Zohran Mamdani, the Democratic nominee in the race for mayor of New York City, moved to distance himself from comments that sparked outrage during the primary.Zohran Mamdani, the Democratic nominee for New York City mayor, told an influential group of business leaders on Tuesday that he would not use the phrase “globalize the intifada,” which has been seen as a call to violence against Jews, and would “discourage” others from doing so, according to three people familiar with his comments.The phrase has been a rallying cry among opponents of the war in Gaza, and Mr. Mamdani, an ardent critic of Israel’s military operations, had refused to condemn its use during the Democratic primary race that he won in June.His comments came in a closed-door meeting with roughly 150 business executives at the offices of Tishman Speyer in Rockefeller Center. It was hosted by the Partnership for New York City, a consortium of members representing banks, law firms and corporations.Mr. Mamdani told the group that while many people used the term to express solidarity with Palestinians, some New Yorkers viewed it as a reference to violence against Israel, according to one of the people who were familiar with his comments.Just two weeks ago, shortly after his primary victory, Mr. Mamdani said in an interview on “Meet the Press” that the term was “not language that I use” but that “I don’t believe that the role of the mayor is to police speech.”Mr. Mamdani’s shifting language comes as his campaign moves from his stunning victory in the June primary to the general election in November, when he faces a fractured field of competitors including Mayor Eric Adams and former Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo, who are running as independents, and the Republican nominee, Curtis Sliwa.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

On This Week’s Episode:Enough power to make a small difference, but only that, so what do you do?Abbas Alawieh, a founder of the Uncommitted National Movement, with fellow Michigan delegates at the Democratic National Convention in August.Nick Oxford for The Washington Post, via Getty ImagesNew York Times Audio is home to the “This American Life” archive. Download the app — available to Times news subscribers on iOS — and sign up for our weekly newsletter. More

Oliver Laughland travels to Walt Disney World, Florida, to see how a law restricting the teaching of LGBTQ+ issues is affecting voters in the run-up to the midterm elections. Republicans extended their majority in the state in 2020, and with far-right Governor Ron DeSantis up for re-election, will his divisive culture wars help him win a second term? More

The former president’s halting responses to questions by a special counsel show him exactly as a majority of Americans believed him to be — and as Democrats repeatedly insisted he was not.For much of his time in the White House, former President Joseph R. Biden Jr. offered a quick rebuttal to those raising concerns about his age: “Watch me,” he said.Yet, in the end, it may be the sound of Mr. Biden’s own voice that proves what his aides worked furiously, and spent hundreds of millions of campaign dollars, to try to keep the public from seeing with its own eyes.The five-hour-and-10-minute audio recording of a special counsel’s interview with Mr. Biden on Oct. 8 and 9, 2023, shows a president struggling to recall dates and details, whose thoughts seem jumbled as he tries to recreate events that had occurred just a few years earlier.The information in the audio recording, which Axios published on Saturday, is not new. The 258-page transcript of the interview of Mr. Biden by Robert K. Hur, the special counsel who investigated his handling of classified documents, was released in March 2024. His report set off a political firestorm in the midst of the president’s re-election campaign.But the sound of Mr. Biden’s fragile voice and unsteady responses offers a revelation of its own. The Hur tapes reveal the president exactly as a majority of Americans believed him to be — and as Democrats repeatedly insisted he was not.In the days after Mr. Hur released his report, Democrats fanned out across the news media to vouch for the president, assuring the public of their eyewitness vantage point on his deep knowledge and sure-handed command of the nation and the world. He was “sharp” and at the “top of his game,” they said almost in unison. He was “focused, impressive, formidable and effective,” as Senator Jon Ossoff of Georgia, one of the youngest leading Democrats, put it memorably. Biden administration officials declined to release the audio recording of his interview, asserting executive privilege.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

After big gains in stocks and mediocre returns for bonds, investors are taking on undue risk if they don’t rebalance their holdings, our columnist says.All eyes were on the Federal Reserve this past week, or so several market analysts solemnly said. This was true even though the Fed essentially did nothing in its latest meeting but hold interest rates high to fight inflation, just as it has done for many months.To be fair, there was a little news: The Fed did appear to affirm the likelihood of rate cuts starting in September, and that’s important. But so are the big performance shifts in the market, away from highflying tech stocks like Nvidia and toward a broad range of less-heralded, smaller-company stocks. In fact, there’s a great deal to think about once you start focusing on the behavior of the markets and the health of the economy in an election year.But what is perhaps the most important issue for investors rarely gets attention.In a word, it is rebalancing.I’m not talking about a yoga pose, but rather about another discipline entirely: the need to periodically tweak your portfolio to make sure you’re maintaining an appropriate mix of stocks and bonds, also known as asset allocation. If you haven’t considered this for a while — and if nobody has been doing it for you — it’s important to pay attention now because without rebalancing, there’s a good chance you are taking on risks that you may not want to bear.The rise in the stock market over the last couple of years, and the mediocre performance of bonds, has twisted many investment plans and left portfolios seriously out of whack. I found, for example, that if you had 60 percent of your investments in a diversified U.S. stock index fund and 40 percent in a broad investment-grade bond fund five years ago, almost 75 percent of your investments would now be in stock. That could make you more vulnerable than you realize the next time the stock market has a big fall.Asset AllocationThe Securities and Exchange Commission defines asset allocation as “dividing an investment portfolio among different asset categories, such as stocks, bonds and cash.” It’s an important subject, but it’s not as straightforward as that description seems.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More