Aurelia Butler

More stories

  • 175 Shares97 Views

    in Elections

    Trump Treats Tariffs More as a Form of Power Than as a Trade Tool

    Instead of viewing tariffs as part of a broader trade policy, President Trump sees them as a valuable weapon he can wield on the world stage.President Trump’s allies often describe him as a 40-year devotee of tariffs who, stymied by his first-term advisers, is finally able to put his long-held economic theory into practice.But while Mr. Trump spoke about tariffs off and on before becoming a presidential candidate, he usually described his broader grievance about trade in terms of other countries or companies “ripping off” the United States. It is since Mr. Trump became a candidate in 2015 that he has talked about tariffs in earnest, describing them as a tool that he could easily deploy to rebalance the country’s economic footing.“We are going to have 10 percent to 20 percent tariffs on foreign countries that have been ripping us off for years, we are going to charge them 10 percent to 20 percent to come in and take advantage of our country because that is what they have been doing,” Mr. Trump said in August 2024, one of many comments he made in that race emphasizing he would impose sweeping tariffs if he won, far beyond those in his first term.Mr. Trump’s latest retreat this week from his own self-imposed tariff deadlines underscores the challenge he has faced in treating tariffs as a quick-fix — a tool that he asserts will bring in lots of money for the country while swiftly resetting trade relationships.A review of Mr. Trump’s comments about tariffs over the decades shows he has often been fairly vague on the topic, and only more recently came to describe them as the centerpiece of his approach to trade.Far more frequent and durable has been Mr. Trump’s repeated refrain that other countries are turning the United States into “suckers.” His references to tariffs often came as part of his description of a feeling of national injury that became common as the country’s manufacturing base began eroding. That attentiveness to trade as an issue, even absent a cohesive policy plan, helped Mr. Trump win in 2016.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

  • 75 Shares104 Views

    in Elections

    How Crypto Lobbying Won Over Trump

    Just over a year ago, while sitting around a table in an ornate meeting room at Mar-a-Lago, David Bailey and a group of top Bitcoin executives made a pitch to Donald J. Trump.They were looking for a savior.For years, cryptocurrency companies had endured a sweeping crackdown in Washington — a cascade of lawsuits, regulatory attacks and prosecutions that threatened the industry’s survival.Mr. Trump wasn’t an obvious sympathizer. He had once dismissed Bitcoin as a “scam.” But he welcomed the executives into his private club in Florida because the industry had suddenly gotten his attention. Mr. Bailey was mobilizing crypto investors to vote for Mr. Trump and had called on his colleagues to raise $100 million for the election effort.At Mar-a-Lago, Mr. Bailey brought along representatives of several large Bitcoin mining firms — an energy-guzzling sector that has drawn noise complaints and environmental concerns. They pitched Mr. Trump on the economic benefits of Bitcoin, before pivoting to a bold request: Could Mr. Trump write a supportive post on his social media site?The proposed language was included at the bottom of a bullet-pointed meeting agenda, according to a copy reviewed by The New York Times. Mr. Trump said he would “consider it,” Mr. Bailey, who runs the digital currency firm BTC Inc., recalled in an interview. “We had no idea if that was going to happen.”That night, Mr. Trump fired off a Truth Social post containing the exact message proposed by the executives: “We want all the remaining Bitcoin to be MADE IN THE USA!!! It will help us be ENERGY DOMINANT!!!”

