gma wowowin

Urban Outfitters Stock Slips Ahead Of Q3 Earnings: Retail’s NeutralAaditya writes to CM over illegal poster menace

NoneEldorado Gold Releases Updated Mineral Reserve and Mineral Resource Statement; 2024 Gold ...

Despite what you may have heard, the 2024 election was pretty close . President-elect Donald Trump won a clear victory in the Electoral College, but he leads outgoing Vice President Kamala Harris in the national popular vote by only 1.5 percentage points, 49.8 percent to 48.3 percent* — one of the smallest margins ever in a presidential race. Nonetheless, the magnitude of Trump's triumph may appear much larger because it featured a major swing to the right from where the nation voted in 2020. As President Joe Biden defeated Trump by about 4.5 points nationally four years ago, Trump's 2024 advantage represents about a 6-point shift to the right, which is the largest swing toward either party since 2008. Back then, Barack Obama's 7.3-point edge represented a nearly 10-point swing to the left from George W. Bush's 2.5-point win in 2004. Yet the national swing only tells part of the story. What particularly stands out this year is the breadth of the swing in Trump's direction across not only the 50 states and the District of Columbia, but also an overwhelming majority of the more than 3,000 counties or their equivalents in the United States. Compared with his showing in 2020, Trump didn't pick up a huge amount of ground in many places, but he did gain at least a little bit nearly everywhere. We can see this by drilling into the state-level and county-level data below. Every state swung to the right in 2024 From one presidential election to the next, more states usually swing toward the party that gains ground compared with how it performed four years earlier. However, it's rare for every state to move in the same direction, even in elections where one candidate wins decisively. After all, changes in the makeup of the party coalitions and the varying appeal of individual candidates can lead different states to move in opposite directions. Plus, at least in a few historical cases, a third-party candidate may have won a meaningful share of the vote that cut more into one party's coalition than another. But in 2024, all 50 states and D.C. swung to the right to varying degrees based on their margins versus the 2020 race. This marked the first presidential election since 1976 in which all 51 components of the Electoral College moved in the same direction relative to how they voted four years earlier. Unlike 1976, though, all 50 states and D.C. moved to the right in 2024 even though the previous election was also highly competitive. That wasn't the case in the closely fought 1976 race won by Jimmy Carter: His victory came four years after a landslide result in 1972 , when Richard Nixon carried 49 states and won by 23 points nationally — the largest popular vote edge a candidate has earned in the post-World War II era — making 1976's leftward swing more of a return to a highly competitive baseline. Although six other elections since 1976 featured larger swings than in 2024, at least one state in each of those contests still moved toward the party that lost ground. In 1980, Vermont was the only state where Carter's margin improved even as he lost reelection badly to Ronald Reagan. In 1984, Reagan built significantly on his 1980 margins while winning the only definite landslide since Nixon's 1972 victory, but seven states and D.C. still voted more Democratic than they had four years earlier. Republicans lost ground in 49 states while winning again in 1988, but George H.W. Bush's margin grew very slightly over Reagan's in Tennessee and D.C. When the elder Bush lost reelection in 1992, he did worse in nearly every state, but still managed to improve his margin slightly in Iowa. And when Obama won by the largest margin in recent years in 2008, five now-dark red states trended right (Arkansas, Louisiana, Oklahoma, Tennessee and West Virginia). While every state swung to the right in 2024, the extent of that swing did vary quite a bit. Weighted by each state's share of the national popular vote, the average state shifted 5.6 points to the right by margin from its 2020 result. Leading the way was New York, which Harris only won by about 13 points after Biden carried it by 23 points — a swing of more than 10 points. Other populous blue states like New Jersey (10 points) and California (9 points) also swung notably to the right, as did large red states like Florida (10 points) and Texas (8 points). Conversely, 36 states and D.C. shifted to the right by less than the weighted average. Those states tended to be less populous and therefore more rural, but also include most of the seven principal swing states in the 2024 race, which had the most concentrated campaign attention and spending during the election. Of those, only Arizona had a larger-than-average shift to the right of 5.8 points, while Nevada's 5.5-point rightward shift was about the same as the weighted average. Beyond that, Michigan swung just 4.2 points to the right, and the other four swing states — Georgia, North Carolina, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin — all swung right by fewer than 3 points. Of all the states, Washington state had the smallest swing to the right, going from Biden +19 to Harris +18. The Washington outcome serves as yet another reminder that you should never rely on one data point as an indicator of things to come. After all, Washington's blanket and top-two primary results have often served as a decent predictor