In the chaotic series of events surrounding President Trump’s COVID-19 diagnosis can be found almost every element of the turbulent, acrimonious politics of this moment in U.S. history.
Newsletter
Get our Essential Politics newsletter
The latest news, analysis and insights from our politics teams from Sacramento to D.C.
You may occasionally receive promotional content from the Los Angeles Times.
Fights over basic facts. Political weaponizing of public health recommendations. Refusing to provide basic levels of public transparency and accountability. A federal government that has struggled to project calm, not calamity.
The idea of an “October surprise” is one of the more hackneyed ideas in politics — a vestige of an era where a surprise revelation could sway enough undecided voters to change the outcome of an election.
Advertisement
But the surprise this time didn’t upend the campaign as much as it confirmed for voters the central premise: a president who hasn’t seemed to take the dangers of the coronavirus seriously enough.
“It’s been a very interesting journey,” Trump said. “I learned a lot about COVID.”
The president’s health is shaping up to be an October surprise like none other, a symbol of his personal and political struggle with a public health emergency that now dominates the national conversation with only four weeks until election day.
His temperature may have gone down, as his physician insisted over the weekend, but he still feverishly sought to downplay the situation’s severity — culminating in an impromptu outing on Sunday to wave to supporters gathered outside Walter Reed National Military Medical Center.
My colleague David Lauter summed up the show of stamina this way: “Trump’s brief drive-by in a sealed vehicle to wave to his supporters outside the hospital put his Secret Service detail at risk. The president’s main political liability is that voters don’t think he takes the disease seriously.”
Unhelpful, too, was the muddled message delivered by the president’s physician, Dr. Sean Conley. Much of Saturday seemed consumed by Conley’s changing story on how long Trump had known he was COVID-19 positive. Sunday didn’t get much better, after Conley made opaque comments about there having been “expected findings” when asked about tests on the president’s lungs and that he would have to “check with the nursing staff” for details on Trump using supplemental oxygen.
Meanwhile, our Times team has taken a look at how the president might have contracted COVID-19. And many of those who have been with Trump or at events at the White House have announced they, too, are infected with the virus.
With Joe Biden announcing on Sunday that he had tested negative for the coronavirus, his attention remained on the campaign — including the effort to win over voters in Nevada.
For months, Democrats failed to conduct the intensive voter registration and face-to-face conversations that helped flip the state in the late 2000s from red to blue.
Advertisement
Although Democrats say they’re making up for lost time — using measures that ensure it’s safe again to knock on doors and finding creative means of engaging voters on social media and other outlets — they also say the contest is closer in Nevada than is comfortable.
There is no longer a single day on which ballots are mailed to voters across California, though most of the 21.3 million ballots for this election will be in the mail on Monday.
And the Trump-generated furor over voting by mail and the U.S. Postal Service is upending the conventional wisdom, said longtime election data analyst Paul Mitchell.
“We believe there’s actually going to be more Democratic voters returning their ballots early than in prior years,” he said about the early weeks. Republicans, meanwhile, may follow the president’s lead and show up more often to vote in person.
Advertisement
“That idea that there’s this polarization about election mechanics, and that people will take actions to be on ‘team blue’ or ‘team red,’ is just the weirdest part of this election cycle.”
British Columbians could find out who wins the provincial election on Oct. 19 in about the same time it took to start counting ballots in previous votes.
Andrew Watson, a spokesman for Elections BC, says new electronic vote tabulators mean officials hope to have half of the preliminary results for election night reported within about 30 minutes, and to be substantially complete within an hour of polls closing.
Watson says in previous general elections — where votes have been counted manually — they didn’t start the tallies until about 45 minutes after polls closed.
This will B.C.’s first general election using electronic tabulators after the system was tested in byelections in 2022 and 2023, and Watson says the changes will make the process both faster and more accessible.
Voters still mark their candidate on a paper ballot that will then be fed into the electronic counter, while networked laptops will be used to look up peoples’ names and cross them off the voters list.
One voting location in each riding will also offer various accessible voting methods for the first time, where residents will be able to listen to an audio recording of the candidates and make their selection using either large paddles or by blowing into or sucking on a straw.
The province’s three main party leaders are campaigning across B.C. today with NDP Leader David Eby in Chilliwack promising to double apprenticeships for skilled trades, Conservative Leader John Rustad in Prince George talking power generation, and Greens Leader Sonia Furstenau holding an announcement Thursday about mental health.
