ZAGREB, Croatia (AP) — Croatia’s incumbent President Zoran Milanovic has a sweeping lead in Sunday’s election and could win the five-year presidency in the first round, according to an exit poll released immediately after the voting. The poll by the Ipsos polling agency and released by the state HRT television showed Milanovic winning over 50% of the votes, while his main challenger Dragan Primorac, a candidate of the conservative HDZ ruling party trailed far behind with 19%. Milanovic thanked voters in a post on social networks. The first official results are yet to be published. Pre-election polls predicted that the two would face off in the second round on Jan. 12, as none of all 8 presidential election contenders were projected to get more than 50% of the vote. Left-leaning Milanovic is an outspoken critic of Western military support for Ukraine in its war against Russia. He is often compared to Donald Trump for his combative style of communication with political opponents. The most popular politician in Croatia, 58-year-old Milanović has served as prime minister in the past. Populist in style, he has been a fierce critic of current Prime Minister Andrej Plenković and continuous sparring between the two has lately marked Croatia’s political scene. Plenković, the prime minister, has sought to portray the vote as one about Croatia’s future in the EU and NATO. He has labeled Milanović “pro-Russian” and a threat to Croatia’s international standing. “The difference between him and Milanović is quite simple: Milanović is leading us East, Primorac is leading us West,” he said. Though the presidency is largely ceremonial in Croatia, an elected president holds political authority and acts as the supreme military commander. Milanović has criticized the NATO and European Union support for Ukraine and has often insisted that Croatia should not take sides. He has said Croatia should stay away from global disputes, though it is a member of both NATO and the EU. Milanović has also blocked Croatia’s participation in a NATO-led training mission for Ukraine, declaring that “no Croatian soldier will take part in somebody else’s war.” His main rival in the election, Primorac, has stated that “Croatia’s place is in the West, not the East.” His presidency bid, however, has been marred by a high-level corruption case that landed Croatia’s health minister in jail last month and featured prominently in pre-election debates. During the election campaign, Primorac has sought to portray himself as a unifier and Milanović as divisive. “Today is an extremely important day,” Primorac said after casting his ballot. "Croatia is going forward into the future. Croatia needs unity, Croatia needs its global positioning, and above all Croatia needs peaceful life.” Trailing a distant third in the pre-election polls is Marija Selak Raspudić, a conservative independent candidate. She has focused her election campaign on the economic troubles of ordinary citizens, corruption and issues such as population decline in the country of some 3.8 million. Sunday’s presidential election is Croatia’s third vote this year, following a parliamentary election in April and the European Parliament balloting in June.Gabby Logan is forced to apologise to Amazon Prime viewers as pundit swears during the broadcaster's live Champions League coverageAvior Wealth Management LLC Acquires Shares of 9,274 Invesco BulletShares 2032 Municipal Bond ETF (NASDAQ:BSMW)og 777 casino login 。

