O número de seções eleitorais alteradas entre os 1º e 2º turnos diminuiu para 444 de acordo com dados do Superior Tribunal Eleitoral.
Isso significa que 130 mil eleitores de 22 estados vão votar no dia 25 em local diferente do que votaram no primeiro turno. A maioria dos eleitores afetados estão em Minas Gerais (29.715), Paraná (17.968) e Amapá (11.614).
No sábado, o Tribunal havia divulgado mudança de endereço de 4,3 mil seções. No domingo eram 1.116. Hoje, o número diminuiu mais uma vez. Segundo o TSE, as alterações nos locais de votação são definidas pelos tribunais eleitorais dos estados (TREs), já que a justiça local conhece melhor a realidade de cada zona eleitoral.
O TSE alerta que estão sendo feitos ajustes em relação aos locais de votação, por isso esses números ainda podem mudar.
O problema é que os dados do TSE diferem, em alguns casos, dos dados dos TREs. O site do TRE do Tocantins, por exemplo, informa que todos os locais de votação foram mantidos entre o 1º e o 2º turno. Porém, no sistema do TSE constava, até a tarde desta segunda-feira (19), ao menos duas seções alteradas na cidade de Itaguatins, afetando 382 eleitores.
Na dúvida, tanto o TSE como os TREs orientam os eleitores a consultarem, com antecedência, o local de votação. Pelo aplicativo E-título, o eleitor deve acessar a opção "Onde Votar".
Também é possível fazer a consulta no Autoatendimento Eleitoral ou pelo assistente virtual ChatVote.
© Marcelo Camargo/Agência
Após uma grave lesão que o afastou de grande parte da temporada transata, James Maddison parece estar a recuperar a melhor forma e esta segunda-feira apontou um belo golo, inaugurando o marcador na receção do Tottenham ao Coventry, em jogo de encerramento da 7.ª jornada.
Aos 14 minutos, o ex-Leicester recebeu a bola em boa posição e não desiludiu, protagonizando um remate em arco que só parou no fundo da baliza adversária e motivando a euforia nas bancadas.
O melhor é ver para crer. Confira o vídeo abaixo.
James Maddison com um golaço, a tentar fugir do último lugar na tabela @premierleague | @Spurs_Official 1 x 0 @CoventryCityFC 𝐎𝐟𝐞𝐫𝐭𝐚 de 𝟏𝟐 𝐦𝐞𝐬𝐞𝐬 com 𝟓𝟎% 𝐝𝐞 𝐝𝐞𝐬𝐜𝐨𝐧𝐭𝐨 adere em https://t.co/EnIqqUlQFj #DAZNPremier https://t.co/gjmBbODcqE
— DAZN Portugal (@DAZNPortugal) October 19, 2026
The annual Emma Crawford Coffin Races and Festival is returning to Manitou Springs this weekend.
The event, which takes place on October 24, kicks off at 10 a.m. when the Fan Zone and coffin staging begins.
Previous Coverage: Thousands gather in Manitou Springs for 31st anniversary of the Emma Crawford Coffin Races Thousands gather in Manitou Springs for the 31st anniversary of the Emma Crawford Coffin RacesThe parade starts at noon followed by the popular coffin races.
Started in 1995, the Manitou Springs Chamber of Commerce held the first coffin races in the nation to honor Emma Crawford, a beloved resident who died in 1891.
According to the events website:
In 1929, after years of harsh winters and spring rains, Emma and her coffin came racing down the mountainside. The young children who happened upon her remains found only the casket handles, a nameplate, and a few bones.Last year marked the 31st anniversary of the famed event.
For details and more information, click here.
___
____
Watch KOAA News5 on your time, anytime with our free streaming app available for your Roku, FireTV, AppleTV and Android TV. Just search KOAA News5, download and start watching.
Michael Loccisano/Getty Images
John Carreyrou has seen "You Can See Everything" twice.
The reporter, whose award-winning investigation for The Wall Street Journal helped bring down blood-testing startup Theranos, told Business Insider that he liked the documentary. It follows Elizabeth Holmes, the startup's CEO, in the 34 days before she reported to federal prison in 2023.
The film — co-directed by Nathan Fielder and Lance Oppenheim — has inspired a mix of reactions from viewers, ranging from shock to boredom to sympathy for Holmes.
Carreyrou doesn't see that ambiguity.
"The film is a great piece of art, but let's not confuse that art with the underlying facts," he told Business Insider.
It mirrors what he's been writing on X. Carreyrou has been pushing back on people who, he said, had accused him of "missing the point" of the film — namely, that Holmes is unknowable.
"She went after Tyler Shultz and Erika Cheung with everything she had," he wrote, referring to the two company whistleblowers at the center of his 2015 story. "I was threatened with litigation on a daily basis for months on end. It was a ruthless cover-up of a breathtaking fraud, and she was at the controls."
A few readers have taken me to task for “missing the point of the film,” which is apparently that Elizabeth Holmes is unknowable and everything is ambiguous. Here’s my response: She went after Tyler Shultz and Erika Cheung with everything she had. I was threatened with litigation on a daily basis for months on end. It was a ruthless cover-up of a breathtaking fraud, and she was at the controls. Just a little context for those who have forgotten or didn’t follow the original story. By the way, I loved the film. #BestPicture, IMO.
