Begum Khaleda Zia, a dominant force in Bangladeshi politics for over four decades and the nation’s first female prime minister, passed away on Tuesday in Dhaka following a long battle with illness. She was 80, according to officials.

The interim government has declared that her funeral will take place on Wednesday with full state honors. She will be laid to rest next to her husband, the late President Ziaur Rahman.

As chairperson of the Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP), Khaleda Zia held the office of prime minister on three occasions, becoming the country’s first woman in that role. Leaders from around the globe, including those from India, the United States, China, and Pakistan, paid tribute to her, recognizing her significant contributions to Bangladesh’s contemporary political landscape.

Born in 1945, she entered politics after the 1981 assassination of her husband, Ziaur Rahman, a former army chief who founded the BNP and led the country during a phase of military rule. Assuming leadership of the party, Khaleda Zia advanced rapidly, guiding a popular movement that restored parliamentary democracy after years of authoritarian governance and securing the premiership in 1991.

Her tenures included a full term from 1991 to 1996, a short stint later that year, and another complete term from 2001 to 2006. These periods saw Bangladesh shift toward economic liberalization and deeper ties with regional and global partners.

Her career was defined by an intense rivalry with Sheikh Hasina of the Awami League, daughter of Bangladesh’s independence leader Sheikh Mujibur Rahman. This contest between the two women shaped national politics for decades, frequently resulting in political gridlock, mass protests, and outbreaks of unrest.

Supporters praise her for bolstering democratic frameworks and pursuing balanced foreign policy, while detractors blamed her governments for corruption, poor administration, and fostering instability. In her later years, she faced multiple corruption convictions and imprisonment, which the BNP denounced as politically driven.

Her health deteriorated markedly in the last decade due to various chronic conditions, limiting her public appearances as she sought treatment domestically and overseas. Nonetheless, she continued as the BNP’s iconic figure, especially amid party challenges from governmental pressures.

Upon news of her passing, top BNP officials hailed her as pivotal to Bangladesh’s democratic progress and urged peaceful remembrance. Mourners assembled at her Dhaka home for prayers and tributes, with party flags flown at half-mast nationwide.

The interim administration announced enhanced security in the capital for the funeral, anticipated to draw prominent politicians, diplomats, and international delegates.

Khaleda Zia’s death signifies the conclusion of an era in Bangladeshi politics, marked by fierce competition, widespread mobilization, and the profound impact of two influential dynasties on the nation’s history since independence.

A New Era of Leadership Emerges

Zohran Mamdani, at just 34 years old, has been elected as New York City’s next mayor, becoming the first Muslim to hold the position and one of the youngest in the city’s storied history. This triumph transcends local politics, reflecting a broader ideological struggle as Donald Trump’s second presidency begins. Born to Ugandan-Indian immigrants and raised in Queens, Mamdani’s background in grassroots organizing and democratic socialism shaped his campaign, which emphasized housing improvements, equitable taxes, and climate adaptation. These priorities struck a chord with young people and working-class groups disillusioned by conventional politics. Democrats view his success as a revitalizing force for progressives amid the party’s efforts to regain footing post-Trump’s win, embodying a more inclusive, vocal, and policy-focused generation of leaders.

Tensions Rise Between Local Progressivism and National Conservatism

Mamdani’s agenda, including higher taxes on the ultra-wealthy, has sparked backlash from financial hubs like Wall Street and even the federal government. President Trump has warned of cutting city funding, labeling the plans as detrimental to business. Analysts predict this sets the stage for conflicts reminiscent of past disputes between Democratic state leaders and the White House during Trump’s initial term, positioning urban mayors like Mamdani as key resistors to conservative policies. On the international front, his ascent has inspired left-leaning figures in Europe and Asia, who see it as evidence of surging grassroots and reformist movements. In regions like India and Africa, it symbolizes enhanced representation for immigrants in global power centers, with experts stressing that his background can foster unity rather than division.

Challenges and Opportunities for the Democratic Future

Mamdani distinguishes himself by merging bold activism with practical solutions, prioritizing urban advancements like affordable homes, green energy, and better public transportation, alongside reforms in policing and mental health. The real hurdle will be turning these visions into reality amid administrative hurdles, budget limits, and opposition. For Democrats eyeing midterms, his model of community-driven campaigns and donor strategies offers inspiration, yet experts caution that urban progressive successes may not easily scale to broader elections, where moderate voters in key states often resist fiscal expansions. Ultimately, Mamdani’s story heralds a shift toward genuine, action-oriented politics that could redefine the left, providing an optimistic alternative in a polarized landscape under Trump’s renewed conservative push.

