An area trend in party affiliation over the past 14 years shows a dramatic shift in registered voters, including an increase in folks voting independent.
Cherokee County Election Board Secretary Tiffany Rozell shared the data with Tahlequah Daily Press, which shows that over this time span, the number of Republicans increased from 5,833 in 2011 to 12,924 by October 2025. Registered Democrats in 2011 numbered 14,768, and by 2025, the number registered in that party has decreased to 9,313.
This page requires Javascript.
Javascript is required for you to be able to read premium content. Please enable it in your browser settings.
An area trend in party affiliation over the past 14 years shows a dramatic shift in registered voters, including an increase in folks voting independent.
Cherokee County Election Board Secretary Tiffany Rozell shared the data with Tahlequah Daily Press, which shows that over this time span, the number of Republicans increased from 5,833 in 2011 to 12,924 by October 2025. Registered Democrats in 2011 numbered 14,768, and by 2025, the number registered in that party has decreased to 9,313.
This page requires Javascript.
Javascript is required for you to be able to read premium content. Please enable it in your browser settings.
Evan Cragin, president of the Sacramento County Young Democrats, said he was initially hesitant to support his party’s mid-decade push to redraw California’s congressional map to favor Democrats.
The state in 2008 voted to create an independent redistricting commission in an effort to end gerrymandering. In August, Gov. Gavin Newsom proposed Prop 50, a ballot measure that would temporarily override the commission and implement a redrawn map favoring Democrats.
This page requires Javascript.
Javascript is required for you to be able to read premium content. Please enable it in your browser settings.
Evan Cragin, president of the Sacramento County Young Democrats, said he was initially hesitant to support his party’s mid-decade push to redraw California’s congressional map to favor Democrats.
The state in 2008 voted to create an independent redistricting commission in an effort to end gerrymandering. In August, Gov. Gavin Newsom proposed Prop 50, a ballot measure that would temporarily override the commission and implement a redrawn map favoring Democrats.
This page requires Javascript.
Javascript is required for you to be able to read premium content. Please enable it in your browser settings.
Evan Cragin, president of the Sacramento County Young Democrats, said he was initially hesitant to support his party’s mid-decade push to redraw California’s congressional map to favor Democrats.
The state in 2008 voted to create an independent redistricting commission in an effort to end gerrymandering. In August, Gov. Gavin Newsom proposed Prop 50, a ballot measure that would temporarily override the commission and implement a redrawn map favoring Democrats.
This page requires Javascript.
Javascript is required for you to be able to read premium content. Please enable it in your browser settings.
SACRAMENTO, Calif. — Evan Cragin, president of the Sacramento County Young Democrats, said he was initially hesitant to support his party’s mid-decade push to redraw California’s congressional map to favor Democrats.
The state in 2008 voted to create an independent redistricting commission in an effort to end gerrymandering. In August, Gov. Gavin Newsom proposed Prop 50, a ballot measure that would temporarily override the commission and implement a redrawn map favoring Democrats.
This page requires Javascript.
Javascript is required for you to be able to read premium content. Please enable it in your browser settings.
SACRAMENTO, Calif. — Evan Cragin, president of the Sacramento County Young Democrats, said he was initially hesitant to support his party’s mid-decade push to redraw California’s congressional map to favor Democrats.
The state in 2008 voted to create an independent redistricting commission in an effort to end gerrymandering. In August, Gov. Gavin Newsom proposed Prop 50, a ballot measure that would temporarily override the commission and implement a redrawn map favoring Democrats.
This page requires Javascript.
Javascript is required for you to be able to read premium content. Please enable it in your browser settings.
SACRAMENTO, Calif. — Evan Cragin, president of the Sacramento County Young Democrats, said he was initially hesitant to support his party’s mid-decade push to redraw California’s congressional map to favor Democrats.
Evan Cragin, president of the Sacramento County Young Democrats
Photo provided by Sacramento County Young Democrats
The state in 2008 voted to create an independent redistricting commission in an effort to end gerrymandering. In August, Gov. Gavin Newsom proposed Prop 50, a ballot measure that would temporarily override the commission and implement a redrawn map favoring Democrats.
This page requires Javascript.
Javascript is required for you to be able to read premium content. Please enable it in your browser settings.
SACRAMENTO, Calif. — Evan Cragin, president of the Sacramento County Young Democrats, said he was initially hesitant to support his party’s mid-decade push to redraw California’s congressional map to favor Democrats.
Evan Cragin, president of the Sacramento County Young Democrats
Photo provided by Sacramento County Young Democrats
The state in 2008 voted to create an independent redistricting commission in an effort to end gerrymandering. In August, Gov. Gavin Newsom proposed Prop 50, a ballot measure that would temporarily override the commission and implement a redrawn map favoring Democrats.
This page requires Javascript.
Javascript is required for you to be able to read premium content. Please enable it in your browser settings.
SALEM — Voters elected several newcomers to the City Council during Tuesday’s municipal election.
Erin Turowski
Louise Michaud/Courtesy photo
In Ward 1, challenger Erin Turowski defeated incumbent Cynthia Jerzylo, receiving 622, or 59.4% of the votes cast in the election compared to Jerzylo’s 426 votes, according to unofficial results.
This page requires Javascript.
Javascript is required for you to be able to read premium content. Please enable it in your browser settings.
