in a social media post Sunday that urged senators to vote for the bill.

On Monday, the Senate is slated to take a procedural vote on the measure, seen as a once-in-a-generation chance to overhaul the byzantine system for approving projects needed to modernize power grids, build artificial-intelligence data centers and revitalize clean energy development.

The legislation is supported from groups including oil companies and renewable energy developers, but faces hurdles to passage in the two remaining months Congress is in session. House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries is opposing the bill in its current form, arguing it hasn’t received enough input from House Democrats. Other progressive Democrats say they should use their newfound control of Congress next year to negotiate a better deal.

Democratic Sens. Sheldon Whitehouse and Martin Heinrich of New Mexico, as well as Republican Sens. Shelley Moore Capito of West Virginia and Mike Lee of Utah, unveiled a new version of the bill Saturday, but several environmental groups still opposed it.

“After closely evaluating the full bill and the newly released substitute amendment alongside our state and territorial affiliates, Tribal partners, environmental justice partners, hunting, fishing, and outdoor recreation partners, water coalition partners, and other conservation partners, we have concluded we cannot support the legislation in its current form,” Collin O’Mara, president of the National Wildlife Federation, said in a statement Sunday.

Natter writes for Bloomberg.

Nov. 3, 2026 10:51 AM PT

We are tracking which party will have the majority of senators, members of Congress and governors.

All 435 House of Representatives seats are up for election, with 37 considered competitive and 21 of them toss-ups by the Cook Political Report, a respected polling analysis site. To control the House, Democrats need a net gain of four seats.

Republicans hold a 53-47 edge in the Senate and can lose no more than two seats to retain their majority. Thirty-five seats are on the November ballot.

It may be several days until the result of every race is known. Some states such as California take weeks to certify their results. Even in states where the vote may be tallied faster, the Trump administration has plans to challenge the results.

Races on this page are called by the Associated Press, which surveys the numbers posted by local election officials and projects the winner using vote returns and other data.

U.S. Senate

U.S. House

Governors

Check back for updates in the senatorial, congressional and gubernatorial races as polls close and ballots are counted across the country. You can see results for California’s congressional races here.

Back to top

America’s obsession with the Latino vote has become a ritual as slippery and messy as a grunion run.

But who could be blamed for caring too much about how we crushed it in the midterms?

Latinos helped Democrats take back the House and Senate by casting our ballots in record numbers.

We flipped red districts blue, including those in the Rio Grande Valley that the Texas GOP gerrymandered last year to take out Latino Democrats. Speaking of Texas, the state elected a Latino as governor for the first time with Gina Hinajosa’s victory, while Xavier Becerra will be California’s first Latino governor in 151 years.

Latino voters helped elect a record number of their own kind to Congress, from Republicans who have denounced President Trump to moderate Democrats to Latin Grammy winner Bobby Pulido to democratic socialists. Three of the six DSA members elected to the House for the first time are Latinas, including Angela Gonzales-Torres here in Los Angeles.

The narrative this time is that Latinos helped pull American democracy back from the jaws of MAGA, which I guess is better than the charges of self-defeating treason thrown at us two years ago. That’s when 48% of Latinos voted for Trump — a record for a Republican presidential candidate — and the GOP gained in even the bluest of Latino-heavy precincts, a shift that conservatives predicted would become larger, and permanent.

Well, New York Times data showed a 29-point shift to the Dems for Latino voters nationwide in the midterms, compared with two years ago — by far the largest of any ethnic group.

The stereotype for decades was that Latinos were a “sleeping giant”: We could be powerful one day, if only our supposed self-sabotaging mañana approach to life wasn’t holding us down. Now that we’re actually exercising our franchise, we don’t seem to be making anyone happy. Even as progressive friends of mine are celebrating the blue tsunami, they’re criticizing Latino men for not having voted more decisively for Democrats, as Latinas did.

It’s the eternal conundrum: We’re always too much or too little, and never just enough. Because we don’t fit anyone’s expectations but our own, we’re seen as an eternal threat and never reliable.

To that, I say: good.

Texas Governor-elect Gina Hinojosa speaks to supporters at an election night event in Austin, Texas.

(Ashley Landis/Associated Press)

We’re the largest minority group in this country, increasing in voters and political power in places far from traditional strongholds. Why, Jess Rivera beat a five-term GOP incumbent to become the first Latina in the North Carolina state Senate. With our growing influence, politicians should be courting us and never assuming we’re automatically with them.

There’s also something more fascinating at work. Forget Ohio as a bellwether of American politics — look to Latinos.

Ronald Reagan’s popularity with Latinos, especially after he signed the immigration amnesty, reflected a thirst for a leader who believed in the fundamental goodness of this nation. After the GOP’s swath of xenophobic laws in the 1990s, the Latino blue wave that helped put Bill Clinton in the White House showed that we would only suffer scapegoating for so long.

Our slight shift to the right for George W. Bush showed a working class unease with a Democratic Party that signed off on NAFTA, which decimated the heartland as much as it did Mexico’s rural economy. Our embrace of Barack Obama highlighted an America mature enough to elect a Black man twice. And our lukewarm support for Hillary Clinton in 2016 compared to Obama was the signature on the death certificate of her doomed campaign.

Trump, the most anti-Latino president since James K. Polk, increased his Latino support with each presidential run because the Democratic Party couldn’t break the spell he cast over too many Americans. Tuesday’s repudiation of Trump shows that we have mostly snapped out of it — sick of his pathetic economy, his horrible immigration raids, his pointless wars and jejune insults.

If Latinos can exorcise themselves of MAGA, anyone can.

Except white people, it seems. New York Times number crunchers found that 51% of white voters nationwide chose Republican candidates. They still stood with a party that allowed Trump to lavish attention on vanity projects that even the pharaohs would consider gauche, instead of what Americans need.

Wokoso academics have long claimed that Latinos turn conservative in a desire to become white. I’ve always found that argument facile. Most of the Latino Trumpers I know are proud rancho libertarians who love to blast their corridos and apply for dual citizenship and who think gringos are weak, whiny ingrates. The one thing those Latinos did pick up from white Trump supporters was a strain of grievance politics that hasn’t historically been a part of who we are.

That may have been a natural byproduct of assimilation, which isn’t just about the language you speak or owning a home or cultural traditions. It’s also about picking up the political vibes of the powerful, which for the past decade have leaned toward MAGA’s nihilism.

But if that’s what being an American means, many Latinos said on Tuesday, then screw assimilation.

Oh, we’ll still learn English and strive for the middle class and root for the Raiders or Cowboys or Broncos or some other underachieving NFL squad. But Latinos expect more from this country than just kvetching and corruption, blind loyalty and excuses. Polls have long shown we’re among the most optimistic of Americans. And if we can still believe in this crazy democracy, then others should follow.

