won

On Sunday, Argentinians voted in midterm elections that attracted an uncommonly high level of international attention. This was in part due to the potential $40bn bailout promised to cash-strapped Buenos Aires by Washington. Ahead of the vote, United States President Donald Trump had made clear the cash injection was contingent upon the election results.

And Trump’s far-right buddy Javier Milei, the equally uniquely coiffed president of Argentina, did not fail to deliver. Milei’s party, La Libertad Avanza, pulled off a rather startling win, scoring more than 40 percent of the votes cast, according to early results. Half of the seats in Argentina’s lower Chamber of Deputies and a third of the seats in the Senate were up for grabs.

Trump naturally wasted no time in appropriating the electoral feat as a personal victory, claiming that Milei “had a lot of help from us. He had a lot of help.”

Before the election, Trump explained that his generous gesture to Milei – made even as the US president was overseeing sweeping cuts to healthcare and other services at home – was his own way of “helping a great philosophy take over a great country”.

US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent similarly contended that the “bridge” the US was extending to Milei was in the hopes “that Argentina can be great again”.

Call it MAGA – the South American version.

But as is the case with the US itself, it’s not quite clear when, precisely, in history Argentina was ever so “great”. Of course, there were the good old days of the US-backed Dirty War when a right-wing military dictatorship murdered and disappeared tens of thousands of suspected leftists, many of them dropped from aircraft into the ocean or Rio de la Plata.

As historian Greg Grandin documented in his biography of eternal US diplomat Henry Kissinger, the statesman advised the junta’s foreign minister, Admiral Cesar Augusto Guzzetti, in 1976: “If there are things that have to be done, you should do them quickly.”

Another great “philosophy”.

Now, Trump stands poised to preside over a renewed era of US influence in the South American nation. And while the days of dropping bodies from airplanes may be over, there is still plenty of room for right-wing brutality.

Milei, who self-defines as an “anarcho-capitalist” and who assumed the presidency in 2023, made a charming habit of wielding a chainsaw at political rallies to symbolise his approach to governance – which has been to slash spending on healthcare, education and other public services while overseeing mass layoffs and pension cuts.

In the first six months of Milei’s austerity programme, poverty in Argentina soared to nearly 53 percent. Inflation has dropped, but so has purchasing power, and surveys indicate that most Argentines do not earn enough to pay their monthly expenses. Sunday’s legislative win – pardon, Trump’s victory – was crucial to maintaining the “chainsaw” strategy, which anyway has worked out just fine for certain elite sectors of the Argentinian populace.

Until now, Milei’s party commanded less than 15 percent of the seats in Congress. This meant that the president was forced to govern at the mercy of an opposition that insisted on overturning his vetoes on things like increasing benefits for people with disabilities and restoring congressional funding for paediatric healthcare and universities.

Naturally, Milei’s sociopathic efforts are near and dear to Trump’s heart, and the US head of state has repeatedly come out in his defence: “Everybody knows he’s doing the right thing. But you have a radical-left sick culture that’s a very dangerous group of people, and they’re trying to make him look bad.”

To be sure, it takes a hell of a “radical-left sick culture” to say that children should have healthcare or that folks with disabilities should be lent a hand.

Incidentally, Milei’s government has effectively done its part to increase the number of Argentinians with disabilities by, inter alia, wantonly firing rubber bullets and tear gas at pensioners and other demonstrators protesting against violent austerity measures. In March, 33-year-old Jonathan Navarro was blinded in one eye by a rubber bullet while protesting on behalf of his father and other retirees.

For his part, Trump, who no doubt sympathises with the need for militarised responses to peaceful demonstrators, recently graciously joked with Milei about the possibility of sending Tomahawk missiles to Argentina: “You need them for your opposition, I guess.” Trump and Milei also see eye to eye on the subject of Israel, and in August, the Argentinian president proposed a $1m initiative to boost relations between Latin America and the genocidal state.