for the national political environment in the ensuing November election. But in 2024, Democrats running for the U.S. House of Representatives did better in the state's top-two primaries than they performed in 2020 or 2022, yet the November results saw Republicans nationally do much better than in 2020 and similar to their 2022 result in the national popular vote for the House. Most counties swung right to a small or medium degree Naturally, as one party gains more compared to the last election, it tends to gain a larger share of voters across the nation's counties, and county-level data can help us understand the depth and breadth of the swing behind an election's outcome. But a simple count of the number of counties that moved in one direction isn't especially helpful in painting this picture. After all, most counties are rural (and consistently conservative-leaning), but rocks and trees can't vote. Carter's 1976 victory was the last time a Democratic presidential nominee won more counties than the Republican did, yet Democrats have won five of the 12 White House contests since then. To get a read on the scope of county-level swings, it's more useful to consider the share of the nation's overall vote found in counties that moved toward one party or the other. That way, we better account for the vast differences in population across counties. By this measure, the rightward swing of Trump's 2024 victory featured substantial breadth. Compared with the 2020 election, 92 percent of voters lived in counties (or their equivalents) that swung toward Trump, while only 8 percent lived in places that moved toward Harris. The only recent election to rival that span is Obama's 2008 win, when 92 percent of voters lived in counties that swung to the left from the 2004 election. Now, the depth of Trump's swing was somewhat shallower than Obama's 2008 win, which isn't necessarily surprising considering 2008 saw a bigger overall swing nationally (9.7 points to the left). More than half of all votes in 2008 came from places that swung at least 10 points to the left by margin. By comparison, only 11 percent of 2024 votes hailed from counties that swung more than 10 points to the right, while 81 percent overall came from counties that shifted between zero and 10 points to the right. Compared to recent contests besides 2008, though, the broad scope of Trump's gains across much of the country seem striking. The third-biggest swing in the past quarter century after 2008 and 2024 came in 2012, when Obama won reelection but the country as a whole swung 3.4 points to the right. Yet even as much of the country swung slightly to the right that year, about 1 in 4 votes still came from counties that moved at least somewhat to the left. In 2020, we saw a similar story: Biden swung the country about 2.4 points to the left from 2016, but a tad more than 1 in 4 votes came from counties that swung right toward Trump. Another data point further suggests that the shift from 2020 to 2024 was not just broad, but especially consistent in its impacts across the country. Overall, the correlation between each county's margin in 2020 compared with 2024 was .995 on a scale of -1 to 1 — a near-perfect positive association between the two elections, and the strongest between the results in any two consecutive presidential elections dating back to 2000. To be clear, this does not mean that the results were the same in each county in 2020 and 2024. Rather, it broadly means that the more Republican a county voted in 2020, the more Republican it tended to vote in 2024. Although results in other recent pairs of elections have been highly correlated as well, the 2020-24 comparison is particularly notable because such an incredibly strong association happened even while the country swung 6 points to the right. This suggests that, broadly speaking, this ample national swing did not vary massively across the country. By contrast, the sizable 10-point swing to the left in 2008 from 2004 had a county-level correlation of .933, meaning that while the margins across counties were relatively similar, more places still saw some substantial movement that didn't correspond as closely. And in 2016, which saw particularly large county-level swings from 2012 because of the shifting nature of the Democratic and Republican coalitions at the start of the Trump era, the correlation between the two contests was .945. *** The breadth of the nation's rightward swing could suggest a couple of larger possibilities. Considering 2008 saw the only similarly large national shift in recent times amid financial and global turmoil, the broad swing in 2024 seems to be another point in favor of larger fundamentals-based reasons for the shifts in this election. Dissatisfaction with the economic status quo and immigration, along with high disapproval of the incumbent president, were all clear boons for Trump's candidacy. At the same time, Trump's gains may have greater resonance moving forward. The relative consistency of the county-level shifts suggests that there weren't major coalition shifts this year, but even minor swings could be a harbinger. Notably, Trump improved most in more urban and more racially diverse places . Odds are that the 2028 election results will be highly correlated with the 2024 results, so even small coalition changes in this election could have a long-term impact on the makeup of the parties and the preferences of voters as we look ahead to future elections. Footnote * 2024 data is based on unofficial election results from ABC News as of 12 p.m. Eastern on Dec. 10, 2024.