That’s why Americans should obsess over how Latinos vote. Because we’re not beholden to any side just yet, we’re ultimately more objective. We’ll back Democrats or Republicans if they’re doing a better job than the other party — and if they’re not, we’ll toss them out like a bad batch of enchiladas. Isn’t that the American experiment at its best?

JACKSON, Miss. — Democrat Scott Colom hasn’t won Mississippi’s U.S. Senate race, but the local prosecutor was welcomed as a historic figure Friday as he strolled through the Farish Street business district where civil rights leaders once organized.

“It’s so wonderful! It’s so wonderful to have Scott Colom as our representative,” said Maati Jone Primm, who owns Marshall’s Music and Book Store in Jackson.

The state is still tallying ballots that could make Colom the first Black senator from this Deep South state since Reconstruction. The possibility of Colom defeating Republican Sen. Cindy Hyde-Smith puts many Black voters somewhere between cautious optimism and outright celebration in a state where nearly 40% of the population is Black but the top representation for generations has been white.

“I’m so glad we are at the point where we are,” said Sorie Tarawally, a 76-year-old attorney who has long known Colom’s father. He called the 43-year-old candidate “the man, our messiah, our savior.”

The contest remains too early for the Associated Press to call, and Colom’s historic bid will hinge on a tedious process playing out in elections offices across Mississippi’s 82 counties. Local officials are receiving and examining absentee and provisional ballots, called affidavit ballots, before deadlines next week. Volunteers and lawyers representing each campaign look on in anticipation of potential litigation.

“We’re going to make sure everything is followed according to the law, and I have confidence in those local officials,” Colom said. “They’re doing their jobs. Got to be patient with them.”

Hyde-Smith has not appeared publicly since election night, when she essentially declared victory despite her razor-thin lead at the time with ballots still uncounted. Ballots tallied since have leaned in Colom’s favor.

Colom chided Hyde-Smith for not explaining her strategy going forward.

“She’s still our senator. Where is she? Why is she not doing any interviews?” he asked. “Why can’t she explain what her pathway to success is?”

In a social media post on Friday, Hyde-Smith wrote, “We are not backing down. This election is not over. Our team is working across Mississippi to monitor the remaining ballots and protect the integrity of the process. We will see this through to the very end!”

Uncertain number of outstanding ballots

The pool of outstanding ballots includes absentee ballots, which can be counted in Mississippi as long as they are received by Tuesday, five business days after the election. The rest are affidavit ballots, which are cast at the polls when there’s a glitch: Perhaps the person’s name was not on the rolls or the person did not have proper identification, or a poll worker determined the person’s identification did not precisely match the name on the list.

Citizens who had identification issues have until Tuesday to address those matters in person at their local elections office. For people who were not on a precinct’s rolls, local officials can verify a person’s status using previous records and information on the affidavit that person filed when filling out a ballot. That person typically has no responsibility to come to a local elections office; ballot status can be found on the Mississippi secretary of state’s office website.

Counties have until Friday to certify complete results to the secretary of state.

Mississippi law has no provision for a statewide recount. Campaigns could seek court orders, usually county by county, seeking to examine ballots.

A potentially seismic effect in state

Democrats already have won control of the Senate, so the result in Mississippi would not change the balance of power in Washington.

But it would mark a seismic shift in the state, where white conservatives have dominated the Statehouse and congressional delegation for nearly 150 years. Through Jim Crow segregation and the civil rights era, those leaders were nearly all Democrats. In the decades since, as the Democratic Party rid itself of white nationalists, Republicans have taken over the leadership. For Black Mississippians, the result was the same: a lack of proportional representation at the top levels of state government and in Washington.

Colom was initially viewed as a long shot, and it wasn’t until late October that Senate Democrats’ top campaign group started spending on advertising to support him. But the midterms revealed a broad backlash against redistricting efforts in the South that were aimed at boosting Republicans and, by extension, reducing Black representation.

Primm’s bookstore, where Colom visited Friday, opened in the 1930s and is recognized as the oldest Black-owned bookstore in the U.S.

She said the Farish Street neighborhood still represents Black Mississippians’ “first migration, from the plantation to the city.” Having Colom there as a potential senator “makes us so proud, and it gives us someone to aspire to. Our youth need to see the possibilities for their lives, and we do when we see our next senator from Mississippi.”

As he campaigned, Colom emphasized that he can represent all Mississippians, and he said President Trump’s policies — the war with Iran and tariffs, especially — cut across all demographic lines. He celebrated the extended ballot counting process as a benefit to the state’s 2.95 million residents.

“I’m so glad the national press is getting to see the beauty of our state,” he said.

But Colom and his Black supporters also have never ignored the significance of his candidacy.

“We are motivated by the gross inequalities we have seen in society and how only one side seems to benefit,” said Tarawally, who was born in Sierra Leone and arrived in the Deep South to attend law school at the University of Mississippi. “So, we want a person who speaks to our benefit.”

Colom ended his campaign with an ad set at the Jackson home of Medgar Evers, the civil rights leader who was gunned down in 1963 in his own driveway, dying in front of his wife and children.

“It’s a powerful reminder of the sacrifice to gain the ballot, and nobody sacrificed more than Medgar Evers and his family,” Colom said Friday.

“What was important to me about that ad is we didn’t ask people to vote for me. We just talked about the sacrifice, talked about the story,” he continued. “We just wanted that to be the closing ad because I wanted that to be the last message that the people of Mississippi heard.”

Barrow and Bates write for the Associated Press.

Days after the midterm elections, Proposition 40 has yet to be decided. The ballot measure, which would impose a one-time 5% tax on California billionaires to help fund healthcare, is failing by more than 8 percentage points.

Statewide, more than 4 million votes remain to be counted in this race, according to the Associated Press, which calculates the expected vote using returns and other data. That includes more than half a million from Los Angeles County, where the “yes” vote leads by more than 7 percentage points.

The proposition has so far found support in nine counties: Alameda, Humboldt, Los Angeles, Mendocino, Monterey, San Francisco, Santa Cruz, Sonoma and Yolo. In Southern California, Los Angeles is the only county leaning toward “yes.”

Propositions 41 and 42

While Proposition 40 focuses narrowly on taxing billionaires, competing Propositions 41 and 42 would have broader impacts on the state’s ability to enact new taxes. And the measures could undercut Proposition 40 if it passes.

As of Friday, the latest vote tallies showed “yes” on Proposition 41 trailing by more than 7 points, while “yes” on Proposition 42 was ahead by more than 6 points.

Proposition 41 would would require audits for new state special taxes and prohibit new state taxes from being exempted from a voter-approved state spending limit. Proposition 42 would prohibit new taxes on retirement holdings, individually owned assets and other personal savings. If Proposition 40 passes and either of these measures passes with more “yes” votes than Proposition 40, it would prevent the billionaire tax from becoming law.

