© Jack Guez/Agence France-Presse — Getty Images
© Bruno Kelly/Reuters
© Rodrigo Paiva/Getty Images
Early voting opened on October 26 across Washington D.C. and will run through every district until Sunday, November 1.
Residents who missed the online or mail registration deadline can still register directly at the polling center. That same-day registration requires a valid, recent proof of address, such as an official identification, a utility bill or a bank statement issued within the past ninety days.
RELATED: Trump’s Grip on Senate at Stake in 10 Key Midterm Races
District law also lets non-citizen residents who meet age and local residency requirements vote in municipal elections. They receive a separate ballot limited to district offices, including the Council, the Board of Education and the Advisory Neighborhood Commissions.
In neighboring Maryland, the early voting period runs through Thursday, October 29, with centers open daily from 7 A.M. to 8 P.M. local time. Voters there can also register the same day by showing a document that proves their current address.
Election authorities detailed the rules for those who prefer mail ballots or official drop boxes before the November 3 general vote. In Washington D.C., ballots must carry that date’s postmark or be deposited before 8 P.M.
Maryland set Tuesday, October 27, as the cutoff for requesting printed ballots at each county’s local offices.
Voters who miss the October 27 request deadline in Maryland can still cast a ballot in person during the early window or on November 3. The mail route, however, closes at that point for printed ballots.
The midterm cycle has produced a sharp rise in early participation. As of October 25, more than 23 million people had voted early nationwide, up from the 15 million recorded in 2022.
After two years marked by unilateral decisions, a hardline stance on immigration, rising living costs and involvement in the war against Iran, Donald Trump’s administration now faces a ballot test that could strip Republicans of their absolute control of Congress.
All 435 seats in the House of Representatives are being contested. Republicans hold 218 seats against 214 for the Democrats, along with two vacancies and one independent seat occupied by Kevin Kiley after his departure from the Republican Party. That narrow margin leaves the chamber within reach for the opposition, and the surge in early ballots is being read as a measure of how much ground the ruling party could lose.
The early vote will keep building through the final weekend before November 3, when the full contours of the midterm electorate will emerge.
Mississippi Republicans’ newfound objection to AI-generated ads is the latest sign that MAGA world is fretting over the state’s U.S. Senate race.
The Democratic candidate, Scott Colom, said late last week that his campaign would delete an ad created with the help of artificial intelligence tools that depicted his Republican opponent, Sen. Cindy Hyde-Smith, hurrying away from reporters, as she has done before. The ad has been online for weeks, but Mississippi’s Republican attorney general demanded that Colom’s campaign take it down.
According to Mississippi Today:
Republican Attorney General Lynn Fitch said Friday that Scott Colom, the Democratic nominee for U.S. Senate, likely violated state law with a digital ad that featured an artificial intelligence-generated depiction of Republican Sen. Cindy Hyde-Smith running away from reporters.
Colom told Mississippi Today he would delete the post because he didn’t want Fitch to launch litigation with taxpayer money. That came after Fitch sent Colom a complaint letter demanding that he remove that ad from his social media accounts. If he did not, the complaint said, the attorney general’s office could file an injunction against him.
“As violations of this election integrity law can carry criminal penalties, Attorney General Fitch has also asked Scott Colom and his campaign to preserve all records related to this matter so as not to obstruct justice,” the statement reads.
The article quotes Colom as saying Hyde-Smith is “clearly desperate” and that her allies are attempting to “weaponize the justice system to distract from the real issues, which is that she has sold out our farmers, sold out our small businesses, and sold out our families.”
You can judge for yourself whether you believe the Mississippi GOP truly cares about the scourge of AI-generated political ads, but the party’s fierce support for President Donald Trump — whose social media feeds have become cesspools of political AI slop — raises doubt in my mind.
What seems more likely to me is that Mississippi Republicans are trying to undercut Colom’s campaign, which has already garnered laughter for another ad targeting Hyde-Smith — in a midterm race the GOP didn’t think would be competitive.
Republicans have reportedly voiced concerns that Hyde-Smith’s Senate seat appears to be in play for Democrats in next week’s election, amid backlash toward Trump and the GOP. The fact that the president scheduled a rally in Mississippi one week out from Election Day reflects such concerns, despite forecasters giving Hyde-Smith the edge in their estimates of how the race will shake out. The GOP candidate has said Trump would come campaign for her “if I get in trouble,” and it looks like that’s what’s happening.
Short of a victory, one could argue that Colom improving on Democratic Senate nominee Mike Espy’s 2020 election numbers would be a remarkable feat for liberal activists in Mississippi, which boasts the largest percentage of Black eligible voters out of any state in the country but has — with help from decades of racist voter suppression — remained almost exclusively under control of white conservatives.
Colom is looking to change that. His ads prove that his campaign has the GOP’s attention — and help support Georgia Democratic Sen. Raphael Warnock’s argument that Democrats need to invest more heavily in Southern states.
The post In Mississippi’s Senate race, GOP targets Democratic candidate’s ad appeared first on MS NOW.
Ahead of Israel’s Oct. 27 national vote, President Donald Trump issued a sweeping endorsement of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s re-election bid, calling him a "great warrior," an "even greater partner for peace" and an ally in the confrontation with Iran.
The backing could give Israel’s longest-serving prime minister a boost ahead of the country’s first national vote since the Hamas-led Oct. 7, 2023, massacre. The election is widely viewed in Israel as a referendum on whether to grant Netanyahu another term to pursue his war objectives, including disarming Hamas and Hezbollah and countering the nuclear threat from the Islamic Republic.
In response, Netanyahu thanked Trump for his "extraordinary endorsement." "Together we will never let Iran’s regime get nuclear weapons," he said.