    .css-m0b4as{max-width:600px;margin:0 auto;display:block;}.css-m0b4as:hover{-webkit-text-decoration:none !important;text-decoration:none !important;}.nytapp-vi-homepage .container-margin-none .css-m0b4as,.NYTApp #programming-list .container-margin-none .css-m0b4as{margin-left:20px;margin-right:20px;}@media (min-width:740px){.nytapp-vi-homepage .css-m0b4as,.NYTApp #programming-list .css-m0b4as{margin-left:auto;margin-right:auto;}}.css-1eu3oi1{display:-webkit-box;display:-webkit-flex;display:-ms-flexbox;display:flex;-webkit-flex-direction:row;-ms-flex-direction:row;flex-direction:row;padding-bottom:20px;color:var(–color-content-secondary,#363636);}.css-npk1al{padding-left:10px;}.css-61i2mm{font-family:nyt-franklin,helvetica,arial,sans-serif;font-size:0.75rem;font-weight:700;text-transform:uppercase;-webkit-letter-spacing:0.03rem;-moz-letter-spacing:0.03rem;-ms-letter-spacing:0.03rem;letter-spacing:0.03rem;display:block;color:var(–color-content-secondary,#363636);}.css-4z4bzs > :last-child{margin-bottom:20px;}.css-4z4bzs > :not(:first-child){margin-top:0.25rem;}.container-margin .css-4z4bzs{margin-top:20px;}.css-4z4bzs > :last-child{margin-bottom:10px;}.css-10r0njy{width:70px;height:70px;background-color:#d9e1e3;border-radius:4px;width:81px;height:81px;}.css-wwq616{font-family:nyt-franklin,helvetica,arial,sans-serif;font-weight:bold;font-size:0.875rem;line-height:1rem;margin-bottom:2px;font-size:1rem;line-height:1rem;margin-bottom:5px;}@media (min-width:740px){.css-wwq616{font-size:0.875rem;line-height:1.125rem;}}.nytapp-vi-homepage .css-wwq616,.NYTApp #programming-list .css-wwq616{font-size:0.9375rem;line-height:0.9375rem;margin-bottom:0;display:block;}@media (min-width:740px){.nytapp-vi-homepage .css-wwq616,.NYTApp #programming-list .css-wwq616{font-size:0.875rem;line-height:1.1875rem;}}@media (min-width:740px){.css-wwq616{font-size:1rem;line-height:1rem;}}.css-1qudybh{font-family:nyt-franklin,helvetica,arial,sans-serif;font-size:0.8125rem;line-height:1rem;font-weight:500;color:var(–color-content-tertiary,#5A5A5A);font-size:0.9375rem;line-height:1.25rem;}@media (min-width:740px){.css-1qudybh{font-size:0.875rem;line-height:1.125rem;}}.nytapp-vi-homepage .css-1qudybh,.NYTApp #programming-list .css-1qudybh{font-size:0.9375rem;line-height:1.1875rem;display:block;margin-top:2px;}@media (min-width:740px){.nytapp-vi-homepage .css-1qudybh,.NYTApp #programming-list .css-1qudybh{font-size:0.875rem;line-height:1.1875rem;}}@media (min-width:740px){.css-1qudybh{font-size:0.9375rem;line-height:1.25rem;}}.css-89khpe{display:-webkit-box;display:-webkit-flex;display:-ms-flexbox;display:flex;-webkit-flex-direction:row;-ms-flex-direction:row;flex-direction:row;padding-bottom:20px;color:var(–color-content-secondary,#363636);padding-bottom:10px;}.css-m0b4as{max-width:600px;margin:0 auto;display:block;}.css-m0b4as:hover{-webkit-text-decoration:none !important;text-decoration:none !important;}.nytapp-vi-homepage .container-margin-none .css-m0b4as,.NYTApp #programming-list .container-margin-none .css-m0b4as{margin-left:20px;margin-right:20px;}@media (min-width:740px){.nytapp-vi-homepage .css-m0b4as,.NYTApp #programming-list .css-m0b4as{margin-left:auto;margin-right:auto;}}.css-1eu3oi1{display:-webkit-box;display:-webkit-flex;display:-ms-flexbox;display:flex;-webkit-flex-direction:row;-ms-flex-direction:row;flex-direction:row;padding-bottom:20px;color:var(–color-content-secondary,#363636);}.css-npk1al{padding-left:10px;}.css-61i2mm{font-family:nyt-franklin,helvetica,arial,sans-serif;font-size:0.75rem;font-weight:700;text-transform:uppercase;-webkit-letter-spacing:0.03rem;-moz-letter-spacing:0.03rem;-ms-letter-spacing:0.03rem;letter-spacing:0.03rem;display:block;color:var(–color-content-secondary,#363636);}.css-4z4bzs > :last-child{margin-bottom:20px;}.css-4z4bzs > :not(:first-child){margin-top:0.25rem;}.container-margin .css-4z4bzs{margin-top:20px;}.css-4z4bzs > :last-child{margin-bottom:10px;}.css-10r0njy{width:70px;height:70px;background-color:#d9e1e3;border-radius:4px;width:81px;height:81px;}.css-wwq616{font-family:nyt-franklin,helvetica,arial,sans-serif;font-weight:bold;font-size:0.875rem;line-height:1rem;margin-bottom:2px;font-size:1rem;line-height:1rem;margin-bottom:5px;}@media (min-width:740px){.css-wwq616{font-size:0.875rem;line-height:1.125rem;}}.nytapp-vi-homepage .css-wwq616,.NYTApp #programming-list .css-wwq616{font-size:0.9375rem;line-height:0.9375rem;margin-bottom:0;display:block;}@media (min-width:740px){.nytapp-vi-homepage .css-wwq616,.NYTApp #programming-list .css-wwq616{font-size:0.875rem;line-height:1.1875rem;}}@media (min-width:740px){.css-wwq616{font-size:1rem;line-height:1rem;}}.css-1qudybh{font-family:nyt-franklin,helvetica,arial,sans-serif;font-size:0.8125rem;line-height:1rem;font-weight:500;color:var(–color-content-tertiary,#5A5A5A);font-size:0.9375rem;line-height:1.25rem;}@media (min-width:740px){.css-1qudybh{font-size:0.875rem;line-height:1.125rem;}}.nytapp-vi-homepage .css-1qudybh,.NYTApp #programming-list .css-1qudybh{font-size:0.9375rem;line-height:1.1875rem;display:block;margin-top:2px;}@media (min-width:740px){.nytapp-vi-homepage .css-1qudybh,.NYTApp #programming-list .css-1qudybh{font-size:0.875rem;line-height:1.1875rem;}}@media (min-width:740px){.css-1qudybh{font-size:0.9375rem;line-height:1.25rem;}}.css-89khpe{display:-webkit-box;display:-webkit-flex;display:-ms-flexbox;display:flex;-webkit-flex-direction:row;-ms-flex-direction:row;flex-direction:row;padding-bottom:20px;color:var(–color-content-secondary,#363636);padding-bottom:10px;}Key Players Trying to Sway Trump on CryptoDavid BaileyChief executive of BTC Inc.David SacksSilicon Valley venture capitalist and White House crypto czarBrad GarlinghouseChief executive of RippleStuart AlderotyChief legal officer of RippleCharles HoskinsonFounder of Input OutputPaul ManafortFormer Trump campaign chairmanBill ZankerLongtime Trump business partnerTracy Hoyos-LópezBitcoin advocate and former prosecutorBrian BallardMajor Trump-fundraiser and lobbyistReince PriebusFormer White House chief of staffEric TrumpThe president’s middle sonWe 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