If the ads are any indication, Proposition 50 offers Californians a stark choice: “Stick it to Trump” or “throw away the constitution” in a Democratic power grab.
And like so many things in 2025, Trump appears to be the galvanizing issue.
Even by the incendiary campaigns California is used to, Proposition 50 has been notable for its sharp attacks to cut through the dense, esoteric issue of congressional redistricting. It comes down to a basic fact: this is a Democratic-led measure to reconfigure California’s congressional districts to help their party win control of the U.S. House of Representatives in 2026 and stifle President Trump’s attempts to keep Republicans in power through similar means in other states.
Thus far, the anti-Trump message preached by Proposition 50 advocates, led by Gov. Gavin Newsom and other top Democrats, appears to be the most effective.
Supporters of the proposal have vastly outraised their rivals and Proposition 50, one of the most expensive ballot measure campaigns in state history, leads in the polls.
“Whenever you can take an issue and personalize it, you have the advantage. In this case, proponents of 50 can make it all about stopping Donald Trump,” said former legislative leader and state GOP Chair Jim Brulte.
Adding to the drama is the role of two political and cultural icons who have emerged as leaders of each side: former President Obama in favor and former Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger against, both arguing the very essence of democracy is at stake.
Schwarzenegger and the two main committees opposing Proposition 50 have focused on the ethical and moral imperative of preserving the independent redistricting commission. Californians in 2010 voted to create the panel to draw the state’s congressional district boundaries after every census in an effort to provide fair representation to all state residents.
That’s not a political ideal easily explained in a 30-section television ad, or an Instagram post.
Redistricting is a “complex issue,” Brulte said, but he noted that “the no side has the burden of trying to explain what the initiative really does and the yes side gets to use the crib notes [that] this is about stopping Trump — a much easier path.”
Partisans on both sides of the aisle agree.
“The yes side quickly leveraged anti-Trump messaging and has been closing with direct base appeals to lock in the lead,” said Jamie Fisfis, a political strategist who has worked on many GOP congressional campaigns in California. “The partisanship and high awareness behind the measure meant it was unlikely to sag under the weight of negative advertising like other initiatives often do. It’s been a turnout game.”
Obama, in ads that aired during the World Series and NFL games, warned that “Democracy is on the ballot Nov. 4” as he urged voters to support Proposition 50. Ads for the most well-funded committee opposing the proposition featured Schwarzenegger saying that opposing the ballot measure was critical to ensuring that citizens are not overrun by elected officials.
“The Constitution does not start with ‘We, the politicians.’ It starts with ‘We, the people,’” Schwarzenegger told USC students in mid-September — a speech excerpted in an anti-Proposition 50 ad. “Democracy — we’ve got to protect it, and we’ve got to go and fight for it.”
California’s Democratic-led Legislature voted in August to put the redistricting proposal that would likely boost their ranks in Congress on the November ballot. The measure, pushed by Newsom, was an effort to counter Trump’s efforts to increase the number of GOP members in the House from Texas and other GOP-led states.
The GOP holds a narrow edge in the House, and next year’s election will determine which party controls the body during Trump’s final two years in office — and whether he can further his agenda or is the focus of investigations and possible impeachment.
Noticeably absent for California’s Proposition 50 fight is the person who triggered it — Trump.
The proposition’s opponents’ decision not to highlight Trump is unsurprising given the president’s deep unpopularity among Californians. More than two-thirds of the state’s likely voters did not approve of his handling of the presidency in late October, according to a Public Policy Institute of California poll.
Trump did, however, urge California voter not to cast mail-in ballots or vote early, falsely arguing in a social media post that both voting methods were “dishonest.”
Some California GOP leaders feared that Trump’s pronouncement would suppress the Republican vote.
In recent days, the California Republican Party sent mailers to registered Republicans shaming them for not voting. “Your neighbors are watching,” the mailer says, featuring a picture of a woman peering through binoculars. “Don’t let your neighbors down. They’ll find out!”
Tuesday’s election will cost state taxpayers nearly $300 million. And it’s unclear if the result will make a difference in control of the House because of multiple redistricting efforts in other states.
But some Democrats are torn about the amount of money being spent on an effort that may not alter the partisan makeup of Congress.
Johanna Moska, who worked in the Obama administration, described Proposition 50 as “frustrating.”
“I just wish we were spending money to rectify the state’s problems, if we figured out a way the state could be affordable for people,” she said. “Gavin’s found what’s working for Gavin. And that’s resistance to Trump.”
Newsom’s efforts opposing Trump are viewed as a foundational argument if he runs for president in 2028, which he has acknowledged pondering.
Proposition 50 also became a platform for other politicians potentially eyeing a 2026 run for California governor, Sen. Alex Padilla and billionaires Rick Caruso and Tom Steyer.
The field is in flux, with no clear front-runner.
Padilla being thrown to the ground in Los Angeles as he tried to ask Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem about the Trump administration’s immigration policies is prominently featured in television ads promoting Proposition 50. Steyer, a longtime Democratic donor who briefly ran for president in 2020, raised eyebrows by being the only speaker in his second television ad. Caruso, who unsuccessfully ran against Karen Bass in the 2022 Los Angeles mayoral race and is reportedly considering another political campaign, recently sent voters glossy mailers supporting Proposition 50.