Addressing the endorsement, Doron Spielman, international spokesman for the Israeli Prime Minister’s Office, told Fox News Digital that no personal or professional bond in the history of U.S.-Israel relations compares with the current partnership.
"Israel and the U.S. have stood together as the two countries bearing the torch for the West, and that is a direct result of the incredible relationship between President Trump and Netanyahu," he said.
He reiterated Netanyahu’s long-standing foreign-policy priority and central campaign promise: ensuring that Iran does not acquire atomic bombs under his watch.
"Israel prefers to do this with the U.S., which has been our greatest ally and friend, and who has already entered the front with us twice. But already at the time of Operation Rising Lion, Israel showed that it was willing to act alone. Israel acted for over a week before the U.S. joined," he said, in reference to the June 2025 military mission against Iran.
Israel’s longest-serving prime minister, with roughly 20 years in office, Netanyahu began his diplomatic career in 1982 as deputy chief of mission at Israel’s embassy in Washington, D.C. He served as Israel’s ambassador to the United Nations from 1984 to 1988 before entering politics with Likud. He became the party’s chairman in 1993 and was first elected premier in 1996.
After losing the 1999 election, Netanyahu returned to government in 2002 as foreign minister and later served as finance minister. He returned to the premiership in 2009, serving until 2021 and again from late 2022. He is widely credited with liberalizing Israel’s economy and helping transform the country into a global high-tech hub.
FORMER ISRAELI ARMY CHIEF GADI EISENKOT EMERGES AS NETANYAHU’S LEADING ELECTION CHALLENGER
Netanyahu’s current political allies include Itamar Ben-Gvir’s Otzma Yehudit, Bezalel Smotrich’s Religious Zionism-Zehut, and the ultra-Orthodox parties Shas and United Torah Judaism. The newcomer Amcha Yisrael, led by Ofer Winter, could also join the bloc, although Winter is currently feuding with Likud over concerns that his party, which is hovering near the electoral threshold, could split the right-wing vote and potentially "waste" tens of thousands of ballots.
According to most Hebrew-language media polls, neither Netanyahu’s bloc nor the opposition led by Gadi Eisenkot currently has a clear path to securing the 61 Knesset seats needed to form a government.
If no candidate can assemble a governing coalition, Israel could head to another election, repeating the cycle of political instability that saw the country hold four national votes between April 2019 and March 2021.
Dan Diker, president of the Jerusalem Center for Security and Foreign Affairs, told Fox News Digital that any incoming government will face the same formidable security challenges as the current one, with few prospects for quick victories.
"The major challenge in this election will be what Netanyahu discussed in terms of adjusting the national security concept to prioritize prevention. That means taking very serious, assertive and aggressive military counterterrorism and nonmilitary actions against our enemies," Diker said.
The Israeli left, center and even far-right believe Netanyahu has failed to meet the expectations associated with his image as "Mr. Security," according to professor Tamar Hermann, a senior researcher at the Israel Democracy Institute.
ISRAEL DRILLS FOR SURPRISE ATTACK WITH MASSIVE MILITARY EXERCISE AS EXPERT INVOKES 1973 WAR
"He promised to topple the Iranian regime, he promised to dismantle Hamas, he promised to crush Hezbollah. None of it was achieved," Hermann told Fox News Digital. "He gave a green light to not punishing vigilantes in the settlements who act against Palestinians. He also gave too much to the ultra-Orthodox parties, giving up on the idea of universal conscription."
Hermann said that Netanyahu’s current term has been his least successful, beginning with the judicial reform push, which triggered mass protests in 2023, and followed by the Palestinian terror attacks on Oct. 7. Netanyahu subsequently faced public anger over his handling of the hostage crisis, although, in coordination with Trump and his envoys, he ultimately secured the return of all the captives.
"In the eyes of some, his legacy will be that he inflicted a huge disaster upon Israel in terms of what happened to civilians on Oct. 7 and the deterioration of Israel’s international image," she said.
Michael Oren, a former Israeli ambassador to the United States, framed the upcoming election in terms of legacy and how Netanyahu will be remembered 50 years from now.
"There are two types of leaders: leaders in history and leaders of history," he told Fox News Digital. "There are leaders who go into office and perform as best they can, and there are leaders who go into office and see themselves as transformative, as having a historical role like Abraham Lincoln, Roosevelt or Churchill. Benjamin Netanyahu belongs to this category."
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
Oren said Netanyahu sees his mission as saving Israel from existential threats, foremost among them Iran, a goal he has yet to achieve.
"He is willing to endure virtually limitless criticism and condemnation around the world, as well as mass demonstrations against him, to fulfill this one role," he said. "To understand that is to understand Benjamin Netanyahu: He is a leader of history."
This story originally appeared in Common Dreams on Oct. 26, 2026. It is shared here under a Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0) license.
“There is nothing inevitable about the far right,” said one former Obama administration official Sunday night as supporters of the left-wing Student List in Serbia poured into the streets of Belgrade and other cities across the Balkan country, celebrating their defeat of right-wing President Aleksandar Vučić, who has led the nation for nearly a decade and has been accused of corruption and autocratic rule.
The Student List’s victory coincided with that of Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, who was also backed by a student-led movement that marched through Rio de Janeiro and other cities in recent weeks, as US President Donald Trump was accused of election interference on behalf of right-wing Sen. Flávio Bolsonaro, Lula’s opponent.
Both countries reported high voter turnout in the pivotal elections, proving, as journalist Anne Applebaum said, “that voters can alter what feels like a historical shift.”