  • 88 Shares118 Views

    in Elections

    A Primer on Primaries for New Yorkers

    Should they be open or closed? In even years or odd? The mayor’s charter revision panel is considering shaking up the city’s voting system.Good morning. It’s Wednesday. Today we’ll look at how open primaries would work in New York City, as a special panel appointed by Mayor Eric Adams considers the idea.Hiroko Masuike/The New York TimesNew York City’s mayoral race has certainly been eventful to say the least. After Zohran Mamdani’s primary win, some Democrats are strategizing to find ways to defeat him. And a city panel is considering overhauling the whole primary system. Let’s get into it.A special city panel appointed by Mayor Eric Adams is considering asking voters to approve an open primary system to allow those who aren’t registered with a party to vote in primary elections, according to my colleague Emma Fitzsimmons. The panel, a charter revision commission, released a 135-page report outlining the proposal, along with several others that could be on the ballot in November.New Yorkers may be wondering, what’s with all these changes?Ranked-choice voting came on the scene in 2021. If the panel places an open primary system on the ballot in November and voters approve it, it would take effect in 2029. Hold tight, there’s more. The charter commission is also considering moving elections to even years to align with presidential elections. If a majority of voters approve that proposal, it would require a change to the State Constitution.Right now, only New Yorkers who are registered as Democrat and Republican are able to vote in New York City primaries, and only in their party’s primary. The open primary would allow all registered voters to cast their ballots, and the top two candidates would battle it out in the general election.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

