Even by the ugly standards of the Trump era, the campaign ahead of next week’s congressional midterm elections has been especially horrid.
During a campaign rally in Michigan, Donald Trump slandered the Democratic Senate candidate Abdul El-Sayed as a “jihadist” and a “Muslim Brotherhood member”. Earlier this month, Trump used a anti-transgender slur to attack Democratic South Carolina Senate nominee Dr Annie Andrews, a highly regarded paediatrician who has treated adults for gender identity issues at the hospital she practises at in Charleston.
And two weeks ago, immigration agents raided the Washington, DC home of the Minnesota congresswoman Ilhan Omar, purportedly in connection with a criminal fraud investigation concerning immigration paperwork. Omar, a frequent subject of Trump’s racist abuse, complained that the administration was attempting “to target political enemies and weaponise law enforcement”.
In a bygone era, we used to refer to hard-hitting campaigns as “political slugfests”, “bruising battles” and “no-holds-barred contests”. However, this is the politics of the switchblade and the broken bottle, the gutter and the cesspool. Trump’s personal attacks on political opponents have been especially vicious. Trump has set the tone. This is his business model and brand.
How much could scrapping gas standing charges save you?
Chancellor John Healey has announced that standing charges on gas bills will be scrapped from next year as part of his Budget.
The announcement is part of the Government’s “cost control framework” to drive down energy bills.
What are gas standing charges?
Gas standing charges are a fixed daily fee you pay for being connected to the gas network.
You are charges this regardless of how much gas you actually use – even if you go weeks without using any at all.
Under the current energy price cap, the average gas standing charge is 29.68p a day for households paying by Direct Debit, or £108 a year.
5 min read
What’s the catch?
- It’s important to note that scrapping the standing charge does not mean scrapping the costs it currently pays for – so the price will need to be reflected in bills elsewhere.
- Those costs will instead be moved onto the price you pay for each unit of gas.
- This means some households may see lower energy bills, while others may not notice and others may see an increase
4 min read
How much could you save?
- Only six in ten households will see the £45 drop, according to the Government.
- But whether you see a drop depends on how much gas you use, as standing charges will instead be incorporated into normal gas prices.
- Essentially, the less gas you use, the more likely you are to benefit.
- If you use more gas than most, you could see your bill increase.
go deeper on this topic
What the Budget means for your money
Chancellor John Healey has delivered his long-awaited first Budget, with a raft of changes announced. The measures include a U-turn on a planned cut to cash ISA allowances, £100 in energy support for some households, and extra taxes on banks.
Sale of nicotine products to under-18s banned in Scotland
Under-18s will be banned from purchasing all nicotine and herbal smoking products in Scotland under tougher laws being introduced to protect children and young people from smoking.
What will change?
- It will be illegal for under-18s to purchase pouches, strips and pearls, and any herbal products that can be smoked.
- Anyone selling nicotine products will have to hold a valid registration, so authorities know where products are being sold.
- Vending machines can no longer stock such items.
- Substantial discounts on nicotine products will also
be banned.
5 min read
What have health officials said?
“By banning the sale of these products to under-18s, the Scottish Government is taking a crucial step in protecting people’s health,” said public health minister Maree Todd.
“This in turn is helping people across Scotland to live longer, healthier lives.”
Scotland’s chief medical officer Gregor Smith said the changes “will help reduce
the health harms associated with nicotine
addiction and address health inequalities”.
The four snowballing crises Putin refuses
to acknowledge
Vladimir Putin believes victory over Ukraine is inevitable as his missiles pound the country with near impunity and US policy turns in his favour.
Yet Moscow is also showing signs of strain deep into the fifth year of war, with the Russian leader facing mounting problems at home and on the battlefield.
1. Russian battlefield gains stall
Russian forces have made effectively
zero progress on a series of failed offensives this year, according to the latest analysis by the Institute for the Study of War (ISW) in Washington, DC.
While Russian officials claimed that they had seized 6,500 square kilometres since the start of the year, the ISW put this at closer to 73 square kilometres, and since September the Russians had lost 240 square kilometres.
2. The manpower problem
Russia’s poor battlefield situation has come at the cost of around 40,000 casualties per month, the heaviest losses of the war, according to estimates.
3 min read
3. Energy drain
Even as Russia escalates attacks on Ukraine’s energy grid for a fifth winter,
its own fuel sector is buckling under a relentless campaign of Ukrainian drone strikes.
- Every oil refinery in western Russia has been hit during this campaign, taking out between one-third to half of the country’s refining capacity by different estimates. Only five refineries remain untouched, according to the International Energy Agency.
4. Economic decline
New budget proposals sent to Russia’s parliament this month show an ongoing transition to a war economy at the population’s expense.
Spending on defence is projected to grow to 7 per cent of Russian GDP, while ordinary Russians and small businesses face interest rates of 14 per cent and inflation that is approaching 8 per cent – pushing up prices for petrol and household goods.
Putin still believes victory is close
Despite the political and economic
pressures the Kremlin is facing, Putin thinks victory is close and is promising Russians the end is in sight, said Anna Matveeva of the Russia Institute at King’s College London.
“Putin is signalling to Russians that Ukraine is not going to hold on for very long, that the military campaign has been making good progress and that society just needs to hold on for a few more months,” Matveeva said.