In years of genocide
— Francesca Albanese, UN Special Rapporteur oPt (@FranceskAlbs) October 26, 2026
hope came from the young
In Serbia
2 yrs of youth-led protest -integrity, unity, perseverance- brought change
Today that hope is a rainbow
its far end in Brazil
May it shine
wherever wounds run deep
and the young are fighting the old
Humanity will prevail pic.twitter.com/jKA6n4EmFR
In Serbia, Vučić said it was “clear that we have lost the election,” as results showed his Serbian Progressive Party (SNS) had won about 105 seats while the Student List had won at least 135.
The Student List movement, officially registered by the Republic Electoral Commission as “Studentska lista—Studenti pobeđuju” (Student List—Students Win) began in November 2024 after the concrete roof of a newly renovated train station in Novi Sad collapsed, killing 16 people. Students and other Serbians blamed corruption and negligence by Vučić’s government, and soon began blockades at a majority of the country’s higher education institutions.
Rallies in the coming year drew hundreds of thousands of people. The political movement that grew out of the sustained protests called for an independent judiciary, a special prosecutor to hold public officials accountable, independent reviews of major infrastructure projects, a higher minimum wage, and better funding for education, healthcare, and agriculture.
A cardiologist and professor from Novi Sad, Ilija Srdanović, topped the list of 250 candidates that the Student List put forward ahead of the snap elections on Sunday, but the movement has said Srdanović will not automatically be its choice for prime minister. The list of candidates for Serbia’s 250-seat Parliament includes doctors, farmers, activists, athletes, and actors.
“Never again tyrants in our country,” Srdanović said after the defeat of Vučić, who was prime minister before becoming president in 2017 and has been Serbia’s central political figure since 2012, developing a reputation for threatening his critics and cracking down on press freedom.
One Student List supporter, Sara, told The Guardian in Belgrade, “It’s very strange that on the very streets where the police beat us, on the streets where we retreated countless times in the face of the gendarmerie, we are now standing here as the victors.”
Nebojsa Cosic said to Reuters: “The people have won! The people defeated a dictator! The people will lead Serbia!”
In Brazil, thousands rallied ahead of the runoff election between Lula and Bolsonaro, the son of convicted former President Jair Bolsonaro, a close Trump ally who is serving a 27-year sentence under house arrest for orchestrating a coup attempt after his election loss in 2022.
Right-wing candidates won a significant number of seats in the earlier elections, which followed Trump’s push to secure partnerships across Latin America—stoking fears that Bolsonaro could win Sunday’s runoff and pushing students to lead pro-Lula rallies and marches across the country.
At a Copacabana Beach rally in Rio on Saturday, supporters carried a yellow and green banner that read, “We are going to turn this around!”
Isabella Graze, a retired teacher who joined a 10-million member WhatsApp group aimed at mobilizing pro-Lula voters, told The Guardian that “being a soldier in Lula’s army… means fighting for Brazilian democracy. This isn’t a normal election.”
Huge respect to the organizers, activists and voters of Brazil and Serbia. These results are due to so much work and they give us so much hope. There is nothing inevitable about the far right.
— Ben Rhodes (@brhodes) October 26, 2026
The Serbian and Brazilian elections came two days before Israelis are set to vote, potentially ending the long-running term of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, an accused war criminal whose US-backed government has waged war on Gaza, killing more than 74,000 Palestinians, and pushed to violently take control of more of the occupied West Bank.
They also came just over a week before the midterm elections in the US, with Democrats pushing for congressional control to rein in Trump for the final two years of his term. The campaign has been marked by openly racist, anti-Muslim attacks by Trump and his allies on Michigan US Senate candidate Abdul El-Sayed, a Republican ad claiming that Ohio Democratic gubernatorial candidate Amy Acton lied about her abusive childhood, and persistent claims by the president that the cost of living is down, contrary to all evidence.
“Feeling so much hope from the results out of Serbia and Brazil,” said Rep. Yassamin Ansari (D-Ariz.). “This took tremendous people power, organizing, and grit. Now it’s time to turn our country around, too.”
Kenneth Roth, former executive director of Human Rights Watch, said Sunday was “a good day for democracy.”
“Israel could be next on Tuesday, then the US midterms the following week,” said Roth. “The best case against the autocrats is the autocrat.”
In 1996, Israel’s then-Prime Minister Simon Peres appeared to be on his way to victory in parliamentary elections that would keep him and his center-left Labor Party in power. On the key issue of peace, he had pledged to provide West Bank and Gaza Strip territory to the Palestinians for a sovereign state. The “land […]
The post Netanyahu hopes voters forget October 7, 2023 appeared first on Asia Times.
For those concerned about Donald Trump trying to derail election results he doesn’t like, Friday was an unsettling day: The Justice Department filed a preemptive lawsuit aimed at blocking certification of Alaska’s U.S. Senate race — but only if the Republican incumbent, Sen. Dan Sullivan, loses while his rival with the similar name remains on the ballot.
Usually, Trump waits until after Election Day to try to overturn the will of the voters. As of late last week, he took a step toward doing so before the votes are tallied.
Legal experts from the left, right and center took a good look at the litigation, and the reaction was universal amazement at how ridiculous the case is. Richard Pildes, a New York University law professor who specializes in election issues, went so far as to say, “It is one of the weakest election lawsuits I’ve ever seen.”
The question then became why in the world the Justice Department would embarrass itself with such an absurdity. We didn’t have to wait too long for an answer.
On Monday afternoon, the president boasted to reporters that the case was filed at his behest. “I’m the one that said, ‘Do it,’” Trump declared. On Saturday and Sunday, he continued to not only defend the lawsuit — his argument was rooted in part on the idea that Alaskan voters might not know what “incumbent” means — but also claimed that he was directly responsible for the case’s existence.
