New Brunswick election campaign offered voters sharp contrast in visions for province

VANCOUVER – British Columbia woke up Sunday to a reshaped political landscape but no clear winner of a provincial election marked by the rise of the B.C. Conservatives from the political fringe to centre stage.

Neither the Conservatives, led by John Rustad, nor the incumbent NDP of Premier David Eby reached the 47 seats needed to form a majority government after initial counting ended on election night, with a handful of seats undecided.

Elections BC said counting was set to resume Sunday morning.

But regardless of the outcome, the election represented a stunning moment for the B.C. Conservatives, who received less than two per cent of the vote last election.

They are now elected or leading in 45 ridings, the NDP was elected or leading in 46, while the BC Greens won two seats in the legislature.

“This is what happens when you stand on values,” a triumphant Rustad told supporters in Vancouver late Saturday.

“If we are in that situation of the NDP forming a minority government, we will look at every single opportunity from day one to bring them down … and get back to the polls.”

Eby said in a muted speech that a “clear majority” of voters supported “progressive values.”

But he acknowledged that Rustad “spoke to the frustrations of a lot of British Columbians” when it came to costs of living and public safety.

“We’ve got to do better,” Eby told supporters. “That was our commitment to British Columbians. We’ve got to do better, and we will do better.”

He said he was committed to working with Green Leader Sonia Furstenau, whose party could hold the balance of power.

What happens next hinges on nine seats that were undecided when election-night counting ended, in particular Surrey City Centre and Juan de Fuca-Malahat, where the NDP was ahead by fewer than 100 votes.

If the Conservatives flip the lead in both of them, and hang onto the others where they lead, they will win with a one-seat majority in the 93-riding legislature.

If not, and assuming the NDP is unable to pass the Conservatives in any other undecided races, Westminster tradition means the incumbent party gets the first opportunity to try to form a minority government — in this case, the NDP, with the help of the Greens.

But the final outcome may not be confirmed for about a week.

Elections BC said automatic recounts would take place on Oct. 26 to 28 in districts where the margin was 100 votes or fewer after the initial count ends.

The election agency said more than 99.7 per cent of votes were counted on election night, but ballots cast by voters outside their district were still to be tallied, while “election official availability and weather-related disruptions” delayed some preliminary results.

Furstenau lost her seat but said her party was nevertheless poised to play a “pivotal role” in the legislature.

The Green victories went to Rob Botterell in Saanich North and the Islands and Jeremy Valeriote in West Vancouver-Sea to Sky.

Furstenau lost to the NDP’s Grace Lore after switching ridings to Victoria-Beacon Hill, but said she was “so excited” for her two colleagues, calling their wins “incredible.”

“This is a passing of the torch and I am going to be there to mentor and guide and lead in any way that I can,” she told her supporters in Victoria.

Botterell, a retired lawyer, said it was an “exciting day” for him and he was “honoured” for the opportunity to serve his constituents.

“Tonight’s a night for celebration,” he said. “There will be lots of discussion over the upcoming weeks, but I am totally supportive of Sonia and I’m going do everything I can to support her and the path forward that she chooses to take because that’s her decision.”

Rustad said his party had “not given up this fight” to form government.

“I am optimistic that people in this province are hungry for that change.”

Royal Roads professor David Black said the Greens retaining official party status by winning two seats could give them “some real bargaining power” in what is shaping up to be a very tight legislature.

“The Greens are going to be the kingmakers here whatever happens, if the race is as close as it is right now between two larger parties,” he said in an interview on election night.

B.C. Conservatives president Aisha Estey called her party’s showing “the ultimate underdog story” and relished what she called a “historic campaign.”

“Whether it’s government tonight or official opposition, we’re not going anywhere. There’s a Conservative Party in B.C. now finally,” she said. “We’re back.”

Rustad’s unlikely rise came after he was thrown out of the Opposition, then known as the BC Liberals, joined the Conservatives as leader, and steered them to a level of popularity that led to the collapse of his old party, now called BC United — all in just two years.

Outgoing New Democrat MLA George Heyman, who did not run for re-election, said it was always “going to be a tight election.”

“It’s reminiscent of 2017,” Heyman said, referring to the last B.C. election where no party reached majority. “The message is clear, people have been struggling. They’re having a hard time.”

The B.C. Conservatives set to enter the legislature include Brent Chapman in Surrey South, who had been heavily criticized during the campaign for an old social media post in which he called Palestinian children “inbred” and “time bombs.”

A group of former BC United MLAs running as Independents were all defeated, with Karin Kirkpatrick, Dan Davies, Coralee Oakes and Tom Shypitka losing to Conservatives.

For the NDP, Minister of Water, Land and Resource Stewardship Nathan Cullen lost to Conservative Sharon Hartwell.

When election night counting ended, the NDP had received 44.6 per cent of the total vote, the B.C. Conservatives 43.6 per cent and the Greens 8.2 per cent.

Preliminary figures show 2,037,522 valid votes were cast, the first time the 2 million mark has been passed in a B.C. election, with turnout of about 57.4 per cent.

