With just a week remaining before the U.S. presidential election, the political arena has intensified, with Vice President Kamala Harris and former President Donald Trump trading sharp words as they vie for votes. Harris, representing the Democratic Party, delivered her final appeal near the White House on Tuesday evening, while Trump hosted a rally in Pennsylvania, one of the seven battleground states likely to determine the election outcome.

Harris’s remarks were pointed, aimed at contrasting her proposed leadership style with Trump’s. She pledged to focus on policies to improve Americans’ lives and committed to approaching the presidency with a proactive “to-do list.” In a symbolic choice of location, she spoke near where Trump addressed his supporters before the January 6 Capitol riot, a connection she didn’t hesitate to highlight. “We know who Donald Trump is. He is the person who stood at this very spot nearly four years ago and sent an armed mob to the United States Capitol to overturn the will of the people,” she said.

Meanwhile, Trump continued to rally his base, targeting Harris directly and dismissing her as “grossly incompetent.” However, his campaign has been quick to distance itself from an inflammatory joke by comedian Tony Hinchcliffe, who recently mocked Puerto Rico as a “floating island of garbage” at a Trump event in New York. While Trump has denied knowing Hinchcliffe, he refrained from denouncing the joke, which was seen by some as a missed opportunity to affirm respect for Puerto Ricans.

With Latino and Puerto Rican votes pivotal in key states, particularly Pennsylvania, Harris’s campaign moved swiftly to counter Trump’s silence. Her team produced a digital ad asserting that “Latino voters deserve better,” a message targeting the substantial Puerto Rican communities in Pennsylvania, North Carolina, Wisconsin, and Michigan. In Pennsylvania alone, over 300,000 eligible Puerto Rican voters may sway the election.

Both candidates have repeatedly exchanged insults, with Trump questioning Harris’s intelligence and insinuating she would be “walked all over” by foreign leaders. In turn, Harris has endorsed descriptions of Trump by some of his former aides as a “fascist” with intentions of authoritarian governance in a second term. Trump reciprocated, using similar language against Harris. As the nation watches, the attacks reflect deeper ideological divides amid this closely fought race.

Polls suggest a virtual dead heat, with both candidates narrowly leading or trailing within the margin of error in several crucial states. According to the University of Florida’s Election Lab, nearly 49 million Americans have already cast ballots, either in person or by mail, ahead of next Tuesday’s Election Day, in a turnout pace that may rival or exceed 2020’s record of 155 million voters.

With the U.S. presidential election determined by the Electoral College rather than the national popular vote, each state becomes a contest of its own. Candidates compete for a total of 538 electoral votes, with 270 needed to win. Most states allocate their votes on a winner-takes-all basis, though Maine and Nebraska use a hybrid approach. Current polling shows Harris and Trump each holding leads in 43 states, sufficient to accumulate at least 200 electoral votes apiece, leaving the election in the hands of voters in seven battlegrounds: Michigan, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Georgia, North Carolina, Arizona, and Nevada.

The stakes are further heightened by Trump’s pledge to consider pardoning individuals convicted for their role in the January 6 Capitol riot, a promise that has generated both support and outrage. Nearly 1,500 people were arrested for participating in the attack, which resulted in injuries to over 140 law enforcement officers and millions in property damage. Trump’s stance on potential pardons has struck a nerve, particularly among those who view the Capitol riot as a direct assault on American democracy.

With razor-thin margins in pivotal states, the outcome remains highly uncertain. Both Harris and Trump are likely to focus on energizing their bases and persuading undecided voters in these final days, mindful that even the smallest shift in any battleground state could determine the presidency.

As Somaliland approaches its crucial elections on November 13, 2024, the KULMIYE party, led by President Muse Bihi Abdi, stands poised for victory. With a palpable wave of enthusiasm sweeping through the Republic, Bihi’s re-election campaign is not just about maintaining leadership; it’s a celebration of progress, unity, and a brighter future for Somaliland.