A late October poll showed voter opposition to Propositions 41 and 42 had grown even as support for the billionaire tax declined.

The money behind the measures

Support for Proposition 40 has totaled to nearly $35 million, mostly from the Service Employees International Union-United Healthcare Workers West, the healthcare workers union that proposed the tax.

Backers of Propositions 41 and 42 also opposed Proposition 40. Combined, they raised more than $300 million. Most of that money came from the billionaires who would be subject to the tax.

A Culver City ballot measure that would give 16- and 17-year-olds the right to vote in municipal and school board elections was trailing Thursday.

Ballots still were being counted, but Measure YV was losing, with 55% of voters in Culver City voting against it and 45% voting for it, according to early results posted by the Los Angeles County Registrar’s Office.

There were 7,875 votes against the measure and 6,487 for it as of Thursday — a margin of 1,388 votes.

Passage of Measure YV, which was championed by a group of high school students called Vote16 Culver City, would make the Westside city one of just a few municipalities nationwide, and among a handful in California, to expand voting rights to people younger than 18.

The measure proposes an amendment to the city charter that would allow youth voters to participate only in school board and city elections. They would not be able to vote in county, state or federal contests.

The teenage proponents spent weeks canvassing for the measure in Culver City, despite having no power to cast ballots for it.

This is the second time the youth-vote initiative has been on the ballot in Culver City, where a similar measure failed in 2022 by just 16 votes.

In 2024, a citizens’ initiative to lower the voting age failed to gather enough signatures to qualify for the ballot. In February, the City Council, at the request of Vote16 Culver City, voted to put the measure on the November ballot.

Supporters say that 16- and 17-year-olds who are old enough to work, drive and pay taxes are mature enough to have a say in local decisions that affect their schools, parks, public safety, transportation and other matters. In California, they already are allowed to preregister to vote so that on their 18th birthday, they become automatically eligible to cast a ballot.

“I feel really strongly that 16- and 17-year-olds are very capable to vote and make a calm, educated decision for a school board and city elections,” 16-year-old Arlo Meighan-Thiel, a leader for Vote16 Culver City, said last month. “It would be amazing for us, the people who go to school five days a week, to have a say who represents us on the school board.”

Opponents counter that 16- and 17-year-olds are too young to make reasoned electoral choices and easily could be manipulated by adults.

Ron Bassilian, who signed the opposition statement in the city’s voter guide, told The Times in a text message Thursday that the 2022 measure trailed significantly a few days after that year’s election, only to lose by a few votes in the end.

“We remain cautiously optimistic for now” that the measure will not pass, said Bassilian, president of Protect Culver City, a political action committee that has opposed local efforts to defund law enforcement and other causes.

Bassilian, a Republican, told The Times last month that progressive candidates and activists had “really been pushing their way into the high school” seeking to influence young people, and that he was concerned about high schools becoming places where political interests were fighting for access to teenagers.

Vote16 Culver City is a part of Vote16USA, a national organization that supports youth-led state and local campaigns to lower the voting age. Vote16USA is funded by the New York-based nonprofit Goodnation Foundation, according to its website.

In 2013, Takoma Park, Md., became the first city in the U.S. to lower its voting age to 16 for municipal elections. A few additional cities in Maryland, as well as cities in New Jersey and Vermont, allow people younger than 18 to cast ballots in some or all local elections.

Multiple efforts to pass a similar youth voting initiative in San Francisco have failed by a narrow margin in recent years.

In 2016, Berkeley became the first municipality in California to drop the voting age to 16 for school board elections, followed by its Alameda County neighbor Oakland in 2020. Voters in Albany, also in Alameda County, took it a step further in 2024 when they passed a measure to let 16- and 17-year-olds cast ballots in all municipal elections — though the county still is trying to figure out how to fully accommodate youth voters in citywide contests.

In those cities, 16- and 17-year-olds were able to vote for the first time in this year’s school board elections, according to the Alameda County elections office. Every eligible preregistered youth voter was set to receive a vote-by-mail ballot before the election.

The only grandchild of celebrated civil rights leaders Martin Luther King Jr. and Coretta Scott King just voted for the first time, and she says she wants to lead the way her grandparents did.

Yolanda Renee King took a break from her social justice studies at Columbia University in New York City to return to her hometown of Atlanta to vote in the 2026 midterm elections alongside her parents, Martin Luther King III and Arndrea Waters King. The occasion was a momentous one for Yolanda, who turned 18 in May. “It’s such a full-circle moment,” she told ABC. “Finally, I can actually go.

“For such a long time, I would always tell people the importance of voting, but I could never participate myself as a voter firsthand,” she said. “But now I think it’s so special that I have a say.”

Yolanda King, who penned the children’s book “We Dream a World: Carrying the Light From My Grandparents” back in 2024, has been especially busy this year, putting out calls to action for fellow teens who are now eligible to vote — in the media, on Instagram, and even at the Lincoln Memorial in August, for the 63rd anniversary of the March on Washington, where she spoke during the “Defend the Vote” rally.

According to the Center for Information & Research on Civic Learning and Engagement, close to 50 million youth ages 18 to 29 are eligible to cast ballots, including more than 8 million newly eligible voters since the 2024 election. Although data are still being collected, at the time this article was published, 66% of that group of voters cast their ballot for a Democratic candidate for the U.S. House of Representatives, compared with 31% for a Republican candidate. And 11% of all votes in the 2026 midterms were cast by young voters.

In an op-ed published by Teen Vogue on Monday, King wrote of the unique challenges she sees her generation facing including inflation, immigration enforcement, climate change, the rising cost of education paired with dwindling hopes for homeownership, restrictive voting policies and more. “The cost of living is reaching a breaking point, as a war in Iran continues with seemingly no solution in sight,” she wrote. “And the rise of AI brings a kind of uncertainty to jobs and the environment that no one has known before.

“This doesn’t take anything away from what came before us,” she continued. “My grandparents’ generation faced segregation, violence, and jail cells, and their challenges were staggering. But our time is ours, and so is what we feel living through it.”

King said that she felt the weight of those challenges in August, when she spoke at the same place, on the same day, where Martin Luther King Jr. gave his “I Have a Dream” speech in 1963. “It wasn’t just about using my voice; it was about my first vote,” she wrote. “And it felt like my grandparents were right there with me, whispering: ‘It’s your turn.’

“I want to lead the way they did. But know I am still learning.”

King’s mother posted CNN coverage of her daughter’s first vote on Instagram, writing alongside the clip that the election day was a personal one for the family. “The little girl whose hand we held is stepping into a responsibility her grandparents — and so many others — sacrificed so much to secure. … There is something deeply moving about watching your child take her place in a story that began long before her.”

