After US Election Loss, What's Next For Kamala Harris?

US Vice President Kamala Harris addressed a sombre crowd at her alma mater Howard University after she lost to Republican rival Donald Trump. She vowed to continue the fight that fuelled her campaign for the US election.

The 60-year-old will demit office in 72 days and has announced no immediate plans as far as her political career is concerned.

So what is next for Kamala Harris?

Prepare For 2028?

The most obvious choice before the former Democratic nominee is to take time and prepare for another bid in 2028. There are a few examples from the past. John Kerry, the 2004 nominee, lost to George Bush but didn't entirely disappear from the political scene after that. He served as the Secretary of State in Barack Obama's second term.

Back To The Senate?

Like John Kerry, returning to state politics and building the momentum again is an option. However, the road for Ms Harris doesn't appear to be an easy one. Longtime Democrat donor Mark Buell expressed the disappointment shared by many in her home state. “Everybody is devastated,” he was quoted as saying by New York Times.

Richie Greenberg, a Republican commentator based in San Francisco, said that Ms Harris might struggle to secure the fundraising support she once enjoyed.

Role In The Democratic Party

One potential path for Ms Harris could be that of a spokesperson within the Democratic Party, given her broad name recognition and connections. However, Greenberg thinks she will face challenges reigniting financial support from her base in San Francisco.

A Tell-All Book

Like at least two of the former Democratic nominees -- Hillary Clinton and Al Gore -- who lost the Presidential bids and decided to immerse themselves in writing and other pursuits, Ms Harris could also think in the same direction. While Hillary wrote a book titled 'What Happened' after losing to Trump in 2016, Gore produced a documentary film 'An Inconvenient Truth'.

Enjoy Time Away From Politics

In a couple of months, Ms Harris will be out of the Vice-President's office and can do what she promised to herself on October 27. “I plan on putting on some pounds after this is over,” she said at a Pennsylvania bookstore. “They're working me to the bone.”

Other than that, Harris could also follow in the footsteps of Ms Clinton, who hasn't been that active in politics and is more focused on her personal life. However, she continues to maintain a good rapport with donors.

from NDTV News-World-news https://ift.tt/v5N3TVP

Opinion: Private Property And The Question Of 'Constitutional Socialism'

Recently, an ideological dialogue happened in the Indian Supreme Court on Article 39(b) of the Constitution. The judgment by a nine-judge Bench in Property Owners Association v. State of Maharashtra last Tuesday reflects a division of opinion on the topic, though the majority on the Bench laid down the law.

Constitutional socialism, like political socialism, has remained a controversial issue in the Indian juridical discourse. Article 39(b) of the Constitution, together with other provisions under the directive principles in part IV of the Constitution, embodies an idea of constitutional socialism. This, however, is a contested argument. To understand the legal and political ramifications of the verdict, let us now examine the crux of the judgment.

The Fundamentality Of Directive Principles

The Court in the current case broadly did two things. First, it said that the annulment of certain amendments made to Article 31-C of the Constitution would not nullify Article 31-C in the unamended form. This is the Article that gives immunity to certain laws from judicial review if the laws are made to further the directive principles of state policy stated in the Constitution. The Article says that such laws cannot be assailed on grounds of violation of the equality clause (Article 14) or the freedom clause (Article 19) in the Constitution. This signifies the fundamentality of directive principles in the process of governance, which are otherwise not enforceable. This takes us to the second and the more vital part of the judgment. The majority held that the interpretation given to Article 39(b) of the Constitution by Justice Krishna Iyer in a minority judgment in 1977 in Ranganatha Reddy endorsed by the five-judge Bench in Sanjeev Coke (1982) was not good law on Article 39(b). Thus, the Court overturned the precedential materials in the Article that gave an expanded connotation to this constitutional provision.

