AFP USA

Donald Trump emerged battered by an election night that was disastrous for his party, after failing to deliver on the promise that secured his second White House term: lowering the cost of living for Americans.Tuesday’s vote was “not expected to be a victory,” Trump told Republican senators a day after elections in Virginia, New Jersey and New York handily won by the Democratic opposition.”I don’t think it was good for Republicans,” he added.Steve Bannon, one of the leading architects of Trump’s Make America Great Again movement, had foreshadowed the Democratic success: “The warning signs are flashing.””It was a very, very bad night for Donald Trump,” said Robert Rowland, a professor of communication at the University of Kansas.Democratic wins on Tuesday night shared “a common theme: the cost of living,” said Thomas Kahn, a professor of political science at American University in Washington.- Life of a baron -Billionaire Trump, 79, proclaimed Wednesday that the US has “the hottest economy we’ve ever had.”But that sentiment clashes with “the reality that people experience when they go to the grocery store,” Rowland said.Trump has also repeatedly claimed that gas prices are at $2 per gallon ($0.52 per liter), including in a Fox News interview Wednesday, while a tracker by AAA showed the national average at $3.08 — around the same price as a year ago.Polls show Americans are increasingly dissatisfied with the cost of living, along with rising concern over the impact of Trump’s global tariff war.Instead of hammering home messages about rising costs and kitchen-table issues, Trump’s gone “completely off script,” Kahn said.Recent gold-and-marble renovations at the White House and an opulent Halloween party at his Mar-a-Lago estate show a US leader out of touch with ordinary citizens, he said.”The American people are suffering…facing these high prices and struggling, they watch Donald Trump live the life of a baron,” Kahn said.Trump also blamed Tuesday’s Republican losses on the federal government shutdown — now the longest ever at 36 days.It has led to hits on social welfare programs, unpaid leave for hundreds of thousands of federal workers, and pared back public services.- ‘Kamikaze’ -Far from signaling a willingness to compromise, Trump slammed “kamikaze” Democratic lawmakers and has urged Senate Republicans to force through a budget bill by abandoning a longstanding 60-vote threshold for most legislation.Without the so-called filibuster, Trump and his party would be able to unilaterally pass reforms, including a voter ID law he believes would favor Republicans ahead of next year’s midterm elections.Republican candidates are wary, after seeing voters who supported Trump in 2024 turn to Democratic candidates on Tuesday.Conservatives “have really tied themselves to Trump, but Trump is now underwater,” said Wendy Schiller, a political scientist at Brown University.Republicans now face the problem of “how do they uncouple from Trump,” she said. “What these elections showed is that they’re on the wrong side of these issues, according to a lot of voters.”However, Republican candidates are reluctant to directly oppose Trump for fear of being sidelined by more radical candidates, Rowland said.Trump’s comeback abilities are also unparalleled, considering his White House reelection after a criminal conviction and the deadly January 6, 2021 attack on the US Capitol by his supporters.”Anybody in the past who’s ever counted out Donald Trump loses the bet,” Kahn said.His return to power wasn’t solely due to the unwavering support of his base, but because he was able to attract undecided voters concerned about making ends meet.”He can survive anything except bad economic news,” Rowland said.