On the first day of the KULMIYE campaign, thousands of supporters gathered at Freedom Park in Hargeisa, draped in the colors of the KULMIYE party and the national flag. The energy was electric as enthusiastic crowds welcomed back their president with open arms and unwavering support. The gathering served as a powerful reminder of the solid backing Bihi enjoys from the people of Somaliland, a testament to his firm leadership and vision for the nation.

The campaign kickoff featured not just jubilant supporters, but also prominent figures in Somaliland’s political landscape. Accompanied by ministers, MPs, and members of the KULMIYE party’s campaign committee, President Muse Bihi Abdi addressed the throngs of dedicated supporters, thanking them for their steadfast commitment to the party and its values. He emphasized the significance of their voices in shaping Somaliland’s future and urged them to rally for a successful election on November 13.

“The enthusiasm and self-expression we see here are a testament to the strength of our party. You are the heartbeat of KULMIYE, and together we will continue to pave the way for development, stability, and prosperity in Somaliland,” Bihi passionately conveyed to throngs of supporters.

Following the rally in Hargeisa, Bihi journeyed to Burco in the Togdheer region, where the reception was equally grand. He was met with cheers and adoration from KULMIYE supporters who eagerly awaited his message. Addressing them, Bihi reaffirmed his commitment to serving the people and building on the progress made during his first term.

President Bihi’s leadership has been marked by significant strides in infrastructure, governance, and security—an incredible feat for a nation striving for international recognition while facing challenges from instability in neighboring Somalia. His vision centers around continued development, with an emphasis on fostering peace, unity, and economic growth.

With the support of KULMIYE, Bihi intends to further enhance Somaliland’s standing on the global stage, championing democratic values and inviting the world to recognize the achievements of a country that has established itself as a beacon of hope in a turbulent region. This ongoing commitment resonates deeply with the aspirations of the people.

As the election date draws near, there is a palpable sense of optimism regarding the likelihood of a KULMIYE victory. Muse Bihi Abdi’s re-election is widely predicted, and his supporters stand ready to mobilize their efforts in ensuring his continued leadership. His approach combines robust governance with a heartfelt connection to the people, engendering loyalty that is evident in every rally and gathering.

Cast your votes on November 13, and together we will continue to write the story of Somaliland, one defined by strength, resilience, and extraordinary achievements.

As the KULMIYE party embarks on this final stretch of campaigning, President Muse Bihi Abdi embodies the hopes and aspirations of Somaliland. His leadership over the next five years is anticipated to drive progress forward, further strengthening the foundation for the democratic principles that underpin Somaliland. With unity and determination, the people of Somaliland will once again make their voices heard at the ballot box, ensuring a bright future with Muse Bihi Abdi at the helm.

In Georgia, President Salome Zourabichvili has urged citizens to protest against Saturday’s parliamentary election results, which declared the ruling Georgian Dream party the victor with nearly 54% of the vote. The president, a former ally turned critic of Georgian Dream, rejected the election outcome, likening it to a “Russian special operation,” though she stopped short of suggesting direct Russian interference. Her call to action follows opposition parties’ claims of widespread electoral violations, further fueling concerns over Georgia’s democratic trajectory and its strained relationship with Europe.

The results, favoring Georgian Dream, have provoked backlash from pro-Western factions within the country who view the election as a decisive moment in Georgia’s contested path toward EU integration. Prime Minister Irakli Kobakhidze, a Georgian Dream member, lauded his party’s performance, dismissing allegations of electoral manipulation as “doomed to failure.” Yet, the election has sparked protests in Tbilisi, with opposition leaders such as Nika Gvaramia of the Coalition for Change condemning it as a “constitutional coup.”

Election monitors, including the 57-nation OSCE, reported numerous irregularities, including alleged voter intimidation, bribery, and ballot-stuffing, which they warned could have impacted the final count. Antonio Lopez-Isturiz White, a European Parliament representative with the OSCE, expressed deep concern over what he described as Georgia’s “democratic backsliding,” a sentiment echoed by European Council President Charles Michel, who urged Georgia to investigate these claims thoroughly.