Steyer committed $12 million to support Proposition 50. His initial ad, which shows a Trump impersonator growing increasingly irate as news reports showing the ballot measure passing, first aired during “Jimmy Kimmel Live!” Steyer’s second ad fully focused on him, raising speculation about a potential gubernatorial run next year.
Ads opposing the proposition aired less frequently before disappearing from television altogether in recent days.
“The yes side had the advantage of casting the question for voters as a referendum on Trump,” said Rob Stutzman, a GOP strategist who worked for Schwarzenegger but is not involved with any of the Proposition 50 campaigns. “Asking people to rally to the polls to save a government commission — it’s not a rallying call.”
WEST PALM BEACH, Fla. — President Donald Trump says that Chinese President Xi Jinping has given him assurances that Beijing would take no action toward its long-stated goal of unifying Taiwan with mainland China while the Republican leader is in office.
Trump said that the long-contentious issue of Taiwan did not come up in his talks with Xi on Thursday in South Korea that largely focused on U.S.-China trade tensions. But the U.S. leader expressed certainty that China would not take action on Taiwan, while he’s in office.
“He has openly said, and his people have openly said at meetings, ‘We would never do anything while President Trump is president,’ because they know the consequences,” Trump said in an excerpt of an interview with the CBS’ program “60 Minutes” that aired Sunday.
U.S. officials have long been concerned about the possibility of China using military force against Taiwan, the self-ruled island democracy claimed by Beijing as part of its territory.
The 1979 Taiwan Relations Act, which has governed U.S. relations with the island, does not require the U.S. to step in militarily if China invades but makes it American policy to ensure Taiwan has the resources to defend itself and to prevent any unilateral change of status by Beijing.
Asked if he would order U.S. forces to defend Taiwan if China attacked, Trump demurred. The United States, both Republican and Democratic administrations, have maintained a policy of “strategic ambiguity” on Taiwan — trying not to tip their hands on whether the U.S. would come to the island’s aid in such a scenario.
“You’ll find out if it happens, and he understands the answer to that,” Trump said of Xi.
The Chinese embassy in Washington did not immediately respond to a request for comment. The White House also did not provide further details about when Xi or Chinese officials have conveyed to Trump that military action on Taiwan was off-the-table for the duration of the Republican’s presidency.
The “60 Minutes” interview was taped on Friday at Trump’s Mar-a-Lago resort in Florida. It marked Trump’s first appearance on the show since he settled a lawsuit this summer with CBS News over the newsmagazine’s interview with Kamala Harris.
The rest of the interview is scheduled to air later Sunday.
WEST PALM BEACH, Fla. (AP) — President Donald Trump says that Chinese President Xi Jinping has given him assurances that Beijing would take no action toward its long-stated goal of unifying Taiwan with mainland China while the Republican leader is in office.
Trump said that the long-contentious issue of Taiwan did not come up in his talks with Xi on Thursday in South Korea that largely focused on U.S.-China trade tensions. But the U.S. leader expressed certainty that China would not take action on Taiwan, while he’s in office.
“He has openly said, and his people have openly said at meetings, ‘We would never do anything while President Trump is president,’ because they know the consequences,” Trump said in an excerpt of an interview with the CBS’ program “60 Minutes” that aired Sunday.
U.S. officials have long been concerned about the possibility of China using military force against Taiwan, the self-ruled island democracy claimed by Beijing as part of its territory.
The 1979 Taiwan Relations Act, which has governed U.S. relations with the island, does not require the U.S. to step in militarily if China invades but makes it American policy to ensure Taiwan has the resources to defend itself and to prevent any unilateral change of status by Beijing.
Asked if he would order U.S. forces to defend Taiwan if China attacked, Trump demurred. The United States, both Republican and Democratic administrations, have maintained a policy of “strategic ambiguity” on Taiwan — trying not to tip their hands on whether the U.S. would come to the island’s aid in such a scenario.
“You’ll find out if it happens, and he understands the answer to that,” Trump said of Xi.
The Chinese embassy in Washington did not immediately respond to a request for comment. The White House also did not provide further details about when Xi or Chinese officials have conveyed to Trump that military action on Taiwan was off-the-table for the duration of the Republican’s presidency.
The rest of the interview is scheduled to air later Sunday.
Copyright 2025 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
BLACKSBURG, Va. (AP) — Abigail Spanberger, the Democratic candidate for Virginia governor, said Monday that she would not oppose a push by the state’s Democratic-controlled legislature to redraw congressional districts ahead of next year’s midterm elections.
Virginia Democrats earlier in the day began taking steps to change the state’s constitution to allow for a new congressional map, a change that must ultimately be approved by voters before it becomes law. The change is designed to counter President Donald Trump’s push to create more partisan districts in several Republican-run states.
In an interview on her campaign bus just eight days before Election Day, Spanberger told The Associated Press that she would not stand in the way of the Democratic leaders in the state General Assembly, although it’s unclear whether congressional districts could be changed in time for the 2026 midterm elections.
“What they are doing at this moment is keeping alive the option of taking action into the future,” said Spanberger, who would become the governor in January if she wins next week. “While I like to plan for everything, on this one, because I’m on the bus tour, because we are eight days away (from Election Day), I’m like, I will let the General Assembly take this step, and then we’ll talk calendar issues later.”
Her position marks a shift of sorts from this summer when she said she had “no plans to redistrict Virginia.”
Virginia Republicans, including Spanberger’s Republican opponent, Lt. Gov. Winsome Earle-Sears, blasted the move in a news conference outside the statehouse.