In a victory speech capping his meteoric rise, New York’s mayor-elect Zohran Mamdani quoted at length from the famous “Tryst with Destiny” address by independent India’s first prime minister Jawaharlal Nehru. As he left the stage to a cheering cross-section of the metropolis, the song on the speaker was not one of the many well-worn tunes about New York but the beats from a Bollywood blockbuster, “Dhoom.”Mamdani, winning a mandate with a left-wing agenda focused on making New York more affordable, has made history in many ways — as the first Muslim and first South Asian to lead America’s largest city, and, at 34, its youngest mayor in a century.But Mamdani’s victory is a watershed not just for his identity but how he embraces it — fully.”I am young, despite my best efforts to grow older, I am Muslim, I am a democratic socialist and — most damning of all — I refuse to apologize for any of this,” Mamdani told supporters inside a Brooklyn music venue.South Asians constitute one of the fastest-growing communities in the United States, totalling more than five million people, and have made major inroads into politics — notably former vice president Kamala Harris, whose mother was from India.But candidates have handled their identity in sharply different ways. Two once-prominent Indian Americans, Nikki Haley and Bobby Jindal, both Republican governors of conservative Southern states, took pains to describe how they had become Christians.”The comfort level expressing and embracing outwardly your identity has varied from candidate to candidate over the years,” said Kishan Putta, an elected commissioner in Washington DC who serves on a Democratic Party advisory committee on Asian Americans.Putta, who has followed South Asian candidates for years, also pointed to the victory in Virginia of Ghazala Hashimi as lieutenant governor, noting that the very first line on her website’s online biography is how she was the first Muslim and first South Asian American to serve in the Virginia Senate.”So it’s not just candidates in cities or places with huge South Asian and immigrant communities,” Putta added. “Candidates are getting much more comfortable in talking about their identity.”- ‘Symbolic moment of acceptance’ -For Mamdani, like many South Asians, that identity is not always concise to explain. He was born in Uganda to two prominent Indian-born parents — the academic Mahmood Mamdani and filmmaker Mira Nair, who is Hindu.Mamdani has spoken passionately about Islamophobia following the September 11, 2001 attacks, counts a kebab counter in diverse Jackson Heights as his favorite restaurant and days before the election campaigned car to car at LaGuardia Airport among taxi drivers, who are often South Asian.Mamdani’s openness on his background “certainly is a break from what we have seen in the past,” said Sara Sadhwani, a political scientist at Pomona College who has studied South Asian Americans.”But that very much goes along with Mamdani’s brand of authenticity and embracing difference — fully accepting the nuance of those differences,” she said.”Even if all Indian Americans don’t completely embrace his politics, it is nonetheless a symbolic moment of acceptance of Indian Americans.”- Trump base attacks -President Donald Trump has furiously attacked Mamdani but has earlier courted Indian Americans, making gains in last year’s election in a community that has historically voted Democratic and by some measures has the highest household income in the United States.Trump’s stance is not shared by all his base, with online far-right campaigners in recent months writing hateful comments against Indian Americans.Trump in September yanked up the fee for a visa used by Indian tech workers as part of a broader crackdown on immigration.Vice President JD Vance is married to an Indian American, Usha Vance, but recently raised eyebrows by saying he would be happy if she converts from Hinduism to Christianity. Vance accused critics of anti-Christian bias.Vivek Ramaswamy, the pro-Trump Indian American tech entrepreneur running for governor of Ohio, said one lesson from Tuesday’s losses was: “Cut out the identity politics. It doesn’t suit Republicans.”Dinesh D’Souza, a longtime Republican militant born in India, wrote on X: “A very loud group on the Right said, ‘Indians go home,’ and so many of them did — to the Democratic Party.”

US President Donald Trump accused “kamikaze” Democrats of being prepared to destroy the country as the government shutdown became the longest in history on Wednesday, eclipsing the 35-day record set during the Republican leader’s first term.Federal agencies have been grinding to a halt since Congress failed to approve funding past September 30, and the pain has been mounting as welfare programs — including aid that helps millions of Americans afford groceries — hang in the balance.Some 1.4 million federal workers, from air traffic controllers to park wardens, remain on enforced leave or are working without pay. Some courts are using emergency funds to stay open, warning that operations could slow if the shutdown drags on.”I just got back from Japan,” the 79-year-old president told a breakfast meeting with Republican senators at the White House as the shutdown entered its sixth week. “I talked about the kamikaze pilots. I think these guys are kamikaze,” he said, referencing Democrats. “They’ll take down the country if they have to.”Before the shutdown record toppled at midnight, the Trump administration sounded the alarm over turmoil at airports nationwide if the crisis drags further into November, with worsening staff shortages snarling flights and closing down sections of airspace.Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy told a news conference Wednesday that the scheduled capacity for flights was being cut by 10 percent starting Friday in 40 busy air traffic areas.The American Automobile Association (AAA) says 5.3 million passengers flew domestically over the Thanksgiving weekend in 2023, and gave a projected figure of 5.7 million for last year’s holiday, which it is due to update later this month. More than 60,000 air traffic controllers and Transportation Security Administration (TSA) officers are working without pay, and the White House has warned that increased absenteeism could mean chaos at check-in lines.  Airport workers calling in sick rather than working without pay — leading to significant delays — was a major factor in Trump bringing an end to the 2019 shutdown.Both Democrats and Republicans remain unwavering, however, over the main sticking point in the current stoppage — health care spending.- ‘Defiance’ -Democrats say they will only provide votes to end the funding lapse after a deal has been struck to extend expiring insurance subsidies that make health care affordable for millions of Americans.But Republicans insist they will only address health care once Democrats have voted to switch the lights back on in Washington.While both sides’ leadership have shown little appetite for compromise, there have been signs of life on the back benches, with a handful of moderate Democrats working to find an escape hatch.A separate bipartisan group of four centrist House members unveiled a compromise framework Monday for lowering health insurance costs.Democrats believe that millions of Americans seeing skyrocketing premiums as they enroll in health insurance programs for next year will pressure Republicans into seeking compromise.But Trump has held firm on refusing to negotiate, telling CBS News in an interview broadcast Sunday that he would “not be extorted.” The president has sought to apply his own pressure to force Democrats to cave by threatening mass layoffs of federal workers and using the shutdown to target progressive priorities.Trump on Tuesday repeated his administration’s threat to cut off a vital aid program that helps 42 million Americans pay for groceries for the first time in its more than 60-year history, even though the move was blocked by two courts.The White House later clarified, however, that it was “fully complying” with its legal obligations and was working to get partial SNAP payments “out the door as much as we can and as quickly as we can.”