The results could complicate Georgia’s stalled EU membership application, which has already been hampered by what Brussels describes as the ruling party’s authoritarian leanings. Over recent years, Georgian Dream has enacted contentious laws on “foreign agents” and LGBTQ+ rights, measures that have drawn ire from Western allies but praise from some Russian officials. The election’s rural support base for Georgian Dream contrasted with poor showings in larger cities, underscoring a divide within the country over its future political direction.

Meanwhile, Georgia’s recent history with Russia has also cast a shadow over the election. Relations between the two nations have been fraught since the 2008 war over South Ossetia, a conflict that entrenched many Georgians’ resentment toward Russia’s backing of separatist territories. Georgian Dream’s founder, billionaire Bidzina Ivanishvili, campaigned on a non-interventionist stance regarding the war in Ukraine, which resonated with some voters despite accusations of Russian sympathies.

Zourabichvili’s call for mass protests highlights a broader discontent within Georgia, where opposition leaders argue that the country’s pro-European stance has been undermined by the ruling party’s policies. Tina Bokuchava of the United National Movement went so far as to say the election was “stolen,” signaling her party’s commitment to rallying supporters and potentially boycotting parliament.

The outcome has also drawn international scrutiny, with European leaders expressing concern about Georgia’s future alignment. Germany, Estonia, and Latvia issued statements urging further investigation into electoral misconduct, while Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban, an ally of Georgian Dream, plans a solidarity visit to Georgia. His planned visit could be seen as further complicating Georgia’s relationship with Brussels, which remains cautious about Georgia’s internal political dynamics.

With the election controversy continuing to unfold, Georgia’s path to EU integration faces renewed challenges. The country’s political stability now hinges on whether the ruling party can mitigate dissent and avoid a protracted standoff with opposition forces intent on challenging the election’s legitimacy.

As the U.S. heads into the final days before its November 5 presidential election, Vice President Kamala Harris and former President Donald Trump are making a final push to secure any remaining undecided voters. Both candidates are focused on the seven battleground states that could tip the balance in what is shaping up to be one of the closest presidential races in decades.

For Harris, Pennsylvania remains a priority. She was in Philadelphia on Sunday, attending a church service and making campaign stops throughout the city. The Democratic stronghold is crucial for her path to the White House, as Pennsylvania’s 19 electoral votes are highly sought after in this tight race. Her visit marks yet another appeal to the working-class and minority voters who have long been a cornerstone of Democratic victories in the state.

In contrast, Trump is taking his campaign to Madison Square Garden in New York City. Although he has little chance of winning New York, where he earned less than 40% of the vote in 2020, Trump’s rally at the iconic venue underscores his belief that personal brand and location resonate strongly with his supporters. “It’s Madison Square Garden,” he told an interviewer, conveying the symbolic significance he attaches to the venue.

As Harris prepares to deliver her campaign’s closing address on the Ellipse in Washington on Tuesday, her team aims to draw a distinct contrast with Trump by holding the event near the site where he spoke to supporters on January 6, 2021. Her message is expected to emphasize stability, rule of law, and a rejection of political violence. The choice of location carries a subtle critique of Trump, as Harris’s address seeks to remind voters of the chaos of the Capitol riot—a moment that continues to divide public opinion.

Meanwhile, Trump has suggested he might pardon some of the January 6 rioters if he returns to the White House, a proposition that has drawn criticism from Democrats and underscores the stark divide in how each candidate frames their vision for the country.

According to the University of Florida’s Election Lab, more than 41 million Americans have already cast their ballots either in person or by mail. Early voting and mail-in balloting remain ongoing this week, with the 2020 election setting a precedent for unprecedented levels of early participation. More than 155 million Americans ultimately voted in that election, and early signs suggest the total turnout could be comparable this year.

Polling data remains razor-thin, with results depending largely on interpretation. While The New York Times and The Washington Post have reported that Harris maintains a slim lead in four of the seven battleground states, this edge is not universally supported. ABC News and RealClearPolitics.com have analyses showing Trump holding a narrow lead in aggregate polling, adding to the uncertainty around the final outcome.