National Security Fears Spark Push for TikTok Overhaul

For years, TikTok has captivated millions with its addictive short-form videos, but beneath the viral dances and trends lurks a geopolitical storm. Owned by Chinese tech giant ByteDance, the app has faced intense scrutiny from U.S. officials over potential national security risks. Lawmakers argue that ByteDance’s connections to Beijing could allow the Chinese government to access data from TikTok’s staggering 170 million American users, turning the platform into a tool for espionage or influence operations. TikTok and ByteDance have consistently dismissed these claims, insisting on robust data protections and independence from state control. Yet, similar concerns have triggered bans or restrictions in countries like India, Australia, and parts of Europe, highlighting a global unease with Chinese-owned tech.

The tipping point came in April 2024, when Congress passed bipartisan legislation, swiftly signed by then-President Joe Biden, mandating ByteDance to sell TikTok’s U.S. operations within nine months or face a nationwide shutdown. Framed as a safeguard against foreign threats, the bill cited fears of data harvesting and algorithmic manipulation that could amplify propaganda. TikTok fired back, labeling the law “unconstitutional” and warning of dire consequences for free speech, economic livelihoods, and cultural expression. The company launched aggressive legal battles, including appeals to federal courts, but these efforts crumbled under judicial rulings favoring national security priorities. ByteDance, meanwhile, publicly vowed never to divest, setting the stage for a high-stakes standoff.

Enter Donald Trump, who reclaimed the White House in January 2025 after a contentious election. Extending the original deadline multiple times, Trump signaled a willingness to negotiate rather than enforce an outright ban, a shift from his first-term rhetoric, where he had once threatened to prohibit the app entirely. His administration’s extensions bought time for deal-making, reflecting a pragmatic blend of protectionism and economic realism. By September 2025, with the clock ticking, Trump announced a breakthrough: a deal that keeps TikTok alive in America under new, predominantly U.S. ownership. This resolution not only averts a digital catastrophe but also underscores the evolving U.S.-China tech rivalry, where apps like TikTok become proxies in broader trade and security battles.

Deal Structure: U.S. Control Over Algorithms and Data

At the heart of the agreement is a $14 billion valuation for TikTok’s U.S. entity, now transitioning to a joint venture dominated by American investors. Trump, flanked by Vice President JD Vance in the Oval Office, unveiled key players: Oracle Corporation, led by Trump ally Larry Ellison; media titan Rupert Murdoch of Fox Corporation; Dell Technologies founder Michael Dell; and private equity firm Silver Lake, known for its sports investments like Manchester City’s parent group. Officials have hinted at recruiting “patriotic” backers, with rumors swirling around figures like OnlyFans creator Tim Stokely and YouTube star MrBeast (Jimmy Donaldson). This consortium will hold six of seven board seats, capping Chinese ownership at under 20%,  a structure designed to insulate the app from Beijing’s influence.

The crown jewel, and most contentious element, is TikTok’s algorithm, the AI-driven engine that curates hyper-personalized feeds, fueling user engagement and ad revenue. Under the deal, the U.S. version will deploy a retooled algorithm, derived from the original but retrained solely on American user data to prioritize local preferences and compliance. “Trusted security partners” will oversee all updates, data flows, and code changes, ensuring transparency and preventing backdoors. Oracle, already storing U.S. user data on domestic servers since a 2022 pact, will expand its role as the app’s technological backbone, adding layers of encryption and audits.

This setup complies with the 2024 law’s divestiture mandates, according to White House officials, who emphasize that it neutralizes security risks without killing the platform. Operationally, the new TikTok U.S. will function independently, with enhanced privacy features and content moderation tailored to American standards. Financially, the deal injects capital for innovation, potentially accelerating features like e-commerce integrations and AI enhancements. Critics, however, question whether fragmenting the global algorithm could dilute the app’s magic, leading to a less engaging experience. Proponents argue it’s a win-win: preserving jobs for thousands of U.S. employees while bolstering data sovereignty in an era of digital warfare.