Donald Trump emerged battered by an election night that was disastrous for his party, after failing to deliver on the promise that secured his second White House term: lowering the cost of living for Americans.Tuesday’s vote was “not expected to be a victory,” Trump told Republican senators a day after elections in Virginia, New Jersey and New York handily won by the Democratic opposition.”I don’t think it was good for Republicans,” he added.Steve Bannon, one of the leading architects of Trump’s Make American Great Again movement, had foreshadowed the Democratic wave: “The warning signs are flashing.””It was a very, very bad night for Donald Trump,” said Robert Rowland, a professor of communication at the University of Kansas.Democratic wins on Tuesday night shared “a common theme: the cost of living,” said Thomas Kahn, a professor of political science at American University in Washington.- Life of a baron -Billionaire Trump, 79, proclaimed Wednesday that the US has “the hottest economy we’ve ever had.”But that sentiment clashes with “the reality that people experience when they go to the grocery store,” Rowland said.Polls show Americans are increasingly dissatisfied with the cost of living, along with rising concern over the impact of Trump’s global tariff war.Instead of hammering home messages about rising costs and kitchen-table issues, Trump’s gone “completely off script,” Kahn said.Recent gold-and-marble renovations at the White House and an opulent Halloween party at his Mar-a-Lago estate show a US leader out of touch with ordinary citizens, he said.”The American people are suffering… facing these high prices and struggling, they watch Donald Trump live the life of a baron,” Kahn said.Trump blamed Tuesday’s Democratic sweep on the federal government shutdown — now the longest ever, at 36 days — over a budget standoff in Congress.It has led to hits on social welfare programs, unpaid leave for hundreds of thousands of civil servants, and pared back public services.- ‘Kamikaze’ -Far from signaling a willingness to compromise, Trump slammed “kamikaze” Democratic lawmakers and urged Republicans to force through a budget bill.This would mean abandoning a key 60-vote threshold required for the Senate to advance legislation, a longstanding check on power that forces lawmakers to find bipartisan solutions.Republicans hold only a simple majority in the chamber but senators are reluctant to scrap the so-called filibuster.Without it, Trump and his party would be able to pass reforms including a voter ID law that would favor Republicans ahead of next year’s midterm elections, in which one-third of Senate seats and entire House of Representatives will be contested.Republican candidates are wary, after seeing voters who supported Trump in 2024 turn to Democratic candidates on Tuesday.- Uncoupling -Conservatives “have really tied themselves to Trump, but Trump is now underwater,” said Wendy Schiller, a political scientist at Brown University.Republicans now face the problem of “how do they uncouple from Trump,” she said. “What these elections showed is that they’re on the wrong side of these issues, according to a lot of voters.”However, Republican candidates are reluctant to directly oppose Trump for fear of being sidelined by more radical candidates, Rowland said.Trump’s comeback abilities are also unparalleled, considering his White House reelection after a criminal conviction and the deadly January 6, 2021 attack on the US Capitol by his supporters.”Anybody in the past who’s ever counted out Donald Trump loses the bet,” Kahn said.His return to power wasn’t solely due to the unwavering support of his base, but because he was able to attract undecided voters concerned about making ends meet.”He can survive anything except bad economic news,” Rowland said.