The president’s public comments helped shed light on the unfortunate origins of this foolish case, and why it’s a bad idea for federal law enforcement to file lawsuits based on the whims of a former television personality whose only legal background is being charged with dozens of felonies. But Trump also offered a timely reminder about who’s pulling the strings at Main Justice. The New York Times reported:
Mr. Trump has grown increasingly agitated about the dueling Sullivans, among other election-related grievances. He has demanded the department take legal action, even as some department officials raised concerns about the merits and constitutionality of the case, according to two people with knowledge of the situation, speaking on the condition of anonymity to avoid retribution.
Vanita Gupta, the associate attorney general during the Biden administration, told the Times, “The department is taking commands from the president and throwing spaghetti at the wall to file meritless lawsuits. The ultimate goal is undermining faith in the election, intimidating voters and discrediting results the administration doesn’t like.”
It has long been obvious that the West Wing effectively controls this Justice Department, but to the extent that any pretense existed, it’s now gone. Indeed, it wasn’t long ago when the U.S. attorney’s office in Washington abandoned Reflecting Pool prosecutions, drawing outrage from the president who expected to be personally consulted about developments in a baseless vandalism case.
“From the moment President Trump was re-elected, he has muscled his way into the driver’s seat at the Justice Department, leaving tread marks on its time-honored independence from the White House by demanding, and sometimes directing, investigations into his enemies,” the Times reported in August. “But his tight grip on the steering wheel has often threatened to lead the department off a cliff.”
Two months later, the problem appears to be intensifying.
During Blanche’s confirmation process, Blanche made it clear that he, unlike Trump’s first-term attorneys general, envisioned his role as that of an instrument of the president’s will. Indeed, while Trump has ended up clashing with all of his other attorneys general, Blanche was positioned to succeed where others failed because he willingly accepted the idea that his office is an extension of the West Wing.
But recent events have brought into sharp relief the fact that Blanche’s goal is to serve one American, not 340 million Americans. It’s precisely what makes Trump’s former defense lawyer the AGINO — the Attorney General in Name Only.
The post Who runs the Justice Department? Blanche and Trump aren’t bothering to hide the answer. appeared first on MS NOW.
Today’s installment of campaign-related news items from across the country.
* In Ohio’s gubernatorial race, the editorial board of The Plain Dealer in Cleveland announced months ago that it would no longer make endorsements in top-of-the-ballot races. After seeing Republican Vivek Ramaswamy’s notorious attack ad, the editors changed their mind and endorsed Ramaswamy’s Democratic rival, Amy Acton. From the endorsement:
There are moments when a community must decide what it stands for, when its institutions have a duty to speak and when silence itself becomes a statement. Ohio has reached such a moment.
Vivek Ramaswamy, seeking the highest office in this state, has produced a campaign advertisement that weaponizes the sexual abuse his opponent, Amy Acton, suffered as a child. People across the political spectrum have rightly condemned it.
But condemnation has to mean something. Our politics have been debased for a decade, but this we will not accept. A candidate who uses childhood sexual abuse as a weapon against the person who endured it has crossed a line that Ohioans should defend, whatever their party.
For his part, the GOP nominee is still airing the disgusting attack, though his campaign has switched from a 60-second version to a 30-second version.
Ramaswamy also appeared on Fox News on Monday morning and accused Acton of being “crazy” and “unstable,” which came after Donald Trump spent part of the weekend reiterating his support for the vile attack.
Also on Monday morning, Acton appeared on MS NOW and said, “I can tell you that decency is on the ballot in this election.”
* In Mississippi’s unexpectedly competitive U.S. Senate race, Democrats supporting local prosecutor Scott Colom began investing in the contest last week. And soon after, the Senate Leadership Fund, the top Senate Republican super PAC, announced that it’s spending more than $1 million in the hopes of rescuing Sen. Cindy Hyde-Smith.
These moves precede the president’s scheduled rally in Mississippi in support of Hyde-Smith.
* In Texas’ U.S. Senate race, Democratic state Rep. James Talarico continues to pick up some GOP endorsements, including a new one from Thomas Phillips, the former Republican chief justice of the Texas Supreme Court.
“Paxton’s longstanding reputation will embarrass Texas in ways our state simply cannot afford,” Phillips wrote in an op-ed for The Beaumont Enterprise, referring to Republican state Attorney General Ken Paxton.
On a related note, ProPublica reported last week that the scandal-plagued GOP nominee’s trust invested $600,000 in a convicted fraudster’s company, Paxton’s “tough on crime” claims notwithstanding.
* In South Carolina’s U.S. Senate race, a new super PAC representing the data center industry is scrambling to try to help appointed Republican Sen. Darline Graham in South Carolina.
* And in North Carolina, The New York Times reported that new mail ballot rules are opening the door to thousands of ballots not being counted.
“At issue is a requirement that voters seal not only the outer envelope of their mail ballot but also an inner envelope that contains the ballot itself,” the article explained.
The post Monday’s Campaign Round-Up, 10.26.26: Fallout from Ramaswamy ad continues appeared first on MS NOW.
Attorney General Todd Blanche said on social media over the weekend that the Department of Justice does not seek “to stop the certification of Alaska’s election.”
The Department of Justice does not seek to stop any ballot from being cast or to stop the certification of Alaska's election. This litigation seeks to ensure that after Alaskans cast their ballots, they are preserved in a manner so that only Alaska's governing officials have the…
— Attorney General Todd Blanche (@AGToddBlanche) October 24, 2026
That statement is tough to square with the lawsuit the DOJ filed days earlier against Alaska’s election officials, as the department seeks to intervene there and in California amid GOP fears of losing congressional control in next week’s midterm elections.
The federal government’s Alaska complaint stems from its concern that Republican Sen. Dan S. Sullivan could lose a close race to Democratic challenger Mary Peltola due to the presence of a candidate on the ballot named Daniel J. Sullivan, who the DOJ said is running “with the intention of misleading supporters of Senator Sullivan into voting for him.”