The stakes in these battlegrounds—Michigan, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Georgia, North Carolina, Arizona, and Nevada—are heightened by the electoral college system, which requires a candidate to secure at least 270 of the 538 electoral votes to win the presidency. The seven states, where polling margins remain within statistical error, have therefore become the focal points for both campaigns.

Both Harris and Trump are also battling the limitations of the electoral college itself. Unlike the national popular vote, which would theoretically favor Harris in larger, Democratic-leaning states, the electoral college magnifies the influence of a small number of swing states. With Harris and Trump each projected to secure at least 200 electoral votes based on relatively safe states, the race is likely to hinge on the electoral leanings of just a few thousand voters in the remaining battlegrounds.

This final stretch is characterized by heightened efforts to motivate turnout rather than attempting to persuade. Both campaigns are banking on core supporters in the battleground states, knowing that even a slight shift in these key regions could determine the election. With both candidates having secured strong bases, Harris and Trump are now locked in an intense drive to turn out voters who are supportive but not necessarily guaranteed to head to the polls.

In the coming days, as the campaigns scramble to lock down support, the nation watches a closely contested race that remains largely undecided. If the candidates hold their ground in expected states, the ultimate decision could indeed come down to a few narrow margins in the seven battleground states, setting the stage for a possible historic recount or legal contestation if the vote count is close enough.

The recent breach of U.S. telecommunications systems by hackers linked to China has sparked significant concerns over potential foreign interference in the upcoming U.S. presidential election. Both the campaigns of Republican nominee Donald Trump and Democratic nominee Kamala Harris have been targeted in this intrusion, raising fears about cyber vulnerabilities within the U.S. infrastructure.

The FBI and the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) have confirmed they are investigating the breach, which they attribute to “Chinese-affiliated actors.” They noted that affected telecommunications companies were notified as soon as the breach was discovered and offered federal assistance to bolster defenses. Despite ongoing security measures, there are concerns that additional victims may emerge, particularly within other telecommunications systems.

While U.S. authorities are still analyzing the scale of the breach, there is heightened worry about the sensitive data that could have been compromised. Reports indicate that Chinese hackers may have specifically attempted to intercept communications on phones associated with Trump’s campaign, including data from his running mate, Senator JD Vance. Similar concerns surround Vice President Harris’s campaign, with some evidence suggesting campaign-affiliated personnel were also targeted.

The Chinese government has denied any involvement, dismissing the U.S. accusations as “disinformation” and condemning what it describes as Washington’s history of cyber espionage. The Chinese Embassy in Washington reiterated China’s opposition to all forms of cyberattacks, but Beijing’s denial has done little to quell growing tensions between the two nations.

The FBI’s February advisory, in which CISA highlighted the potential threat from the China-linked hacking group known as Volt Typhoon, underscores the risks of persistent cyber infiltration. According to the advisory, Volt Typhoon has been involved in strategic positioning within U.S. networks, potentially setting the stage for future disruptive attacks. CISA Director Jen Easterly described the group’s activities as likely “the tip of the iceberg,” suggesting that there may be further, undiscovered incursions.

The Trump campaign’s response to the breach has added a political dimension to the unfolding cyber incident. The campaign issued a statement that blamed Harris and the Democratic Party for allowing the breach, citing the incident as a form of “election interference.” Trump campaign communications director Steven Cheung accused Democrats of emboldening foreign adversaries, including China, to attack critical American infrastructure to undermine Trump’s candidacy.

U.S. intelligence agencies have, for months, raised alarms about foreign actors, specifically Russia, Iran, and China, aiming to disrupt the November election. These nations, according to a recently declassified assessment, are engaged in activities designed to stoke divisive narratives and erode public confidence in U.S. democracy. The report highlights how foreign intelligence operations may increase the risk of election-related violence by sowing discord and promoting polarizing content. Notably, there is no uniform consensus among the three countries about their desired election outcome: Russia reportedly favors Trump, Iran leans toward Harris, and China is seen as ambivalent.