King’s father commented on the post as well, sharing words from his own dad: “My father said, ‘A voteless people is a powerless people.’ When [Yolanda] was little, we took her to the polls with us, and she’d wear our ‘I voted’ stickers and pretend she’d voted too. This morning on CNN, she shared why she’s finally ready to use her own voice, especially now that the Voting Rights Act has been hollowed out. There is nothing more powerful than our vote.”

Democrats swept California’s statewide down-ballot races — no surprise in a state where registered Democrats outnumber Republicans by a nearly two-to-one margin, and voters haven’t elected a Republican to a statewide office since 2006.

The dominance was evident in the Democratic candidates’ victories for attorney general, secretary of state, lieutenant governor, treasurer and controller.

“When you look at the results so far, the thing that’s most striking, I think, is that the percentages are almost identical for every statewide race between the two parties,” said Kim Nalder, director of the Project for an Informed Electorate at Sacramento State University. One might have imagined that some candidates would have received a larger or smaller share of votes than others, based on voters’ personal feelings toward them, but Californians instead hewed strongly to party lines, she said.

“I think that says that Californians are probably voting based on nationwide trends, as much as anything else,” she said, referencing the blue surge that swept the country, with Democrats taking control of both the House and Senate.

“It also just means, honestly, that people don’t know a lot about most of these statewide offices and don’t necessarily do their homework, so they’re reverting to the cue that’s simplest, which is party cues,” she added.

The AP called the victories for the down-ballot races.

One contest remained too close to call Wednesday afternoon: The race between two Democrats to succeed Ricardo Lara as insurance commissioner. With 51.7% of expected votes in, former San Francisco Supervisor Jane Kim held a slight lead over three-term state Sen. Ben Allen, with 52% versus 48%. The commissioner regulates the state’s insurance industry and has the authority to approve or reject rate increases and investigate fraud.

A former director of the Working Families Party, Kim has proposed a novel “single payer” state-run insurance plan to cover catastrophic fire damage, earning her endorsements from U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and the California Federation of Labor Unions. Allen, who has blasted Kim’s plan as too short on details, has campaigned on improving the current system, pointing to his long record of insurance industry reform bills. He’s backed by the California Democratic Party and top elected party officials, including U.S. Sens. Adam Schiff and Alex Padilla.

Elsewhere down the ballot, incumbent California Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta, a former Democratic state legislator, handily won releection as the state’s top prosecutor. He beat out former Huntington Beach City Atty. Michael Gates, a Republican, receiving 63.8% of the vote with 59.6% of expected votes in.

Bonta was first appointed to the office by Gov. Gavin Newsom in 2021, and then elected in 2022.

Democrat Shirley Weber was reelected as secretary of state, besting Orange County Supervisor Donald Wagner, a Republican, with 64.7% of the vote when 59.4% of expected votes were in. The secretary of state is in charge of administering statewide elections, providing information about ballot measures and candidates to voters, overseeing campaign finance and handling business licensing and filings.

Weber, a former state Assembly member, was initially appointed to the role in 2020 by Newsom and then elected by voters in 2022.

Voters chose state Treasurer Fiona Ma, a Democrat, to succeed termed-out Lt. Gov. Eleni Kounalakis. Ma defeated former State Senate Majority Leader Gloria Romero, a Republican, receiving 63.8% of the vote with 59.5% of the expected vote in. The job is largely a ceremonial post, but if the sitting governor dies, resigns or is removed from office, then the lieutenant governor would be elevated to take over.

Kounalakis, meanwhile, won the race to succeed termed-out Ma as state treasurer, beating Republican Jennifer Hawks, who had billed herself as a political outsider. With 59.1% of the expected vote in, Kounalakis received 64%. The California treasurer is the state’s chief financial manager and responsible for overseeing public investments and issuing bonds to fund major projects like roads, sewers, schools and affordable housing.

Incumbent Controller Malia Cohen won reelection over challenger Herb Morgan, a Republican finance and investment advisor. With 58.9% of the expected vote in, Cohen received 63.8%. The controller is the state’s fiscal watchdog, responsible for auditing government agencies, administering payroll for state employees and reuniting abandoned assets with their owners.

Cohen was elected in 2022 after serving as a member of the state Board of Equalization from San Francisco.

Times staff writers Laurence Darmiento, Iris Kwok, Summer Lin, Kevin Rector and Dakota Smith and correspondent Jon Regardie contributed to this report.

In the race to become Los Angeles’ next mayor, City Councilmember Nithya Raman holds a three-percentage-point lead over incumbent Karen Bass, according to preliminary results released by county officials Wednesday.

Early leads may change as the vote count continues. So far, Raman leads with 51.7% of the vote, while Bass trails with 48.3%.

The precinct-level results include more than 730,000 votes in the mayoral race counted as of 3 a.m. on election night. The county’s latest update totals to more than 784,000 votes.

The map below shades each precinct by the leading candidate. Deeper green or orange indicate a wider lead. Precincts with more votes cast per square mile appear more solid, with areas with lower voter density fade to white. Hatched areas had 10 or fewer votes.

With the county’s latest returns, about 66.6% of the expected vote is in. The Associated Press, which estimates the voter turnout, has not called the race.

Election results will be finalized by the California secretary of state in early December.

The fate of multiple high-stakes California ballot propositions remained undecided Wednesday, as poll workers continued to tally votes from across the state.

Other measures have generated decisive action from voters on such issues as public funding for housing and voter identification.

Six races have been called by the Associated Press, according to The Times tracker. They include four propositions — 1, 2, 3 and 37 — and two failed measures — 39 and 44. Eight remained undecided.

So far, there have been no big surprises, said Mark Baldassare, statewide survey director at the Public Policy Institute of California. The verdicts are “consistent with what we were seeing in the preelection polling.”

Undecided

Among the undecided items is Proposition 4, which would allow state and local governments to use public money to help finance political campaigns — something California largely has prohibited since 1988. The measure would lift that prohibition, subject to restrictions on how the money could be used and who could receive it. As of Wednesday, votes were leaning slightly against the proposition.

Another undecided item, Proposition 5, would change the process for recalling an elected official. It would separate the decision to recall the official from the choice of who replaces them, creating a second election or appointment process to determine the successor. The race was very tight Wednesday, with votes in favor holding a narrow edge.

Proposition 38 is leaning toward a passing vote by a solid margin. The measure would authorize the state to issue $8.4 billion in bonds to fund immunology and immunotherapy research that aims to cure and prevent cancer, heart disease and Alzheimer’s disease. Half the money would go to a single UC-affiliated nonprofit research institute, with the other half distributed through research grants.