But even if that claim about the other Sullivan’s intention is true, the legal question is: What can a federal court do for the federal government about it?
In the part of its complaint in which the DOJ makes its case for having legal standing to bring the suit, it said that its asserted legal injuries would be solved by a court order “declaring a certification of an election result prejudiced by Daniel J. Sullivan’s inclusion on the ballot unlawful and enjoining defendants [Alaska officials] from allowing such a certification to occur.”
Putting the merits of the DOJ’s argument aside — election law experts have deemed it incredibly weak — its complaint expresses an interest, contra Blanche’s post, in stopping the certification of Alaska’s election. To “enjoin” something is to stop it from happening. At least, according to the complaint, the DOJ wants to halt Alaska’s certification if the result is “prejudiced” by the other Sullivan’s inclusion on the ballot, At least, according to the complaint, the DOJ wants to halt Alaska’s certification if the result is “prejudiced” by the other Sullivan’s inclusion on the ballot — a claim that would be difficult to demonstrate in a timely manner, if ever.
Furthermore, in the complaint’s “prayer for relief,” which is the standard section where a plaintiff tells a court what it wants, the DOJ lists two specific things.
First, it asks the court to: “Declare that certification of any result that may be impacted by voter confusion, as defined above, would violate Defendants’ duties under the NVRA [National Voter Registration Act] to ‘protect the integrity of the electoral process.’”
Second, it asks the court: “Defendants from certifying any result that may be impacted by voter confusion, as defined above, pending an investigation to determine whether votes cast for Daniel J. Sullivan were meant to be cast for Senator Sullivan and any further procedures or relief this Court deems necessary and appropriate to determine what the result would have been absent Daniel J. Sullivan’s inclusion on the ballot.”
That second request for relief reads as if it is missing a word at the beginning. If so, then based on the rest of the complaint, the word “Enjoin” would seem to fit well. As in: Enjoin defendants from certifying … (I asked the DOJ press office whether a word is missing there, and if so, what that word is, but I did not immediately hear back.)
Whatever’s happening with that line, the government’s opponents are reading the complaint as seeking to block certification. Peltola’s campaign committee and the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, which are attempting to join in the case to get it dismissed, said in a Sunday filing that the “DOJ seeks an unprecedented order precluding certification of the U.S. Senate election if the candidate the President favors loses narrowly.”
Calling the government’s claims “utterly without legal basis,” they said the Alaska district court “should not allow this lawsuit to hang like the Sword of Damocles over the ongoing election, lending false legitimacy to the President’s and the Attorney General’s ongoing efforts to spread false narratives about Alaska’s elections as voting continues and as results begin to be tabulated next week.”
The post Blanche says the DOJ doesn’t want to block Alaska’s election. The DOJ’s lawsuit says otherwise. appeared first on MS NOW.
A historically-high number of voters have chosen parties classified as authoritarian or populist, according to new research looking at 31 countries across Europe, not just the EU.
Germany saw the starkest rise, with the Alternative for Germany (AfD) getting over 20 percent of the last national parliamentary vote, while in contrast parties classified as radical left split the 13.8 percent of votes between them.
The Authoritarian Populism Index, published by two European think tanks, EPICenter and the Nordics-based Timbro late last week (22 October), analyses parliamentary election results for 260 parties in 31 countries since 1946, or since the year free elections were first held.
The high support for populists is a result of mainstream parties not being able to “adequately address the concerns of our time,” Emelie Franzén, EPICenter’s research coordinator, told EUobserver.
The populists’ success is a “result of a lack of trust towards the elites,” Mateusz Michnik, economic analyst for EPICenter, told EUobserver. He also added that populists are more effective communicators than mainstream parties, especially in crisis situations, such as the Covid pandemic, the migration wave of 2015, or Russia’s 2022 attack on Ukraine.
The Index has been classifying populist parties since 2016, defining them as groups where representing the people above the elite is “a central organising principle of their political worldview,” the author says.
Reinhard Heinish, political science professor in Salzburg, told EUobserver that the report “combines different hard-to-measure concepts, and needs to interpreted with some caution.”
Despite this overarching characteristic, their profile is far from uniform, the report’s author, Andreas Johansson Heinö, Timbro’s director, warned.
“Most are culturally conservative, while economically they are almost evenly divided between left and right.” The populist parties included in the study tend to be eurosceptic, but only a minority supports leaving the EU, he added.
Throughout the 1950s and 1960s, about 10 percent of Europeans chose authoritarian or populist leaders. Since 2000, the number started to increase, reaching just under 30 percent in 2019.
Now, parties outside of the political mainstream have seats in 11 out of 31 European governments.
“Populists can ‘infect’ other political parties with populism,” Michnik said, which he thinks explains a surge of anti-migration policies across the continent.
Contrary to Germany, Bulgaria, and Norway, which recorded the largest increases in the past years, Hungary’s score radically decreased with the April elections that brought an end to Viktor Orbán’s rule.
This text was updated on Tuesday 27 October.
One of the recurring themes this election cycle is a sense of betrayal: There are a growing number of constituencies that backed Republicans two years ago, only to feel abandoned by Donald Trump and his party.
Farmers, for example, voted for the president by lopsided margins in the 2024 race, and many have been let down by an administration that’s repeatedly made matters worse for the agricultural industry. Latino voters also shifted to Republicans in large numbers two years ago, confident that Trump would focus his deportation agenda on violent criminals. They now know better.
Similarly, many Muslim voters also took at enormous risk in 2024, moving toward a GOP nominee who championed a Muslim ban in his first term. Two years later, it’s a community that feels used and betrayed by a party that has seized on Islamophobia as the foundation for its closing message in the midterm elections.
