Mr Maduro addressed a rival rally of supporters in Caracas, saying: “Let the people decide.”
Opposition leaders have called for a mass walk-out on Friday. After the general strike, if the government continues to block the recall referendum process, the opposition threatened to march on the presidential palace – something it has not been allowed to do since a march there in 2002 started a short-lived coup against the former President, Hugo Chavez.
Mr Maduro, a former bus driver and union leader, is blamed by the opposition for Venezuela’s dire economic situation. The oil-rich country is facing widespread food shortages and spiralling inflation.
In turn, he has accused the opposition of having links to foreign states, the US in particular, and of seeking to overthrow him to “lay their hands on Venezuela’s oil riches”.
Under Venezuela’s constitution, a recall referendum can be held once a president has served half of his term in office and the requisite steps are met.
So far, the opposition has completed the first step of the process.
He had to position himself as the change candidate – just days after a Fox poll showed that Hillary Clinton, whose party has held the presidency for eight years, was beating him on the question of who would “change the country for the better”.
Instead, after a roughly half an hour of something resembling an actual policy debate about the Supreme Court, gun rights, abortion and even immigration, the old Donald Trump – the one who constantly interrupted his opponent, sparred with the moderator and lashed out at enemies real and perceived – emerged.
He called Mrs Clinton a liar and a “nasty woman”.
He said the women accusing him of sexual harassment bordering on assault were either attention-seekers or Clinton campaign stooges.
He said the media were “poisoning the minds” of the public. And, most notably, he refused to say whether he would accept the results of the election if he loses.
Mrs Clinton had her own moments where she was put in the defensive – on her emails, on the Clinton Foundation and on embarrassing details revealed in the Wikileaks hack.
The difference, however, is that Mrs Clinton largely kept her poise and successfully changed the topic back to subjects where she was more comfortable. It was, in fact, a master class in parry-and-strike debate strategy.
The key takeaway from this debate, however – the headline that Americans will wake up to read in the morning – will certainly be Mr Trump’s refusal to back way from his “rigged” election claims.
That was what Mr Trump wanted to say, but it isn’t something the American people – or American democracy – needed to hear
Mrs Clinton’s skill at deflecting attacks and baiting Mr Trump into unhelpful answers first was on display when moderator Chris Wallace brought up a line from one of her Wall Street speeches – revealed in the Wikileaks hack – that she endorsed a hemispheric free-trade and open-immigration zone.
After saying she was only talking about an open energy market – an assertion that seems somewhat questionable – she tried to turn the question into a discussion of whether Mr Trump would renounce the Russian government, which US officials have said is behind the cyber-attack.
Mr Trump actually called Mrs Clinton out on her attempted “great pivot” – but then he went on to get bogged down on the Russian issue.
He said he’d never met Mr Putin (although he boasted during a primary debate that he had talked with him in a television green room), and said that Mrs Clinton was a liar and the real Russian “puppet”.
Oh, and this all came up when the debate topic was supposed to be immigration.
A bad experience
Mrs Clinton’s next chance to pull a rhetorical switch-a-roo came during the economic portion of the debate. After a discussion of their tax proposals – and a predictable exchange of allegations over who’s cutting and who’s raising them too much – Mr Trump went after Mrs Clinton on her past support of trade deals.
When she waffled a bit, he tried to tag her with a line he used in an earlier debate with some success.
Why didn’t Mrs Clinton enact her economic reforms over her 30 years in the public sphere? Mr Trump asked.
“You were very much involved in every aspect of this country,” he said. “And you do have experience. I say the one thing you have over me is experience, but it’s bad experience, because what you’ve done has turned out badly.”
The problem with reusing attack lines is that sometimes your opponent prepares a defence – and Mrs Clinton had a scathing response ready to fly.
She said that while she was defending children’s rights in the 1970s, Mr Trump was defending himself against charges he engaged in housing discrimination against African-Americans.
When Mrs Clinton was speaking out for women’s rights as first lady in the 1990s, Mr Trump was taunting a beauty contest winner about her weight. And when she was in the White House situation room watching the raid on Osama bin Laden’s compound, Mr Trump was hosting a television reality show.
“I’m happy to compare my 30 years of experience, what I’ve done for this country, trying to help in every way I could, especially kids and families get ahead and stay ahead, with your 30 years,” she said.
“I’ll let the American people make that decision.”
It was a scripted set-piece, yes, but it drew blood.