Ministers summoned over Khao Kradong disputeNoneInside Caprice's family Christmas with adorable traditions her 10 year old sons lovePanamanian President José Raúl Mulino strongly rejected claims made by former U.S. President Donald Trump regarding Chinese interference in the operation of the Panama Canal. On December 26, 2024, Trump posted on Truth Social alleging that China was "illegally" operating the canal and accusing the United States of paying billions of dollars in "repair" costs while having no influence over the waterway. In response, Mulino emphatically denied any Chinese involvement, stating that there was "absolutely no Chinese interference or participation in anything to do with the Panama Canal." Trump’s allegations In his post, Trump accused China of “illegally” operating the Panama Canal , claiming that the United States continues to pay billions of dollars in “repair” costs while having no influence over its operations. Trump also referred to the historical significance of the canal, stating that the US had lost 38,000 workers during its construction over 100 years ago. This reference to the canal’s construction in the early 1900s highlights the immense costs and efforts involved in completing the monumental project. Trump's concerns over Panama Canal tolls Earlier, Trump raised concerns over what he described as “ridiculous” tolls for US vessels. Threats of US control over the Canal Trump recently even threatened that if Panama did not secure the canal’s operation, the US would demand its return . His comments quickly drew sharp responses from the government of Panama, reigniting tensions surrounding the waterway, which has long been a subject of geopolitical importance. 1977 Panama Canal treaty: A shift in control The Panama Canal was initially started by French engineers in the late 19th century, but the project was plagued by tropical diseases and difficult terrain, leading to its abandonment. The United States took over the effort in 1904 and completed the canal in 1914. Under US control, the canal remained an essential maritime route for global trade. However, the control of the Panama Canal shifted dramatically under the presidency of Jimmy Carter, with the signing of the 1977 Panama Canal Treaty. This agreement effectively ceded control of the canal to Panama, while ensuring its neutral status and guaranteeing the US unimpeded access. Panamanian government’s firm denial Panama’s swift and firm response to Trump’s comments came from President Mulino, who unequivocally rejected the notion of Chinese interference. During a press conference on December 26, Mulino stated: “There is absolutely no Chinese interference or participation in anything to do with the Panama Canal.” The Panama Canal’s strategic importance The Panama Canal, which allows ships to travel between the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans, is one of the most important maritime routes in the world. It is critical for global trade, with approximately five percent of world trade passing through it. The United States remains the largest user of the canal, accounting for 74% of its traffic, while China is the second-largest user with 21%. The canal serves as a shortcut, saving time and resources by eliminating the need for ships to navigate around the southern tip of South America.

AP Business SummaryBrief at 4:56 p.m. EST

Butte news briefs: NorthWestern new feature, essay winners named

Canadiens’ Mike Matheson out against Utah with lower-body injuryGiants' Malik Nabers, Tyrone Tracy Become 3rd NFL Rookie Teammates to Reach 1K YardsAmong elites across the ideological spectrum, there's one point of unifying agreement: Americans are bitterly divided. What if that's wrong? What if elites are the ones who are bitterly divided while most Americans are fairly unified? History rarely lines up perfectly with the calendar (the "sixties" didn't really start until the decade was almost over). But politically, the 21st century neatly began in 2000, when the election ended in a tie and the color coding of electoral maps became enshrined as a kind of permanent tribal color war of "red vs. blue." Elite understanding of politics has been stuck in this framework ever since. Politicians and voters have leaned into this alleged political reality, making it seem all the more real in the process. I loathe the phrase "perception is reality," but in politics it has the reifying power of self-fulfilling prophecy. Like rival noble families in medieval Europe, elites have been vying for power and dominance on the arrogant assumption that their subjects share their concern for who rules rather than what the rulers can deliver. In 2018, the group More in Common published a massive report on the "hidden tribes" of American politics. The wealthiest and whitest groups were "devoted conservatives" (6%) and "progressive activists" (8%). These tribes dominate the media, the parties and higher education, and they dictate the competing narratives of red vs. blue, particularly on cable news and social media. Meanwhile, the overwhelming majority of Americans resided in, or were adjacent to, the "exhausted majority." These people, however, "have no narrative," as David Brooks wrote at the time. "They have no coherent philosophic worldview to organize their thinking and compel action." Lacking a narrative might seem like a very postmodern problem, but in a postmodern elite culture, postmodern problems are real problems. It's worth noting that red vs. blue America didn't emerge ex nihilo. The 1990s were a time when the economy and government seemed to be working, at home and abroad. As a result, elites leaned into the narcissism of small differences to gain political and cultural advantage. They remain obsessed with competing, often apocalyptic, narratives. That leaves out most Americans. The gladiatorial combatants of cable news, editorial pages and academia, and their superfan spectators, can afford these fights. Members of the exhausted majority are more interested in mere competence. I think that's the hidden unity elites are missing. This is why we keep throwing incumbent parties out of power: They get elected promising competence but get derailed -- or seduced -- by fan service to, or trolling of, the elites who dominate the national conversation. There's a difference between competence and expertise. One of the most profound political changes in recent years has been the separation of notions of credentialed expertise from real-world competence. This isn't a new theme in American life, but the pandemic and the lurch toward identity politics amplified distrust of experts in unprecedented ways. This is a particular problem for the left because it is far more invested in credentialism than the right. Indeed, some progressives are suddenly realizing they invested too much in the authority of experts and too little in the ability of experts to provide what people want from government, such as affordable housing, decent education and low crime. The New York Times' Ezra Klein says he's tired of defending the authority of government institutions. Rather, "I want them to work." One of the reasons progressives find Trump so offensive is his absolute inability to speak the language of expertise -- which is full of coded elite shibboleths. But Trump veritably shouts the language of competence. I don't mean he is actually competent at governing. But he is effectively blunt about calling leaders, experts and elites -- of both parties -- stupid, ineffective, weak and incompetent. He lost in 2020 because voters didn't believe he was actually good at governing. He won in 2024 because the exhausted majority concluded the Biden administration was bad at it. Nostalgia for the low-inflation pre-pandemic economy was enough to convince voters that Trumpian drama is the tolerable price to pay for a good economy. About 3 out of 4 Americans who experienced "severe hardship" because of inflation voted for Trump. The genius of Trump's most effective ad -- "Kamala is for they/them, President Trump is for you" -- was that it was simultaneously culture-war red meat and an argument that Harris was more concerned about boutique elite concerns than everyday ones. If Trump can actually deliver competent government, he could make the Republican Party the majority party for a generation. For myriad reasons, that's an if so big it's visible from space. But the opportunity is there -- and has been there all along.General election, Trump's win, McGregor court case: The top stories of 2024