“This, my friends, is not about party, it’s about principle,” Earle-Sears said, standing in front of a podium marked with the words, “Spanberger’s sideshow session.” “The voters created an independent redistricting commission. Only the voters have the right to decide a future, not gerrymandering Democrats.”
The Democratic-led legislature’s push to enter Virginia into a redistricting battle comes after California made a similar move earlier this year.
If Democrats gain just three more seats in the U.S. House of Representatives, they would take control of the House and with it, the power to impede Trump’s agenda. But Republicans in other states, at Trump’s urging, are working aggressively to extend their advantage in redistricting moves of their own.
In Virginia on Monday, the House amended its agenda to allow a redistricting constitutional amendment to be put forward, with details to come later. The state senate is expected to follow suit this week.
Democratic state Sen. Schuyler VanValkenburg, who has championed Virginia’s current redistricting law, said he still supports the concept of a bipartisan redistricting commission, “but I’m also not going to let Donald Trump go around to states that have the majorities that he likes and try to make it so that he can’t lose.”
Because Virginia’s redistricting commission was created by a voter-approved constitutional amendment, voters must sign off on any changes to the redistricting process. A proposed constitutional amendment would have to pass the General Assembly in two separate sessions and then be placed on the statewide ballot.
Democrats are scrambling to hold that first legislative vote this year in order to take a second vote after a new legislative session begins Jan. 14.
Copyright 2025 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
NAIROBI, Kenya (AP) — Presidents and representatives of African heads of state joined thousands of mourners at a state funeral service Friday for Kenya’s former Prime Minister Raila Odinga, the democratic reformer who died this week in India at the age of 80.
Kenyans have turned out in large numbers to mourn Odinga since his death on Wednesday, reflecting the outsized influence the respected statesman had on political life in the East African country.
Thousands filled a soccer stadium where Odinga’s casket was covered in the national flag for an Anglican Church service in the Kenyan capital, Nairobi. They chanted and held up portraits of Odinga, while some carried twigs, a symbol of peace and unity in Kenyan tradition.
Odinga ran for Kenya’s presidency five times over three decades, and although he never succeeded in becoming president, he is revered for a life of activism that helped steer Kenya toward becoming a vibrant multiparty democracy.
Odinga’s body lay in state in Parliament on Friday morning ahead of the funeral, an honor only reserved for the president and former presidents.
President William Ruto said Odinga deserved the honor for having been a legislator for 15 years, a role he used to play “a pivotal role in shaping some of the most consequential laws in our Republic’s history.”
Ruto campaigned for Odinga in 2007 — a disputed election that was marred by violence. The two men were rivals in subsequent elections, including the most recent one in 2022.
The two leaders signed an agreement this year after months of anti-government protests, and the pact saw opposition party members appointed to cabinet positions.
David Kodia, the Anglican bishop who led the service, urged the leaders present to be “selfless” like Odinga and to shun corruption. Odinga was a practicing member of the church.
Political analyst Herman Manyora told The Associated Press that the love displayed by so many mourners was a reflection of his work for democracy.
“You can’t point at a man more willing to sacrifice everything just for the sake of his people,” said Manyora, who is based at the University of Nairobi.
Among the mourners were Odinga’s wife Ida, daughters Winnie and Rosemary, and son Raila Odinga Junior.
Winnie, who was with him in India, led the mourners to chanting in the local Luo language. She said her father died “strong, with dignity and pride” after he pushed his morning walk from his usual two to five rounds around the hospital where he was being treated.
His son Junior, while donning his father’s beaded hat and a fly whisk, said he would take care of the family as the sole surviving son.
President Ruto led the mourners in singing Odinga’s favorite song, Harry Belafonte’s “Jamaica Farewell” and said he helped him steady the nation earlier in the year.
“Whenever the nation needed him to rise above self, he always did so unreservedly,” he said.
Copyright 2025 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
In the early days of President Trump’s second term, the U.S. appeared keen to cooperate with Nicolás Maduro, Venezuela’s authoritarian leader. Special envoy Ric Grenell met Maduro, working with him to coordinate deportation flights to Caracas, a prisoner exchange deal and an agreement allowing Chevron to drill Venezuelan oil.
Grenell told disappointed members of Venezuela’s opposition that Trump’s domestic goals took priority over efforts to promote democracy. “We’re not interested in regime change,” Grenell told the group, according to two sources familiar with the meeting.
But Marco Rubio, Trump’s secretary of State, had a different vision.
In a parallel call with María Corina Machado and Edmundo González Urrutia, two leaders of the opposition, Rubio affirmed U.S. support “for the restoration of democracy in Venezuela” and called González “the rightful president” of the beleaguered nation after Maduro rigged last year’s election in his favor.
Rubio, now also serving as national security advisor, has grown closer to Trump and crafted an aggressive new policy toward Maduro that has brought Venezuela and the United States to the brink of military confrontation.
Secretary of State Marco Rubio whispers to President Trump during a roundtable meeting at the White House on Oct. 8, 2025.
(Evan Vucci / Associated Press)
I think Venezuela is feeling the heat
— President Trump
Grenell has been sidelined, two sources told The Times, as the U.S. conducts an unprecedented campaign of deadly strikes on suspected Venezuelan drug boats — and builds up military assets in the Caribbean. Trump said Wednesday that he has authorized the CIA to conduct covert action in the South American nation, and that strikes on land targets could be next.