It was a rain-soaked election day for many voters, who braved high winds and torrential downpours brought by an atmospheric river weather system.

Two voting sites in Cariboo-Chilcotin in the B.C. Interior and one in Maple Ridge in the Lower Mainland were closed due to power cuts, Elections BC said, while several sites in Kamloops, Langley and Port Moody, as well as on Hornby, Denman and Mayne islands, were temporarily shut but reopened by mid-afternoon on Saturday.

— With files from Brenna Owen, Dirk Meissner, Brieanna Charlebois, Ashley Joannou and Darryl Greer

This report by The Canadian Press was first published Oct. 20, 2024.

JAKARTA, Indonesia (AP) — Prabowo Subianto was inaugurated Sunday as the eighth president of the world’s most populous Muslim-majority nation, completing his journey from an ex-general accused of rights abuses during the dark days of Indonesia’s military dictatorship to the presidential palace.

The former defense minister, who turned 73 on Thursday, was cheered through the streets by thousands of waving supporters after taking his oath on the Quran, the Muslim holy book, in front of lawmakers and foreign dignitaries. Banners and billboards to welcome the new president filled the streets of the capital, Jakarta, where tens of thousands gathered for festivities including speeches and musical performances along the city’s major throughfare.

Subianto was a longtime rival of the immensely popular President Joko Widodo, who ran against him for the presidency twice and refused to accept his defeat on both occasions, in 2014 and 2019.

But Widodo appointed Subianto as defense chief after his reelection, paving the way for an alliance despite their rival political parties. During the campaign, Subianto ran as the popular outgoing president’s heir, vowing to continue signature policies like the construction of a multibillion-dollar new capital city and limits on exporting raw materials intended to boost domestic industry.

Backed by Widodo, Subianto swept to a landslide victory in February’s direct presidential election on promises of policy continuity.

Subianto was sworn in with his new vice president, 37-year-old Surakarta ex-Mayor Gibran Rakabuming Raka. He chose Raka, who is Widodo’s son, as his running mate, with Widodo favoring Subianto over the candidate of his own former party. The former rivals became tacit allies, even though Indonesian presidents don’t typically endorse candidates.

But how he’ll govern the biggest economy in Southeast Asia — where nearly 90% of Indonesia’s 282 million people are Muslims — remains uncertain after a campaign in which he made few concrete promises besides continuity with the popular former president.

Subianto, who comes from one of the country’s wealthiest families, is a sharp contrast to Widodo, the first Indonesian president to emerge from outside the political and military elite who came from a humble background and as president often mingled with working-class crowds.

Subianto was a special forces commander until he was expelled by the army in 1998 over accusations that he played a role in the kidnappings and torture of activists and other abuses. He never faced trial and went into self-imposed exile in Jordan in 1998, although several of his underlings were tried and convicted.

Jordanian King Abdullah II bin Al-Hussein was expected to attend Sunday’s ceremony, but canceled at the last minute because of escalating Middle East tensions, instead deciding to send Foreign Affairs Minister Nancy Namrouqa as his special envoy. Subianto and Abdullah met in person in June for talks in Amman on humanitarian assistance to people affected by the war in Gaza.

Subianto, who has never held elective office, will lead a massive, diverse archipelago nation whose economy has boomed amid strong global demand for its natural resources. But he’ll have to contend with global economic distress and regional tensions in Asia, where territorial conflicts and the United States-China rivalry loom large.

Leaders and senior officials from more than 30 countries flew in to attend the ceremony, including Chinese Vice President Han Zheng and leaders of Southeast Asia countries. U.S. President Joe Biden sent Linda Thomas-Greenfield, the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations. Adm. Samuel Paparo, the U.S. Commander of the Indo-Pacific Command, was also among the American delegation.

Army troops and police, along with armored vehicles, fire trucks and ambulances, were deployed across the capital, and major roads were closed to secure the swearing-in.

The election outcome capped a long comeback for Subianto, who was banned for years from traveling to the United States and Australia.

He has vowed to continue Widodo’s modernization efforts, which have boosted Indonesia’s economic growth by building infrastructure and leveraging the country’s abundant resources. A signature policy required nickel, a major Indonesian export and a key component of electric car batteries, to be processed in local factories rather than exported raw.

He has also promised to push through Widodo’s most ambitious and controversial project: the construction of a new capital on Borneo, about 2,000 kilometers (1,240 miles) away from congested Jakarta.

Before February’s presidential election, he also promised to provide free school lunches and milk to 78.5 million students at more than 400,000 schools across the country, aiming to reduce malnutrition and stunted growth among children.

Indonesia is a bastion of democracy in Southeast Asia, a diverse and economically bustling region of authoritarian governments, police states and nascent democracies. After decades of dictatorship under President Suharto, the country was convulsed by political, ethnic and religious unrest in the late 1990s and early 2000s. Since then, it has consolidated its democratic transition as the world’s third-largest democracy, and is home to a rapidly expanding middle class.

___

Associated Press journalists Edna Tarigan and Andi Jatmiko contributed to this report.