GREENSBORO, N.C. (AP) — Matthew Downing threw for two touchdowns and ran for another to lead Elon to a 31-21 season-ending win over North Carolina A&T on Saturday. The game was tied at 7 in the second quarter when the Phoenix turned a fumble recovery into a field goal. That started a string of four-straight scoring possessions. Javascript is required for you to be able to read premium content.Bluff or existential threat? As Trump vows tariffs on all imports from Canada, Mexico and China, leaders wonder if he's serious

ROCHESTER – Before Americans coach Mike Leone talked about how center Konsta Helenius’ soft hands and terrific vision created the tying goal, he brought up a mistake the rookie made early in Friday’s 4-3 overtime loss to the Hershey Bears. “Yeah, there were some things, though,” Leone said following the game in Blue Cross Arena. Just 4:40 into the contest, Helenius’ turnover helped Hershey open the scoring. When the Buffalo Sabres prospect returned to the bench, he said no one mentioned the mistake to him. “Usually they say it, but I knew that it was my goal,” Helenius said following his first two-point night for the Amerks. “They didn’t say anything because they knew that I knew.” Friday was likely the stiffest test of the Finn’s 17-game AHL career. The Bears, a veteran team, have won the last two Calder Cups. They stifle offense and play a heavy game. Still, Helenius, the 14th overall pick this year, showcased his smarts and talent, helping the Amerks erase two early deficits. Later in the first period, he skated through the neutral zone and softly shot the puck on goal from the right wing, likely trying to create the rebound defenseman Kale Clague converted. In the third period, Helenius adroitly fed winger Brett Murray at the far post from the left circle, putting the puck through an opponent’s legs to generate a power-play goal. Leone, of course, liked Helenius’ notable response following an early gaffe. “I credit him a lot for coming back and playing a really strong game,” he said. “I thought his second and third period were good. But you got to play a disciplined game against a really good team. He had an extended shift.” Helenius, 18, began the night with just one assist all season and on a five-game pointless streak. The short drought did not bother Leone because the youngster kept creating offense. “If he’s not getting scoring chances, it’s more of a concern,” he said. “But, I mean, if you look at the plays at Laval (on Wednesday) ... he could’ve got three of four assists that game. I think he’s still driving offense.” Helenius, having scored five goals and eight points, has been one of the Amerks’ top catalysts all season. “It’s hard that you play well but you didn’t get rewarded,” he said. “But you just have to continue to believe the points will come.”

Dow ends at fresh record as oil prices pull back on ceasefire hopesAmpliTech Group Announces Closing of $1.4 Million Registered Direct Offering

Confident Bucs gear up for stretch run against lighter season-ending schedule