The list of similarities goes on. Trump has never been one to look down on corruption or nepotism – as long as he’s the one benefitting – and Milei wasted no time in appointing his own sister as secretary-general to the presidency. Karina Milei has played the starring role in one of various scandals to have rocked her brother’s administration – scandals that were supposedly threatening to jeopardise his party’s performance in Sunday’s midterms.

In August, leaked audio recordings featured Diego Spagnuolo, who at the time was the head of Argentina’s National Disability Agency, discussing bribes allegedly pocketed by Karina Milei in exchange for pharmaceutical contracts concerning the procurement of medications for people with disabilities.

Anyway, only a “radical-left sick culture” would have been bothered by such an arrangement.

Now that the midterm elections appear to have breathed new life into Milei’s unhinged free-market experiment, impoverished Argentinians certainly have a lot to lose. But Washington has much to gain, as Trump made clear in his victory speech after the results were released: “We’ve made a lot of money based on that election because the bonds have gone up. Their whole debt rating has gone up.”

The president went on to add that the US was “not in that for the money, per se”. Remember those words as Argentina is chain-sawed to greatness again.

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

A SINGLE UK ticket-holder has won the £25million EuroMillions jackpot, The National Lottery has announced.

The winning numbers for the Friday night draw were 06, 07, 17, 20 and 21 with the Lucky Star numbers 01 and 10.

1

It marks the second Friday in a row that a UK ticket-holder has won the top prize, and the fourth time this year.

Andy Carter, senior winners’ adviser at Allwyn, operator of The National Lottery, said: “Wow, it’s been an exciting night for EuroMillions players, as a single UK ticket-holder has landed the amazing £25m jackpot.

“That’s two UK EuroMillions jackpot wins in the space of a week, after another lucky player scooped the incredible £26M jackpot in last Friday’s draw (3 October).

“Players are now urged to check their tickets and to give us a call if they think they are tonight’s lucky winner.”

Every EuroMillions ticket also bags you an automatic entry into the UK Millionaire Maker, which guarantees at least one player will pocket £1million in every draw.

The UK Millionaire Maker Selection winner is: TGXG94724.

The first EuroMillions draw took place on February 7, 2004, by three organisations: France’s Française des Jeux, Loterías y Apuestas del Estado in Spain and the Camelot in the UK.

One of the UK’s biggest prizes was up for grabs on December, 4, 2020 with a whopping £175million EuroMillions jackpot, which would make a winner richer than Adele.

Another previous UK winner who’s whole life was altered with their jackpot was a player who wanted to remain anonymous on October 8, 2019. They walked off with a cool £170,221,000.

Colin and Chris Weir, from Largs in Scotland, netted a huge £161,653,000 in the July 12, 2011.

Adrian and Gillian Bayford, from Haverhill, Suffolk, picked up £148,656,000 after they played the draw on August, 10, 2012, while Jane Park became Britain’s youngest lottery winner when she scooped up £1 million in 2013.

The odds of winning any EuroMillions prize are 1 in 13.

Everything you need to know about Lottery and EuroMillions

PHILADELPHIA — Even Dodgers fans steeped in the lore of Kirk Gibson might not remember the name of Mel Didier.

Didier was the scout who had issued this warning to the 1988 Dodgers: If you’re facing Dennis Eckersley, the mighty closer for the Oakland Athletics, and the count runs full, he’s going to throw a backdoor slider.

Eckersley threw it, Gibson hit it for a home run, and the Dodgers went on to win the World Series.

If these Dodgers go on to win the World Series, no one will struggle to remember the name of Mookie Betts, of course. On Monday, however, Betts pushed the Dodgers to within one win of the National League Championship Series — not with his bat and not with his glove, but with memory and aptitude to rival Didier.

“His mind is so far advanced,” Dodgers coach Dino Ebel said of Betts. “That was the ballgame right there.”

With the tying run at second base and none out in the ninth inning, he was the calm in a screaming madhouse. As the Dodgers infielders gathered at the mound and Alex Vesia entered from the bullpen, Betts thought back to a play he had participated in once, in an August game against the Angels. Miguel Rojas had taught him the so-called “wheel play.”

