Iván Cepeda begins his second week heading into the presidential runoff with no money and time running out. His campaign team, deployed across several regions of the country for the final push, is convinced that the race will be decided in two cities: Bogotá and Barranquilla. The ruling party candidate has renewed his bet on social media: he now appears in more personal videos with voters, painting murals and even playing soccer. And he has the math clear: he needs at least 2.5 million additional votes to overtake his opponent Abelardo de la Espriella and cross the threshold into the Casa de Nariño presidential residence.

Since the results of Sunday, May 31, his campaign coordinators have concluded that relying on a first-round victory was an error. “That was the first mistake. The second was trying to deny it was a mistake and saying what we experienced was not a defeat,” one of his advisers says. Since then, the campaign has been shaken. The problem is there is little time left and they have little money to right the ship. The plan now is to present a more empathetic, more accessible, fresher candidate and to fight vote by vote in parts of the country that still have growth potential.

The left has run out of funds for the runoff. Cepeda knocked on the doors of two major private banks, Grupo Aval and Bancolombia. Both financial groups have lent to other candidates in these elections, but, according to three people on his staff, they refused Cepeda. His team requested 25 billion pesos (about $6 million). By contrast, De la Espriella has received more than 35 billion pesos (about $8.3 million) from the banks.

The private banks’ rebuff to the ruling party candidate is not insignificant. One of his regional coordinators says they were also denied the chance to put up more campaign billboards in public spaces. “When we said which candidate it was for, they refused to rent them to us,” he says. The funds the campaign has managed to secure for the runoff came through Cooperativa Financiera Confiar, a smaller organization whose electoral lending cap is 15 billion pesos (about $3.6 million).

Finances are not the only problem. The communications strategy arrived late. Too late. It was only this week that the campaign decided to change: bright colors, reels, Cepeda in the streets painting murals, speaking with K-pop fans and kicking soccer balls about. The candidate once associated with reading speeches in public squares is now mingling more with people in working-class neighborhoods. The shift was necessary, but it began after an entire week had already been lost before the runoff.

But the costliest mistake was not the delay: two people on his team say the most damaging misstep in the first post-electoral week came when Cepeda publicly asked his supporters not to wear the Colombia national team jersey — an idea that, according to these sources, came from the communications leadership — and which none of his advisers endorsed. Amid World Cup fever, his team tried to fix the error quickly, and although his activists have since embraced the garment, the false step was costly.

Cepeda’s image overhaul, however, is not merely cosmetic. It is also political: he has sought to distance himself from President Gustavo Petro, who continues to intervene in the campaign without restraint and to contradict his party’s candidate. One of the initial conclusions reached by the president and Cepeda was that they had to abandon the idea of a Constituent Assembly. That had been one of Petro’s major obsessions, but Cepeda never fully agreed.

On Wednesday, three days after the election, the committee collecting signatures to call for a constitutional change abandoned its project. The strategy to mobilize votes, Cepeda’s inner circle says, is easier to activate with a message that does not have Petro as a protagonist, or in the shadows. And although the distance between them seemed clear until then, the truth is Petro refuses to leave his successor’s campaign alone. This Sunday, while Petro insisted on his theory of fraud in the first round, Cepeda publicly broke with him and, hours later, explicitly acknowledged the election results.

Meanwhile, Cepeda’s team is now looking to gain at least 2.5 million new votes. Those are their calculations for victory. Barranquilla is the most contested front; the city where far-right candidate De la Espriella built much of his electoral base and from which he has reaped the reward has become a priority target for Cepeda.

The country’s northern region has not proven fertile territory for the left in these elections, although the Caribbean coast has a progressive memory. That is why a large part of Cepeda’s campaign team traveled there on Saturday to establish a permanent base to campaign for more votes in the Caribbean region before time runs out. De la Espriella, meanwhile, threatens with the hand of Donald Trump those who campaign for Cepeda in the Caribbean.