But it’s also worth sparing a thought for those who believed Trump when he promised he was committed to “making America healthy again.” An overwhelming body of evidence leaves little doubt that he didn’t mean a word of it. The New York Times reported on the findings of a devastating investigation:
In total, since taking office again, Mr. Trump exempted 202 facilities in 39 states and Puerto Rico from clean-air regulations that were going into effect. Some were among the country’s worst industrial polluters, including chemical manufacturers, copper smelters and coal-burning power plants. About 3.3 million people live within three miles of at least one affected facility.
The exemptions represent the biggest presidential intervention in enforcement of the Clean Air Act in the half-century since President Richard M. Nixon signed the bedrock environmental law. And that is only one of the ways the Trump administration is dismantling a variety of federal environmental protections.
The Times documented in great detail the degree to which the Republican administration has systematically dismantled public safeguards to champion the wishes of polluters and chemical manufacturers, in ways without precedent in American history.
I’m mindful that much of the “MAHA” movement’s base is comprised of activists who are focused almost entirely on opposition to vaccines. But to the extent there are others who are genuinely interested in making America healthy again and who have sincere concerns about the spread of cancer-causing pollution, the Republican White House has gone to stunning lengths to express total indifference to those issues, instead elevating chemical industry lobbyists to leadership roles inside Trump’s Environmental Protection Agency.
“Donald Trump and [Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.] keep treating MAHA activists like disposable political pawns and now wonder why many resent it,” Protect Our Care President Brad Woodhouse recently said in a statement. “There’s not one MAHA promise Trump hasn’t been willing to break once the checks clear from his big chemical, food and tobacco donors. Food, air, water safety and kids’ health have all been compromised to feed profits for makers of addictive fruit flavored vapes, cancer-linked pesticides, and PFAS forever chemicals. And every time RFK Jr. proves himself a phony by making excuses for Trump’s latest MAHA double-cross, like making glyphosate great again.”
Time will tell how many of these constituencies move toward Democrats in the midterms or decide not to cast to ballots at all; but after the dust settles on the election cycle and the president and Republican leaders assess what went wrong, they might want to start by acknowledging the Americans who felt betrayed after counting on the GOP to deliver.
The post As Election Day nears, a growing number of constituencies feel betrayed by Trump appeared first on MS NOW.
When the White House rolled back tariffs on coffee, fruit, beef, and farm equipment, it was effectively an admission that the tariffs were raising prices—and that Americans, not foreigners, had been paying for them.
Now, in the closing stages of the midterm campaign, the White House is once again rolling back some of those import taxes—and once again making an awkward implicit admission.
President Donald Trump's tariffs have become politically toxic.
The administration announced late last week that it would lift the 50 percent tariffs on some Canadian imports, apparently in an attempt to help Sen. Susan Collins (R–Maine) survive a tough reelection campaign in which the tariffs have played a significant role.
If this is indeed an attempt to sway voters in Maine, it is not a very convincing one. The Trump administration is removing tariffs on some agricultural and mechanical goods, as well as packaging and plywood, The Wall Street Journal reports. But Trump is also imposing new 50 percent tariffs on "other Canadian goods, including carpet, certain valves, and waste products."
Collins issued a statement thanking the White House for the changes. This is what members of the U.S. Senate have been reduced to—begging the president to cast his capricious, tariff-happy eyes toward products that will hurt people in other states more than in your own. (In fairness to Collons, she has voted repeatedly to roll back Trump's tariffs, but not enough of her fellow Republicans went along with it.)
Still, it's worth asking: What exactly is the pitch to voters here? Here's a tariff cut, now vote for Republicans so the president can continue to arbitrarily tax imports whenever the mood strikes?
It's easy to see why Trump's tariffs have become so unpopular. They are a huge and broad tax increase—the Tax Foundation estimates that 54 percent of imports are subject to Trump's tariffs, which are costing the average household about $1,000 annually—that was imposed without congressional authorization or popular support. They create more losers than winners, as downstream businesses and consumers pay the price for the protectionism offered to American manufacturers. Even the supposed "winners" of the tariff policy tend also to be "losers," since so much manufacturing depends on importing raw materials and intermediate goods.
Perhaps more surprising is how unwilling Republicans are to defend the president's signature economic policy. Or to even talk about it.
The Wall Street Journal's Greg Ip crunched the numbers and found that House GOP candidates have not run a single ad talking about the tariffs during this election cycle.
Just such a fun chart here from @greg_ip. If only we could tease out some meaning. Ah, well, nevertheless.
— Scott Lincicome (@scottlincicome) October 23, 2026
That silence speaks volumes. Trump says "tariff" is "the most beautiful word in the dictionary." But it is now "one of the most hated words in politics," writes Ip.
The only Republicans to mention trade or tariffs in a campaign ad, as far as I've seen, is former Rep. Mike Rogers, who is now running for the Senate seat in Michigan (and thus was not included in Ip's analysis). And he's calling for an end to the "tariff war."
There is a lesson here that hopefully will linger beyond the next week: If you support a policy that deliberately and unlawfully raises taxes and prices, voters will not reward you for it.
It's a lesson that the Republican Party learned long ago, but apparently forgot.
Against economists' advice, a Republican-led government in 1930 implemented a huge tariff hike intended to protect American farms and factories at the start of the Great Depression. Instead, those tariffs worsened economic conditions and triggered foreign retaliation.
When voters went to the polls in 1930, the first midterm after the Smoot-Hawley tariffs were passed, they registered their displeasure. The GOP lost 52 seats in the House that year. Two years later, an even larger landslide would sweep Democrats into power in Congress and the White House, ushering in the New Deal era that reshaped the federal government forever. The two lawmakers who lent their names to the legislation were among those who lost their seats, fittingly.