“All he had to do was tell me once,” Betts said. “To me, that was like a do-or-die situation. Them tying the game up turns all the momentum there. If we can find a way to stop it, that would be great.

“I just made a decision and rolled with it.”

On the mound, amid the bedlam, Betts put on the wheel play. It’s a bunt coverage: with a runner on second base, the third baseman and first baseman charge home, with the idea that one would field the bunt and throw out the runner at third.

In any previous decade, the Dodgers would have practiced this play in spring training, repeatedly.

“We don’t really even practice the wheel play, with pitchers not hitting any more,” third baseman Max Muncy said. “There’s very few times where you’re 100% sure that a guy is going to bunt.”

This was the time. The Phillies had opened the ninth with three consecutive hits, including a two-run double from Nick Castellanos.

The Dodgers led 4-3 with none out and Castellanos on second base. Phillies manager Rob Thomson said he wanted to play for the tie and take his chances to match his team’s bullpen against the Dodgers bullpen in extra innings.

And for the “never bunt” crowd: the chance to score one run is slightly higher with a runner on third base with one out than with a runner on second base and none out. The Phillies had the bottom of the order coming up — starting with infielder Bryson Stott, whom the Dodgers had evaluated as a good bunter.

Betts remembered how he had asked Rojas when to run the wheel play.

“In a do-or-die situation,” Rojas had told him.

So Betts took charge and put on the play.

“I don’t know if it was very comfortable, but somebody’s got to do it,” Betts said.

“I figured, if there was ever a good time to make a decision and roll with it, that was the time.”

Dodgers third baseman Max Muncy throws to third after fielding a bunt from Phillies second baseman Bryson Stott in the ninth inning in Game 2 of the NLDS on Monday.

(Robert Gauthier / Los Angeles Times)

Muncy would charge and, if the ball was bunted to him, would throw to Betts covering third base. First baseman Freddie Freeman then said he would charge and, if the ball was not bunted to him, would cover second base so Stott could not advance there, since second baseman Tommy Edman would be covering first. Later, on his PItchCom, Vesia said he heard an order to cover second base.

By the time Dodgers manager Dave Roberts got to the mound, the infielders said the play was on.

“When Doc came out and made the pitching change, we talked to him about it and he was all on board,” Muncy said. “I am going to credit Mook. It was his idea.”

Said Betts: “That was one of times where Doc called on us and said, you guys figure it out — in a very positive way. And we did.”

Rojas called Betts “an extension of the manager on the field.”

Said Rojas: “I’m happy that he called it right there on the field. Because it was the right play with the right runner, knowing the guy was going to bunt.”

All of this speaks well of Betts’ intuition and intelligence, but the postseason is not the time for “trust the process” blather. The postseason is the time when the right call is the one that actually works.

For Stott or anyone else, Thomson said, a batter that sees the wheel play in motion should forget about the bunt and swing away, given the holes left by two infielders charging the plate and the other two rushing to cover a base.

Stott bunted.

The first problem for the Phillies was that they had no one available to pinch-run for Castellanos. Aside from a backup catcher, they had two position players left: Harrison Bader, playing with a sore groin, and Weston Wilson, whom the Phillies had to save to run for Bader.

The second problem for the Phillies was that the Dodgers had only run the wheel play once this season, so even the best advance scouts could not have been warning the Phillies to beware.

“It’s something we have under our sleeve,” Rojas said.

The third and most critical problem for the Phillies was that Betts had lingered close to second base, shadowing Castellanos. By the time Stott could have seen Betts take off for third, it was too late.

“Mookie did a great job of disguising the wheel play,” Thomson said.

Muncy fielded the ball cleanly, and Betts beat Castellanos to the bag by so much that Betts had time to drop his knee and block the bag before tagging out Castellanos, holding onto the ball even as Castellanos upended him.

“Those guys executed it to perfection,” Roberts said. “It was a lot tougher — they made it look a lot easier than it was. And for me, that was our only chance, really, to win that game in that moment.”