In Bogotá the approach is different. The priority is not persuading undecided voters, rather mobilizing those who are already convinced but stayed home on election day. Cepeda’s team estimates that nearly half the voters in the southern districts of the capital — historically left-leaning territory — did not go to the polls in the first round. If they can move that mass, internal calculations point to at least one million additional votes in Bogotá alone.

That is why Cepeda’s appearances in localities such as Bosa, where he shared a soccer ball with Antonella Petro, the president’s youngest daughter, are no coincidence. It is in those neighborhoods where they expect electoral growth. The idea is repeated especially in rural Colombia, which has historically voted for progressive candidates but did not make it to the polls on May 31.

The other front Cepeda needs to close is alliances with the political center. In the first round, Sergio Fajardo and Claudia López together won just over 1.2 million votes that could tip the balance. Talks with them, and with Juan Daniel Oviedo, have progressed quietly, but not everyone wants to make their support public for fear of losing their own political capital. Oviedo, for example, set conditions that have already been met: abandoning calls for a Constituent Assembly, a thorough review of the total peace policy, and recognition that there was no fraud in the first round. Other actors added their own demands.

On Thursday there is a meeting in which Cepeda’s team hopes the sought-after photo will finally be taken. “The idea is that if they decide not to make their support public, they will make their teams available to join the campaign,” says one of his closest aides.

And while the campaign presses in Bogotá and on the coast, Cepeda will also contest a terrain the far right has already conquered: votes abroad. More specifically, Colombians in the United States. According to a member of his team, the candidate plans trips to New York and Washington in the coming days. The internal reading is simple: if the right‑wing leader Cepeda faces at the polls has Donald Trump as an ally, the left‑wing candidate needs to show up in that country and meet with Democrats. Organizers say he will also meet with some Republicans.

With several fronts open to win the election, Cepeda knows that distancing himself from the president is the hardest strategy of all. Not because he does not want to, but because Petro refuses. The idea of contradicting Petro does not sit well with several members of Cepeda’s team. But outside advisers are convinced victory — or defeat — depends largely on the president of the Republic.

Sign up for our weekly newsletter to get more English-language news coverage from EL PAÍS USA Edition

Voters in Maine, Nevada, South Carolina, and North Dakota will head to the polls this Tuesday, June 9, to participate in another round of primary elections. The elections will determine the candidates for the Senate, the House of Representatives, governorships, and dozens of state and local offices that will be up for grabs in November.

Among the races drawing the most attention are the search for a challenger to Republican Senator Susan Collins in Maine, the Republican race to succeed Governor Henry McMaster in South Carolina, and the gubernatorial primary in Nevada. In addition, North Dakota will vote on a proposal to amend its state Constitution.

When and at what time are the primary elections?

The primary elections will be held on Tuesday, June 9, 2026.

Polling hours vary by state. In South Carolina, polls will be open from 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. local time. In Maine, hours depend on each municipality, although most polling places will close at 8:00 p.m. In Nevada, polling places will close at 7:00 p.m. local time, while in North Dakota, hours vary by county, with closing times scheduled between 7:00 p.m. and 8:00 p.m.

What’s on the ballots?

In South Carolina, voters will elect candidates for governor, the U.S. Senate, the House of Representatives, and various state offices. The race for governor is one of the most closely watched, with seven Republicans and three Democrats vying to succeed outgoing Governor Henry McMaster.

Maine will hold primaries for governor, the U.S. Senate, the House of Representatives, and the state legislature. Much of the attention is focused on the Democratic primary to determine who will face Republican Senator Susan Collins, considered one of the most vulnerable figures in the Republican Party in the Senate. The race for the 2nd Congressional District, which became open following Representative Jared Golden’s decision not to seek reelection, will also be decided.

In Nevada, nominations will be decided for governor, the House of Representatives, lieutenant governor, attorney general, and other state offices. Republican Governor Joe Lombardo will seek to advance toward a re-election campaign, while Democrats will choose their candidate in an effort to win back one of the most competitive governorships in the country.