Kemi Badenoch has long proved herself to be a gaffe-prone politician - and that trend has not ended since she was elected Tory leader. In the the race to replace Rishi Sunak , the former Business Secretary found herself at the mercy of headline after headline amid interview car crashes and bizarre moments. At the Tory conference in September, she caused a huge row after claiming maternity pay was "overburdening businesses". Elsewhere during the conference she said between 5% and 10% of civil servants are "should-be-in-prison bad" . This would mean between 25,000 and 50,000 were put behind bars. During the same month she was mocked after claiming she became working class when she got a job in McDonalds. Since becoming the leader of the Conservative Party on November 2, Ms Badenoch has had a rocky road. Her performances at the weekly Prime Minister's Questions clash with Keir Starmer have been branded underwhelming - and the latest YouGov polling shows more than half of Brits think she does not look like a Prime Minister in waiting. Here The Mirror takes a look at some of her top gaffes and weird moments since becoming Tory leader. 1. Partygate was 'overblown' A day after becoming Tory leader, Ms Badenoch thought it would be a good idea to declare Boris Johnson a "great" Prime Minister and that the Partygate scandal was "overblown". In her first major interview since winning the contest to replace Mr Sunak , Ms Badenoch suggested the problem instead was with the Covid fines. During his time in No10, Mr Johnson became the first sitting PM to be sanctioned by police after he was found to have breached his own Covid rules. Despite being among dozens who resigned from his government in July 2022, Ms Badenoch told the BBC's Sunday with Laura Kuenssberg: "I thought he was a great Prime Minister. "But there were some serious issues which were not being resolved and I think that during that tenure the public thought that we were not speaking for them or looking out for them, we were in it for ourselves." She went on: "Some of those things I think were perception issues, a lot of the stuff that happened around partygate was not why I resigned. I thought that it was overblown. We should not have created fixed penalty notices, for example. That was us not going with our principles." She added that the public was "not wrong to be upset about partygate", but said : "The problem was that we should not have criminalised everyday activities the way that we did." At the time, chair of the Labour Party Ellie Reeves said: “Listening to Kemi Badenoch dismiss Partygate as 'overblown' will add insult to injury for families across Britain who followed the rules, missing loved one’s deaths and family funerals, whilst her colleagues partied in Downing Street." 2. Misleading attack at PMQs At the start of November Kemi Badenoch used her first PMQs session to launch a misleading attack on the Government over defence spending. The new Tory leader told MPs there was nothing in the October Budget on defence spending. In fact Chancellor Rachel Reeves announced an additional £2.9billion for the Ministry of Defence and said the Government would "set a path" to spending 2.5% of GDP on defending the country. Ms Badenoch told the PM: "His Chancellor's Budget did not even mention defence. The Chancellor's budget last week was a copy and paste of Bidenomics. It turns out that a high spending, high borrowing, high inflation approach is less popular than she may have thought." The PM shot back: "The one thing I learned as leader of the opposition it is a good idea to listen to what the Government is actually saying. I think she said defence wasn't mentioned in the Budget. It was seven days ago and it is absolutely clear and central to the Budget." He said that the Government is committed to bringing defence spending to 2.5% - and pointed out that the last time this was achieved was under the last Labour government. 