New York mayoral election winner Democratic socialist Zohran Mamdani said Wednesday that he was ready to engage with his arch-critic President Donald Trump on the issue of cost of living.The Muslim-American lawmaker, whose rapid ascent from rank outsider to mayor-elect has stunned observers, joked at a briefing that the “White House hasn’t reached out to congratulate me.””I continue to be interested in having a conversation with President Trump on the ways in which we can work together to serve New Yorkers,” he said suggesting “delivering on his campaign promises around cost of living” as one.Mamdani, like Trump, put the high cost of living, impact of inflation and elevated grocery expenses at the heart of his campaign which triumphed over former governor Andrew Cuomo’s platform.”I think the lesson for the president is that it’s not enough to diagnose the crisis in working class Americans lives. You have to deliver on addressing that crisis.”Mamdani called out Trump for his own campaign promises to address the soaring cost of groceries, but seeking to suspend food assistance while in office under the government shutdown.After winning on promises to make city bus travel free, control rents and offer free childcare, Mamdani said “what scares Republicans across the country is the fact that we will actually deliver on this agenda.”Mamdani on Wednesday introduced the five women who will co-chair his transition.Among them is Lina Khan, chair of the Federal Trade Commission under Joe Biden, and Maria Torres-Springer, who resigned her post as deputy mayor under outgoing mayor Eric Adams due to his engagement with Trump.

A majority of US Supreme Court justices appeared deeply skeptical of the legality behind a swath of Donald Trump’s tariffs as they heard a landmark case Wednesday that could uphold — or upend — the president’s economic agenda.Billions of dollars in customs revenue and a key lever in Trump’s trade wars are at stake as the conservative-dominated panel again grappled with the Republican’s attempts to expand presidential powers.The high court’s nine justices are considering Trump’s use of emergency powers to impose “reciprocal” tariffs on nearly every US trade partner, as well as levies targeting Mexico, Canada and China over their alleged roles in illicit drug flows.In a hearing lasting more than two-and-a-half hours, several conservative justices, along with the three liberals, questioned whether the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) that Trump invoked confers the authority to impose tariffs.”The statute doesn’t use the word tariffs,” said Chief Justice John Roberts, and imposing tariffs is equivalent to taxation, which has always been a “core power of Congress.”The justices sought to clarify whether Congress has to give clear authorization for policies with significant economic or political consequences.Solicitor General John Sauer, arguing on behalf of the Trump administration, said this did not apply given the president’s inherent, broad range of authorities.”President Trump determined that our exploding trade deficits have brought us to the brink of an economic and national security catastrophe,” Sauer said.Sauer sought to frame the issue as one involving the power to regulate foreign commerce — including the ability to impose tariffs — rather than the power to tax.Justice Sonia Sotomayor, a liberal, noted that the power to impose taxes is a “congressional power, not a presidential power.””You want to say tariffs are not taxes, but that’s exactly what they are,” Sotomayor said.- ‘Simply implausible’ -Justice Neil Gorsuch, a Trump appointee, questioned if Congress could reclaim powers once it delegates them to the presidency, suggesting that “as a practical matter in the real world, it can never get that power back.”Neal Katyal, representing small businesses challenging Trump’s tariffs, charged that it was “simply implausible” that in enacting IEEPA, Congress “handed the president the power to overhaul the entire tariff system and the American economy in the process.”He contended that the word “regulate” has also not been used to impose taxes.But there were questions too surrounding refunds if Trump’s tariffs were overturned, with Justice Amy Coney Barrett saying it could be “a mess.”The court’s decision, which could take months to arrive, does not concern sector-specific tariffs Trump separately imposed, including on steel, aluminum and automobiles.Trump has brought the average effective tariff rate to its highest since the 1930s, and has repeatedly warned of calamity if his duties are overturned.A lower court ruled in May that he had exceeded his authority, with the case ultimately making its way to the Supreme Court.Trump did not attend Wednesday’s hearing but several top officials did, including Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent and US Trade Representative Jamieson Greer.”In recent years, the court has been reluctant to overrule presidential decisions of this magnitude,” ING analysts said.But the outcome is hard to predict, they added, as “upholding Trump’s tariffs would shift the balance of power from Congress to the President.”Josh Lipsky of the Atlantic Council noted that even as justices were skeptical, they appeared concerned about fallout from overruling the tariffs.”How do the refunds work?” Lipsky asked. “What does this mean for the president’s foreign policy ability to negotiate deals?”Although Trump’s tariffs have not sparked widespread inflation, companies say they bear the brunt of higher import costs.Lawyers noted that if the top court finds Trump’s global tariffs illegal, the government can tap other laws to temporarily impose up to 15-percent duties while pursuing pathways for more lasting levies.Countries that have already struck deals with Trump may therefore prefer not to reopen negotiations.