One closely watched item, Proposition 40 — the so-called “billionaire tax” — also is leaning toward a likely rejection from voters. The proposition would create a one-time 5% tax on individuals and trusts with wealth of more than $1 billion, with the revenue going toward healthcare, food assistance and education. State officials estimated it would generate tens of billions of dollars for the state, but others, including Gov. Gavin Newsom, warned that it would lead wealthy residents to leave California and lead to future budget problems.

Two separate ballot measures, Proposition 41 and Proposition 42, were crafted to nullify the wealth tax and still remain too close to call.

Proposition 43, meanwhile, would require a two-thirds vote, rather than a simple majority, to approve certain local government taxes. It was leaning toward rejection.

Another big-ticket item, Proposition 45, was opposed by a small margin of voters but still too close to call. It would change the state’s landmark environmental review process, the California Environmental Quality Act, by shortening deadlines and permitting rules for public and private development projects. Supporters say it would cut costly delays and expedite essential housing, transportation, water, health and education projects. But opponents say it would clear the path for more artificial intelligence data centers.

Prop. 45 “has been interesting all along because it fits in with concerns about housing affordability,” Baldassare said. However, it also raised questions about “unintended consequences” for the environment.

“CEQA reform is complicated, let’s face it,” he said. “That has made the voters more split.”

Passed

The passing propositions each won with what were considerable margins Wednesday.

They included Proposition 1, which authorizes $11.25 billion in state bonds to finance affordable housing programs, with $1.25 billion set aside for housing for veterans.

Another passing item, Proposition 2, gives lawmakers the ability to put more money into California’s “rainy day fund,” doubling the reserve from 10% to 20% of the state’s general fund revenues. It also would require the state to save more in years when tax revenues are high, helping to weather economic ups and downs. It passed with a clear majority, according to The Times tracker.

Voters also approved Proposition 3, which permanently extends a high-income tax increase on California’s highest earners. The increase was approved by voters in 2012 and was scheduled to expire in 2031. The money generated by Proposition 3 would flow to education, with 89% going to K-12 schools and 11% to community colleges. It is separate from Proposition 40 — the more controversial tax on California’s wealthiest citizens, which remains undecided.

“We saw a majority of Californians in our poll saying that the wealthy should be taxed,” Baldassare said. And while voters were warned that Proposition 40 could push billionaires out of the state, Proposition 3 seemed a more palatable way to do that.

Proposition 37 passed with a clear majority of the vote. It authorizes up to $25 billion in state-issued bonds to create a loan program to help middle-income Californians buy newly constructed homes. Qualified buyers can borrow up to 17% of the price of the home while contributing 3% of the down payment from their own funds.

“There’s been strong support for the idea of spending more money on housing affordability through bonds, not taxes, and that explains the support that we saw all along for Proposition 1 and Proposition 37, despite the fact that it’s a lot of bond money,” Baldassare said.

Rejected

Californians rejected Proposition 39, which would have required voters to provide government-issued identification when voting in person or provide identifying information on mail-in ballots. It would have changed California’s signature-based voter identification system and was a resounding rejection of the broader fight playing out over onerous voter ID measures at the national level.

This was another measure where voters received a clear message, including from governor-elect Xavier Becerra, who urged Californians to vote no, Baldassare said.

“We saw in our polling before the election that most Californians don’t think that there’s a problem with the way that we go about our elections and casting ballots and counting votes … so that sort of didn’t align with thinking,” he said.

California voters also resoundingly rejected Proposition 44. The act would have required certain nonprofit community health clinics serving low-income and medically underserved populations to spend at least 90% of their annual revenue on health care services. Those that fell short would be penalized. As of Wednesday morning, a whopping 82% of votes were against the proposition, more than any other.

Polls suggest the governing party could fall below 40 percent as voters weigh failing services.

South Africans are voting in local elections widely seen as a verdict on the African National Congress (ANC), the party that led the country out of white minority rule in 1994 but has steadily lost support over the past decade.

Polls opened at 7am (05:00 GMT) on Wednesday and close at 9pm (19:00 GMT). A record 29.2 million people are registered to vote at 23,696 voting stations, according to the Electoral Commission of South Africa (IEC). More than 1.4 million special votes were cast on Monday and Tuesday.

Voters are electing councils for the country’s eight metropolitan municipalities, 44 district councils and 205 local councils. Those councils then choose mayors.

The ANC fell below 50 percent in municipal polls for the first time in 2021. In the 2024 national election, it lost its parliamentary majority and was forced into a coalition government with the Democratic Alliance (DA) and other parties. Polls suggest the ANC’s support could drop below 40 percent this time.

“Municipal failures have contributed to declining public trust and confidence in democratic governance,” President Cyril Ramaphosa said in his weekly newsletter, “From the Desk of the President”.

Ramaphosa is due to vote at Hyde Park High School in Johannesburg, the presidency said.

Johannesburg is the biggest prize in this election. The country’s financial capital has had five mayors in four years.

The DA has fielded its 75-year-old former leader, Helen Zille, for the city’s top job. Her campaign stunts included snorkelling in a mud-filled trench that was flooded by a burst municipal water pipe.

A News24 poll put Zille at 36 percent, meaning she would need coalition partners, particularly the ANC, to govern. Zille told the Associated Press news agency that the ANC was “in free fall”.

This is the first local vote for former President Jacob Zuma’s uMkhonto weSizwe (MK) party, which is mounting a strong challenge in the coastal city of Durban.

“We are going to start by taking back our country here,” Zuma told supporters in the city on Sunday, the AFP news agency reported. Durban has become a centre of anti-migrant sentiment, a prominent theme in the campaign.

Turnout may be a concern. Only 46 percent of registered voters took part in the 2021 municipal elections.

Coalition government is already widespread: 74 of the country’s 257 municipalities were run by coalitions or minority administrations as of February, according to the Mapungubwe Institute for Strategic Reflection.

Security has also been tightened. Police said 21 election-related cases have been recorded since Sunday. KwaZulu-Natal has 165 voting stations classed as high risk, the most of any province.

Final results are expected on Sunday. They are expected to shape the race to succeed Ramaphosa as ANC leader at the party’s conference in December 2027.

Election day is here, which means it’s the final chance to cast your ballot for the midterm election.

Early voting options have allowed more than 5.5 million Californians to cast their ballot ahead of election day, according to Political Data Intelligence, voter data analysis software.

However, with more than 23 million registered voters in the state, there are still nearly 18 million people who potentially could head to the polls, which could translate to long lines at polling places and voting centers.

You can avoid long wait times. Here’s how to do that, plus a few other helpful tips on election day.

How to avoid long lines at the polls

On election day, voting and polling centers are open from 7 a.m. to 8 p.m.

The Los Angeles County registrar-recorder/county clerk’s website has a vote center locator online.