If Muncy did not field the ball cleanly or did not make a good throw, or if Betts did not beat Castellanos to the bag or tag him out, the Phillies would have had the tying run at third base and the winning run at first base with none out.

But they did not, which meant the ensuing single did not tie the score. Two batters later, the Dodgers had won.

The play would be difficult enough for a lifelong shortstop. Betts is in his first season as a full-time shortstop.

“It shows his intuition in the game,” Muncy said. “It’s second to none out there. It doesn’t matter what position you put that guy at — he knows what’s going on. It’s honestly really impressive.”

Said Ebel: “He’s obsessed with being a great player. And he’s still learning. He’s still going to get better. That’s the scary thing about it.”

As the Dodgers headed for a happy flight back to Los Angeles, Betts offered this game a five-star review.

“I’ll take off my Dodgers hat and just put on a fan hat,” he said. “I think that was a really dope baseball game.”

US scientist Dr Fred Ramsdell was on the last day of a three-week hike with his wife Laura O’Neill and their two dogs, deep in Montana’s grizzly bear country, when Ms O’Neill suddenly started screaming.

But it was not a predator that had disturbed the quiet of their off-grid holiday: it was a flurry of text messages bearing the news that Dr Ramsdell had won the Nobel Prize for medicine.

Dr Ramsdell, whose phone had been on airplane mode when the Nobel committee tried to call him, told the BBC’s Newshour Programme that his first response when his wife said, “You’ve won the Nobel prize” was: “I did not.”

To which Ms O’Neill replied that she had 200 text messages that suggested he had.

Dr Ramsdell, along with two other scientists, won the prize for their research into how the immune system attacks hostile infections.

The winners share a prize fund worth 11m Swedish kronor (£870,000).

After Ms O’Neill received the messages, the couple drove down to a small town in southern Montana in search of good phone signal.

“By then it was probably three o’clock in the afternoon here, I called the Nobel Committee. Of course they were in bed, because it was probably one o’clock in the morning there,” Dr Ramsell said.

Eventually, the immunologist was able to reach his fellow laureates, friends and officials at the Nobel Assembly – 20 hours after they first tried to reach him.

“So it was an interesting day,” he said.

Dr Thomas Perlmann, the secretary-general of the Nobel Assembly, told the New York Times it was the most difficult attempt to contact a winner since he assumed the role in 2016.

While the committee was trying to reach him, he “was living his best life and was off the grid on a preplanned hiking trip,” a spokesperson for his lab, Sonoma Biotherapeutics, said.

When asked by the BBC whether he thought it might be a trick that his wife might play on him, Dr Ramsdell said: “I have a lot of friends, but they’re not coordinated enough to pull off this joke, not with that many of them at the same time.”

It was the latest incident in an often comic history of laureates learning they had won the prize.

In 2020, economist Paul Milgrom unplugged the phone when the Nobel committee called – in the middle of the night – to tell him he had won the Nobel for economics.

Instead, his co-winner Bob Wilson was forced to walk over to Milgrom’s house, dressed in his pyjamas, and deliver the news through the security camera on his front door.

When a journalist informed the novelist Doris Lessing she had won the 2007 Nobel Prize for literature, she responded: “Oh, Christ.”

Moldova’s ruling pro-West governing party won a majority in the country’s tense Sunday elections, beating pro-Russian parties by a wide margin amid reported attempts to violently disrupt the vote and allegations of interference by Russia.

Results from more than 99 percent of the polling stations counted by Monday noon showed the Party of Action and Solidarity (PAS) clearly in the lead, despite analysis and opinion polls before the vote suggesting that pro-Russian parties would come close and possibly upset the ruling party’s parliamentary majority.

The small country is located between Ukraine and Romania. One of Europe’s poorest states, it was part of the Soviet Republic until 1991. The breakaway, semi-autonomous region of Transnistria, which lies along the border with Ukraine, has traditionally supported ties with Russia.

As a result, in recent years, Moldova has emerged as a battleground for influence between Russia and the West.

In a September 9 speech at the European Parliament, Moldovan President Maia Sandu, founder of PAS, declared that this election would be “the most consequential” in the country’s history.