Article 39(b) says that the State shall strive for policy to secure that “the ownership and control of the material resources of the community are so distributed as best to subserve the common good”. In a minority judgment in State of Karnataka v. Ranganatha Reddy (1977) Justice Krishna Iyer analysed the Article and said that all individual wealth is part of the community's wealth and therefore, private property is well within the ambit of “material resources of the community”. He said that “material resources of the community in the context of re-ordering the national economy embraces all the national wealth, not merely natural resources, all the private and public sources of meeting material needs, not merely public possessions”. He added that “to exclude ownership of private resources from the coils of Article 39(b) is to cipherise its very purpose of redistribution the socialist way”. This minority verdict in Ranganatha Reddy was endorsed by a five-judge Bench in Sanjeev Coke. Thus, the minority verdict [which essentially has not expressly disagreed on the point of Article 39(b)] got an authoritative endorsement in Sanjeev Coke. This interpretation was validated in a series of judgments that followed Sanjeev Coke. Thus, the ”Krishna Iyer doctrine”, as CJI Chandrachud calls it, got judicially reaffirmed.

What Ambedkar Said 

It is this constitutional landscape that is now thoroughly altered by the majority judgment in the Property Owners Association case. According to CJI Chandrachud, Dr. B.R. Ambedkar did not perceive the Article in the way Krishna Iyer did. Relying on the reply given by Dr Ambedkar to Prof. K.T. Shah in the Constituent Assembly, Justice Chandrachud said that the Court is unable to subscribe to “the expensive view” of Justice Iyer. He wrote: ”...(T)his Court must not tread into the domain of economic policy, or endorse a particular economic ideology while undertaking constitutional interpretation”.

The counter view on Article 39(b) is well reflected in Justice Dhulia's minority view. He endorses Krishna Iyer's approach on the ground that the Constitution in general and the directive principles [including Article 39(b)] are essentially socialist in their tone and tenor. Curiously again, Justice Dhulia relies on Dr Ambedkar's reply (relied on by Chandrachud) to say quite the opposite of what Justice Chandrachud said. According to him, the very scheme of the directive principles reflected the idea of constitutional socialism. He also relied on Ambedkar's famous speech in the Constituent Assembly on November 25, 1949, underscoring the absence of socio-economic equality in the country. He also put forward a blunt commonsensical reading of the Article, saying that for utilising public assets for public good, no constitutional provision is required, and the very purpose of Article 39(b) is to empower the state to ensure public good by resorting to privately owned resources. He said public property will be used for public good only, even if it is not contemplated in the directive principles. Criticism of the 'Krishna Iyer doctrine' by Chief Justice Chandrachud is not endorsed by Justice Nagarathna either, though the judge agreed substantially with the majority judgment.

Law, Politics, And The 'Iyer Doctrine' 

It is necessary to understand the constitutional, political and economic context in which the ‘Iyer doctrine' evolved. The era of Land Reforms Acts by different states, laws for abolition of the Zamindari system and privy purses, and nationalisation of private banks were all developments that facilitated a political climate of Nehruvian socialism that paved the way to the Krishna Iyer doctrine. Laws are essentially political statements made by the regime of the day. The preambular addition of the word “socialist” did not indicate anything new but only restated the socialist inclination of the Constitution, which was otherwise clear, as elaborated by Justice Dhulia in the present minority verdict.

The present judgment also held that Article 31-C in the unamended form will hold good. Certain additions to this Article made by way of the 42nd amendment in 1977 were struck down in the Minerva Mills Case (1980). The curious aspect, however, is that the Centre argued in favour of the State's power to treat private properties as “material resources of the community”, relying on Krishna Iyer's doctrine. This argument was repelled by the majority on the Bench. In an era of privatisation of public properties, this gesture may appear to be a bit ironic.

At any rate, the present regime at the Centre is not a proponent of Nehruvian socialism. Political and ideological shifts play a big role in determining what the Constitution means, what it says and how it is invoked. The distance that the nation has travelled since 1977 is reflected in the Property Owners Association case and the dissent in the judgment shows the other side of the coin. The judgment will carry forward the eternal discourse on the socialist traits in the country's Constitution. The juridical discourse on the topic underlines the quality of deliberative democracy within the system of judiciary.