Global Reactions and User Implications Amid Uncertainty

Reactions to the deal have been mixed, reflecting the intricate U.S.-China dynamics. Trump claimed personal credit, stating Chinese President Xi Jinping endorsed it during a September 19 call, with Beijing “fully on board.” Yet China’s foreign ministry offered a measured response, respecting ByteDance’s autonomy while insisting on adherence to market rules and national laws, a subtle nod to required export licenses for the algorithm. Analysts doubt ByteDance would proceed without Beijing’s tacit approval, especially given China’s export controls on AI tech. ByteDance itself has stayed mum, though an earlier statement thanked both leaders for preserving TikTok’s U.S. footprint. Trump plans further talks with Xi at October’s APEC summit in South Korea, potentially smoothing any lingering hurdles.

For U.S. users, averaging 51 minutes daily on the app in 2024, the deal spells relief from ban fears that sparked creator backlash and lobbying blitzes. Influencers, who rely on TikTok for income, had decried potential devastation, with some lawmakers noting ironic reinforcements of security concerns from user campaigns. Rivals like Instagram Reels, YouTube Shorts, and emerging Chinese app RedNote were poised to capitalize on any void, but now TikTok endures, albeit evolved.

Still, uncertainties abound. Will the U.S.-tuned algorithm match the original’s virality? Forrester analyst Kelsey Chickering warns, “The jury’s out on whether this localized version replicates the seamless, addictive experience.” Broader implications include setting precedents for foreign tech firms, possibly inspiring similar deals for apps like WeChat or Shein. As digital borders harden, this pact highlights America’s quest for tech autonomy, balancing innovation with vigilance in a multipolar world.

“Saturday Night Live” has spent decades lampooning politicians, bringing humor to an often divisive subject. According to creator Lorne Michaels, the show’s landmark 50th season will be no exception. As the November election approaches, Michaels views the upcoming weeks as an opportunity to invite some of the show’s beloved former cast members back to the iconic Studio 8H for special appearances.

“I want to celebrate this season with people coming back who have been a part of the show and who love it — not necessarily as hosts, but just making appearances,” Michaels shared in a recent interview. He added that the election season, with five or six episodes in the lead-up to November, presents the perfect chance for these guest spots.

One familiar face returning is Maya Rudolph, who will once again step into the role of Vice President Kamala Harris. Michaels also confirmed that Steve Martin will make an appearance during this milestone season, though not to portray Minnesota Governor Tim Walz, despite online calls for him to do so. Martin’s exact role remains a mystery, but fans can look forward to his comedic presence.

As for the portrayal of former President Donald Trump, Michaels did not confirm whether Alec Baldwin, who famously played Trump in recent seasons, would return to the role. However, cast member James Austin Johnson, who has also portrayed Trump, will be involved in some capacity. “Trump has morphed,” Michaels noted, referring to the evolution of Trump’s public persona. “We’re going to have to reinvent it again because, well, you saw the debate. You can’t come back with the same show.”

Michaels emphasized that part of the beauty of show business is the need to constantly refresh and reexamine familiar characters. This creative reinvention is key to keeping “SNL” relevant, especially when it comes to political figures who change over time. “We have the people to play the candidates, and it should be fun,” Michaels said, hinting at the exciting comedic takes viewers can expect as the election season unfolds.

Discussing “SNL’s” approach to political satire, Michaels explained that the show’s goal is not to preach to its audience but to provide an even-handed comedic take on both sides of the political spectrum. “You can’t lecture the audience, which is what most of politics is now — people lecturing the audience,” Michaels remarked. “Ours is like, ‘Yeah, there are kind of idiots on both sides.’ It has to be comedy. We’re first and foremost a comedy show.”

As the countdown to the election begins, “SNL” is gearing up for another round of political sketches that balance humor with insight. With a talented cast and returning favorites, the 50th season promises to be a celebration of the show’s long history of using comedy to reflect on current events.

“SNL” will kick off its highly anticipated 50th season on September 28 on NBC. The season opener will feature Jean Smart, star of “Hacks,” as the host, with musical guest Jelly Roll. With a lineup like this and the return of familiar faces, this season is set to be a memorable one. Fans can expect plenty of surprises, sharp satire, and, of course, laughter as “Saturday Night Live” continues its tradition of finding humor in the heart of American politics. As “SNL” embarks on this milestone season, it also serves as a reminder of the show’s resilience and adaptability in an ever-changing political landscape. The return of iconic cast members and the introduction of new voices reflect its commitment to staying relevant and entertaining. With each sketch, “SNL” aims not just to provoke laughter but to spark conversations about the issues that matter most, ensuring that its legacy endures for years to come.