3. Sandwich In December Kemi Badenoch triggered a bizarre row after launching an attack on sandwiches - and dismissing them as not "real food". It caused Keir Starmer to issue a defence of sandwiches as a "great British institution" . In a magazine interview, she said "lunch is for wimps" before ranting: "I don't think sandwiches are a real food, it's what you have for breakfast." Describing her daily routine, Ms Badenoch said: "What's a lunch break? Lunch is for wimps. I have food brought in and I work and eat at the same time." She added that she "will not touch bread if it’s moist”. And in another weird turn, she revealed that she sometimes has a steak brought to her as she works. No10 was having none of it. The PM's official spokesman said at the time: "I think he was surprised to hear that the leader of the Opposition has a steak brought in for lunch. The Prime Minister is quite happy with a sandwich lunch." He added that the PM "enjoys a tuna sandwich and occasionally a cheese toastie". Ms Badenoch's rant was a far cry from her predecessor's equally odd moment, in which Mr Sunak claimed his favourite meal is "sandwiches" in a cringe-worthy appearance on ITV's This Morning in July. 4. Criticism of PM backfires In another wobbly PMQs moment in November, Ms Badenoch appeared to read from her pre-prepared lines as she attacked the government's "cruel family farms tax" over a changes in October's Budget. But it landed her in trouble when moments after she attempted to attack Mr Starmer on his "scripted lines". It caused a severe mocking from the PM , who drew loud laughter from the Labour benches. He responded sharply: "I'm happy to help the leader of the opposition. If she's going to complain about scripted answers, it's probably best not to read that from a script. "I'm glad she's raised farmers. Because the budget last week put £5billion over the next two years into farming. That's the single biggest increase, unlike the £300million which was underspent under the last government. But when it comes to inheritance, the vast vast majority of farmers will be unaffected, as she well knows; as they well know." 5. Flat-rate tax is an attractive idea In December Ms Badenoch came under fire after suggesting millionaires should pay the same rate of tax as the poor. The Tory leader faced comparisons to Liz Truss after saying a flat tax rate is a "very attractive" idea. She made the comments at a theatre that was ironically showing a pantomime of Robin Hood - the heroic character known for helping the poor. Ms Badenoch said the country couldn't afford to introduce a flat rate of tax at the moment and that the cost of welfare, such as benefits, in the country needs to be "turned around" to do so. The comments triggered comparisons to disastrous ex-PM Ms Truss , who tried to push for tax cuts for the rich but crashed the economy with her unfunded promises. At the time in 2022, Ms Truss admitted her plans would disproportionately benefit wealthy people. Currently British people pay different levels of tax depending on their tax band - which is determined by how much they earn. Critics have warned that introducing a flat rate in the UK would mean low paid earners would face a tax rise, while high earners would face a tax rise. Labour analysis showed that Ms Badenoch's idea could see low earners facing a £1,200 tax hike , while the highest earners would get a tax cut of more than £5,000. A Labour spokesman hit back: “ Kemi Badenoch needs to come clean about how much she would hike taxes on working people to pay for tax cuts for the super-rich. While Labour protects working people with no tax rises on their payslips, the Tories are bringing out the ghost of Christmas past with these Truss-style tax cuts for millionaires. They haven’t listened and they haven’t learnt.” 6. Row with Nigeria A row erupted earlier in December between Kemi Badenoch and the Nigerian Vice-President Kashim Shettima, who hit out at the Tory leader for having talked down Nigeria. Ms Badenoch, who was born in the UK but mostly raised in the West African country, previously said "fear was everywhere" during her childhood in Lagos. Nigerian Vice-President Kashim Shettima suggested Ms Badenoch could "remove the Kemi from her name" if she was not proud of her "nation of origin". During a speech, he said his government was "proud" of her "in spite of her efforts at denigrating her nation of origin." The audience applauded him as he added: "She is entitled to her own opinions; she has even every right to remove the Kemi from her name but that does not underscore the fact that the greatest black nation on earth is the nation called Nigeria." He compared her comments to Mr Sunak's pride in his Indian heritage, describing him as "a brilliant young man" who "never denigrated his nation of ancestry". Ms Badenoch's spokesman hit back that she "stands by what she says" and "is not the PR for Nigeria". "She is the leader of the opposition and she is very proud of her leadership of the opposition in this country," he said. "She tells the truth. She tells it like it is. She is not going to couch her words." 