“I think Venezuela is feeling the heat,” he said.
The pressure campaign marks a major victory for Rubio, the son of Cuban emigres and an unexpected power player in the administration who has managed to sway top leaders of the isolationist MAGA movement to his lifelong effort to topple Latin America’s leftist authoritarians.
“It’s very clear that Rubio has won,” said James B. Story, who served as ambassador to Venezuela under President Biden. “The administration is applying military pressure in the hope that somebody inside of the regime renders Maduro to justice, either by exiling him, sending him to the United States or sending him to his maker.”
In a recent public message to Trump, Maduro acknowledged that Rubio is now driving White House policy: “You have to be careful because Marco Rubio wants your hands stained with blood, with South American blood, Caribbean blood, Venezuelan blood,” Maduro said.
As a senator from Florida, Rubio represented exiles from three leftist autocracies — Cuba, Nicaragua and Venezuela — and for years he has made it his mission to weaken their governments. He says his family could not return to Cuba after Fidel Castro’s revolution seven decades ago. He has long maintained that eliminating Maduro would deal a fatal blow to Cuba, whose economy has been buoyed by billions of dollars in Venezuelan oil in the face of punishing U.S. sanctions.
In 2019, Rubio pushed Trump to back Juan Guaidó, a Venezuelan opposition leader who sought unsuccessfully to topple Maduro.
Rubio later encouraged Trump to publicly support Machado, who was barred from the ballot in Venezuela’s 2024 presidential election, and who last week was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize for her pro-democracy efforts. González, who ran in Machado’s place, won the election, according to vote tallies gathered by the opposition, yet Maduro declared victory.
Rubio was convinced that only military might would bring change to Venezuela, which has been plunged into crisis under Maduro’s rule, with a quarter of the population fleeing poverty, violence and political repression.
But there was a hitch. Trump has repeatedly vowed to not intervene in the politics of other nations, telling a Middle Eastern audience in May that the U.S. “would no longer be giving you lectures on how to live.”
Denouncing decades of U.S. foreign policy, Trump complained that “the interventionalists were intervening in complex societies that they did not even understand.”
To counter that sentiment, Rubio painted Maduro in a new light that he hoped would spark interest from Trump, who has been fixated on combating immigration, illegal drugs and Latin American cartels since his first presidential campaign.
Venezuelan presidential candidate Edmundo González Urrutia, right, and opposition leader María Corina Machado greet supporters during a campaign rally in Valencia before the country’s presidential election in 2024.
(Ariana Cubillos / Associated Press)
Going after Maduro, Rubio argued, was not about promoting democracy or a change of governments. It was striking a drug kingpin fueling crime in American streets, an epidemic of American overdoses, and a flood of illegal migration to America’s borders.
Rubio tied Maduro to Tren de Aragua, a Venezuelan street gang whose members the secretary of State says are “worse than Al Qaeda.”
“Venezuela is governed by a narco-trafficking organization that has empowered itself as a nation state,” he said during his Senate confirmation hearing.
Meanwhile, prominent members of Venezuela’s opposition pushed the same message. “Maduro is the head of a narco-terrorist structure,” Machado told Fox News last month.
Security analysts and U.S. intelligence officials suggest that the links between Maduro and Tren de Aragua are overblown.
A declassified memo by the Office of the Director of National Intelligence found no evidence of widespread cooperation between Maduro’s government and the gang. It also said Tren de Aragua does not pose a threat to the U.S.
The gang does not traffic fentanyl, and the Drug Enforcement Administration estimates that just 8% of cocaine that reaches the U.S. passes through Venezuelan territory.
Still, Rubio’s strategy appears to have worked.
In July, Trump declared that Tren de Aragua was a terrorist group led by Maduro — and then ordered the Pentagon to use military force against cartels that the U.S. government had labeled terrorists.
Trump deployed thousands of U.S. troops and a small armada of ships and warplanes to the Caribbean and has ordered strikes on five boats off the coast of Venezuela, resulting in 24 deaths. The administration says the victims were “narco-terrorists” but has provided no evidence.
Elliott Abrams, a veteran diplomat who served as special envoy to Venezuela in Trump’s first term, said he believes the White House will carry out limited strikes in Venezuela.
“I think the next step is that they’re going to hit something in Venezuela — and I don’t mean boots on the ground. That’s not Trump,” Abrams said. “It’s a strike, and then it’s over. That’s very low risk to the United States.”
He continued: “Now, would it be nice if that kind of activity spurred a colonel to lead a coup? Yeah, it would be nice. But the administration is never going to say that.”
Even if Trump refrains from a ground invasion, there are major risks.
“If it’s a war, then what is the war’s aim? Is it to overthrow Maduro? Is it more than Maduro? Is it to get a democratically elected president and a democratic regime in power?” said John Yoo, a professor of law at UC Berkeley, who served as a top legal advisor to the George W. Bush administration. “The American people will want to know what’s the end state, what’s the goal of all of this.”
“Whenever you have two militaries bristling that close together, there could be real action,” said Christopher Sabatini, a senior fellow for Latin America at the think tank Chatham House. “Trump is trying to do this on the cheap. He’s hoping maybe he won’t have to commit. But it’s a slippery slope. This could draw the United States into a war.”