  • 75 Shares104 Views

    in Elections

    If Zohran Mamdani Wins, Then What?

    Zohran Mamdani’s remarkable, decisive defeat of Andrew Cuomo in the New York Democratic primary for mayor opens a potential new path for progressive governance — one that will be a challenging, if thrilling, test for the American left.Mr. Mamdani, the 33-year-old state assemblyman and proud democratic socialist, is the heavy favorite to win the general election in November, even in a field that includes the beleaguered incumbent, Eric Adams, running as an independent. If he prevails, he will be, without a doubt, the most powerful unabashedly left-wing politician in America.That’s direct power: over America’s largest police force, its largest education department and a municipal budget that has soared past $110 billion. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Bernie Sanders are famous and influential leftists, but they do not oversee the machinery of government in the way mayors do. And governing, unlike legislating, cannot simply default to activism.Mr. Mamdani would become the leftist others look to, either as a savior or as a villain.New York City has a larger population than most states; it is racially, ethnically and politically diverse. The deep-blue hue of its electorate belies a tremendous complexity that has deviled many a mayor. How to govern for progressive A.O.C. supporters and conservative Orthodox Jews? What about churchgoing African Americans, Muslim Middle Easterners and Sikhs? This is a city that less than a year ago saw a significant swing toward Donald Trump.Mr. Mamdani would face numerous tests. (A disclosure: In 2018, when I ran for state senator in New York City, Mr. Mamdani was my campaign manager.) With the city, the nation and even the world watching him, he would be tasked with fulfilling campaign promises that were widely popular. As mayor, he could freeze rent on rent-stabilized apartments, since the mayor appoints the members of the board that makes this decision. He could fund, through the municipal budget, the five city-run grocery stores in his campaign proposal, perhaps partnering with existing chains and subsidizing them to lower the cost of items there.But at least some of his proposals would not be immediately deliverable. He would need to barter with the state-run Metropolitan Transportation Authority — and by extension, Kathy Hochul, the moderate Democratic governor — for his proposal to make buses free, even if the overall cost (it would mean forgoing an estimated $800 million a year in fare revenue) is not terribly expensive, in the grand scheme of the city and state budgets, which total north of $100 billion and $200 billion, respectively.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

  • 163 Shares73 Views

    in Elections

    Should New York City Ditch Its Party Primaries in Favor of Open Races?

    A panel created by Mayor Eric Adams wants to consider using an “open primary” system for elections in New York City. Here’s how the plan would work.For the last century, New York City has typically elected its mayor the same way. Democrats choose a candidate in their party primary, Republicans choose a candidate in their primary, and the twain meet in November.That may soon change.A special panel appointed by Mayor Eric Adams is formulating a plan that would scrap the current system in favor of an open primary where all the candidates — regardless of political party affiliation — would be on the ballot.Under the proposal, the top two candidates would advance to the general election, regardless of their party affiliation. And all voters would be eligible to participate in the primary election. Right now, only registered Democrats and Republicans can vote in their party’s primary contest.The 13-member panel, a charter revision commission, recently released a 135-page report that details several proposals that could be on the ballot this November. The measures could curb the City Council’s power to reject new housing, among other ideas. Voters would need to approve the proposals, which would be listed as ballot questions, for them to be enacted.The commission has not yet decided whether to put open primaries on the ballot, and during a four-hour hearing on Monday, public opinions were clearly divided.Here’s what you need to know about the proposal:How would an open primary system work?The panel is considering moving to a system where all registered voters could participate in local primary elections, and the top two candidates who receive the most votes would face off in the general election.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