(Kaleeswaram Raj is a lawyer at the Supreme Court of India)

Disclaimer: These are the personal opinions of the author

from NDTV News- Topstories https://ift.tt/foFEuYy

'The Simpsons' 2024 Prediction Of Kamala Harris As US President Falls Flat

With Republican Donald Trump's victory, The Simpsons, renowned for its uncanny ability to predict real-world events, has fumbled with the 2024 US presidential election.

The much-loved animated show's forecast of Democrat Kamala Harris succeeding Trump as the President didn't play out as expected. Instead, Trump has returned to the White House, defeating Harris and upending the show's long streak of prophetic accuracy.

The origins of this prediction go back to the 2000 episode “Bart to the Future,” where The Simpsons depicted a future in which Lisa Simpson becomes president, inheriting a chaotic financial situation from her predecessor, Donald Trump.

In an Oval Office scene, President Lisa remarked, “As you know, we've inherited quite a budget crunch from President Trump.” When Trump became the 45th president of the United States in 2016, fans were astounded at the apparent foresight, seeing a connection between his administration and the episode's fictional budget crisis.

With US President Joe Biden's endorsement of Harris as the Democratic nominee in 2024, many believed that The Simpsons' prediction might finally come true.

Social media lit up with discussions, memes, and videos speculating that Harris' election could complete the so-called “Trump-to-female-president” prophecy. Yet, with her defeat, the prediction now appears to have missed not once but twice – first in 2020, when Biden succeeded Trump, and again in 2024.

After Trump won the Presidential election, social media buzzed with reactions from fans who have come to view The Simpsons as a pop culture oracle. Many shared clips from the “Bart to the Future” episode, some were surprised, and some were disappointed that the prediction about Harris did not come true.

“False prophecy,” a user wrote on X.

FALSE PROPHECY !

????
The Simpsons
"Bart to the Future"
Season 11
Episode 17
Time 10:22
March 19, 2000 pic.twitter.com/h9Iib6yhRZ

— EDD (@eddesign_) November 7, 2024

Another wrote, “The Simpsons are wrong??” while someone said, “She was most likely inaugurated in January 2029, as Bart to the Future is set in the year 2030.”

"She was most likely inaugurated in January 2029, as Bart to the Future is set in the year 2030." https://t.co/iBDP4RFQ3Y

— ???? - Michelle (@tkachuktkaching) November 6, 2024

Donald Trump won the US presidential election on Wednesday.

In his victory speech, the President-elect described the Republican campaign as the "greatest political movement of all time".

"We are going to help our country heal, fix our borders, we made history for a reason tonight. We have achieved the most incredible political win. I want to thank the American people. I will fight for you and your family with every breath in my body," he said.

from NDTV News-World-news https://ift.tt/e1gE5Ku

Donald Trump Flips Georgia In Huge Setback To Kamala Harris

With a win in key swing state Georgia, Donald Trump came significantly closer to the magic number 270 which would assure him a stunning political comeback in a fiercely contested election. Mr Trump has already won another key battleground state - North Carolina - giving him an edge over his rival and Democratic candidate Kamala Harris.

With this, Republicans have also seized control of the Senate, which till now had a slender Democratic margin of two seats.

As per numbers currently - Trump at 247 and Harris at 210 - it seems that the Democrats now have to win nearly all the remaining seats to be able to cross the 270-mark required to win the election, giving them the narrowest of margins to do so.

Kamala Harris seems to be losing out in the battleground states that hold the key to who will win. Trump has managed to flip a victory in the states which had voted Democrats in 2020. Ms Harris's campaign office has said that she would not be speaking to supporters at a watch party in Washington DC, as had been announced earlier. They however said that she will be speaking tomorrow.