For Moldovans, the elections represented a crucial turning point. The small country with Russia’s war in Ukraine on its doorstep could either continue on its current path towards European Union membership, or it could fall back into the old fold of Russian influence.

Ultimately, despite reports of pro-Russian groups threatening violence, with at least three people arrested in Moldova, and several bomb scares reported at polling booths abroad, the Moldovan diaspora played a key role in delivering a pro-EU victory.

What was the outcome of Moldova’s election?

Nearly all votes cast at polling stations had been counted by Monday. Some 1.6 million people cast their votes, making about 52.2 percent of eligible voters, which is higher than in previous elections.

The ruling pro-EU PAS, led by parliament president and PAS cofounder, Igor Grosu, won 50.16 percent of the vote and about 55 of the 101 seats in parliament, translating to a comfortable majority government, according to the country’s election agency.

The current prime minister, Dorin Recean, appointed by Sandu in February 2023, is expected to retain his position.

The pro-Russian Patriotic Electoral Bloc (BEP), an alliance of four parties led by former president and Russian ally Igor Dodon, came in a far second with 24.19 percent of the vote. The party won 26 seats in parliament. Two parties within the bloc, Heart of Moldova and Moldova Mare, were banned from participating in the election amid allegations they had received illicit funding from Russia.

In third place was the Alternative Party, which is also pro-EU with 7.97 percent of the vote, securing eight parliamentary seats.

Our Party, a populist group, and the conservative Democracy at Home party, respectively, won just more than 6 percent and 5 percent of the vote. That allowed them entry into parliament for the first time with 6 seats each.

What had polls predicted?

Opinion polls had suggested a much tighter race between the ruling PAS and the BEP, which was predicted to come a close second. That scenario would have disrupted PAS’s present control of parliament, potentially forcing it into an uncomfortable coalition with the BEP, and slowing down pro-EU reforms.

Before the Sunday polls, politicians and their supporters on both sides of the debate campaigned intensely on the streets and on TV, but also on online platforms such as TikTok, in an attempt to reach young people who make up about a quarter of the population.

What were the key issues?

EU accession was the single most important issue on the ballot this election. Under President Sandu, Moldova applied to join the EU in early 2022, just after Russia’s February invasion of Ukraine. Chisinau’s goal, alongside a better economy, has been to obtain security guarantees like its neighbour, Romania, which is a member of the EU and of the North Atlantic Treaty Alliance (NATO).

In July 2022, the EU granted Moldova – as well as Ukraine – candidate status, on the condition that democracy, human and minority rights, and rule of law reforms are made. European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen at the time declared that the future of Moldova was in the EU.

However, while President Sandu’s PAS is eager to achieve Moldova’s EU membership by 2028 when her term expires, she has accused Moscow of attempting to scupper this plan in order to continue wielding influence over a country it once controlled.

Russia has considerable support in Moldova, and backs a breakaway, autonomous enclave – Transnistria, located along its border with Ukraine. About 1,500 Russian troops are present there, and the enclave’s government has requested Russian annexation several times.

In a referendum vote last October, just more than 50 percent of Moldovans voted “yes” to joining the EU, a tight margin of victory that was seen as a predictor of this week’s parliamentary elections.

At the time, President Sandu blamed “dirty interference” from Russia for her camp’s thin victory.

Did Russia interfere in these elections?

During the run-up to Moldova’s election, the authorities have repeatedly accused Moscow of conducting a “hybrid war” – offline and online – to help pro-Russian parties to win the vote. Moscow denies meddling in Moldovan politics.

Russia is specifically accused of being behind a widespread “voter-buying” operation – through which voters are bribed to vote for particular parties – and of launching cyberattacks on Moldovan government networks throughout the year.

The authorities have also claimed that Moscow illicitly funds pro-Russia political parties. Two pro-Russia parties – Heart of Moldova and Moldova Mare – were barred from the vote on Friday over allegations of illegal financing and vote buying.