Sabatini and others added that even if the U.S. pressure drives out Maduro, what follows is far from certain.
Venezuela is dominated by a patchwork of guerrilla and paramilitary groups that have enriched themselves with gold smuggling, drug trafficking and other illicit activities. None have incentive to lay down arms.
And the country’s opposition is far from unified.
Machado, who dedicated her Nobel Prize to Trump in a clear effort to gain his support, says she is prepared to govern Venezuela. But there are others — both in exile and in Maduro’s administration — who would like to lead the country.
Machado supporter Juan Fernandez said anything would be better than maintaining the status quo.
“Some say we’re not prepared, that a transition would cause instability,” he said. “How can Maduro be the secure choice when 8 million Venezuelans have left, when there is no gasoline, political persecution and rampant inflation?”
Fernandez praised Rubio for pushing the Venezuela issue toward “an inflection point.”
What a difference, he said, to have a decision-maker in the White House with family roots in another country long oppressed by an authoritarian regime.
“He perfectly understands our situation,” Fernandez said. “And now he has one of the highest positions in the United States.”
Linthicum reported from Mexico City, Wilner from Dallas and Ceballos from Washington. Special correspondent Mery Mogollón in Caracas contributed to this report.
As Californians start voting on Democrats’ effort to boost their ranks in Congress, former President Barack Obama warned that democracy is in peril as he urged voters to support Proposition 50 in a television ad that started airing Tuesday.
“California, the whole nation is counting on you,” Obama says in the 30-second ad, which the main pro-Proposition 50 campaign began broadcasting Tuesday across the state. The spot is part of a multimillion-dollar ad buy promoting the congressional redistricting ballot measure through the Nov. 4 election.
Proposition 50 was spearheaded by Gov. Gavin Newsom and other California Democratic leaders this summer after President Trump urged GOP-led states, notably Texas, to redraw their congressional districts to boost the number of Republicans elected to the House in next year’s midterm election, in an effort to continue enacting his agenda during his final years in office.
“Republicans want to steal enough seats in Congress to rig the next election and wield unchecked power for two more years,” Obama says in the ad, which includes footage of ICE raids. “With Prop. 50, you can stop Republicans in their tracks. Prop. 50 puts our elections back on a level playing field, preserves independent redistricting over the long term, and lets the people decide. Return your ballot today.”
Congressional districts were long drawn in smoke-filled chambers by partisans focused on protecting their parties’ power and incumbents. But good-government groups and elected officials, notably former Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, have fought to take the drawing of congressional boundaries out of the hands of politicians to end gerrymandering and create more competitive districts.
In California, these districts have been drawn by an independent commission created by voters in 2010, which is why state Democrats have to go to the ballot box to seek a mid-decade partisan redistricting that could improve their party’s chances in five of the state’s 52 congressional districts.
The ad featuring Obama, who spoke Monday on comedian Marc Maron’s final podcast about Trump’s policies testing the nation’s values, appears on Californians’ televisions after mail ballots were sent to the state’s 23 million registered voters last week.
The proposition’s prospects are uncertain — it’s about an obscure topic that few Californians know about, and off-year elections traditionally have low voter turnout. Still, more than $150 million has been contributed to the three main committees supporting and opposing the proposition, in addition to millions more funding other efforts.
Obama is not the only famous person to appear in ads about Proposition 50.
In September, former California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, who championed the creation of the independent redistricting commission while in office and has campaigned for similar reforms across the nation since then, was featured in ads opposing the November ballot measure.
He described Proposition 50 as favoring entrenched politicians instead of voters.
“That’s what they want to do, is take us backwards. This is why it is important for you to vote no on Proposition 50,” the Hollywood celebrity and former governor says in the ad, which was filmed last month when he spoke to USC students. “The Constitution does not start with ‘We, the politicians.’ It starts with ‘We, the people.’ … Democracy — we’ve got to protect it, and we’ve got to go and fight for it.”
(CNN) — Barack Obama ripped into the law firms, universities and businesses that have worked out settlements or other deals with President Donald Trump’s administration, arguing that “We all have this capacity, I think, to take a stand.”
The former president said the organizations that concede to Trump should be able to say, “We’re not going to be bullied into saying that we can only hire people or promote people based on some criteria that’s been cooked up by Steve Miller,” referring to the top White House aide.
According to an advance podcast transcript, Obama said he sympathized with those looking to avoid a backlash, but said, “We’re not at the stage where you have to be like Nelson Mandela and be in a 10-by-12 jail cell for 27 years and break rocks.”
The comments, some of the most direct that Obama has made about Trump outside of his campaign trail appearances in 2020 and 2024, came in an interview posting Monday for the final episode of the “WTF” podcast hosted by comedian Marc Maron.
Maron, who last interviewed Obama in 2015, has frequently talked about that conversation in subsequent episodes. In July, after announcing he would end the 16-year run of the pioneering podcast, he suggested that another talk with Obama would be a dream way to finish. Last week, he got his wish — though not by having Obama make another visit to his house, as many of the podcast guests tend to.
Maron kept the interview a surprise even from fans, only teasing in his penultimate episode that he traveled to record it. They met in Obama’s office in Washington.
The conversation focused on the state of America and what Democrats can find hope in — but Obama also criticized progressive absolutism and singled out one rising Texas Democrat who impresses him.