Kamala Harris's camp acknowledged that the race to the White House is extremely close, describing it as "razor thin" and that now her path to victory can only be through the 'Blue Wall' swing states of Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin.

The markets in the US have surged over reports of Trump leading the race. The US Dollar and Bitcoin have both hit record highs. Traders have been betting on a Trump victory and the markets have been reflecting that sentiment.
 

from NDTV News-World-news https://ift.tt/wOVaXBb

Who Will Win US Election 2024? AI Makes Stunning Predictions

Ahead of the 2024 US presidential election, artificial intelligence (AI) tool ChatGPT has been making bold predictions. In a recent experiment, the chatbot adopted the role of 'AI Nostradamus,' predicting the US election results. Unlike conventional polls or analyses, ChatGPT's predictions include both surprising political developments and possible social unrest.

Who will win the US elections?

When asked about the result of the showdown between former President Donald Trump and Vice President Kamala Harris, ChatGPT proposed an alternative outcome. Instead of suggesting a victory for either major candidate, the AI hinted that neither Trump nor Harris might ultimately succeed. Instead, ChatGPT cryptically suggested that "a dark horse would rise from the shadows to take power".

According to the report, adding a poetic twist to its prediction, the AI said, "But in the final hour, a twist unforeseen, neither may claim the throne of serene. A name unspoken in many a tale will rise to power, beyond the pale. Though Trump and Kamala shall fight with might, another will lead, emerging from the night."

Both Trump and Harris are backed by running mates who are not household names, such as Minnesota Governor Tim Walz or Ohio Senator JD Vance. Could one of these vice-presidential candidates be the mysterious figure hinted at by the AI? Only time will tell.

Ivanka Trump's role and Elon Musk's influence

ChatGPT's predictions didn't stop there. In a series of responses, the AI pointed to a surprising future for Donald Trump's daughter Ivanka Trump, suggesting she could play a significant role on the political stage. Similarly, Elon Musk's name surfaced in ChatGPT's musings, though it's unclear what role the tech billionaire might play.

Warnings of unrest and division

ChatGPT's insights extend beyond electoral predictions, touching on possible civil unrest and social upheaval around the time of the US elections. The AI raised the spectre of protests, rallies and potential violence, reminiscent of the January 6, 2021, Capitol attack.

"The eagle's land, torn by division, will see unrest, born of derision. Protests, marches, and rallies loudly shall stir beneath a darkening cloud," it warned, painting a picture of a politically charged atmosphere that could lead to protests and clashes.

Path to reconciliation?

Despite these ominous predictions, ChatGPT held out hope for reconciliation after the election dust settled. The AI foresaw a period of healing, where leaders would work to mend divisions and promote unity and peace.

What did Google's Gemini predict?

According to Decrypt, Google's Gemini AI steered clear of making any predictions or comments on the US elections. Gemini, instead, redirected users to a Google Search link, saying, “I can't help with responses on elections and political figures right now.” Gemini acknowledged that it aims for accuracy but may still make errors. Even when prompted with more complex questions by Decrypt, Google's chatbot maintained its stance, refusing to comment on the election outcome.

from NDTV News- Topstories https://ift.tt/LJQWz6Z

After 0-3 Series Loss, How Kohli Celebrated His 36th B'day With Anushka

The talks of Virat Kohli settling in London over the last year or so have flooded social media. Over Team India's last few assignments, Kohli has been seen flying to London often after the completion of his cricketing assignments. However, as Team India's Test series against New Zealand came to a conclusion, Kohli decided to stay in the country and celebrate his 36th birthday with his wife Anushka Sharma. As per a report, despite India's humiliating 0-3 series whitewash at the hands of the Kiwis, Kohli looked in a good mood as he posed for shutterbugs.

A few pictures and videos have surfaced on social media in which Virat and Anushka could be seen starting the 36th birthday celebrations of the India star. A report in Hindustan Times claimed that Kohli and Anushka celebrated the birthday together at the India batter's restaurant chain One8 Commune. 