7. Fumbling words in PMQs In another on-edge moment in PMQs, confusion circled the chamber as Ms Badenoch fumbled her words - which ended up making no sense. Talking about Mr Starmer's Cop29 trip, Ms Badenoch said: "I welcome the Prime Minister back from his trip to Azerbaijan where he has unilaterally made commitments that will make life more experience (sic) back home." MPs in the Commons wondered what she was talking about... As she continued, it became apparent she had meant to say "expensive". She went on: "He has made life more expensive with his unilateral commitments but speaking of making life more expensive, will the Prime Minister confirm that he will keep the cap on council tax?" The PM replied: "She talks of the trip to Cop. I'm very proud of the fact that we're restoring leadership on climate. That will be measured in lower bills, on energy independence and the jobs of the future." He added: "On the question of councils, she knows what the arrangements are." Be the first with news from Mirror Politics BLUESKY: Follow our Mirror Politics account on Bluesky here . And follow our Mirror Politics team here - Lizzy Buchan , Jason Beattie , Kevin Maguire , Sophie Huskisson , Dave Burke , Ashley Cowburn , Mikey Smith POLITICS WHATSAPP: Be first to get the biggest bombshells and breaking news by joining our Politics WhatsApp group here . We also treat our community members to special offers, promotions, and adverts from us and our partners. If you want to leave our community, you can check out any time you like. If you’re curious, you can read our Privacy Notice . NEWSLETTER: Or sign up here to the Mirror's Politics newsletter for all the best exclusives and opinions straight to your inbox. PODCAST: And listen to our exciting new political podcast The Division Bell , hosted by the Mirror and the Express every Thursday. 8. Bizarre agreement with PM In another weird PMQs moment in November, Ms Badenoch attacked Labour's economic announcements - including on money for local authorities - before bizarrely agreeing with Mr Starmer's comeback. In her rant, the Tory leader called Rachel Reeves a "copy and paste chancellor" and claimed "it is clear they had not thought through the impact of the Budget". But Mr Starmer hit back and said Labour's October Budget "does not increase tax on working people" and is putting huge investment into the NHS, schools and housing. The PM added: "If she's against those things, she should say so." In response, Ms Badenoch surprisingly agreed: "I'm not against any of those things, of course not, none of us are against any of those things. But he has confirmed that he does not know what is going on. "The Prime Minister probably does not realise that on Monday the Ministry for Communities, Local Government and Housing revealed that councils will need to find an additional £2.4 billion in council tax next year. That is a lot more than £600 million. I know that he has been away, but did the Deputy Prime Minister who runs that department make him aware of their £2.4billion black hole?" Mr Starmer replied: "Let me get this straight, she doesn't want any of the measures in the Budget, but she wants all the benefits. So the budget management is back after two weeks in office. They've learned absolutely nothing. We put forward a Budget which takes the difficult decisions, fixing the £22billion black hole, investing in the future of our country. They say they want all of that, but they don't know how they're going to pay for it - same old Tories." 9. Laughing at MP's question In November Ms Badenoch was called out on social media for laughing after an MP criticised her for saying maternity pay is "excessive". The new Tory leader came under fire at the Conservative Party conference in September that maternity pay had gone “too far”. She rowed back on her comments after widespread criticism, claiming “of course” she believes in maternity pay. But she maintained that maternity pay - as well as minimum wage - was "overburdening businesses" . During the PMqs session, Labour MP Lloyd Hatton asked Mr Starmer : "Members have raised their concerns of a range of damaging policies pursued by the Leader of the Opposition. These include voting against critical investment for our NHS , stating maternity pay is excessive and that the minimum wage is a burden, and even backing harmful backing when last in government." The camera then cut to Ms Badenoch laughing on the opposition benches in the Commons. Ms Badenoch hit back: "The Prime Minister can plant as many questions as he likes with his backbenchers but at the end of the day I am the one he has to face at the despatch box."