Quick on the heels of the exchange about experience came the question Mr Trump had to expect – but didn’t appear ready for. What did he think of all the women who had come forward since the last debate to allege that, when it came to sexual harassment, Mr Trump’s actions matched his candid words in that recently revealed recording?
The Republican nominee’s response was that the women were either attention-seekers or Clinton campaign stooges and that the allegations have been “largely debunked” – which, when you think about
Mr Trump’s response, that no one respects women more than he does, was met by laughter in the debate hall and the nearby media hall.
Mrs Clinton brushed off his efforts to turn the topic to her private email server.
He may have lost this election even without the live-mic revelation two weeks ago, but it’s becoming increasingly clear his campaign has been irreparably wounded by it.
During the presidential “fitness” portion of the debate, Wallace had some pointed questions for Mrs Clinton, as well.
He asked her to defend the Clinton Foundation against allegations it was a pay-to-play organisation that granted insider access to the state department in exchange for big-money donations.
Mrs Clinton responded by defending the foundation’s actions – noting its high ratings from non-profit watchdogs and its global health efforts.
Mr Trump called it a “criminal enterprise” – but then Mrs Clinton was able to push the conversation to Mr Trump’s foundation, which has had its own share of controversies.
She noted that Mr Trump had used foundation money to purchase a six-foot portrait of himself. “Who does that?” she asked.
Mr Trump tried to defend himself, but Wallace wouldn’t let him off the hook, asking him why he used charitable money to settle a fine levied on his Florida resort.
The Republican’s response was only that the money had gone to charity.
An exchange on the Clinton Foundation could have been – perhaps should have been – a winning moment for Mr Trump. Instead, it was another opportunity for Mrs Clinton to knock him off his stride.
Mr Trump was already largely sunk at this point in the debate. Mrs Clinton had managed to dodge his most dangerous attacks and goaded him into the kind of badgering behaviour that had garnered him negative reviews after the first debate. He needed a clear victory and, at the absolute best, he had fought Mrs Clinton to a draw.
Then he was asked whether, despite his talk of rigged voting at his rallies this week, he’d follow his running mate’s lead and pledge to accept the results of the election.
“I will look at it at the time,” he said. “I’m not looking at anything now.”
It was a comment that will launch a thousand headlines and dominate discussion in the days ahead.
It was also just the start of a full-spectrum tirade by Mr Trump against a media that “poisoned the minds of voters” and Mrs Clinton, who he said should have been prohibited from even running for the presidency.
Mrs Clinton’s response was that the Republican’s remarks were “horrifying”.
She then deftly expanded her response to paint Mr Trump as a man who cries “rigged” whenever he faces a situation he doesn’t like – whether it’s the FBI decision not to prosecute her for her email server, his loss in the Iowa caucuses earlier this year, the lawsuit against his eponymous for-profit university or even his reality TV show’s defeat at the Emmy Awards. (“Should have gotten it,” Mr Trump piped in.)
He’s talking down our democracy,” she concluded. “And I, for one, am appalled that somebody who is the nominee of one of our two major parties would take that kind of position.”
Talking to Republican officeholders in the media spin room after the debate, their discomfort with Mr Trump’s statement was palpable.
Some explained it away as a tongue-in-cheek joke. Others said it was simply Mr Trump not wanting to consider defeat before Election Day.
The reality, however, is Republican politicians owe their positions – past, current and future – to the people’s vote, and they rely on the legitimacy granted by opponents who concede when defeated.
Mr Trump has called American democracy into question – and when he shakes that particular tree, it’s impossible to determine who might get crushed by falling branches.
Ms Anderson, now 46, said the property mogul touched her through her underwear at a Manhattan nightspot when she was a waitress trying to make it as a model.
She said she was “very grossed out and weirded out”.
Ms Anderson said she turned round to find a man sitting on a red velvet couch whom she recognised instantly as the celebrity property mogul.
“He was so distinctive looking,” she told the Washington Post, “with the hair and the eyebrows. I mean, nobody else has those eyebrows.”
She added: “It wasn’t a sexual come-on. I don’t know why he did it. It was like just to prove that he could do it, and nothing would happen.
“There was zero conversation. We didn’t even really look at each other. It was very random, very nonchalant on his part.”
The newspaper said it had approached Ms Anderson after learning of her story through a third party, and she had spent several days deciding whether to go public.