— John Carreyrou (@JohnCarreyrou) October 18, 2026
He has also reposted a Monday morning interview with Schultz, who said that Holmes "knows that she did something wrong," and alleged that, during the film, she brought out a different device when she was asked to show Theranos' hardware.
The documentary does not retrace every detail of the Theranos scandal or the reporting that exposed it. Instead, it puts viewers inside Holmes' home as she insists that she was wrongly convicted.
For audiences, it's raised bigger questions about performance, self-deception, and whether the film's subject can ever be fully believed.
Carreyrou has told Business Insider that if audiences "have questions afterward or want more context about the Theranos saga, I would encourage them to read my book."
He ended his X post by saying he "loved the film." He also gave a nod to its early Oscar buzz.
"#BestPicture, IMO," he wrote.
No entanto, Tocantins e Rio de Janeiro têm divergências entre as informações do TSE e dos tribunais regionais.
Por outro lado, o Tribunal Regional Eleitoral do Rio de Janeiro indica uma alteração em local de votação no bairro de Brás de Pina, na zona norte da capital fluminense (seções 123, 124, 125, 126 e 127 da 188ª Zona Eleitoral)., enquanto o TSE informa que no estado não teve mudanças de endereço de votação entre os dois turnos das eleições 2026.
Os números oficiais do TSE desta segunda-feira (19) apontam mudanças no endereço de 444 seções eleitorais em 22 estados do país. Isso significa que 130 mil eleitores vão votar no dia 25 em local diferente do que votaram no primeiro turno.
A maioria dos eleitores afetados estão em Minas Gerais (29.715), Paraná (17.968) e Amapá (11.614 ).
De sábado (17) até esta segunda, o TSE alterou duas vezes o número de locais de votação que terão mudança de endereço em todo o país. O Tribunal explica que as alterações são definidas pelos tribunais eleitorais dos estados (TREs) e que os números ainda podem mudar.
Na dúvida, tanto o TSE como os TREs orientam os eleitores a consultarem, com antecedência, o local de votação. Pelo aplicativo E-título, o eleitor deve acessar a opção “Onde Votar”.
Também é possível fazer a consulta no Autoatendimento Eleitoral ou pelo assistente virtual ChatVote.
Isso significa que 130 mil eleitores de 22 estados vão votar no dia 25 em local diferente do que votaram no primeiro turno. A maioria dos eleitores afetados estão em Minas Gerais (29.715), Paraná (17.968) e Amapá (11.614 ).
O TSE alerta que estão sendo feitos ajustes em relação aos locais de votação, por isso esses números ainda podem mudar.
O problema é que os dados do TSE diferem, em alguns casos, dos dados dos TREs. O site do TRE do Tocantins, por exemplo, informa que todos os locais de votação foram mantidos entre o 1º e o 2º turno. Porém, no sistema do TSE constava, até a tarde desta segunda-feira (19), ao menos duas seções alteradas na cidade de Itaguatins, afetando 382 eleitores.
Na dúvida, tanto o TSE como os TREs orientam os eleitores a consultarem, com antecedência, o local de votação. Pelo aplicativo E-título, o eleitor deve acessar a opção “Onde Votar”.
Também é possível fazer a consulta no Autoatendimento Eleitoral ou pelo assistente virtual ChatVote.
After two decades of defeats in rural America, Democrats are suddenly putting up a fight in farm country. The party is running competitive Senate races in Iowa, Kansas and other farm states, as well as House races in heavily rural districts that could help it regain control of Congress in January.
Credit (or blame, depending on your party) for this reversal of fortune lies with President Donald Trump’s tariffs and his war with Iran, which have battered farmers and pushed the rural economy into crisis. The Department of Agriculture’s analysts expect farmers’ net incomes to decline by 5.5% this year, as costs rise and receipts fall. The National Agricultural Law Center’s tally of farm bankruptcies jumped 45% last year, and is on pace to rise another 11% in 2026.
Higher costs for processed-food companies also have punishing consequences in rural communities more broadly.
Three different impacts have simultaneously hammered farmers and the agriculture industry.
First, the Trump administration’s tariff hikes raised costs. The president slapped import taxes as high as 50% on a range of products including hoes and plows, barbed wire, screws, wood, pesticides, irrigation equipment and harvesters. As a result, just about everything farmers do — from putting up a fence to spraying for weeds and bugs to harvesting crops — costs more. That has helped dent sales of farm equipment, according to Creighton University’s September Rural Mainstreet Index, meaning less business for local John Deere and Bobcat dealers this year and lower farm productivity in the years ahead.
Higher costs for processed-food companies also have punishing consequences in rural communities more broadly. Last year, after the Commerce Department put tariffs of 50% on tin cans, Del Monte closed its cannery in Modesta, California. Opened over a century ago, the cannery had been the main buyer of California peaches and pears. Its collapse cost 600 jobs at the cannery, vaporized $500 million in annual Central Valley farm sales and forced local farmers to uproot 420,000 peach trees this summer.