It comes as a health-care advocacy group wants to know where British Columbia politicians stand on six key issues ahead of an election it says will decide the future of public health in the province.
The BC Health Coalition wants improved care for seniors, universal access to essential medicine, better access to primary care, reduced surgery wait times, and sustainable working conditions for health-care workers.
It also wants pledges to protect funding for public health care, asking candidates to phase out contracts to profit-driven corporate providers that it says are draining funds from public services.
Ayendri Riddell, the coalition’s director of policy and campaigns, said in a statement that British Columbians need to know if parties will commit to solutions “beyond the political slogans” in campaigning for the Oct. 19 election.
This report by The Canadian Press was first published Sept. 26, 2024.
In Canadian parliamentary democracy, a vote of no confidence (also known as a confidence motion) is a crucial mechanism that can force a sitting government to resign or call an election. It is typically initiated when the opposition, or even members of the ruling party, believe that the government has lost the support of the majority in the House of Commons.
What Is a Vote of No Confidence?
A vote of no confidence is essentially a test of whether the government, led by the prime minister, still commands the support of the majority of Members of Parliament (MPs) in the House of Commons. If the government loses such a vote, it is either required to resign or request the dissolution of Parliament, leading to a general election.
This process upholds one of the fundamental principles of Canadian democracy: the government must maintain the confidence of the elected House of Commons to govern. This rule ensures accountability and provides a check on the government’s power.
How Many Votes Are Needed for a No Confidence Motion?
In the Canadian House of Commons, there are 338 seats. To pass a vote of no confidence, a simple majority of MPs must vote in favor of the motion. This means that at least 170 MPs must vote in support of the motion to cause the government to lose confidence.
If the government holds a minority of seats, it is more vulnerable to such a vote. In this case, the opposition parties could band together to reach the 170 votes required for the no-confidence motion to succeed. In a majority government, the ruling party has more than half the seats, making it more difficult for a vote of no confidence to pass, unless there is significant dissent within the ruling party itself.
Types of Confidence Votes
Explicit Confidence Motions: These are motions specifically introduced to test whether the government still holds the confidence of the House. For example, the opposition might move a motion stating, “That this House has no confidence in the government.”
Implicit Confidence Motions: Some votes are automatically considered confidence motions, even if they are not explicitly labeled as such. The most common example is the approval of the federal budget. If a government loses a vote on its budget, it is seen as losing the confidence of the House.
Key Legislation: Occasionally, the government may declare certain pieces of legislation as confidence matters. This could be done to ensure the support of the ruling party and its allies, as a loss on such a bill would mean the collapse of the government.
What Happens If the Government Loses a Confidence Vote?
If a government loses a confidence vote in the House of Commons, two outcomes are possible:
Resignation and New Government Formation: The prime minister may resign, and the governor general can invite another leader, typically the leader of the opposition, to try to form a new government that can command the confidence of the House.
Dissolution of Parliament and General Election: The prime minister can request that the governor general dissolve Parliament, triggering a general election. This gives voters the opportunity to elect a new Parliament and government.
Historical Context of Confidence Votes in Canada
Canada has seen several instances of votes of no confidence, particularly during minority government situations. For example, in 2011, the government of Prime Minister Stephen Harper lost a vote of confidence over contempt of Parliament, which led to the dissolution of Parliament and the federal election.
Historically, most no-confidence votes are associated with budgetary issues or key pieces of legislation. They can be rare, especially in majority governments, as the ruling party usually has enough support to avoid defeat in the House of Commons.
To pass a vote of no confidence in Canada, at least 170 MPs out of 338 must vote in favor of the motion. This vote can lead to the government’s resignation or a general election, making it a powerful tool in ensuring that the government remains accountable to the elected representatives of the people. In the context of Canadian democracy, the vote of no confidence is a key safeguard of parliamentary oversight and political responsibility.
A new motion being debated this morning states that the House of Commons has lost confidence in the Liberal government and “offers Canadians the option to axe the tax, build the homes, fix the budget and stop the crime.”
That’s the list of slogans the Tories have been using for months.
On Wednesday, the majority of MPs voted against the first non-confidence motion that was put forward by Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre.
The series of confidence votes comes after the NDP ended the supply-and-confidence deal that had kept the government stable since early 2022.
The Bloc Québécois has given the Liberals until Oct. 29 to pass two private members bills related to supply management and old age security if they want to avoid an election before Christmas.
This report by The Canadian Press was first published Sept. 26, 2024.