Here's an old video of Kohli and Anushka at a One8 Commune restaurant:

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Viral Bhayani (@viralbhayani)

Despite India winning the 2024 T20 World Cup title, this year hasn't been the finest for Kohli from the perspective of form and personal milestones. The iconic batter has struggled for runs, no matter which format he has played. Even in the T20 World Cup, Kohli struggled to step up, barring the solitary final against South Africa.

In the recently concluded Test series against New Zealand, Kohli didn't even manage to cross the 100-run mark cumulatively. In fact, many questions have been raised over his continuity in the team. While Virat has already quit the T20 international format, there are many who wonder if his days in India's Test team could be numbered too.

What next for Virat Kohli?

Kohli has already been picked for India's tour of Australia, where Rohit Sharma's men are scheduled to feature in a total of 5 Test matches. Kohli's love affair with Australia isn't hidden from any of his fans, but his form isn't painting a particularly rosy picture at the moment.

While experts expect Kohli to turn things around and lead India's charge with the bat Down Under, there are those too who worry if Test retirement could be on the horizon in a case where the iconic batter fails to turn the table around.

from NDTV News- Topstories https://ift.tt/Z7fRNJc

"Lost Courage": Award-Winning Cambodian Reporter Quits Journalism After Arrest

A high-profile Cambodian reporter who won an international award for uncovering alleged cyber scams told AFP Tuesday that he is quitting journalism, saying he has lost "courage" after being arrested by the authorities and freed on bail.

Police arrested Mech Dara on September 30 on charges of inciting social disorder, drawing condemnation from around the world.

He was released on bail three weeks later after apologising to Cambodia's former leader Hun Sen and his son Prime Minister Hun Manet in a video shot while he was in prison.

"I have decided that I am retiring from journalism because of the arrest, the questioning and imprisonment," Dara told AFP.

"I am still afraid," he said, adding that authorities used excessive force during his arrest, then questioned him all night afterwards.

"I have lost my courage. It has attacked my spirit, and I have no more courage," Dara said, referring to the arrest and time he spent in prison.

He also urged the court to drop the charges against him.

Hun Manet on Monday posted pictures of him meeting Dara, including one showing the pair embracing one another.

Dara said he informed Hun Manet of his decision to quit journalism during the meeting, which took place a day after his release.

Scam farm reporting

Police detained Dara, 36, after stopping a car carrying him and his family from Sihanoukville, a coastal city where many suspected cyber scam operations take place.

His reporting has appeared in various international news outlets and he worked for the independent Voice of Democracy in Cambodia before the authorities shut it down in February 2023.

Dara has since used his social media platforms to share news content, particularly around the proliferation of "scam farms" -- criminal operations that defraud victims online for vast sums of money and fuel human trafficking across the region.

US Secretary of State Antony Blinken last year presented Dara with a Hero Award, which recognises efforts against human trafficking, for investigations into exploitation at the online scam compounds.

The award hailed his "courageous reporting on human trafficking for the purpose of forced criminality", saying it had led to the government improving its response to the problem.

His arrest came a day after he posted an image on social media purportedly showing a tourist site demolished to make way for a quarry, according to the Cambodian Journalists' Alliance Association.

Local authorities labelled the now-deleted images "fake news" and called for Dara to face punishment for their publication.

After announcing charges against Dara, the Phnom Penh Municipal Court accused him of posting messages on social media platforms designed to "ignite anger (and) to make people misunderstand about the leadership of the Cambodian government".

The charge of incitement is frequently used by Cambodian authorities against activists, and Dara could face up to two years in jail if convicted.

Cambodia places near the bottom of international press freedom rankings and rights groups have long accused the government of using legal cases as a tool to silence dissenting voices.

(Except for the headline, this story has not been edited by NDTV staff and is published from a syndicated feed.)

from NDTV News-World-news https://ift.tt/Cw8RBI0