In addition to election interference, the breach highlights broader concerns about U.S. cybersecurity, particularly in sectors like telecommunications. Security experts warn that foreign actors’ persistence within these systems could lead to real-time interception of critical communications or even the positioning of malicious code that could affect physical infrastructure. Given that state-sponsored cyber operations often evade detection for extended periods, as in the Volt Typhoon case, it is difficult to ascertain the full extent of the breach and its implications.

This latest incident also aligns with trends observed by private cybersecurity firms, which report increased cyber activity from actors linked to Russia, Iran, and China. U.S. officials remain vigilant against similar breaches, underscoring the need for stringent cybersecurity protocols across public and private sectors.

As the investigation continues, U.S. authorities are focused on mitigating risks, collaborating with telecommunications companies to fortify cyber defenses, and closely monitoring foreign interference threats. The breach underscores the vulnerability of critical infrastructure in an era where cyber and geopolitical landscapes are increasingly intertwined. With China and other state actors entrenched in long-term cyber operations, securing national communications remains a pivotal challenge for the United States as it navigates both election security and its broader cybersecurity strategy.

Protests erupted in Mozambique’s capital, Maputo, late Thursday following the announcement that Daniel Chapo, the ruling Frelimo party’s candidate, won the October 9 presidential election in a decisive victory. Demonstrators, challenging the legitimacy of the results, set tires ablaze and blocked main roads. Police officials reported that 371 people were arrested amid clashes that spread across the country, underscoring rising tensions over what opposition supporters have termed a flawed electoral process.

The Mozambican police deployed substantial forces, including dog units, riot police, and armored vehicles, with air support from a helicopter, to quell the protests. Tear gas permeated much of Maputo as security forces sought to disperse crowds and prevent the protests from escalating. According to Orlando Mudumane, spokesperson for Mozambique’s General Police Command, demonstrators had engaged in what he called “disorderly demonstrations” that led to widespread vandalism of public and private property, along with looting from various commercial outlets.

“We will continue our presence on the streets to prevent further violence and destruction of property,” Mudumane said, cautioning citizens to be wary of “incendiary speeches and misinformation” circulating on social media and other platforms.

The demonstrations follow several earlier protests in Maputo and Matola, where crowds gathered to express dissatisfaction with what they labeled fraudulent election results. Officially, the electoral commission declared Chapo the victor with over 70% of the vote, further cementing Frelimo’s longstanding grip on power. The results marked a significant setback for independent candidate Venancio Mondlane, who received just over 20% of the vote, and for the Renamo party, which finished third with less than 6%.

Mondlane, a former lawmaker and prominent opposition figure, called for peaceful demonstrations, urging Mozambicans to stand against what he described as pervasive corruption, electoral fraud, and police violence. The independent candidate has been vocal about the deaths of Elvino Dias and Paulo Guambe, two figures linked to the opposition Podemos party, who were killed last week in incidents many suspect are politically motivated. Mondlane has publicly held Frelimo accountable for the deaths, which sparked national outrage and prompted foreign embassies, including those of the United States, Canada, and the United Kingdom, to issue statements condemning the killings.

In a message posted on social media, Mondlane urged Mozambicans to stage a two-day national standstill. “Let every institution, public and private, come to a halt,” he wrote on Facebook, calling for a sweeping show of civil resistance to protest both the election outcome and issues plaguing Mozambique, from kidnappings to police brutality.

Criticism of the police’s handling of the protests came from international human rights organizations. Zenaida Machado, a researcher with Human Rights Watch, condemned the heavy-handed police response, emphasizing that while the state must maintain order, it must also ensure citizens’ rights to peaceful assembly. “The state, when deploying security forces, must ensure they create a safe space for people to express their grievances and protect them from harm,” Machado stated.

Concerns regarding the election’s integrity have been echoed by the European Union observer mission, which reported obstacles to conducting a full assessment of the vote. Some of the EU’s 179 observers were barred from observing vote tabulation in several districts and provinces, and they witnessed what the mission described as “unjustified alteration” of results at certain polling stations. The Southern African Development Community (SADC) has yet to release its final evaluation of the election process, but its delayed assessment has fueled additional doubts among opposition supporters.