According to researchers and online monitoring groups, Moldova was flooded with online disinformation and propaganda in the months leading up to the vote that attempted to tarnish PAS and raise doubts and concerns about the EU. Researchers found that these campaigns were powered by artificial intelligence (AI), with bots deployed in comment sections on social media or fake websites posting AI-generated content deriding the EU.

International security professor Stefan Wolff, from the University of Birmingham, told Al Jazeera that Russia had indeed tried to influence Sunday’s elections to bring Moldova back under its influence.

“There is very little doubt in my mind and quite convincing evidence that Russia has done basically two things: Tried to bribe Moldovans literally with cash to vote for anti-European parties, and it has exerted massive campaigns of disinformation about what a pro-European choice would mean,” he said.

Wolff added that Russia also attempted to “discredit” President Sandu and PAS’s parliamentary candidates. “This really was a massive Russian operation, but it also, I think, shows the limits of how far Russia can push its influence in the post-Soviet space,” he said.

Google, in a press statement last week, said it had noticed coordinated campaigns targeting the Moldovan elections on YouTube. “We have terminated more than 1,000 channels since June 2024 for being part of coordinated influence operations targeting Moldova.”

What other disruptions to the election were there?

Two brothers and a third man had been arrested in Chisinau on suspicion of planning riots during the election on Sunday, Moldovan police said. According to local media, the police found flammable material in the possession of the suspects.

Last week, police arrested 74 people during 250 raids of groups linked to alleged Russian plans to instigate riots during the vote. Authorities said the suspects, who were between 19 and 49, had “systematically travelled” to Serbia, where they received training for “disorder and destabilisation”.

How did the Moldovan diaspora vote?

Some 17.5 percent of the votes – 288,000 – were cast by Moldovans living abroad, mostly in Europe and the US.

Bomb scares were reported at polling units in Italy, Romania, Spain and the US. Some polling units in Moldova also reported similar scares. The elections agency did not break down how the diaspora voted.

Voters in the enclave of Transnistria – where many people hold dual citizenship with Russia – faced logistical challenges, as they had to travel to polling stations 20km (12 miles) outside Transnistria. Media reports noted long car queues at Moldovan checkpoints on Sunday morning.

Some pro-Russian voters from the enclave told reporters they had been sent back and forth between polling stations because of bomb scares.

How has PAS reacted to the election result?

Speaking to reporters at the PAS headquarters in Chisinau on Monday after the party’s win, PAS leader Grosu reiterated the allegations against Russia.

“It was not only PAS that won these elections, it was the people who won,” Grosu said.

“The Russian Federation threw into battle everything it had that was most vile – mountains of money, mountains of lies, mountains of illegalities. It used criminals to try to turn our entire country into a haven for crime. It filled everything with hatred.”

Prime Minister Dorin Recean also said Moldovans “demonstrated that their freedom is priceless and their freedom cannot be bought, their freedom cannot be influenced by Russia’s propaganda and scaremongering”.

“This is a huge win for the people of Moldova, considering the fully-fledged hybrid war that Russia waged in Moldova,” Recean added. “The major task right now is to bring back the society together, because what Russia achieved is to produce a lot of tension and division in society.”

Last November, Romania cancelled its own presidential elections after authorities alleged that Russian interference had helped a far-right leader win the polls. A second election was held in May this year, which was won by the centrist and pro-EU candidate Nicusor Dan.

What happens next?

The election result was immediately denied by BEP leader Dodon, who called for protests at the parliament building in Chisinau after claiming – without providing evidence – that PAS had meddled with the vote.

In an address on national TV late on Sunday before the results were declared, Dodon claimed his party had won the vote. He called on the PAS government to resign, and asked supporters to take to the streets.

“We will not allow destabilisation,” the politician said. “The citizens have voted. Their vote must be respected even if you don’t like it”.

On Monday, dozens of people gathered to protest the results. It is unclear if the politician will launch a legal challenge.

Meanwhile, President Sandu will now have to nominate a prime minister who will form a new government. Analysts say the president will likely opt for continuity with Prime Minister Recean, who is pro-EU and previously served as Sandu’s defence and security adviser.