Make beef tenderloin for that holiday feastPM setup body to resolve issues between PML-N, PPPOOH Campaign Highlights the Power of Donating During the Thanksgiving Season NEW YORK , Nov. 26, 2024 /PRNewswire/ -- OUTFRONT Media (NYSE: OUT), one of the largest out-of-home (OOH) media companies in the U.S., has unveiled a new campaign with The Farmlink Project, the fastest-growing solution in the charitable food space, to drive home an important food insecurity fact on Thanksgiving. The campaign, running now through Friday, Dec. 6 , features the line " $1 = 17 lbs of food saved" to jolt audiences into action. OUTFRONT Studios and Farmlink's creative team produced the campaign, which also marks the debut of Farmlink's rebrand. The creative can be seen on digital billboards across the country, securing additional impressions with holiday traffic at an all time high. The campaign's message encourages audiences to make a big impact toward battling food insecurity through a small action during Thanksgiving, the largest event for food consumption in the U.S., and Giving Tuesday, an annual global generosity movement. For the month of December, every dollar donated to Farmlink will be matched to provide 32 pounds of food to families in need. "In collaboration with OUTFRONT, we are able to expand our mission of supporting farmers and feeding families by inspiring people to take simple actions," said Aidan Reilly , Head of Partnerships at Farmlink. "Collectively, those efforts can add up to help us reach our goal of raising $100K in December." As a partner of OUTFRONT since 2021, Farmlink has helped further OUTFRONT's purpose of helping people, places and businesses grow stronger. "Fighting food insecurity continues to be one of OUTFRONT's most important causes, driven by our employees," said Liz Rave , Vice President, Marketing at OUTFRONT. "This timely Thanksgiving campaign is our latest effort to support and amplify Farmlink's mission at a critical time for food insecurity solutions. We are also proud to be making a monetary donation of our own this holiday season." The Farmlink Project was born as a student movement at the onset of the pandemic in an effort to support a local food bank in Los Angeles . Having delivered nearly 300 million pounds of food which otherwise would have gone to waste to families across North America , Farmlink is driven by the belief that hunger can be solved in the U.S. using already grown food. About OUTFRONT Media Inc. OUTFRONT leverages the power of technology, location and creativity to connect brands with consumers outside of their homes through one of the largest and most diverse sets of billboard, transit, and mobile assets in the United States . Through its technology platform, OUTFRONT will fundamentally change the ways advertisers engage audiences on-the-go. OUTFRONT Media Contacts: Matt Biscuiti Courtney Richards The Lippin Group OUTFRONT Media 212-986-7080 646-876-9404 outfront@lippingroup.com courtney.richards@OUTFRONT.com Stephan Bisson OUTFRONT Media 212-297-6573 stephan.bisson@outfront.com View original content to download multimedia: https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/outfront-media-and-the-farmlink-project-unveil-new-campaign-to-fight-food-insecurity-302317001.html SOURCE OUTFRONT Media Inc.