In North Dakota, voters will elect candidates for the U.S. House of Representatives, various state offices, the state legislature, and two seats on the Public Service Commission. They will also vote on a proposal to amend the state Constitution to require that each constitutional amendment initiative address a single, specific issue.

Who can vote?

South Carolina uses an open primary system, so any registered voter can choose to participate in either the Democratic or Republican primary.

North Dakota also allows voters to participate without first registering with a political party, although they must select a single party ballot for the primary races.

Maine maintains a mixed system. Voters registered with a party may only participate in their political party’s primary, while independents may choose which primary to vote in.

Nevada uses a closed system. Voters must be registered with a party to participate in their respective primary, although state law allows voters to register or change their party affiliation even on Election Day.

How and where to vote?

Voters can find their polling place, verify their voter registration, review their ballot, and learn about their state’s specific requirements through the official websites of election authorities.

An easy way to find this information is through Vote.org, where you can verify your voter registration, find your polling place, and access each state’s official links.

Some jurisdictions have specific requirements. In South Carolina, for example, voters must present a valid photo ID to vote in person. In Nevada, voters can register or update their party affiliation on Election Day at authorized locations.

When will the results be announced?

The first results will begin to be released after the polls close on Tuesday night.

However, the time required to complete the count will vary from state to state. Nevada and Maine may take longer due to the volume of early and mail-in ballots, while South Carolina and North Dakota typically report a significant portion of their results during the early hours of election night.

In some races, runoffs or additional processes may also be necessary to determine the nominees. In South Carolina, for example, the two candidates with the most votes will advance to a runoff if no one receives more than 50% of the votes in the primary.

Sign up for our weekly newsletter to get more English-language news coverage from EL PAÍS USA Edition

Arab Barghouti (Jerusalem, 35) says that “at the end of the day” he does not think of Marwan Barghouti as a politician, nor as the Palestinian leader of the Second Intifada (2000–2005), who was sentenced by Israel to five life terms in a trial full of irregularities 24 years ago. He thinks of himself as the son who wants his father “to come home.”

Marwan Barghouti (Kobar, 66) is the only Palestinian leader who commands consensus, even among Hamas fundamentalists. That “unified leadership,” his son argues, is “the reason” he believes Israel refuses to release the man known as “the Palestinian Mandela” (Nelson Mandela himself drew parallels between their experiences).

Arab Barghouti spoke with EL PAÍS on June 3 in Madrid. Among other events, in the Spanish capital he met with representatives from all parliamentary groups in Congress except those from the conservative PP, far-right Vox, and pro-independence Junts per Catalunya, as part of the “Free Marwan” campaign to call for his father’s release.

Question. Like you, many Palestinians grew up with parents in prison. What does the imprisonment of Palestinians represent for Israel?

Answer. It is collective punishment and an instrument of the occupation used to silence, oppress, and de-legitimize the Palestinian people’s right to self-defense. Over the past 58 years, more than 800,000 Palestinians have been imprisoned, one-third of them under administrative detention [without charges or trial], which is unlawful under international law. It affects every Palestinian family. As my mother [lawyer Fadwa Barghouti] noted, after October 7, 2023 [the day of the Hamas attacks and the start of the Israeli offensive in Gaza], mass incarceration has become a continuation of the genocide.

Q. You have denounced several assaults on your father in prison. How is he now?

A. His lawyer saw him a few weeks ago and said he was assaulted again at the end of April and also on May 12. Those attacks continue because Israel knows what my father represents. We are facing a deranged prison system that has killed more than 100 Palestinian political prisoners [since October 7, 2023]. That shows how desperate they are, because they fear a man behind bars, whom they lock in a cell and prevent from receiving medical treatment or [sufficient] food. My father has lost more than 10 kilos and has been held in solitary confinement for more than two and a half years, but he remains positive and very strong mentally.

Q. When Israel’s national security minister, Itamar Ben-Gvir, threatened your father on camera, you said that was the representation of the Palestinian struggle. Why?