New Yorkers voted overwhelmingly for Democratic socialist Zohran Mamdani to be their next mayor, setting up a likely showdown with his political foe President Donald Trump.Here are five things to know about the Muslim candidate’s history-making victory, and what comes as he prepares to take office on January 1:- Landslide victory -Mamdani, 34, broke one million votes, earning 50 percent of ballots cast compared to his closest rival, 67-year-old former state governor Andrew Cuomo, who won just shy of 42 percent of the vote on the largest turnout since 1969.A comprehensive ground game that Mamdani claimed involved 100,000 volunteers meant his campaign touched every corner of New York and every demographic.The leftist’s overwhelmingly positive message about making New York City more livable for all its inhabitants resonated with migrant families, young progressives and working-class voters alike.- Trump on horizon -Mamdani certainly has caught the attention of the commander-in-chief after calling for people to “reject Trump’s fascism.”The president has repeatedly attacked Mamdani as a “little Communist” and threatened to cut off federal funds to the city where he made his name if he was elected.Trump has threatened to subject New York to the same immigration enforcement as Los Angeles, Chicago and other major cities.- Time to prepare -Mamdani has less than two months to prepare to run the nation’s most populous city — which is also America’s financial engine room.He will need to assemble a cabinet to deliver his ambitious promises to The Big Apple including city-run supermarkets, free daycare and free bus routes.On Wednesday he named five women to co-chair his transition team — among them Maria Torres-Springer, who resigned her post as deputy mayor under outgoing Eric Adams due to his engagement with Trump.Major issues awaiting Mamdani include efforts by Adams to hobble his ability to freeze rents, as well as the prospect of some 1.8 million New Yorkers losing food assistance under the federal government shutdown.”His vision for New York is not crazy,” said Lincoln Mitchell, a Columbia University politics professor. “It’s filling in some of the gaps in our tattered social safety net.”Mamdani would need a team capable of navigating both City Hall and the state capital Albany, Mitchell added.- Jewish outreach -New York has the largest Jewish community outside of Israel and Mamdani has emphasized the threats posed by antisemitism, particularly towards the end of his campaign.Mamdani was attacked by pro-Israel groups for his unwavering support for Palestinian rights and his criticism of Israel’s conduct in the war in Gaza which he called “a genocide.”The Anti-Defamation League announced Wednesday the launch of a tracking mechanism to scrutinize Mamdani’s policies and appointments.Mamdani said he doubted the ADL’s ability “to do so honestly.””We will build a city hall that stands steadfast alongside Jewish New Yorkers and does not waver in the fight against the scourge of antisemitism,” Mamdani said in his victory speech.    Mayor Adams has previously said 57 percent of hate crimes in New York are against Jewish people.- End of an era -Cuomo’s loss lowers the curtain for now on the family’s long presence on the political scene as well as one-term mayor Adams’s career after he exited the race.”We have toppled a political dynasty,” Mamdani said after vanquishing the Cuomo name made famous by Andrew’s father Mario Cuomo who was also governor of New York.Mamdani’s insurgent campaign backed by leftist figures including Senator Bernie Sanders and Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez relied on a fresh team raising the prospect he will sweep a broom through City Hall, bringing a new approach and fresh ideas. It marks a leftward shift for the Democratic Party brand, and Mamdani was not endorsed by some in the party center like New York’s Senator Chuck Schumer.