Second, U.S. farm exports have struggled as trade partners punch back. America is the world’s top agricultural exporter — 20% of farm receipts come from sales abroad. Last year’s $176 billion in exports included 156 tons of California grapes shipped to sunny Fiji in the South Pacific, and $10,000 worth of biscuits sent to the North Atlantic’s stormy Faroe Islands. This success has helped rural America prosper, but it also makes our farmers uniquely vulnerable targets for retaliation.
Three countries — China, Canada and Mexico — buy half of America’s annual farm exports. Sales to China fell 66% in 2025, with soybean shipments alone collapsing, from $12.6 billion to $3.0 billion, and have only somewhat rebounded during this year’s tariff “truce” with Beijing. Thanks to Trump’s mystifying economic assault on Canada, fresh produce sales to our second-biggest ag market are down 10% this year, while wines, beer and liquor have fallen by two-thirds.
The Republican Party’s hold on politics in rural America has shaped policy, government and law for 20 years. Trump’s decision to upend the farm economy has shaken it.
Third, this spring came Trump’s decision to launch a war with Iran. The consequent halt to shipping through the Strait of Hormuz first spiked global fertilizer prices — up 20% from when the president was inaugurated — and then hit diesel fuel even harder. Farmers need diesel to run tractors, harvesters and irrigation equipment; the trucking firms that move their grain and produce to market use it too. Diesel now costs $6.32 per gallon, up $2.50 from a year ago. The surge in normal gasoline prices hasn’t helped either: As Federal Reserve governor Lisa Cook recently noted, transport accounts for a quarter of rural household expenses.
Trump’s policies have crunched agriculture in less direct ways, too. Both the tariffs and the Iran war have pushed up inflation, forcing the Fed to keep interest rates high — a major burden on farmers who borrow heavily to finance their supplies every year.
The administration’s response has been a series of Band-Aids, with improvised emergency aid packages culminating in $12 billion in transfers to farmers at the end of last year. But as rising bankruptcies show, these measures haven’t healed the wounds the administration’s policies have inflicted.
I don’t want to exaggerate the rural pickup opportunities for Democrats this year. Republicans control the vast majority of House districts dependent on agriculture, and will likely continue to do so after this midterm. The same goes for Senate seats for heavily rural states in the Great Plains and the South.
Still, to hazard an agriculture metaphor, some seeds of change might be sprouting. The Republican Party’s hold on politics in rural America has shaped policy, government and law for 20 years. Trump’s decision to upend the farm economy has shaken it. This doesn’t mean Democrats have yet won the affection of farm country voters. But they have their best opening in decades to win a hearing and, once in government, to act on the rural crisis. That means repealing Mr. Trump’s tariffs, stabilizing relations with Canada and Mexico, and passing the farm bill this administration has abandoned, which could have helped modernize rural infrastructure and restore nutrition programs that benefit low-income families and farmers alike. That might begin changing the political landscape for years to come.
The post Trump’s policies are hammering farmers — and putting rural America in play for Democrats appeared first on MS NOW.
Samuel Alito was the only Supreme Court justice on Monday to signal that he wanted to help Missouri revive a restriction for sex offenders on Halloween.
The high court rejected review of that case and others on its order list announcing the latest actions in pending appeals. It takes four justices to grant review of a petition, and most denials pass without comment from any of the justices, which makes even an unexplained notation like Alito’s significant. The list only said that he “would grant” the state’s petition, without explaining why.
Although justices sometimes explain their disagreements, they don’t always do so. In any event, that Alito stood alone here is unsurprising. He generally backs law enforcement and has split from his colleagues in other First Amendment disputes.
The state sought Supreme Court review after a lower court struck down a law that required registered offenders to post signs that say: “No candy or treats at this residence.”
In the petition the justices denied Monday, Missouri asked them to take the case to settle what it said is a nationwide divide over whether sex-offender notifications unconstitutionally compel speech under the First Amendment.
The state called the rule crucial to enforcing its prohibition on sex-offender participation in Halloween “because it helps prevent children from approaching sex offenders’ doors and assists police in detecting sex offenders who (like Respondent) unlawfully participate in Halloween.”
The respondent to the petition in this case is Thomas Sanderson. Before he was convicted of a sex offense in 2006, he and his family had consistently put on elaborate Halloween displays. Missouri passed the law in question while he was incarcerated. When he was released in 2008, he was told that he was “grandfathered in” and could continue the annual displays. Apparently it was not an issue until 2022, when he was reported to the police and charged with violating the law.
Upholding a lower court ruling favoring Sanderson’s constitutional challenge, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 8th Circuit said there was “insufficient evidence to support the State’s assertion that the sign mandate is the least restrictive means of achieving its goals.”
Successfully opposing review at the Supreme Court, Sanderson said there was no real division to resolve among the lower courts. He said that the appeals court in his case “applied settled First Amendment doctrine to strike down an unusual speech compulsion,” and that “no court of appeals or state high court disagrees with that ruling.”
The post Over Alito’s objection, justices decline to review Halloween-sign rule for sex offenders appeared first on MS NOW.
Login