During the first and potentially only presidential debate between Kamala Harris and Donald Trump, Harris adopted a provocative strategy, targeting Trump with sharp remarks throughout the nearly two-hour event. She criticized Trump heavily, suggesting that world leaders mocked him and military officials deemed him a “disgrace.” Harris also highlighted Trump’s 2020 election loss and his ongoing legal troubles, which she argued he was struggling to accept.

Trump frequently reacted with agitation, often veering off-topic and repeating false claims. He continued to assert unfounded allegations about election fraud, immigrants committing bizarre acts, and Democrats endorsing illegal abortion practices. His rhetoric painted a grim picture of America, reminiscent of his earlier presidency speeches about “American carnage.”

A notable moment in the debate was when Harris jabbed at Trump’s rally sizes, which visibly flustered him. Despite attempts by the debate moderator to steer the discussion towards immigration—a topic Trump usually favors—Trump fixated on his rallies and his grievances about the 2020 election, including repeating a debunked myth about Haitian migrants.

Trump also delved into various conspiracy theories during the debate, including one about migrants supposedly eating pets, despite denials from city officials and a lack of evidence. His assertions about crime rates and election integrity were met with corrections from the moderator, further fueling his erratic responses.

On the topic of abortion, Harris effectively countered Trump’s defense of his stance by sharing real-life implications of restrictive abortion policies, contrasting sharply with his inaccurate claims about abortion laws.

In terms of foreign policy, neither candidate provided concrete plans for resolving ongoing conflicts. Trump criticized Harris for her stance on the Israel-Gaza conflict and claimed he could quickly resolve the Russia-Ukraine war, while Harris accused Trump of being susceptible to manipulation by autocrats.

Overall, the debate showcased Harris’ strategic approach to challenging Trump and highlighted Trump’s tendency to divert discussions and promote conspiracy theories.

Donald Trump’s Arlington National Cemetery Visit Sparks New Controversy

This week, former President Donald Trump’s campaign faced fresh controversy during his visit to Arlington National Cemetery, aimed at highlighting the disarray of the US withdrawal from Afghanistan in 2021.

According to two Trump campaign officials, an individual physically obstructed Trump’s team from accompanying him during the Monday visit. A cemetery spokesperson confirmed to CNN that an incident occurred and a report was filed, but offered no further details.

Trump’s visit, which included a wreath-laying ceremony to honor the 13 US service members killed at Kabul airport’s Abbey Gate, was marked by a TikTok video posted by the Trump campaign, commemorating the three-year anniversary of the tragedy.

Trump’s Arlington Cemetery Visit Ignites New Controversy Over Photography and Conduct

In a Truth Social post, former President Donald Trump suggested that a recent incident during his Arlington National Cemetery visit was related to his campaign’s use of photography. Trump shared a statement from the families of fallen soldiers who expressed their approval of having an official videographer and photographer present to capture the event respectfully.

However, Arlington National Cemetery clarified that federal law prohibits political campaign or election-related activities within its grounds. The cemetery confirmed that it had communicated these restrictions to all participants, including photographers and content creators supporting partisan political candidates.

The controversy emerged following an NPR report detailing a “verbal and physical altercation” at the event. Sources indicated that a cemetery official attempted to stop Trump’s team from photographing and filming near the burial sites of recent US casualties. According to NPR, Trump campaign staff allegedly “verbally abused and pushed the official aside.”

Trump spokesperson Steven Cheung denied claims of physical altercation but confirmed that an individual attempted to “physically block” Trump’s team. Cheung hinted that video evidence might support this claim.

Trump campaign manager Chris LaCivita defended the visit, stating that Trump attended the event at the invitation of the Abbey Gate Gold Star Families to honor their loved ones. LaCivita condemned the actions of the individual who allegedly obstructed Trump’s team, calling it a disgrace and an affront to Arlington’s sacred grounds.