Mr Trump’s spokeswoman, Hope Hicks, said in a statement emailed to the Washington Post: “Mr Trump strongly denies this phony allegation by someone looking to get some free publicity. It is totally ridiculous.”
Meanwhile, Summer Zervos, a former contestant on season five of The Apprentice in 2006, said she was sexually assaulted by Mr Trump after she was invited by him to discuss job opportunities.
Ms Zervos, 41, told an emotional news conference in Los Angeles that she met him in 2007 in a bungalow at the Beverly Hills Hotel, where the businessman greeted her by kissing her on the mouth.
She said he asked her to sit next to him on a sofa where he “grabbed my shoulder and began kissing me again very aggressively and placed his hand on my breast”.
Ms Zervos fought back tears as she said Mr Trump attempted to lead her into the bedroom and “began thrusting his genitals”, even as she fended off his advances.
She said Mr Trump then began talking to her as if she were a candidate for a job interview.
Ms Zervos, who described herself as a Republican, said she was subsequently offered a low-paid job at a Trump-owned golf course.
She was flanked during the press conference by well-known lawyer Gloria Allred, who has previously represented alleged sexual assault victims of entertainer Bill Cosby.
At the time of the alleged assault, Mr Trump was recently married to his third and current wife, Melania Trump.
His campaign said he “vaguely remembers” Ms Zervos, but insisted the meeting at the hotel never happened.
And during a rally in North Carolina on Friday, the Republican candidate said the several accusations were “sick” and fabricated.
“I don’t know who these people are. I look on television, I think it’s a disgusting thing and it’s being pushed, they have no witnesses, there’s nobody around.
“Some are doing it for probably a little fame, they get some free fame. It’s a total set-up.”
Mr Trump’s campaign have rejected the claims and threatened legal action against the NYT.
His camp made public a letter to the US newspaper calling its article “defamatory” and “a politically-motivated effort to defeat Mr Trump’s candidacy”. The NYT said it was standing by its story.
The allegations come less than a week after a video shot in 2005 emerged which showed Mr Trump making obscene remarks about groping women.
He apologised for the comments – which were widely condemned – but described them as “locker-room talk”.
Calling the NYT story disturbing, Hillary Clinton’s campaign said it “sadly fits everything we know about the way Donald Trump has treated women”.
What are the allegations?
The New York Times published accounts from two women, Jessica Leeds and Rachel Crooks.
Ms Leeds, now 74, said that when she was 38 she sat next to Mr Trump in the first-class cabin of a flight to New York. Once airborne, he lifted the armrest and began to touch her.
“He was like an octopus… his hands were everywhere,” said Ms Leeds. “It was an assault.”
Rachel Crooks said she was kissed on the lips by Mr Trump outside a lift in Trump Tower when she was a 22-year-old receptionist at a real estate company there.
“It was so inappropriate,” Ms Crooks said. “I was so upset that he thought I was so insignificant that he could do that.”
In People magazine, writer Natasha Stoynoff said an incident took place in December 2005, when she went to interview the Trumps ahead of their first wedding anniversary.
Mr Trump said he wanted to show her around their Florida estate, including one “tremendous” room.
“We walked into that room alone, and Trump shut the door behind us. I turned around, and within seconds he was pushing me against the wall and forcing his tongue down my throat,” Ms Stoynoff wrote.
Another woman, Mindy McGillivray, now 36, told the Palm Beach Post that when she was 23, Mr Trump grabbed her bottom at his Mar-a-Lago club in Florida in 2003.
None of the women reported their accounts to the authorities, but said they shared what happened with friends, colleagues or family.
Other reports that have emerged:
The Guardian quoted an unidentified contestant in the Miss USA 2001 pageant as saying the mogul walked in on her and a fellow contestant while they were naked. “He walked in, he stood and he stared,” she said. Buzzfeed reported a similar claim related to the 1997 Miss Teen USA pageant
CBS News reported on video footage from 1992 in which Mr Trump sees a group of young girls and says about one of them: “I am going to be dating her in 10 years”
According to Yahoo News, Cassandra Searles, who was Miss Washington 2013, in a comment on a Facebook post said Mr Trump “continually grabbed my ass and invited me to his hotel room”
How has Mr Trump reacted?
The Trump camp has not reacted to all the claims, but it came out strongly against the NYT report.
In addition to the legal threat, campaign spokesman Jason Miller accused the paper of launching “a completely false, co-ordinated character assassination”.