A majority of US Supreme Court justices appeared deeply skeptical of the legality behind a swath of Donald Trump’s tariffs, as they heard a landmark case on Wednesday that could uphold — or upend — the president’s economic agenda.Billions of dollars in customs revenue and a key lever in Trump’s trade wars are at stake, as the conservative-dominated panel once again grappled with the Republican’s attempts to expand presidential powers.The high court’s nine justices are considering Trump’s use of emergency powers to impose so-called “reciprocal” tariffs on nearly every US trade partner, as well as levies targeting Mexico, Canada and China over their alleged roles in illicit drug flows.Several conservative justices, along with the three liberals, questioned whether the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) that Trump invoked also confers the authority to impose tariffs.”The statute doesn’t use the word tariffs,” said Chief Justice John Roberts.The justices also sought to clarify whether Congress has to give clear authorization for policies with significant economic or political consequences.Solicitor General John Sauer, arguing on behalf of the Trump administration, said this did not apply given the president’s inherent, broad range of authorities.He added that one would expect Congress to confer major powers on the president to address foreign international crises.Sauer sought to frame the issue as one involving the power to regulate foreign commerce — including the ability to impose tariffs — rather than the power to tax.Justice Sonia Sotomayor, a liberal, noted that the power to impose taxes is a “congressional power, not a presidential power.””You want to say tariffs are not taxes, but that’s exactly what they are,” she added.- ‘Simply implausible’ -Justice Neil Gorsuch, a Trump appointee, questioned if Congress could reclaim powers once it delegates them to the presidency, suggesting that “as a practical matter in the real world, it can never get that power back.”Neal Katyal, representing small businesses challenging Trump’s tariffs, charged that it was “simply implausible” that in enacting IEEPA, Congress “handed the president the power to overhaul the entire tariff system and the American economy in the process.”The court’s decision, which could take months to arrive, does not concern sector-specific tariffs Trump separately imposed, including on steel, aluminum and automobiles.Since returning to the White House, Trump has brought the average effective tariff rate to its highest since the 1930s. A lower court ruled in May that he had exceeded his authority, with the case ultimately making its way to the Supreme Court.Trump has hyped the case as “one of the most important” in US history and repeatedly warned of calamity if his tariffs are overturned.He did not attend Wednesday’s hearing, despite floating the provocative idea, but several top officials did, including Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent and US Trade Representative Jamieson Greer.”In recent years, the court has been reluctant to overrule presidential decisions of this magnitude,” ING analysts said in a note Wednesday.But they said this case is hard to predict, as “upholding Trump’s tariffs would shift the balance of power from Congress to the President, further enhancing his executive power.”Businesses, lawmakers and former US officials filed around 40 legal briefs against the president’s global tariffs, while only a few briefs supported his actions.Although Trump’s tariffs have not sparked widespread inflation, companies and particularly small firms say they bear the brunt of higher import costs.Lawyers note that if the top court finds Trump’s global tariffs illegal, the government can tap other laws to impose up to 15 percent tariffs for 150 days, while pursuing pathways for more lasting duties.Countries that have already struck tariff deals with Trump may therefore prefer not to reopen negotiations.

If 2024 was a dumpster fire for Democrats, then 2025 might be the firehose. Tuesday’s US elections weren’t just wins, say analysts, they offer a way forward against Donald Trump’s Republicans.Abigail Spanberger flipped Virginia’s governorship with a double-digit win, fellow moderate Mikie Sherrill took New Jersey by storm and Zohran Mamdani turned New York City into a progressive playground.These were not isolated victories, say Washington-watchers, but full-throated endorsements of a new Democratic vibe centered on the middle class.”These two candidates, in particular — in Virginia and New Jersey — showed the Democrats how to mobilize their base, how to get out the vote,” said Wendy Schiller, a political science professor at Brown University.”That is what Donald Trump has been better at nationally than the Democrats, and this is a path forward for them.”- Middle-class mojo -Democrats have long been criticized for not speaking the language of ordinary voters, but Tuesday showed a shift to kitchen-table issues as Spanberger and Sherrill talked rent, groceries and gas prices.The Democrats showed they were listening, political commentators noted, with middle-income voters swinging back to the Democrats like it was 2008.”What really stood out was not any kind of sweeping ideological shift,” said veteran election strategist Mike Fahey.”Instead, I would characterize it as a return to candidates who speak to the kinds of everyday concerns that most of us can relate to, as opposed to the kind of partisan identity drumming that we saw way too much of in 2020.”That shift also helped patch up another frayed relationship: the one with Latino voters. After drifting toward Trump in 2024, Latinos showed tentative signs of coming back.Independents, meanwhile, swung hard. In Virginia and New Jersey, they broke for Democrats by double-digit margins turning toss-ups into blowouts.Add to that the youth vote — especially in New York, where Mamdani’s grassroots campaign lit up college campuses and TikTok feeds — and you have a coalition that looks suspiciously like Barack Obama’s.Above all, Tuesdays elections confirmed that the House of Representatives is in play.With California voting in a new electoral map and momentum in swing districts, Democratic leaders were voicing confidence in the wake of election night that could make up the seats they need to flip the chamber in next year’s midterms.The Senate is a tougher nut, but party strategists are optimistic that they can keep the focus on affordability and avoid internal conflict.