By entering your address, the locator will create a list of voting centers that are less than a mile away or as far as 10 miles.

Included with the vote center address is how long the current wait time is at that specific location.

The wait times are color coded as follows:

• Dark green: 15 minutes or less
• Light green: 16 to 30 minutes
• Yellow: 31 to 45 minutes
• Orange: 46 to 60 minutes
• Red: More than 1 hour
• Blue: Wait time unavailable

I’m at a vote center but left my ballot at home

You can request a provisional ballot at any polling place in the county in which you are registered to vote.

A provisional ballot is a regular ballot that is placed in a special envelope prior to being put in the ballot box.

It’s counted once election officials verify that you are a registered voter in that county and haven’t already voted in the election.

How to participate in ‘curbside voting’ for registered voters with disabilities

All polling places and voting centers are required to be accessible to voters with disabilities and will have accessible voting machines.

Any voter who cannot reach the voting area at the center because of architectural barriers or physical limitations may request to vote curbside — whether the voter is physically on the curb or in their car.

There is a sign posted outside of every vote center with a phone number to call an election worker who will bring a ballot to the voter, according to the Los Angeles County registrar-recorder/county clerk.

I forgot my check-in code for in-person voting

Los Angeles County election officials say you can check in at a voting center by scanning your “quick check-in code” — a number that verifies your voter registration.

Your unique code can be found on your mailed sample ballot and vote center postcard. Take either of those hard copies to the vote center.

If you forgot the hard copies, you can find the code online. You retrieve it by verifying your voter registration here. You’ll need to input your last name, birth date, the house number of your residential address and your ZIP Code.

For assistance call, (800) 815-2666, Option 2.

How late is too late to vote at the polls on election night?

In California, any voter who is in line at 8 p.m. when the polls are scheduled to close is allowed to vote, according to the secretary of state.

If there is a line when the polls close, a poll worker stands at the back of the line to let people who arrive after 8 p.m. know that the polls have closed.

Any voter who arrives after the polls have closed may not be allowed to vote, even if voters who were in line to vote before the polls closed are in the process of voting.

More election news

Nearly two-thirds of California voters are worried that the Trump administration may try to halt the vote count early, stoking disquieting levels of election anxiety on the eve of the midterms, a new poll shows.

Those fears arise as the Justice Department continues its aggressive efforts to challenge or wrest control over state voting processes, including threatening to prosecute uncooperative elections officials in California, after years of baseless claims of widespread election fraud by the Republican president.

Among California voters, 63% worry that the federal government may attempt to stop the counting of votes in California and other states in the days following Tuesday’s election, according to the poll from the UC Berkeley Institute of Governmental Studies, co-sponsored by The Times. Around half of voters — 49% — are not confident that the state’s election will be free of federal interference, the survey found.

“Both of the items, together, I think should raise alarms for threats against democracy in California,” said Matt Barreto, director of the UCLA Voting Rights Project.

California voters also have grievances with the state’s ballot propositions, a slate of 14 measures that include new taxes on billionaires and funding for cancer research. More than 8 in 10 of the state’s likely voters said that this year’s propositions were worded in a way that made them hard to understand and that special interests groups have too much influence over which propositions appear on the ballot.

Those concerns were shared across partisan lines, unlike how Californians felt about the threats posed to integrity of elections by the Trump administration. The high level of fear in the state reflects the fact that registered Democrats outnumber registered Republicans by nearly 2 to 1 in California.

While 58% of Democrats are not confident the election will be free of federal interference, 27% of Republicans feel the same way, according to the poll. Similarly, 85% of Democrats are worried about the vote count being halted, compared with 22% of Republicans. A majority of California voters not affiliated with either party also expressed fears of interference by the Trump administration.

“I think voters are reflecting the reality,” Barreto said. “For the past month, the president and the Department of Justice have been attempting to directly interfere and take over California elections and voters are aware of that.”

The Department of Justice has sued California requesting the state set aside some 20,000 ballots the federal government has flagged as being potentially from noncitizens. Federal prosecutors have threatened criminal actions against election officials who refuse to comply. On Monday, the Trump administration escalated its effort to discount the flagged California ballots to the Supreme Court, which rejected its request to set aside the ballots.

Over the weekend, Newsom sent a letter to U.S. District Court judges across California sharing his “grave concerns federal agents will seek search warrants to seize ballots and ballot materials before the election results are certified” and urging judges not to comply.

Newsom wrote that President Trump’s history of weaponizing the Department of Justice to carry out his partisan agenda supports “legitimate concerns about further attempts to disenfranchise voters and undermine election integrity.” Newsom said this could include an attempt to prevent the certification of California’s election.

Concerns have also been raised about the presence of immigration agents around voting centers and performing door knocks and street stops to try to identify voter fraud.

Court rulings have recently dealt a series of blows to the Trump administrations efforts to intervene in the state’s voting process. Nonetheless, distress over election integrity remains extremely high, according to the poll.

Fears of federal meddling in the election are slightly higher among voters of color; 64% of Black voters and 54% of Latino voters said they are not confident the election will be free of interference, compared with 44% of white non-Hispanic voters, according to the poll.

Voters of color tend to lean more liberal, but the historic and ongoing efforts to disenfranchise minorities probably also contribute to this disparity, Barreto said.

Black voters have been a target of voter suppression efforts from the post-Civil War Reconstruction era through the passage of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, he said. More recently, the Trump administration has singled out Latino Californians, accusing them of being noncitizens and voting illegally.

Professor Eric Schickler, co-director of the UC Berkeley Institute of Governmental Studies, described the level of alarm over election integrity in California and across the nation as without precedent.

He noted that both parties are distrustful about different things, with Republicans focused on allegations of fraudulent voting and Democrats fearful that the federal government may attempt to overturn results.

The last time America saw extreme political polarization paired with widespread claims of illegitimacy over election outcomes was during the Reconstruction era in the late 19th century, when there were widespread accusations of voter suppression in the South and of people voting illegally in the North, he said.

“That hasn’t happened really in the United States for well over a century now,” Schickler said, “so what we’re seeing now is really unusual, especially for a modern and long-lived democracy.”

Schickler said his highest level of concern with possible federal efforts to halt California’s vote count would be with congressional races. A handful of California races could play a pivotal role in deciding which party takes control of the U.S. House of Representatives. However, he said current polling data do not indicate that a Democratic path to victory in the lower house will rely on Golden State voters.

Trump in the past has criticized California for being one of the slowest states in the nation to finish tabulating its election results due to its large population and high number of voters who mail in their ballots. He’s also complained about late arriving ballots. Votes processed after election day in California typically contain a higher proportion of Democratic ballots than those processed on election night.