The most notable difference this time around is that Congress didn't actually pass a tariff bill. The trade barriers were instead imposed directly by the executive. Voters don't seem to care. Republicans were too cowardly to stand up to Trump's unilateral power grab, and now they seem too ashamed to try to defend that policy (and their largely complicit response) on the campaign trail.
As they say, those who don't learn from history are doomed to repeat it. And "doomed" may be a fitting way to describe the Republican majority in Congress right now, thanks in no small part to Trump's tariffs.
The post Trump's Tariffs Are Politically Toxic appeared first on Reason Magazine.
This story originally appeared in Common Dreams on Oct. 26, 2026. It is shared here under a Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0) license.
In a historic comeback, Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva triumphed in Sunday’s run-off election over right-wing challenger Flávio Bolsonaro, the son of former Brazilian President and convicted coup-plotter Jair Bolsonaro.
Lula’s victory comes despite the best efforts of US President Donald Trump and his Big Tech backers, as Trump’s administration openly intervened on behalf of Bolsonaro and Meta boosted pro-Bolsonaro over pro-Lula content on its social media platforms.
“Lula won, Brazil won, democracy won, the Americas won,” said Pennsylvania Democratic House nominee Chris Rabb from Lula’s campaign headquarters in Sao Paulo, Brazil, after the results were announced around 9:15 pm Brasilia time. “They declared victory for Lula da Silva for his fourth term against a raging fascist, rubber-stamped for Donald Trump.”
“These elections have represented a historic victory for the majority of the Brazilian people, who mobilized to defend democracy against the threat of fascism.”
Rabb noted that Lula’s victory marked an important turning point for the left in Latin America, as far-right parties had won every other national election in the region since the start of Trump’s second term. “This is the first victory for democracy in this hemisphere since Trump took office,” Rabb said.
ith 99.99% of the votes counted, Lula won by 51.79% to Bolsonario’s 48.21%, making him the first Brazilian candidate since the restoration of democracy in 1985 to win a second-round election after coming in second in the initial round.
“I would like to thank the Brazilian people for the generosity they have shown me for a long time,” Lula said in his victory speech in São Paulo late Sunday. “And, in this second round, I want to thank the generosity of the Brazilian youth, who took to the streets to defend democracy.”
After finishing two percentage points behind Bolsonaro in the October 4 poll, Lula re-energized his campaign by finally shortening the Brazilian workweek from six to five days, as his supporters launched demonstrations against the far-right.
“These elections have represented a historic victory for the majority of the Brazilian people, who mobilized to defend democracy against the threat of fascism,” Francesca Emanuele, senior international policy associate with the Center for Economic and Policy Research (CEPR), told Common Dreams from Sao Paulo, Brazil, where she was monitoring the elections. “It was the Brazilian people themselves (students, working-class, and middle-class Brazilians) who took to the streets and mobilized tirelessly from the very first day after the first round of voting to overturn the first-round results and secure Lula’s victory.”
Reginaldo Lopes, a federal deputy for Lula’s Workers’ Party, told The Guardian: “I feel incredible… This is Brazil telling the world that the extreme right is fascist, that the extreme right is against Black people, is against the poor, against the state, against gay people… We are going to reorganize the democratic forces [in this country.]”
Sunday’s victory did not come easily, as the Lula campaign complained of bus shortages in the key cities of Salvador and Sao Paulo, requesting that the Brazilian Supreme Court extend the voting by two hours. The court granted the request, so polls closed at 7 pm Brasilia time instead of 5 pm.
“Lula’s win is the first good news for the planet in a while!”
“Lula has won despite the unfair practices his campaign has faced from Meta, interference from the Trump administration, and severe disruptions to public transportation on election day in major cities (where up to 50% of bus fleets were reportedly out of service),” Emanuele told Common Dreams. “These disruptions disproportionately affected working-class voters, who rely heavily on public transportation and have historically been a key part of Lula’s electoral base.”
She continued: “Despite all these obstacles, Lula’s campaign managed to turn around a first-round result that, just a few weeks ago, had seemed extremely difficult to reverse. This is a major victory for the majority of the Brazilian people.”
Several advocates and lawmakers hailed the election results as a rebuke to the far-right and the Trump administration in particular.
“During his campaign, President Lula characterized 2026’s elections as a choice between ‘sovereignty or submission.’ Brazil has clearly chosen sovereignty,” the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA), who sent a delegation to observe both rounds of Brazil’s elections, wrote in a statement.
Progressive Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.) posted on social media: “People all across the world are fighting back against extremism. With Lula in Brazil, they just won. Authoritarian leaders always attack democracy because they stand no chance against the will of their people. Trump must respect the results and not undermine Brazil’s elections.”
Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) said: “Congratulations to Lula on his extraordinary reelection victory in the Brazilian presidential election. Lula has stood up for Brazilian workers & democracy—and will continue to do so in the next four years.”
“Lula’s hard-fought victory is an indictment on the right-wing wave sweeping through Latin America,” Joseph Bouchard, a journalist and researcher who focuses on Latin America, told Common Dreams. “Except for [ Salvadorian President Nayib] Bukele, the right across the region is still incredibly unpopular, and rightly seen as corrupt, autocratic, and uncommitted to fixing systemic issues. Lula shows there is still a fight for democracy worth having, while the region is plunged into its darkest, most regressive period since the Cold War. The entire region is populated by vassal states for US interests, who have declared states of exception to curtail rights, freedoms, and basic principles of social democracy, in the name of a failed and anti-human war on drugs.”
Lula’s victory also has planetary consequences, as he brought deforestation in the Amazon rainforest back down to record lows after it accelerated during the tenure of Jair Bolsonaro, who attacked environmental protections and Indigenous rights.
