Dwayne | Reading desk

Axios15 OctArticle

Unexpected House battles pop up deep in Trump country

Republicans who haven't faced serious reelection fights in years are suddenly campaigning like they're running in swing districts. Why it matters: Democrats are eyeing House districts so Republican that they weren't even on the party's radar at the start of the 2026 midterm election cycle. That includes incumbents like Reps. John McGuire (R-Va.) and Lauren Boebert (R-Colo.), neither of whom were seen as remotely vulnerable coming into the second Trump term. Most of these seats haven't elected a Democrat in years or even decades and are only truly in play if the party is winning nationally by double digits. Even then, some are a stretch. But candidates in Trump country say frustration with rising prices, corruption, the war in Iran and political incumbency in general have led to a sea change that could precipitate some shock results on Nov. 3. State of play: Rep. Jack Bergman (R-Mich.) is running scathing attack ads against Democratic opponent Callie Barr, labeling her "Crooked Callie" and tying her to Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Rashida Tlaib and Abdul El-Sayed. That's a stark change from 2024, when Bergman defeated Barr by 21 percentage points. His ads that cycle made at most a passing reference to Barr , according to AdImpact. Rep. John McGuire (R-Va.) won by 15 points in 2024, a sleepy general election with minimal spending or ads. He too is running attack ads amid a challenge from former Democratic Rep. Tom Perriello. What we're hearing: Democrats say they are astounded by the level of anti-establishment frustration in their districts. "We're in a real race. It's unreal,"

Andrew Solendertop

Axios13 OctArticle

Inside Trump, Netanyahu's dilemma: Strike Iran before elections or wait

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and President Trump last week discussed the possibility of launching a major new operation against Iran before the Israeli and U.S. elections, according to two U.S. officials, one Israeli official and a fourth source with knowledge of the matter. Netanyahu said during the call that he was concerned about Israeli intelligence indicating Iran was taking troubling steps to reconstitute its nuclear program, according to the Israeli official. The Israeli leader's call with Trump about the possible attack took place before Trump said he would not strike Iran ahead of the midterms. Why it matters: Resuming major combat operations in Iran would inject a volatile new issue into the Oct. 27 Israeli elections and the U.S. midterms a week later. But the Israeli and U.S. militaries are still on alert and concluding preparations to be ready in case he changes his mind, sources said. " Bibi seems to want to go in again. He has talked to the president about it a couple times, and the president has said, 'Well, you know, Bibi, go ahead and get ready.' But there's really no commitment. 'Go ahead and get ready' is maybe now, maybe later, maybe never," a U.S. official said. A White House official said it's "false" that Trump and Netanyahu discussed resuming the war. "The President has said that we will not be attacking Iran at any time prior to the midterm elections," the person said. Netanyahu's office said that "the prime minister maintains regular contact with President Trump and senior U.S. administration officials and does not comment on the conte

Marc Caputotop

Axios12 OctArticle

U.K. prime minister attributes plot against U.S. bomber base to Iran

British Prime Minister Andy Burnham told the U.K. House of Commons Monday that Iran's Revolutionary Guard was "almost certainly" behind the suspected plot to attack the RAF Fairford base where U.S. bombers were stationed. Why it matters: This was the first time the U.K. officially blamed Iran for the alleged planned attack . What he's saying: "I can confirm our assessment that it is highly likely to have been coordinated in Iran, almost certainly directed by the IRGC. We will not tolerate these threats on our soil," Burnham said. Driving the news: 10 days ago, the U.S. evacuated a dozen B-1 strategic bombers from RAF Fairford in response to intelligence indicating an Iranian drone attack. It would have been an unprecedented and brazen move by Iran against a U.S. base in Europe — with the potential to dramatically escalate the war in the Middle East. The decision to move the bombers came several days after British security forces arrested several dual British-Iranian citizens suspected of planning an attack on the base. It was unclear whether the people who were arrested were connected to the alleged planned drone attack or if they were planning a different attack. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said Israel provided the U.K. with intelligence that pointed to a threat of an Iranian attack. State of play: British Foreign Secretary Ed Miliband said Monday that the Iranian ambassador was summoned to the foreign office in London to denounce the alleged Iranian plot. The other side: The Iranian ambassador to the UK, Seyed Ali Mousavi, told IRNA that Iran "categorically

Barak Ravidtop

Axios12 OctArticle

Two U.S. professors win Nobel prize in economics

Stanford University's Robert E. Hall and Columbia University's Michael Woodford won the Nobel Prize in economics for research on how policymakers can stabilize economies , the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences said on Monday. Why it matters: Their work helped shape how central banks set interest rates and communicate policy. The win comes as those institutions fight energy-driven inflation and risks to economic growth. Zoom out: For decades, policymakers relied on economic models that linked higher inflation with lower unemployment. But that framework broke down during the 1970s stagflation when both prices and joblessness surged at the same time. "The solution by Robert Hall and Michael Woodford was to build a new framework ground up," Timo Boppart, a member of the Nobel economics prize committee, said on Monday. What they're saying: Woodford, who called into Monday's press conference hosted by the committee, said he was "elated" by the win. " It's a tremendous honor. It's a surprise — but I'm feeling very good about it," Woodford said. The intrigue : Asked by a reporter about the threat to the global economy, Woodford said the Middle East conflict has disrupted energy markets and driven price changes with consequences far beyond the region. He pointed to the 2008 financial crisis as a key test of his research, when central banks cut interest rates to near zero but struggled to revive economic activity. His framework helped explain how other tools, including forward guidance and asset purchases, could support the economy. Zoom in: In research culminating in a landmark 2003