- Candidate chemistry -Spanberger and Sherrill are moderates with national security cred and fresh energy. Mamdani is an articulate firebrand with an everyman touch.The messaging wasn’t so much “Save Democracy” as “Save My Paycheck,” as Democrats cleaned up by focusing on cost of living and talked about trash pickups, and not just Trump.”It’s clearer than ever that affordability needs to be the centerpiece of the Democrats’ message going into the midterms,” political communications expert Andrew Koneschusky told AFP.”The affordability message cuts across demographics and highlights a major vulnerability for Republicans. Trump campaigned on bringing prices down and he hasn’t done that.”Off-year elections historically favor the party out of power, turnout is lower and the electorate skews older and whiter.But for election-watchers, this year felt different. Voters weren’t just venting — they were choosing relatable candidates. One big takeaway, says Koneschusky, is that Democrats need candidates who reflect their electorates rather than taking a “one-size-fits-all” approach.”In some cases, that may mean fielding progressive candidates. In other cases, it may mean moderate or centrist candidates,” he said.”There’s a lot of talk right now about whether Democrats should shift more to the left or more to the center. The answer is both. It depends on their constituents.”

US Supreme Court justices questioned the legality behind a wide swath of Donald Trump’s tariffs on Wednesday, as they began hearing a landmark case that could uphold — or upend — the president’s economic agenda.Billions of dollars in customs revenue and a key lever in Trump’s trade wars are at stake, while the conservative-dominated court once again grapples with the Republican’s attempts to expand presidential power.The high court’s nine justices are considering Trump’s citing of emergency powers to impose so-called “reciprocal” tariffs on nearly every US trade partner, as well as levies targeting Mexico, Canada and China over their alleged roles in illicit drug flows.Opponents argue that such broad tariffs are not permitted by the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), the law Trump cited in rolling out the levies.An important issue before the court is whether the “major questions doctrine” applies. Under the doctrine, Congress has to give clear authorization for policies with significant economic or political consequences. Solicitor General John Sauer, who is arguing on behalf of the Trump administration, fielded questions from several justices on the doctrine and said it did not apply given the president’s inherent, broad range of authorities.He added that one would expect Congress to confer major powers on the president to address foreign international crises.Sauer also made a case that the issue here is not the power to tax but rather, to regulate foreign commerce. The power to impose tariffs, he said, is a “core application” of such authorities.The court’s decision, which could take months to arrive, does not concern sector-specific tariffs Trump separately imposed, including on steel, aluminum and automobiles.Since returning to the White House, Trump has brought the average effective tariff rate to its highest since the 1930s. A lower court ruled in May that he had exceeded his authority, prompting the Supreme Court case.Trump has hyped the case as “one of the most important” in US history and warned of calamity if his tariffs are overturned.- ‘Ringside seat’ -The president floated the provocative idea of attending Wednesday’s court hearing himself but ultimately decided against it, saying he did “not want to distract” from the decision’s importance.Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent however told Fox News he planned to “have a ringside seat,” while US Trade Representative Jamieson Greer was at the court as well, his office confirmed.When Bessent was asked if his presence could be seen as an intimidation attempt, he said: “I am there to emphasize that this is an economic emergency.””In recent years, the court has been reluctant to overrule presidential decisions of this magnitude,” ING analysts said in a note Wednesday.But they said this case is hard to predict, as “upholding Trump’s tariffs would shift the balance of power from Congress to the President, further enhancing his executive power.”Trump’s administration argues that under the IEEPA, the president can “regulate” trade by unilaterally setting import tax rates.But challengers note the words “tariff” or “tax” do not appear in the statute, and that the US Constitution explicitly grants Congress the power to establish levies.Businesses, lawmakers and former US officials have filed around 40 legal briefs against the president’s global tariffs, while only a few briefs supported his actions.Although Trump’s tariffs have not sparked widespread inflation, companies and particularly small firms say they bear the brunt of higher import costs.Lawyers note that if the top court finds Trump’s global tariffs illegal, the government can tap other laws to impose up to 15 percent tariffs for 150 days, while pursuing pathways for more lasting duties.Countries that have already struck tariff deals with Trump may therefore prefer not to reopen negotiations.