The National Electoral Commission (CNE), responding to allegations of irregularities, stated that investigations are ongoing, though the results are provisional until validated by Mozambique’s Constitutional Council. However, with tensions escalating and scrutiny intensifying, the legitimacy of the election appears to hinge on these final assessments and the state’s response to civil unrest.

This election marks yet another chapter in Mozambique’s complex political landscape, where accusations of electoral manipulation and the suppression of opposition voices have become recurring themes. The coming days will be critical in determining whether Mozambique’s leadership can quell the discontent, restore public confidence, and navigate the challenges posed by its citizens’ demand for transparency and fairness in the democratic process.

In Mozambique’s latest presidential election, ruling party candidate Daniel Chapo secured victory with over 70% of the vote, solidifying Frelimo’s control—a position the party has maintained since the country’s independence in 1975. The results, announced by Mozambique’s National Electoral Commission, showed independent candidate Venancio Mondlane as the runner-up with 20%, while Renamo, the traditional opposition party, garnered less than 6%.

Despite the decisive margin, Mondlane has alleged widespread electoral manipulation, calling for peaceful national protests. Recent demonstrations saw police deployment of tear gas against protestors in Maputo, a response further intensified by the recent killings of opposition members Elvino Dias and Paulo Guambe. While these deaths have drawn international condemnation, including statements from the U.S., Canada, Norway, Switzerland, and the U.K., outgoing President Filipe Nyusi urged against premature conclusions regarding political motives behind the violence. The U.S. State Department echoed a call for Mozambicans to address electoral grievances peacefully.

Before the election, Adriano Nuvunga, director of Mozambique’s Center for Democracy and Human Rights, cast doubt on the potential for change, suggesting Frelimo’s dominance would persist despite popular support for Mondlane. “The terrain is already prepared…we know the status quo will prevail,” Nuvunga told VOA. Frelimo MP Sergio Pantie defended the outcome, attributing the party’s success to its “genuine popularity” among the Mozambican populace.

However, political observers, including Kenya’s Kenneth Ombongi, argue that Mozambique’s electoral process lacks the transparency seen in other African nations transitioning toward democratic reform. “In disputed elections, the opposition often claims manipulation,” Ombongi noted, adding that state responses typically include a heavy-handed security presence. The EU’s observer mission also reported irregularities, citing incidents where their personnel were obstructed during vote tabulation. They further described “unjustified alterations” in recorded vote counts at some polling stations.

Nonetheless, the generational shift represented by Chapo and Mondlane, both in their 40s, was met with cautious optimism. Kwaku Nuamah, a professor at American University, lauded the presence of younger political leaders, stating, “The youth has arrived in Mozambique…for the first time, there’s turnover from the liberationist generation. Hopefully, they’ll address issues that resonate with young Mozambicans.” He also commended outgoing President Nyusi for respecting the two-term constitutional limit—a rarity among some African leaders.

The new administration faces a complex set of challenges, particularly in the resource-rich but conflict-stricken Cabo Delgado province. Ongoing violence between insurgents and military forces there has claimed approximately 4,000 lives and displaced close to a million people since 2017, hampering major gas and oil developments. The recent withdrawal of Southern African Development Community (SADC) troops and the continued presence of Rwandan and Tanzanian forces indicate a protracted security dilemma. As Professor Nuamah emphasized, resolving Cabo Delgado’s crisis will demand robust strategies and international cooperation, including decisions about foreign military involvement and sustainable development of natural resources.

Beyond security, economic concerns loom large. Mozambique, with a reported poverty rate exceeding 60%, is rich in oil, gas, and other valuable resources, but this wealth has yet to benefit most Mozambicans. According to Ombongi, the country’s natural resources have primarily served foreign interests rather than contributing to local economic development. He attributes this to “neo-colonial tendencies” and a domestic political elite susceptible to foreign influence.

Mozambique’s future under Chapo remains uncertain, marked by formidable economic and security challenges but also by the possibility of incremental political change. Whether this will translate into tangible benefits for ordinary citizens is yet to be seen, but the pressure is on for the new administration to address economic disparity, maintain peace, and foster a more democratic process in future elections.