Reaching back decades set “a new low for where the media is willing to go in its efforts to determine this election”, he said.
Accounts from Ms Stoynoff and Ms McGillivray were both described by the campaign as lacking “merit or veracity”.
Asked during last Sunday’s debate whether he had kissed or groped women without their consent, Mr Trump said: “No, I have not”, and stressed that he respected women.
How have voters reacted?
The latest polls show Hillary Clinton pulling into a solid lead over her Republican rival.
On Monday, a poll by Reuters/Ipsos gave Mrs Clinton an eight-point lead.
It also showed that a fifth of Republicans thought Mr Trump’s comments about groping woman disqualified him from the presidency.
Meghan McCain on dad dumping Trump: The choice wasn’t easy
Donald Trump on Tuesday went after John McCain (R) after the Arizona senator withdrew his support for the Republican presidential nominee.
“The very foul mouthed Sen. John McCain begged for my support during his primary (I gave, he won), then dropped me over locker room remarks!” Trump tweeted Tuesday.
McCain rescinded his support for Trump last weekend after the release of a 2005 tape in which Trump can be heard making lewd comments about women. In the tape, Trump describes how he could grope and kiss women without their consent because of his celebrity status.
In response, Trump on Tuesday tweeted that the “shackles have been taken off,” adding that he can now “fight for America the way I want to.”
McCain said in a statement Saturday that he had wanted to support the Republican nominee.
“He was not my choice, but as a past nominee, I thought it important I respect the fact that Donald Trump won a majority of the delegates by the rules our party set. I thought I owed his supporters that deference,” the Arizona senator said.
“But Donald Trump’s behavior this week, concluding with the disclosure of his demeaning comments about women and his boasts about sexual assaults, make it impossible to continue to offer even conditional support for his candidacy.”
McCain on Monday said he may write in Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) when asked during an Arizona Senate debate whom he’ll vote for in the presidential contest.
Trump has gone after McCain in the past. The GOP nominee said last year that the Arizona senator, who was tortured for years as a prisoner of war in Vietnam, was not a war hero because “he was captured.”
“I like people that weren’t captured, OK? I hate to tell you,” Trump said at the Family Leadership Summit in July 2015.
“Hundreds have died; at least 1.4 million people need assistance at this time. Some towns and villages have been almost wiped off the map; crops and food reserves have been destroyed; at least 300 schools have been damaged,” Mr Ban said.
Officials said some people had started to put up blockades to try and stop aid convoys they saw driving through their areas without stopping.
An aid worker told the Associated Press news agency that a convoy carrying food, water and medications was attacked by gunmen in a remote valley where there had been a mudslide.
The UN humanitarian agency issued an appeal to help provide “life-saving assistance and protection” for 750,000 people in south-western Haiti over the next three months.
Officials were still struggling to reach the hardest-hit areas, the agency said, with communities in need of food, clean water and clothing.
Haiti’s ambassador to the UN said the country would face a “severe famine” as its south-western region, the most affected by Matthew, is “considered the bread basket of Haiti”.
“The needs are urgent,” Pierre-Andre Dunbar added.
There were growing fears that flooding could cause a cholera outbreak similar to that after the 2010 earthquake. The waterborne disease reached the island via Nepalese UN troops, causing the deaths of nearly 10,000 people.
Reports said a treatment centre in the town of Jeremie was overcrowded with not enough beds for patients, and some of them were being forced outside. Many of the cases involved children.
Other countries including France and the US have pledged to send aid. The Red Cross has launched an emergency appeal for $6.9m (£5.6m) and Unicef said it needed at least $5m to meet the immediate needs of 500,000 affected children.
Meanwhile, at least 21 have been killed by Matthew in the US, 10 of them in North Carolina, most of them swept away by flood waters.
“Hurricane Matthew is off the map. But it is still with us. And it is still deadly,” Governor Pat McCrory said.
There were also four deaths in Florida and three each in Georgia and South Carolina. One death was reported in Virginia. Nearly 1.2 million people were without power.
A health worker at a cholera treatment centre in the town of Jeremie, where up to 80% of buildings have been destroyed, said there were not enough beds for the patients who were coming in.
Other countries including France and the US have pledged to send aid. The Red Cross has launched an emergency appeal for $6.9m (£5.6m) and Unicef said it needed at least $5m to meet the immediate needs of 500,000 affected children.
But one aid worker said some people had started to put up blockades to try and stop aid convoys they saw driving through their areas without stopping.