Courtenay Browntop

Axios10 OctArticle

Trump rages over Nobel Peace Prize loss

President Trump lashed out late Friday night after he once again did not win the Nobel Peace Prize he has openly coveted . Why it matters: The award is Trump's white whale, an honor he talks about frequently and believes he deserves. This year's prize went instead to a former judge of a court Trump has sanctioned and called "rogue" and "evil." Navi Pillay, the winner, reacted to the award by saying world leaders have a "legal obligation to protect human rights and refrain from war," according to the AP . What he's saying: " I know nothing about this woman, and neither does anyone else! In fact, to the best of my knowledge, no one ever heard of her other than the fact that she, very obviously, hates Israel. I don't know what the woman has done," Trump said in a Truth Social post of nearly 600 words that went up just before midnight on Friday. "I settled 8 Wars, with letters being sent from every President and Prime Minister from the countries that I helped to the Norwegian Nobel Committee, and I'm about to settle, or win, two more, Iran and, Russia/Ukraine," Trump wrote. "They're both happening at breakneck speed but, forget them, it's the 8 that I've already settled, any one of which, in particular, Pakistan and India, would be far more than necessary to win the Nobel Prize. In actuality, I should have won 8 Nobel Peace Prizes, not just 1." Between the lines: Pillay, this year's winner, is a former judge of the International Criminal Court and also the former UN High Commissioner for Human Rights. Nobel officials said she received the honor "for her efforts to promote peace

Ben Berkowitztop

Axios9 OctArticle

Navi Pillay, advocate for international law, wins Nobel Peace Prize

Navi Pillay, an outspoken supporter of international law who has served as a judge on multiple global courts and as the UN's top human rights official, won the Nobel Peace Prize on Friday. Why it matters: President Trump once again did not win the prize he has openly coveted . Pillay, among other posts, previously served on the International Criminal Court — a body Trump sanctioned and last month called " rogue " and "evil." What they're saying: " The Nobel Peace Prize for 2026 goes to a person who with exceptional courage and integrity has led the way towards a more comprehensive global legal order," the prize committee said in a social media post. "This year's laureate has been instrumental in ensuring that war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide are prosecuted." Background: Besides the ICC and the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda, Pillay also served as the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights and as chair of the UN Independent International Commission of Inquiry on the Occupied Palestinian Territory. Pillay , 85 and a native of South Africa, began practicing law in the late 1960s and served on her country's high court before her international appointments. Zoom out: Pillay stands for many of the ideas and institutions Trump has condemned. Besides sanctioning the ICC, he withdrew the U.S. from the UN Human Rights Council last year. He's also made a target of South Africa and its Black government, promising asylum to white South African farmers. The AP reported that Pillay, reacting to the news, said world leaders have a "legal obligation to protect hum

Ben Berkowitztop

Axios8 OctArticle

Trump: U.S. won't attack Iran before midterms

President Trump said Thursday the U.S. will not attack Iran ahead of the Nov. 3 midterm elections. Why it matters: Trump had been considering for several days resuming major combat operations before the midterms. However, his past statements about his intentions in Iran haven't always matched what he ultimately did. If major combat operations resume, they're expected to include large-scale strikes on Iranian energy facilities, infrastructure and nuclear targets, sources say. Resuming the war in the next three to four weeks could influence the midterms, in part because oil prices might rise in response. It could also influence Israel's elections, which are scheduled for Oct. 27. What he's saying: "I want to make it clear to everybody that, while Iran is in very bad condition, both Economically and Militarily, and while the Blockade will remain in full force and effect, with Oil flowing in Record Numbers of Barrels through the Hormuz Strait ... we will not be attacking Iran at any time prior to the Midterm Elections," Trump wrote on Truth Social. Flashback: In June 2025, before Operation Midnight Hammer, the White House said Trump would decide "within two weeks" whether the U.S. would join Israel's war against Iran. When he made that statement, he had already decided to attack Iran's nuclear sites. On Feb. 27, less than 24 hours before Israel and the U.S. launched the war against Iran, Trump claimed he hadn't made a decision on going to war. In reality, Trump had already decided to authorize the attacks. Driving the news: The Pentagon instructed U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM)

Barak Ravidtop

Axios8 OctArticle

The Fed's going to take its time with rate hikes

A couple more interest rate hikes are probably on the way. But the Federal Reserve is in no great hurry to deliver them. That's the takeaway from the latest round of communications out of the central bank. Why it matters: It implies that the Fed is not in a full-scale effort to tighten the screws on the economy, but rather a cautious recalibration in light of inflationary pressures and robust growth. With Fed chairman Kevin Warsh declining to offer much in the way of guidance, traders and Fed watchers must look to other communications for clues — and the message has been strikingly consistent across the latest crumbs of information. Driving the news: Speaking Thursday morning in Istanbul , Fed governor Christopher Waller explained, with distinctly non-Warshian detail, what kind of interest rate path he anticipates. "If the economic data continue to come in as expected, I anticipate additional hikes to support a timelier return of inflation to our 2 percent goal," he said. "But there is some flexibility about when those hikes will occur. The hikes do not need to come at consecutive meetings, but they should be in place in an acceptable period of time." That aligns with the language in the minutes of the September policy meeting released Wednesday afternoon, stating that "most participants assessed that another increase in the target range for the federal funds rate would likely be appropriate by year-end," but that they "approached each meeting with an open mind." Of note: The minutes and Waller comments come after fairly explicit comments last week from vice chair Philip Je

Neil Irwintop