Voters in Nebraska and Arizona will see competing measures on their November ballots — in one case about abortion, in the other about primary elections. If voters approve them all, what happens next could be up to the courts to decide.

Like more than a dozen other states, Arizona and Nebraska have constitutions stating that if two or more conflicting ballot measures are approved at the same election, the measure receiving the most affirmative votes prevails.

That sounds simple. But it’s actually a bit more complicated.

That’s because the Arizona and Nebraska constitutions apply the most-votes rule to the specifically conflicting provisions within each measure — opening the door to legal challenges in which a court must decide which provisions conflict and whether some parts of each measure can take effect.

The scenario may may sound odd. But it’s not unheard of.

Conflicting ballot measures “arise frequently enough, and the highest-vote rule is applied frequently enough that it merits some consideration,” said Michael Gilbert, vice dean of the University of Virginia School of Law, who analyzed conflicting ballot measures as a graduate student two decades ago when his curiosity was peaked by competing measures in California.

What’s going on in Nebraska?

After the U.S. Supreme Court overturned a nationwide right to abortion, Nebraska enacted a law last year prohibiting abortion starting at 12 weeks of pregnancy except in medical emergencies or when pregnancy results from sexual assault or incest.

Abortion-rights supporters gathered initiative signatures for a proposed constitutional amendment that would create “a fundamental right to abortion until fetal viability, or when needed to protect the life or health” of a pregnant woman, without interference from the state. Fetal viability generally is considered to be some time after 20 weeks. The amendment is similar to abortion-rights measures going before voters in eight other states.

Abortion opponents, meanwhile, pursued their own initiative to essentially enshrine the current law into the constitution. That measure would prohibit abortion in the second and third trimesters, except in medical emergencies or pregnancies resulting from sexual assault or incent.

The Nebraska Constitution says the winning measure with the most votes shall become law “as to all conflicting provisions.” State law says the governor shall proclaim which provision is paramount. Lawsuits could follow.

If the measure creating a right to abortion until fetal viability gets the most votes, it could be construed as fully conflicting with the restrictive measure and thus prevail in its entirety, said Brandon Johnson, an assistant law professor at the University of Nebraska.

But if the restrictive measure gets the most votes, a court could determine it conflicts with the abortion-rights measure only in the second and third trimesters, Johnson said. That could create a scenario where abortion is elevated as a fundamental right during the first trimester but restricted in the second and third.

“There’s a decent legal argument, based on the language that talks about conflicting provisions of the measures, that you can synchronize the two,” Johnson said.

What’s going on in Arizona?

Arizona, like most states, currently uses partisan primaries to choose candidates for the general election.

The Republican-led Legislature, on a party-line vote, placed an amendment on the November ballot that would enshrine partisan primaries in the state constitution, reaffirming that each party can advance a candidate for each office to the general election.

A citizens initiative seeks to change the current election method. It would create open primaries in which candidates of all parties appear on the same ballot, with multiple candidates advancing to the general election. It would be up to lawmakers or the secretary of state to enact requirements for exactly how many should advance. If at least three make it to a general election, then ranked choice voting would be used to determine the winner of the general election.

The Arizona Constitution says the winning ballot measure with the most votes shall prevail “in all particulars as to which there is conflict.”

In the past, the Arizona Supreme Court has cited that provision to merge parts of competing measures. For example, in 1992, voters approved two amendments dealing with the state mine inspector. One measure extended the term of office from two to four years. The other measure, which got more votes, limited the mine inspector to serving four, two-year terms.

In a case decided 10 years later, the Supreme Court said parts of both measures should take effect, ruling the mine inspector could serve four, four-year terms. That could have implications for Arizona’s future elections if voters approve both competing measures on this year’s ballot.

“The court really goes out of its way to harmonize the two,” said Joseph Kanefield, an attorney and former state election director who teaches election law at the University of Arizona. Striking one measure entirely “is something that the court will try to avoid unless they absolutely determine the two cannot exist together.”

What’s happened in other states?

When Gilbert’s curiosity was peaked about conflicting ballot proposals, he teamed up with a fellow graduate student at the University of California, Berkeley, to examine 56 instances of competing ballot measures in eight states between 1980 and 2006. In some cases, the measures appeared to directly conflict. In others, the measures merely addressed similar topics.

Their research found that the measure getting the most affirmative votes often was the one that made the least change from the status quo.

But sometimes, the highest-vote rule never comes into play, because voters approve one measure while rejecting the other. Or voters defeat both measures.

In 2022, California voters were presented with two rival proposals to legalize sports betting. Interest groups spent roughly $450 million promoting or bashing the proposals, a national record for ballot measures. But both were overwhelmingly defeated.

In 2018, Missouri voters faced three different citizen-initiated proposals to legalize medical marijuana. Voters approved one and rejected two others.

“It is not unusual to have conflicting measures,” said John Matsusaka, executive director of the Initiative and Referendum Institute at the University of Southern California. “But my observation is that voters usually understand the game and approve one and turn down the other.”