El-Sayed, a left-wing Democrat fighting to become the US’s first-ever Muslim senator, has been singled out more than any other candidate. El-Sayed, Trump has blasted, is a “jihadist” who was “on the side of the terrorists” and would “have to go through a metal detector before he’s allowed to go into the Senate”. Stopping El-Sayed reaching the US Senate has been likened by Trump to preventing Al-Qaeda hijackers boarding flights ahead on September 11th.
Trump has claimed this Michigan-born former public health official is “a Muslim Brotherhood guy, 100 per cent”, and mockingly calls him “Mohammed”. Trump told a rally in Tennessee: “Somebody said, ‘His name isn’t Mohammed, it’s Abdul’. To me, it’s Mohammed. I’m the President. I can call him whatever the hell I want. To me, he’s Mohammed, and he’s a radical jihadist’.”
In the face of Trump’s Islamophobia, El-Sayed had proven himself a tough, counter-punching opponent. “My name is not the reason you can’t afford your gas,” said El-Sayed, focusing attention on the cost of living issues that have made Trump so unpopular. “I don’t care how he pronounces my name, I don’t even care that he remembers my whole name because he can just go on and call me ‘senator’ after November. That’ll be Senator Muhammad to you, bro.”
Anti-Muslim demagoguery has long been an essential part of Trump’s arsenal. In 2015, during his first presidential campaign, he promised “a total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States”.
Ilhan Omar, the first Somali-American to win election to Congress, who became a naturalised US citizen in 2000, has been a frequent target of his misogyny and racism. During a rally in Ohio this month, Trump called her “a disaster” and told his moshpit of Maga faithful: “She comes in from a country without laws, without police, without military, where all they do is shoot each other. And she comes into our country, and she says, ‘I have a constitutional right’.”
In the Texas Senate race, Trump has taken aim at James Talarico, who stands a chance of becoming the first Lone Star state Democrat to win election to the US Senate since 1988. “TalaFREAKo”, Trump has labelled him, as well as claiming, in this famously carnivorous state, that he’s a vegan.
Recently, Talarico, who is not vegan, took a break from campaigning to recover from flu. His absence fuelled Trump’s attacks. “I hear the guy has disappeared,” Trump claimed during a rally in Texas. “He’s sick because he’s forced to eat meat for political reasons and he’s throwing up all over the place.”
“Where do you think they hid that little socialist?” the Republican Senate candidate Ken Paxton chimed in. Vice-President JD Vance has insinuated that Talarico is gay. “I love you too sir,” replied Vance after a male supporter voiced his admiration during a rally in Texas. “In a totally platonic way, to be clear. I’m the Vice-President, not James Talarico.”
In the Ohio gubernatorial race, Trump backed a controversial attack ad made by GOP nominee Vivek Ramaswamy featuring the estranged mother of the Democratic candidate Amy Acton. On camera, Donna Arthur, who stood by the man criminally charged with raping her daughter as a child, claimed that Acton lied about her past.
Acton alleged that, between the ages of nine and 12, her mother’s second husband sexually assaulted her, and her campaign has provided documents showing that he was charged with rape and was indicted by a grand jury, but fled before he could be tried.
Amid calls from senior Republicans to pull the ad, Trump described it as “very powerful” and noted on Truth Social: “Frankly, anybody whose mother spoke about a daughter in that way would normally lead to the daughter being precluded from serving in Office, let alone the Office of Governor.”
Trump, like most presidents in midterm elections, is expected to suffer setbacks. Only four times since the Civil War in the mid-19th century has the presidential party not lost ground. This time, the stakes are especially high. If the Democrats win control of the House of Representatives, which is likely, and the Senate, which is now a possibility, they will be able to conduct investigations into alleged corruption within his administration and have subpoena power to pursue those inquiries.
With a majority in the House, the Democrats could also impeach Trump for a third time (previously only two presidents were successfully impeached, Bill Clinton in 1998 and Andrew Johnson 130 years earlier – Richard Nixon resigned before the House voted). The closer the elections have come, the more desperate and savage Trump’s personal attacks have been on opponents.
The fact usually safe Republican Senate seats are now competitive may also have stoked Trump’s hateful rhetoric. In Kansas, for example, he took aim at Democratic challenger Adam Hamilton, a well-liked pastor and the founder of the country’s largest United Methodist congregation. Trump called him a “bad person” and a “disgrace”. At the same rally, Trump resumed his attacks on El-Sayed and Omar, and promised the incumbent Republican senator Roger Marshall would fight against what he called “hostile third-world migrants”, “jihadists” and “communists”. Kansas has not returned a Democrat to the Senate in 94 years. Ordinarily, Trump would not even have had to campaign in this Republican bastion.
It is hard to recall an uglier midterm congressional campaign, and worryingly we may be watching a prelude of what lies ahead. With the Republicans expected to suffer setbacks, Trump may try to disrupt the vote by dispatching federal agents to polling stations, interrupt the count, and contest results that go against the Republican Party. Meanwhile, Senior Democrats, including Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer and House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, last week filed a lawsuit in federal court to prevent the Trump administration from usurping states’ authority to administer elections or trying to intimidate state and local election officials into complying with illegal demands.
Presently, he is attacking Democrats. After polling day on Tuesday, the man who refused to accept his defeat in the 2020 presidential election could mount another assault on democracy.