The news out of his hometown on his mind, Obama called Trump’s deployment of the National Guard to Chicago “a deliberate end run around not just a concept, but a law that’s been around for a long time” — the Posse Comitatus Act, which generally prohibits the use of the military inside the US for law enforcement purposes.
“That is a genuine effort to weaken how we have understood democracy,” he said.
Obama reflected on his own experiences in the White House, including dealing with pushback from Republican leaders such as Texas Gov. Greg Abbott.
“If I had sent in the National Guard into Texas and just said, ‘You know what? A lot of problems in Dallas, a lot of crime there, and I don’t care what Gov. Abbott says. I’m going to kind of take over law enforcement, because I think things are out of control,’ it is mind-boggling to me how Fox News would have responded,” he said.
The two also discussed the evolution of the media environment, particularly around the podcast world Maron helped shape, and what it has done to political communication.
“It was interesting to me when people started criticizing Bernie [Sanders] or somebody else for going on Rogan. It’s like, why wouldn’t you? Yeah, of course, go,” Obama said, referring to “The Joe Rogan Experience” podcast.
Among the Rogan guests who caught Obama’s eye: Texas state Rep. James Talarico, who turned a viral appearance on the podcast into fuel for what has now become a competitive Senate primary run.
Obama called Talarico “terrific, a really talented young man,” adding that his appearance proves that going on long-form podcasts requires “a certain confidence in your actual convictions to debate and have a conversation with somebody who disagrees with you.”
Overall, Obama argued, “what people long for is some core integrity that seems absent, just a sense that the person seems to walk the walk, just talk the talk.”
Obama said he particularly enjoyed a bit from Maron’s latest stand-up special when the comedian jokes that progressives annoyed the average American into fascism.
“You can’t constantly lecture people without acknowledging that you’ve got some blind spots too, and that life’s messy,” Obama said. “I think this was a fault of some progressive language, was almost asserting a holier-than-thou superiority that’s not that different from what we used to joke about coming from the right moral majority and a certain fundamentalism about how to think about stuff that I think was dangerous.”
“If I talked about trans issues, I wasn’t talking down to people and saying, ‘Oh, you’re a bigot,’” he said. “I’d say, ‘You know, it’s tough enough being a teenager. Let’s treat all kids decently. Why would we want to see kids bullied?”
Panelists at the forum “Democracy and Organized Crime in Latin America” held Thursday in Washington D.C.
Interamerican Institute for Democracy
Experts and former presidents warned that organized crime, narcotrafficking and authoritarian rule are converging into an unprecedented threat to democracy across Latin America as they met during a high-level forum held in Washington, D.C.
The event, titled “Democracy and Organized Crime in Latin America,” on Thursday brought together scholars, diplomats and political figures under the auspices of the Interamerican Institute for Democracy, Florida International University, Universidad Austral, and Infobae.
From the start, the tone was grave. “Organized crime in the region, including the global networks to which it is connected, is the single biggest threat — beyond the People’s Republic of China — to U.S. security and prosperity,” said Professor Evan Ellis, an educator at the U.S. Army War College’s Strategic Studies Institute.
Evan Ellis, professor at the U.S. Army War College, speaking at the forum “Democracy and Organized Crime in Latin America” held Thursday in Washington D.C. Interamerican Institute for Democracy
Speaking before a packed conference room near Capitol Hill, Ellis said that what was once a regional problem has evolved into a hemispheric crisis, feeding instability, corruption and authoritarianism.
“Organized crime in the region,” he warned, “brings drugs that kill more Americans than virtually any other non-medical cause,” while exploiting migrants and “eroding democratic institutions across Latin America.”
A Hemisphere “Awash in Cocaine”
Ellis described a continent “awash in cocaine,” pointing to soaring coca cultivation in Colombia, Venezuela, and Peru. These illicit economies, he said, fuel cycles of “violence, illegal mining, human trafficking, and massive migration” that are destabilizing entire nations.
He identified a nexus of criminal power stretching from Mexico’s Jalisco Nueva Generación cartel to Brazil’s Primeiro Comando da Capital (PCC) and Venezuela’s Tren de Aragua. These organizations, he said, have capitalized on state weakness and corruption to build transnational networks that move drugs, launder billions, and infiltrate political systems.
“The U.S. cannot view these developments as distant,” Ellis cautioned. “Economic malaise and institutional failure open the door for the capture of power by anti-U.S. populists,” citing Venezuela, Nicaragua, Ecuador, and Bolivia as examples of governments that have curtailed law enforcement cooperation and created “safe havens for criminals.”
Ellis also drew attention to China’s expanding role in the region’s illicit economy. “The PRC is the leading source of precursor chemicals for fentanyl and other synthetic drugs,” he said. “Its banks and companies are used for money laundering, creating new challenges for financial intelligence units.”
He urged a coordinated response involving extradition treaties, financial transparency, and the denial of safe havens to criminal organizations. “It is vital not to permit regimes to continue to serve as sanctuaries for criminal groups,” he concluded.
“Either We Act, or We Witness the Death of Democracy”
The forum then turned from academic analysis to the political and personal, as former Ecuadorian president Jamil Mahuad and ex-ambassador to the U.S. Ivonne Baki described how organized crime has infiltrated their own country.
“Ecuador’s nightmare began when Rafael Correa eliminated visa requirements and opened the borders,” Baki said. “He gave the drug trade free rein.”