In addition, to highlight the unprecedented anxiety many California voters are feeling, the poll also shines a light on frustrations voters have with the state’s ballot propositions. Among likely voters, 82% agree that the wording of this year’s propositions made them hard to understand and 82% also agree that special interest groups have largely taken over which initiatives qualify.

In addition, 62% of likely voters feel that there are too many propositions on this year’s ballot. There are 14 statewide propositions, with many voters also seeing additional initiatives at a county and city level.

“The initiative is meant to be an outlet for voters when special interest groups lead legislators to fail to respond to their concerns,” Schickler said. “But now most voters believe the initiative process is itself too beholden to special interests.”

In the last 20 years, California’s ballot initiative campaigns have become increasingly controlled by large corporations or union groups. Part of this is due to the fact that it takes at least $50 million to run an effective campaign capable of reaching the state’s 23 million registered voters, making it challenging, but not impossible, to run a grassroots campaign, Barreto said.

The poll surveyed 2,787 registered voters in California from Oct. 19 to 25 in English and Spanish and has an overall estimated margin of error of plus or minus 2.5 percentage points. Among likely voters, the estimated margin of error is about 3 percentage points in either direction.

Times staff writer Kevin Rector contributed to this report.

Top officials in California are bracing for unprecedented election interference from the Trump administration in coming days, including potential ballot seizures.

They are warning the public about such actions in striking messages casting President Trump and U.S. Department of Justice officials as threats to the vote and to American democracy. They have begged federal judges to reject warrant requests and hold the line against lawless probes. They have deployed armies of election lawyers and volunteer monitors, particularly to areas where congressional races could be close.

“California is dead serious about the security of [Tuesday’s] midterm elections. If Trump tries to meddle with California’s ballots, you can be sure as hell that we’ll prosecute those who help him,” Gov. Gavin Newsom said Monday. “Californians deserve a free and fair election, and that is exactly what we’ll deliver.”

Those efforts, echoing others from Democrats in Congress and liberal officials in other political battlegrounds, are like nothing seen before in the U.S., and in response to an equally extraordinary campaign by the Trump administration to intervene in state-run elections based on claims — espoused by Trump for years — that voting in places such as California has been corrupted by widespread fraud.

On Monday, Justice Department officials redoubled their effort to block about 20,000 California ballots from voters who they allege may be noncitizens by appealing to the U.S. Supreme Court, after lower courts rejected the request — and as another judge in a separate challenge barred them Monday from demanding California officials segregate the same ballots. The Supreme Court denied the request.

They and local partners also rolled out criminal charges against seven noncitizens accused of illegally voting or registering — bringing the total number of lawful permanent residents recently charged with election-related offenses in the state to 35.

Beyond California, the Trump administration is trying to preemptively negate any win by the Democrat in the Alaska Senate race, based on claims that the presence on ballots of a third candidate with the same name as incumbent Sen. Dan Sullivan (R-Alaska) is confusing voters.

The incumbent senator is identified as such on the ballot, and Alaska courts have already rejected similar challenges. A federal judge dismissed the administration’s suit Sunday.

The White House and the Justice Department have said they are simply trying to ensure American citizens’ votes aren’t diluted by illegitimate votes from noncitizens, and that Democrats aren’t able to steal the Alaska race by intentionally confusing voters.

But Democratic leaders have alleged that the lawsuits are part of a broader Trump administration effort to establish a “pretext” to challenge the outcome of Tuesday’s midterm elections if they don’t like the results.

On Saturday, Newsom wrote to federal district court judges across the state, urging them to deny any Trump administration requests for judicial warrants that would allow them “to seize ballots, election records, or certified voting technology while an election is underway and before the results are certified.”

Newsom wrote that he has “grave concerns” that federal agents will “quickly pivot” to making such requests in criminal courts given their mounting losses on other fronts.

The state’s “strict chain of custody, documentation, and retention laws related to ballots and ballot materials ensure any evidence of alleged wrongdoing tied to ballots or ballot materials is preserved and appropriately supervised by a court, so there is no legitimate law enforcement reason to seize ballots, ballot materials, and equipment needed to process and tabulate ballots,” Newsom wrote.

California Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta — whose office has been fighting the Trump administration in court — has also been increasingly vocal about his belief that Trump will take increasingly drastic steps to try to control the election results.

“He’s intent on pulling out all the stops, engaging in whatever type of lying, cheating, and stealing is necessary to get the outcome he wants. He starts with the outcome and he backs it out from there, and will do anything seemingly necessary to try to get to the outcome that he wants — instead of letting the facts, and the law, and the votes determine what the outcome is,” Bonta said in an interview on MS NOW that he posted Sunday.

Elections experts point to the administration’s many losses in court as evidence that its efforts are not working, and said most voters won’t experience any problems with casting their ballots.

They said they do have concerns about future efforts by the administration to intervene, including through dramatic steps such as ballot seizures, but whether it takes such steps may hinge on whether the balance of power in the House or Senate depends on the outcome of a small enough number of close races.

If the expected “blue wave” is large and races are not particularly close, it will be more difficult for the Trump administration to sway the outcome in its favor and less likely it will even try to do so — even if Trump publicly rejects the outcome as illegitimate.

In announcing the latest charges, First Assistant U.S. Atty. Bill Essayli, the top federal prosecutors in Los Angeles, and San Luis Obispo County Dist. Atty. Dan Dow said the fight is not partisan. Six of the charges were federal; the seventh was brought by Dow locally.

Dow, the county’s district attorney since 2014 who has denied previous claims that he harbors anti-Muslim and anti-immigrant sentiments, last week announced that he was investigating a subset of “63 suspected non-citizens registered to vote” in the county from the broader federal list of 20,000 names statewide. On Monday, he appeared alongside Essayli to announce the one person charged in his county — and said more such cases could be coming.

He said California’s system, which requires registering voters to attest to the fact that they are citizens, is an “honor system” that doesn’t work.

One of those charged federally was Moria Dahan, 35, an Israeli national living in West Hills. Dahan was charged with making false statements on her naturalization application to become a U.S. citizen. Prosecutors alleged she illegally registered to vote, voted in person in 2024, and later falsely stated on naturalization papers, under penalty of perjury, that she had never claimed to be a U.S. citizen or registered to vote in a U.S. election.

Tiffany Feder, Dahan’s attorney, described the issue as a mix-up, and said her client never intended to illegally participate in voting. She said Dahan “was targeted through a very extensive scheme to induce her to register and vote,” and like other green card holders with limited English skills, believed the forms she was filling out were official and required.

“The truth is that the moment we discovered this, at her interview, we promptly withdrew her application for naturalization,” Feder said.

California has more than 23.4 million registered voters — meaning the 20,000 flagged individuals would account for less than one-tenth of 1% of all voters in the state, and the 35 charged a tiny sliver of that. State officials and election experts have pointed to the small numbers of arrests, despite a sweeping probe to find such voters by Essayli and others, as proof such fraud is rare.