Sen. JD Vance, Trump’s running mate, downplayed the incident as a “little disagreement” and reiterated that the families had invited Trump to support them. Vance insisted that evidence supports the campaign’s claim of permission for photography.

In contrast, Virginia Democratic Rep. Gerry Connolly has called for Arlington Cemetery to publicly release the report on the incident, questioning Trump’s motives and condemning his team’s behavior as “abhorrent and shameful.”

This story has been updated to include further statements and developments related to the controversy surrounding Trump’s visit.

On Monday, Democrats, supported by Kamala Harris’ presidential campaign, filed a lawsuit to block new election rules in Georgia that they argue could create post-election disorder in the crucial battleground state. The lawsuit, lodged in Georgia state court by the Democratic National Committee, the Georgia Democratic Party, and several county election board members, challenges two recent rules enacted by the Georgia State Election Board. These rules allow for ‘reasonable inquiries’ before certifying election results and authorize county election board members to investigate ballot counts. This legal action escalates a growing controversy involving three Republican state election board members, who have received praise from former President Donald Trump for their actions.

In the 2020 election, Donald Trump lost Georgia by just over 10,000 votes, a result that became the focal point of his unsuccessful efforts to overturn the election through claims of voter fraud, despite no evidence supporting these claims.

Now, Democrats are seeking judicial clarification to ensure that election superintendents cannot delay or refuse to certify the results of the November 5, 2024 election. They want the court to rule that, unless a valid judicial order dictates otherwise, election superintendents must certify the results by 5:00 P.M. on November 12, 2024.

The lawsuit argues that Georgia law traditionally treats election certification as a non-discretionary duty. If election officials have concerns about irregularities, they can raise these issues during the certification process, but they cannot use them as a reason to delay or withhold certification. Certification is a crucial final step in confirming voting results, which must be verified with the secretary of state’s office.

Recent developments have heightened concerns over the state election board’s actions. The five-member board typically handles routine election duties, but recent partisan appointees have been accused of overstepping their authority. Three new Republican members, appointed this year, have come under scrutiny following mentions by former President Trump, who has criticized the board’s handling of election matters.

Democrats and voting rights advocates are calling for an investigation into the Republican board members, urging GOP Governor Brian Kemp to look into the matter. Last week, Democratic state Senator Nabilah Islam Parkes filed an ethics complaint, alleging that board members Janelle King, Rick Jeffares, and Dr. Janice Johnston violated state law by pushing through the new rules so close to the election.

“This is about protecting all voters,” said GOP board member Janelle King. “I am making sure I am doing the right thing. I am appreciative of the president’s support, but I am not working on behalf of anyone.”

The situation continues to evolve as both sides prepare for the upcoming election.

A New York appeals court is scheduled to hear oral arguments on Donald Trump’s appeal regarding the $454 million civil fraud judgment against him on September 26, which makes it unlikely that a decision will be reached before Election Day. Trump is contesting Judge Arthur Engoron’s ruling, which found him liable for fraud and imposed a $354 million penalty plus interest, bringing the total to over $100 million. In his appeal, Trump claims the judgment is unconstitutional, argues that no actual harm occurred, and asserts that the case should be dismissed because the alleged misconduct occurred too long ago.

In April, Trump posted a $175 million bond after the appeals court reduced the amount, which temporarily paused any actions by New York Attorney General Letitia James’ office to seize properties or bank accounts.

Recently, the attorney general’s office filed a brief urging the appeals court to uphold Engoron’s verdict. They argue that there is “overwhelming evidence” proving Trump deliberately inflated the value of his properties on financial statements. The attorney general’s office criticizes Trump’s appeal for focusing on what they describe as “meritless legal arguments” instead of addressing the substantive evidence of fraud. They highlighted specific examples of deception, such as the inflated valuation of Trump’s Mar-A-Lago estate, which they argue exaggerated its value by hundreds of millions of dollars on financial statements.

The attorney general’s office defended the initial judgment, asserting that the $363.8 million figure was a reasonable estimate of the illicit profits resulting from the fraud. They countered Trump’s claims that the judgment improperly included loans beyond the statute of limitations and that profits from property sales were double-counted. According to the attorney general’s office, the judgment accurately reflected distinct categories of ill-gotten gains linked to the fraudulent statements.

Her speech at the Democratic National Convention on Thursday night will be her most challenging moment yet in a whirlwind month that has brought her to the brink of a historic presidency with the potential to transform American politics.