Hurricane Matthew was downgraded to a post-tropical cyclone early on Sunday and the winds reduced to 75mph (121km/h) as it passed over south-eastern states of the US. But it still brought substantial damage, flooding cities and knocking out electric power to millions of homes and businesses. Two million people were ordered to leave their homes.
Of the 16 people who are so far known to have died, nearly half were in North Carolina. Some were swept away by floodwater while in their vehicles; some were killed by falling trees; some suffocated in carbon monoxide fumes from generators; and one elderly man was pinned to the ground by his electric wheelchair.
Four people have been reported missing in the city of Fayetteville in the state.
Fayeteville’s Mayor Nat Robertson said: “Stay home. Most of your Church services have been cancelled. There’s no reason to go out. Take the day off.”
President Barack Obama has declared a state of emergency, meaning federal money can be sent to the affected states.
North Carolina’s Governor Pat McCrory made a plea for people to turn their attention from the political news in the presidential debate to his state’s plight.
Haiti has begun three days of national mourning for those killed by Hurricane Matthew, which devastated the south of the country.
At least 900 people are believed to have died. Tens of thousands of homes have been destroyed and some 350,000 people need aid, the government says.
Cholera is a major fear, with several deaths reported, as are food supplies, given the destruction of crops.
Matthew went on to barrel up the south-eastern coast of the US, killing 10.
It caused extensive flooding, power cuts and damage to buildings in Florida, Georgia and the Carolinas.
At 02:00 local time (06:00 GMT), the now Category 1 Matthew was about 30km (18 miles) off the coast of Cedar Island in North Carolina and heading north-east, further out to sea, at 16mph (25km/h), the National Hurricane Center said.
Matthew passed directly through Haiti’s Tiburon peninsula – encompassing Haiti’s entire southern coast – driving the sea inland and flattening homes with winds of up to 230km/h (145mph) and torrential rain.
The international aid response in Haiti was now “beginning to pick up”, according to Stephane Rolland, regional co-ordinator for the International Federation of the Red Cross (IFRC).
But the challenges remain immense, given the difficulties with infrastructure and reaching remote areas.
The official death toll remains at 336, but the government says this tally only includes fatalities confirmed by visits to villages. Many have not been reached due to collapsed roads and bridges.
The country’s Civil Protection Agency says that number will rise.
On Friday, civil protection officials told the BBC that 877 people had died.
Beth Carroll, of the aid agency Catholic Relief Services, said: “The three needs that we’ve identified for the immediate response are food, water and shelter. A lot of people are outside; a lot of people do not have access to clean drinking water.”
Cholera is a major worry. At least 13 people have died from the disease since the hurricane, as sewage and floodwaters mix.
Eli Pierre Celestin, of the Haitian health ministry, reported cases in Randel, Port-a-Piment and Les Anglais, saying: “There are nurses but no doctors… People have started dying.”
Cholera’s short incubation period causes speedy outbreaks and deaths can be quick without treatment. The disease was brought to Haiti by UN peacekeepers after the earthquake of 2010 and has killed about 10,000 people.
The destruction of crops has been almost total in many parts of the Tiburon peninsula, with loss of livestock also bad.
Many people are running low on food.
Mother-of-three Jocelyne Saint Preux watched US aid arrive in the town of Jeremie. Officials handed out wheat, beans, oil and salt to a queue of people.
The US National Hurricane Center (NHC) has downgraded Matthew to a Category One hurricane, with maximum sustained winds having decreased to 75mph (120km/h).
South Carolina Governor Nikki Haley, warned people to stay in shelters and not to try to go back home on Saturday or Sunday.
“Between downed power lines and trees, and then just unsafe structures – bridge, all of those things.
Officials said emergency responders have carried out multiple water rescues from cars and homes.
The NHC said: “The combination of a dangerous storm surge, the tide, and large and destructive waves will cause normally dry areas near the coast to be flooded by rising waters moving inland from the shoreline.”
Nearly 1.6m homes and businesses in the south-east of the US were left without power.High winds knocked over trees, causing disruption
Hurricane Matthew first made landfall in in the US in South Carolina but its edges had previously battered the coasts of Florida and Georgia.
The World Meteorological Organisation (WMO), which is the UN’s weather agency, had warned that the hurricane would remain dangerous regardless of whether or not it made landfall in the US.
Parts of the city of Savannah, Georgia have been submerged in several feet (one foot = 30cm) of water.