“Lula’s win is the first good news for the planet in a while!” wrote 350.org and Third Act co-founder Bill McKibben. “I bet it shaves a tenth of a degree off how hot our Earth eventually gets, which will save millions of lives. Thank you Brazil!”
Lula still faces a fight ahead, as Bolsonaro announced it was “impossible to concede the election result” due to the extension of polling hours, even though his team had also sought an extension in parts of southeastern Brazil because of unfavorable weather.
Bouchard pointed out that “Lula will fight an uphill battle with a far-right Congress, inept Supreme Court, and constant outside pressure..”
“Trump’s silence on the result is worrisome, with Flavio not conceding and demanding an annulment,” he told Common Dreams. “Sadly, much of the corporate press has legitimated these claims, despite the right’s concerted efforts at destroying democracy. No matter how much the authoritarians try to tip the scales, the people can still prevail, if the left is willing to fight. This might prove to be a confidence boost to the demoralized and overpowered left all over the region, and may hopefully set the region back toward progress, hard fought after decades of dictatorship and neoliberal transitions.”
US-based Lula allies urged others in the US to defend Brazil’s democracy from Trump administration interference and to take their own stand against the far-right in the upcoming midterm elections.
The DSA wrote:
However, the fight continues—the thin margin of this victory indicates that continued struggle and mobilization will be crucial. As global capitalism fails to solve worsening problems of its own making, the capitalists turn to right-wing authoritarianism. Brazil’s left-wing coalition will face a right-wing Congress at home, a hostile Trump administration in the US, and hostile capitalists both [at] home and abroad in the years ahead. We of the DSA stand in solidarity with our comrades in the PT [Lula’s Partido dos Trabalhadores], PSOL [Brazil’s left-wing Socialism and Liberty Party], and Brazilian social movements in this fight for democratic self-determination.
This solidarity means recognizing our country’s role in the threat to Brazilian democracy. These elections were marred by interference from the US, whether by Trump’s politically motivated tariffs, or by manipulation of social media by US-based tech companies like Meta. They aimed to subvert Brazil’s democracy to favor its far-right allies grouped in the “Shield of the Americas,” and to get their hands on crucial natural resources, such as lithium, cobalt, and rare earth minerals as well as petroleum and iron ore, which Brazil possesses in abundance and which Lula has sworn to protect as national patrimony. The DSA categorically denounces these meddlesome, imperialist efforts. We fight for a working-class foreign policy—one which centers peace, multilateralism, and respects national self-determination, free from US interference.
Rabb concluded his message with a call to action, and a celebration: “This is a big deal for us in the United States. This shows that Trumpismo is waning, and it is our responsibility now to make sure that we kill the beast. That beast is injustice, it’s oligarchy, it’s neoliberalism. All of these things. Now it’s our turn, folks. November 3 is right around the corner, but right now I’m going to party with these Brazilians.”
Update: This piece has been updated with commentary from Joseph Bouchard.
Ohio Democratic gubernatorial nominee Amy Acton hit back at Republican Vivek Ramaswamy over his controversial ad featuring her estranged mother, telling MS NOW’s “Morning Joe” there is “no low” her opponent won’t “sink to.” With Election Day just over a week away, Acton framed the race as a choice about the kind of politics that Ohio — and the country — are willing to accept.
“Decency is on the ballot,” she said.
The 60-second ad, which ignited a firestorm and garnered national backlash when it was released last week, features Acton’s mother, Donna Arthur, accusing her daughter of lying about her childhood, including her account of growing up in poverty and living in a tent. Ramaswamy’s campaign has defended the ad as evidence that Acton has misrepresented her past.
However, Acton has said she has not spoken to her mother in nearly five decades. She and her brother were removed from Arthur’s custody in 1978 after their stepfather was arrested and indicted for raping Acton when she was 12 years old.
“It isn’t an easy story,” Acton told “Morning Joe” on Monday. “It’s a sad story. It is my story.”
Acton called the ad part of an “era of cruelty and distraction” in politics. She said people are tired of the hostility and want leaders focused on solving problems and noted that all five living Ohio governors, three Republicans and two Democrats, have publicly condemned the ad.
“Everyone is exhausted of living this way,” she said. “They’re tired of the hate and the chaos and vitriol. They want public servants again who actually solve problems instead of making them. And kindness is not weakness.”
Acton said the country needs “good public servants on both sides of the aisle, back in office again, who want to do the hard work of making life better.”
The physician, who served as Ohio’s top public health official, told MS NOW that her difficult childhood shaped her commitment to improving people’s lives and made her a “fighter for the things that we all hold dear.”
“I know what it feels like to be left behind,” she said. “I know what it feels like to be hungry, or not have the heat on, or be just struggling.”
Acton said voters have shared their own experiences with her on the campaign trail.
“I’ve been on the road now, and people are hearing my story; I’m not ever the only one who’s been through a thing or two in their childhood,” she said. “Half our kids are living in poverty in my state, up to 70% in some pockets. While these folks are capitalizing and enriching things for themselves, the people of my state are going backwards on every single measure, and that’s why I’m here.”
The Democrat said the ad reinforced her view that “there’s no low my opponent won’t sink to,” and she accused Ramaswamy of being “just out for himself.”
With Election Day approaching, Acton said “decency is on the ballot” and urged Ohioans to “help us push back on this” and bring more humanity back to politics.
“Let’s not give into this and let’s not give up on one another,” she said. “I see a new day dawning right now.”
You can watch Acton’s full interview in the clip at the top of the page.
The post ‘Decency is on the ballot’: Acton slams Ramaswamy’s ad featuring her estranged mother appeared first on MS NOW.
Login