The vice president will present a vision for a new beginning, offering a way forward from the prolonged negativity of Donald Trump’s rhetoric, the public fatigue from a once-in-a-century pandemic, and the rising cost of living.

More broadly, she aims to restore a sense of lightness and optimism to American life, reclaiming the concept of “freedom” from conservative interpretations. Her agenda includes expanding reproductive rights, providing new economic relief for working and middle-class families, improving access to health care, and enhancing safety from mass shootings.

In this election, we face a fundamental question: What kind of country do we want to live in?” Harris asked at a crowded rally in Milwaukee on Tuesday night, as the convention unfolded in Chicago. “Do we choose a nation of chaos, fear, and hatred, or one defined by freedom, compassion, and the rule of law?”

With President Joe Biden’s reelection bid ending due to advanced age, Harris is being urged by her party to rise to a higher level in the political arena.

No modern presidential nominee from any major party has faced such a daunting challenge in such a brief period.

Kamala Harris stands as the final barrier to Trump’s return to power, after he navigated four criminal indictments, one conviction, and defeated his primary challengers in pursuit of a remarkable presidential comeback.

On Wednesday night, Minnesota Governor Tim Walz, Harris’ vice presidential pick, asserted that she could “turn the page on Donald Trump.” Speaking in his straightforward Midwestern manner, Walz’s message aims to resonate with White men in the heartland who might be growing weary of the MAGA agenda.

“Kamala Harris is tough, experienced, and ready,” Walz declared emphatically.

In a bid to sway independent and undecided voters, talk show icon Oprah Winfrey, alongside a lineup of entertainers and celebrities, reinforced the convention’s central message.

“Let us choose common sense over nonsense, because that’s the best of America,” Winfrey urged. “Let us embrace the promise of tomorrow over the bitterness of returning to yesterday. We will not go back. We will not be set back, pushed back, bullied back, or kicked back. We are moving forward.”

Harris’ Key Objectives for Thursday Night

Most presidential nominees spend years developing their political strategies and public speaking skills. Kamala Harris, however, has had to rapidly assemble her campaign.

— Harris needs to prove herself as a viable commander in chief. Despite her support for Biden’s national security policies, her stance on issues like China, Russia, the Ukraine conflict, and Iran remains unclear.

— To challenge Trump effectively, Harris must present herself as the change candidate that voters have been calling for. This is challenging given her association with an unpopular administration. In a bid to distinguish herself from Biden, Harris has adopted a populist approach, pledging to tackle price gouging by supermarkets. Expect her to emphasize this in her speech, aiming to connect with voters. Former President Bill Clinton captured this strategy in his convention speech, highlighting the need for candidates to address voters’ problems, opportunities, fears, and dreams.

— Harris’ mixed record as vice president has led to skepticism about her readiness for the presidency. While her strong start as the presidential candidate has mitigated some Democratic concerns, her ability to withstand future scrutiny remains uncertain. Trump aims to frame her as an extreme liberal outside the American mainstream. Her speech on Thursday will be crucial in countering attacks on her immigration record, character, and leadership capabilities. An even bigger test awaits with her debate against Trump on September 10.

— The early phase of Harris’ campaign has been marked by a resurgence in Democratic enthusiasm. Observers will be watching to see if she can translate this momentum into a successful campaign strategy capable of winning significant voter support.

— Harris needs to undermine Trump’s appeal to build her own majority. While she’s been less explicit than Biden in framing the election as a battle for the nation’s soul, she warns that a second Trump term could dramatically alter the country. “This is not 2016 or 2020. The stakes are higher because we know what he does when he’s in office,” Harris has stated.

Ultimately, Harris must make Americans comfortable with the idea of her presidency.

In a personal appeal, second gentleman Douglas Emhoff portrayed her as a compelling leader, sharing details of their relationship.

“She will lead with joy and toughness, with that laugh and look, with compassion and conviction. She believes we are strongest when we fight for our beliefs, not just against our fears,” Emhoff said. “Kamala Harris was the right person for me at a pivotal moment in my life, and at this moment in our nation’s history, she is the right president.”

Despite her four years as vice president, Harris remains relatively unknown to many Americans. A recent CBS News poll found that only 64% of Americans knew her positions, compared to 86% for Trump.