Essayli argued the exact opposite Monday — saying the charges were just a “sampling” from the broader list of 20,000 individuals, and part of an effort to force state officials to take that list seriously by moving forward with local law enforcement partners such as Dow instead of waiting on the courts.

“Our goal is not to charge all 20,000 people,” Essayli said. “Our goal is to get California to not count the votes of noncitizens.”

In the October 27 Israeli elections, 38 parties ran for office. Of these, only two supported peace, equality and an end to the occupation of Palestinian territories. Both were “Arab parties” – made up of Palestinian citizens of Israel.

These two parties earned a historic result, securing 19 seats in the Knesset, after some 80 percent of Palestinian citizens cast a vote.

This unprecedented turnout contributed to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s failure to secure a majority.  His bloc won 53 seats, while the Jewish-led opposition won 48.

The electoral mobilisation of Palestinians was immediately spun as a threat and Palestinian communities now face intensified incitement by members of Netanyahu’s camp. The pro-Netanyahu camp has alleged that the election was “stolen” and is now calling for restrictions on the “Arab vote”.

Thus, Palestinian electoral success exposed an uncomfortable question for Israeli politics: what happens when citizens who are informally isolated on the political scene but whose vote is formally equal become powerful enough to determine who governs?

Palestinian citizens face a fundamental question: Can they truly determine the political outcome and if they can, does that make them equal citizens?

Formal inclusion, informal exclusion

Palestinian citizens of Israel have long faced a dilemma over voting. If they do not mobilise to vote, the risk is that the Jewish right would come to power is high. If they do vote, there is no guarantee that their participation would translate into policies that protect or benefit their communities.

In 1999, Arab turnout reached approximately 75 percent in the elections and Palestinian citizens overwhelmingly supported Ehud Barak of the Labour Party against Netanyahu. A year later, after Ariel Sharon’s visit to Al-Aqsa compound and the outbreak of the second Intifada, Israeli police killed 13 Palestinian citizens. Outrage and disillusionment contributed to an Arab boycott of the 2001 election, when turnout fell to about 19 percent. Sharon won.

Today, Palestinian electoral participation still retains its sway. Higher turnout among Palestinians means fewer seats for two main blocs – the pro- and anti-Netanyahu camps – which could tip the balance in the Knesset. This is what happened on October 27 .

But this potentially powerful position of the Palestinian parties has been diminished by the refusal of Jewish-led parties to work with them on government formation.

The logic of this exclusion was made clear in April 2021, when far-right politician Bezalel Smotrich rejected Netanyahu’s attempt to establish a government supported by one of the Palestinian parties, Ra’am. Smotrich argued that doing so would encourage greater Palestinian turnout which would allow the Palestinian community to enable the return of the left to power in Israel. Accepting Palestinian parties would therefore challenge the Jewish right’s political dominance.

Ra’am eventually joined the short-lived coalition government formed by Naftali Bennett and Yair Lapid, without making any national demands, but its participation came at the cost of significant concessions on national issues. For the first time, Palestinian political leaders recognised Israel as a Jewish state and were even willing to set aside the national question in favour of addressing civil and socioeconomic issues.

Despite these concessions, the Bennett–Lapid government ultimately collapsed following the resignation of two coalition members who opposed sitting in a government alongside Palestinian representatives.

Netanyahu then realised that to prevent the formation of any future government of change, he needed to delegitimise the Palestinian parties and limit their political representation.

Following October 7, 2023, Palestinian citizens experienced a sharp contraction of political space. Students faced disciplinary proceedings over social-media posts; employees lost jobs; antiwar speech prompted police investigations and arrests.

The electoral process itself reflected this climate. Israel’s Central Elections Committee voted to disqualify both Palestinian electoral lists, along with lawmaker Ofer Cassif and Balad chairman Sami Abu Shehadeh. The Supreme Court eventually reversed the bans on the lists.

Meanwhile, attacking Palestinians, including Palestinian citizens of Israel, became a political staple. Ahead of this election, media outlet Arabic Post conducted an analysis of more than 10,000 election-related social-media items. It reported that 40 percent of posts by candidates from Netanyahu’s camp concerned Arabs or Palestinians, and that 94 percent of those were hostile.

More troubling were the police raids on the homes of Ra’am activists in the Negev, following suspicions of electoral bribery which led to the arrest of three men.

Police acknowledged searches without warrants and later reports questioned the strength of the evidence. All three men were released. But the ripple effect of those allegations helped shape a narrative of suspicion against the Palestinian community.

Attacks on the Palestinian vote

In this election, after years of repression and incitement, Palestinian citizens did not retreat. They organised, voted in unprecedented numbers and achieved a remarkable result. They took a gamble by taking their citizenship seriously and by asserting their right to full political equality and a meaningful say in shaping the country’s future.

However, the parties they voted for face isolation unless they fulfil the conditions set by the Jewish-led opposition: namely, recognising Israel as exclusively Jewish, labelling Hamas a “terrorist” organisation and accepting compulsory military or national service, from which Palestinian citizens are now exempt.

In other words, Palestinians can access the political power they should have only if they fully capitulate on the Palestinian question, embrace Zionism and accept their own status as unequal citizens.

In parallel, the Palestinian community also faces intensified incitement, particularly by the pro-Netanyahu camp. Politicians and public figures are throwing claims of electoral manipulation, insisting “the Arabs stole the election”.

Former Deputy Knesset Speaker Moshe Feiglin went as far as declaring that the Palestinian electoral mobilisation was the “October 7” of Israeli politics. Yair Netanyahu, the prime minister’s son, called Palestinian citizens of Israel “the greatest danger to the survival of the State of Israel—aside from the Iranian nuclear threat”.

Many Palestinian citizens now fear that political success could bring further intimidation, restrictions or violence rather than recognition.

Thus, the high voter turnout among Palestinian citizens has forced Israeli society and its political establishment to confront the inherent contradiction between Israel’s identity as a Jewish state and its claim to be a democracy.

This fundamental dilemma may ultimately be resolved in favour of Jewish political dominance, leading to legislation that further undermines Palestinian civil rights and expands the system of apartheid and Jewish supremacy.

It would not be surprising if a bill were introduced in the next Knesset aimed solely at restricting Palestinians’ voting rights. There are already calls on social media for such a move.

A July survey by Israel Democracy Institute found that only 46 percent of respondents in the right-wing Jewish camp supported Palestinian citizens’ right to vote.

In the current reality, following the genocide in Gaza, there is a growing sense among Jewish Israelis that there are no longer any limits to what they can do, pushing the state to act with virtually no restraint towards Palestinian citizens.

If Israeli society does not change direction, its pretence of democracy may soon no longer hold.

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