A. Because there you had a bully, a fascist like Ben-Gvir, who tried to humiliate my father in front of the whole world just to show off. He is a convicted terrorist even in Israel. He is also a perfect reflection of what Israel is today. To me it makes no sense that world leaders do not speak out against Ben-Gvir and the horrific treatment he gives Palestinian political prisoners. That he is allowed to do whatever he wants demonstrates the state of the international community. My father, with his weakened body, represents the Palestinian people. When the Palestinian people starve, he starves; when a Palestinian is attacked, he is attacked. He is someone who embodies the Palestinian history and struggle.

Q. Israel has repeatedly refused to free him, most recently when Hamas demanded his release as part of the October ceasefire in Gaza.

A. My father supports coexistence and a political solution in Palestine. And that is why he remains in prison. In the past 15 years, Israel has released more than 800 Palestinians serving life sentences like his, in cases that, according to them, were more complicated than my father’s. Israel does not want peace with the Palestinians; it wants one of two options. The first is the ethnic cleansing of the Palestinian people, which occurs every day: in Gaza, where they already control more than 60% [of the territory] and where they have killed dozens, if not hundreds, of people; and in the West Bank, where settler terrorism has expelled 40,000 Palestinians. The second option is perpetual apartheid. They do not want a two-state solution or peace. That is why they refuse to release a unifying Palestinian leader who believes in international law, in coexistence and in peace, but who will never renounce the Palestinians’ right to achieve freedom, self-determination, and independence.

Q. How do you explain that Hamas, an Islamist faction, respects your father, who is a leader of the secular Fatah [the main PLO movement]?

A. My father was brave regarding the peace process, but also regarding the Palestinians’ right to defend themselves. He advocated for peace in the 1990s and met with Israelis in Tel Aviv, in Europe, in Palestine and elsewhere. He later understood that the Israelis had not committed to the Oslo Accords nor to the Palestinian people’s right to their own state. That was when he decided to tell the people what to do as a member of parliament during the Second Intifada. From then on, he became the face of that uprising. He is also a highly educated man who taught hundreds of Palestinian prisoners who, upon release, became ambassadors of his political vision and spread his message. Above all, he is a unifying figure.

Q. Does your father still see a two-state solution as possible?

A. My father understands that the Israelis are undermining that solution by building more and more illegal settlements and stealing more Palestinian land. But at the same time, he does not insist on the final form of the two-state solution. Our goal is freedom, dignity, and independence, whatever the ultimate shape of the solution may be.

Q. In 2015, Marwan Barghouti wrote that Israel used negotiations “to advance its colonial project.” Is that prophecy coming true?

A. My father understands what we’re up against, especially now that we’re dealing with an Israeli government as terrible as any we’ve ever seen before. However, the idea that peace in the Middle East can be achieved without addressing the Palestinian question is a myth. There will be no peace or stability in the Middle East without an answer to the Palestinian question. And I hope the international community understands that the only way to confront the Israeli regime, its apartheid, occupation, and war crimes is by sanctioning and isolating it.

Q. That is not the trend the EU is showing by maintaining its association agreement with Israel.

A. Some EU leaders are complicit in the shedding of our blood and the killing of our children, as are leaders of other countries, but we must focus on the future because we owe it to Palestinian children. I am here to build bridges with the EU, with all countries. Even with the governments of the United Kingdom and the United States.

Q. What role does the Palestinian Authority (PA) play in the current political paralysis?

A. I belong to a generation that is very critical of the PA for its inability to protect the Palestinian people, but what I blame them most for is not holding elections when political renewal is essential in Palestine. Right now we welcome all the measures President Mahmoud Abbas is taking, such as the local elections two months ago or the internal Fatah central committee vote a month ago, in which my father was re-elected with the highest number of votes among the candidates. We hope elections are held for the PLO’s Palestinian National Council, which would act as the parliament we do not have, making the whole system dysfunctional. We also trust that general elections will take place, which are essential for the Palestinian Authority to recover its legitimacy and indispensable to achieve political unity between Gaza, the West Bank, and East Jerusalem.

Sign up for our weekly newsletter to get more English-language news coverage from EL PAÍS USA Edition