This moment offers Harris a critical chance to introduce herself to the nation. It also underscores the urgency for her to define her own narrative before Trump does.

She may not get a better opportunity.

A remarkable turn of events

Although Kamala Harris has shown unwavering loyalty to Biden, her vice presidency has not been marked by significant achievements—one reason why there was minimal pressure on Biden to step down at the start of this cycle.

Now, however, a nominee who has yet to win a presidential vote (her 2020 primary campaign ended well before the Iowa caucuses) is being asked to secure victory in a high-stakes election.

Typically, securing a party nomination requires preparation for the immense responsibilities of the presidency. For Harris, this is not entirely uncharted territory, as she was on the 2020 ticket as vice president and has been a heartbeat away from the top position since.

Harris’ reputation has been bolstered by her role as Biden navigated the pressures of his candidacy and eventually yielded to his party’s call for him to step aside. This crisis may have set the stage for her emergence as a key Democratic figure.

She is not alone in this endeavor. This week, former Democratic presidents, first ladies, and members of Harris’ inner circle and family have rallied behind her, marking a dramatic shift in a party reeling from Biden’s poor debate performance against Trump.

Biden’s emotional handover of his legacy and the party’s hopes to Harris, coupled with his retreat after his convention address on Monday night, leaves Harris as the sole figure who must now persuade voters that she is ready to be the 47th president.

A biography that could unite the Democratic coalition

Kamala Harris would be the first Black woman and Indian American President. Throughout the week, Democratic Party leaders have emphasized her diverse background, from her middle-class upbringing and early job flipping burgers at McDonald’s to her role as California’s attorney general, where she tackled violent crime. They argue that her rise from modest beginnings to the vice presidency reflects a life of service that qualifies her to lead the nation.

This rich and varied biography could be pivotal in reuniting the Democratic coalition of women, minority, and suburban voters, potentially paving her way to the Oval Office.

Upon arriving in Chicago, Democrats were energized by the enthusiasm surrounding Harris and Walz, who captivated large crowds at swing state rallies, leaving Trump struggling to gain momentum and facing the challenge of being the oldest candidate in the race at 78.

However, as the days progress, the reality of the still-tight election has begun to set in. Former Presidents Bill Clinton and Barack Obama have cautioned that the race is far from over and that the recent euphoria is merely the beginning of a long campaign.

Minnesota First Lady Gwen Walz has clarified that she and Governor Tim Walz did not use in vitro fertilization (IVF) to conceive their children, revealing that they utilized intrauterine insemination instead. The Governor has frequently discussed their fertility journey on the campaign trail, emphasizing the personal significance of IVF and reproductive care.

Governor Walz has highlighted their fertility struggles in various speeches, including a recent rally in Glendale, Arizona, where he underscored the personal connection his family has to the issue. He has also criticized Republican vice presidential nominee JD Vance for opposing a bill aimed at ensuring nationwide access to IVF, attributing his family’s ability to have children to this treatment in previous statements.

Minnesota First Lady Gwen Walz recently clarified that she and Governor Tim Walz used intrauterine insemination (IUI), not in vitro fertilization (IVF), to conceive their children. Gwen Walz described IUI as “an incredibly personal and difficult experience” and revealed they kept their fertility struggles private, even from close family. The only person who knew the details was their next-door neighbor, a nurse who administered the injections necessary for IUI.

Governor Walz has highlighted their fertility journey as a key issue on the campaign trail, particularly as he has joined the Democratic ticket with Vice President Kamala Harris. He has used their personal experience to advocate for broader access to fertility treatments, linking it to his criticism of Republican vice presidential nominee JD Vance. In recent speeches, including one in Glendale, Arizona, Walz has emphasized the personal nature of reproductive care, stating, “This one’s personal for me about IVF and reproductive care,” and reflecting on their years of fertility treatment.

In July, Walz criticized Vance for opposing a bill that would have ensured nationwide access to IVF, attributing their successful conception to this treatment. “Thank God for IVF, my wife and I have two beautiful children,” he remarked, underscoring the significance of reproductive care in their lives.

Gwen Walz’s clarification comes amid heightened debates over reproductive rights, including attempts to restrict IVF following the overturning of Roe v. Wade. Their story highlights the broader implications of these legal and political battles on personal experiences with fertility.