Baki said President Daniel Noboa’s administration had shown willingness to cooperate with the United States and international partners but warned that the challenge was urgent. “The narcos are organized, and we are not,” she said. “If we don’t act fast and together, it will be too late.”
Mahuad traced Ecuador’s transformation from a relatively peaceful country into one of the most violent in the region, with criminal networks turning coastal ports into export corridors for cocaine. “Ninety percent of the world’s cocaine is produced in Colombia, Bolivia, and Peru,” he said. “Ecuador has become the strategic exit point.”
He argued that successive governments had underestimated the threat by treating narcotrafficking as a social issue rather than a national security emergency. The result, he said, was a weakened state “striking deals with traffickers” instead of confronting them.
His conclusion was stark. “Either we witness the chronicle of the death of democracy in Latin America,” Mahuad warned, “or we believe that the generations condemned to a hundred years of solitude still have a chance on this earth.”
Bolivia’s Crossroads
For Eduardo Gamarra, professor of political science at Florida International University, Bolivia illustrates how organized crime can intertwine with political power until the two become indistinguishable.
“For two decades, Bolivia has been governed by a narco-competitive regime,” Gamarra said, referring to the government of former president Evo Morales and his Movement for Socialism (MAS). “The line between the state and the criminal world has vanished.”
From the Chapare region—long the heart of coca cultivation—to the business hub of Santa Cruz, which he described as “a safe haven for illicit organizations,” Bolivia has become “a central node in the global cocaine trade,” Gamarra said. “Where the state is absent, organized crime rules.”
Yet Gamarra also saw signs of change. With the MAS weakened and two center-right candidates competing in an upcoming presidential runoff, he said Bolivia stood at “a historic crossroads.”
“The next administration has the great responsibility to combat this scourge hand in hand with international institutions,” Gamarra said. “The authoritarian structure is dying, but the narcotics network remains alive. Bolivia must act first—replace two decades of narco-politics with sovereign leadership.”
Regional Crisis, Shared Consequences
Ellis’s and Gamarra’s analyses reflected a broader consensus among participants: that the fusion of organized crime and politics represents a new phase of instability in Latin America.
Speakers described a region where the rule of law is eroding, institutions are captured by criminal interests, and illicit economies sustain both authoritarian leaders and violent groups.
The overlap of political and criminal agendas, they argued, has transformed traditional governance challenges into a direct assault on democracy. Countries such as Venezuela and Nicaragua, they said, have evolved into “narco-states,” where criminal networks operate under state protection.
Participants also highlighted the role of corruption, weak judicial systems, and foreign actors in perpetuating impunity. Without coordinated international action, they warned, the hemisphere risks a generation of entrenched instability.
A Call for Collective Action
Throughout the forum, one message recurred: that the threat facing Latin America is transnational, and that only multilateral cooperation—linking governments, the private sector, and civil society—can counter it.
For Ellis, this means rethinking security partnerships and economic strategies. For Mahuad and Baki, it means rebuilding the moral and institutional foundations of democracy. And for Gamarra, it means replacing regimes that have normalized criminality with ones that restore the rule of law.
All agreed that the window for action is narrowing. “The narcos are organized, and we are not,” Baki’s warning echoed across the session as participants discussed how to prevent further state capture by organized crime.
A Region Under Pressure
The concerns raised at the forum come amid a broader regional surge in violence and political instability. Homicide rates have climbed in Ecuador, Honduras, and Haiti; mass migration continues from Venezuela and Central America; and in several countries, police and military forces have been implicated in drug-related corruption.
Analysts say these developments have not only weakened public confidence in democracy but also created openings for authoritarian leaders who promise order while consolidating control.
Ellis’s reference to China underscored the global dimensions of the crisis. With Beijing expanding its economic footprint in Latin America—through infrastructure projects, energy investments, and trade—U.S. officials and regional experts have warned that criminal networks are exploiting the same channels to launder money and traffic illicit goods.
The growing nexus between state corruption, transnational crime, and great-power competition has made policy coordination increasingly complex, even among allies.
Warnings for Washington
While the forum focused on Latin America, speakers repeatedly emphasized the implications for U.S. national security. Ellis described organized crime as “the single biggest threat—beyond the People’s Republic of China—to U.S. security and prosperity,” linking narcotrafficking to the domestic fentanyl crisis and border instability.
The flow of drugs, money, and people across the hemisphere, he added, is not only reshaping Latin American politics but also reaching deep into American society.
“Economic malaise and institutional failure open the door for the capture of power by anti-U.S. populists,” he said, warning that democratic backsliding abroad will eventually reverberate at home.
The Fight Ahead
By the forum’s close, participants returned to the same question that had opened the day: whether democracies in the Americas can withstand the combined pressures of crime, corruption, and authoritarianism.
The answer, most agreed, will depend on political will. Renewed cooperation, transparency and judicial reform were repeatedly cited as essential. So were citizen engagement and accountability, which speakers said are being eroded by fear, apathy, and disinformation.
Despite the grim outlook, there was also a sense of determination. “It is vital not to permit regimes to continue to serve as sanctuaries for criminal groups,” Ellis said. Mahuad, invoking García Márquez’s famous line, offered a note of hope: that Latin America’s generations “still have a chance on this earth.”
Galardonado periodista con más de 30 años de experiencia, especializado en la cobertura de temas sobre Venezuela. Amante de la historia y la literatura.