  • 100 Shares87 Views

    in Elections

    Musk’s Third Party Starts With a Good Idea

    Elon Musk has finally done something predictable (for a gazillionaire with a political itch, that is): He says he’s launching a third party devoted to the cause of deficit reduction. Instead of the quadrennial dream of No Labels, in which high-minded donors put up the money for an imaginary white knight who never materializes, we may get the “America Party,” in which the world’s richest man puts his fortune behind, he says, “extremely concentrated force at a precise location on the battlefield.”If you parse Musk’s postings and re-postings, that seems to mean a third party strategy that targets a handful of close Senate and House seats, trying to create a legislative faction that exerts control over both bodies by preventing anything from passing without their crucial votes.Credit where due: This is a somewhat better plan than just backing a doomed third-party presidential bid in 2028. The most compelling suggestion for would-be third partyers during Joe Biden’s presidency was that they should persuade a clutch of discontented senators to caucus as independents, creating a potent Joe Manchin-Mitt Romney-Lisa Murkowski-Susan Collins-Kyrsten Sinema bloc. Musk’s concentrated-force idea, presumably, would be an attempt to create this kind of bloc from scratch, discovering the next Murkowskis and Manchins and making it possible for them to fund and win a race without an R or D beside their name.Before the travails of DOGE, I would have said that it was a mistake to automatically bet against Musk; now it seems safer to just acknowledge up front that this plan is unlikely to work out, and that Musk will probably find it too difficult to seriously pursue.But in the spirit of possibility, and because the House-and-Senate plan is an advance on most third-party fantasias, let’s consider the things that would need to happen for Musk to succeed.First, the America Party couldn’t just target the tightest swing states. You’ll notice that of the independent-minded senators and former senators listed above, only Sinema comes from a hotly contested state. That’s because under polarized conditions, a true swing state is usually the place where both parties make the strongest efforts at persuasion, where the stakes of each election seem highest and the fear of the other party’s rule is sharpest among partisans on either side.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

  • 113 Shares139 Views

    in Elections

    How Insularity Defined the Last Stages of Biden’s Career

    Former President Joseph R. Biden Jr.’s aides did not want him to speak with me.For months, as I worked on a book about the 2024 presidential election, I made multiple requests for an interview with Mr. Biden. One of my co-authors had sat down with President-elect Donald J. Trump, and we felt it was critical to talk to Mr. Biden. But the former president’s aides said he was working on a memoir, and that would conflict with my book.Yet when I reached Mr. Biden on his cellphone in late March, he answered and agreed to talk. He broke his silence on his successor to criticize the early weeks of Mr. Trump’s second term. “I don’t see anything he’s done that’s been productive,” the former president said.When I asked if he had any regrets about dropping out of the presidential race, Mr. Biden said, in a detached tone, “No, not now. I don’t spend a lot of time on regrets.” Then he hung up because he was boarding an Amtrak train.My brief conversation with Mr. Biden prompted a cascade of concern among his top aides. One screamed at me for calling the former president directly. Others texted furiously, trying to figure out how I had obtained Mr. Biden’s phone number.Mr. Biden had seemed open to continuing the conversation, but my subsequent calls went straight to voice mail. His automated greeting simply said, “Joe.”Two days later, that greeting was replaced by a message from Verizon Wireless: “The number you dialed has been changed, disconnected or is no longer in service.”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

  • 150 Shares95 Views

    in Elections

    Dan Osborn to Seek Pete Ricketts’s Nebraska Senate Seat, Stressing Class Issues

    A steamfitter and former union leader, running as an independent but with Democratic support, will take on the Republican incumbent, a billionaire’s son.Dan Osborn, a steamfitter and former labor leader from Nebraska who ran a surprisingly close campaign for a Senate seat as an independent last year, announced Tuesday that he would run for the Senate again in 2026.Mr. Osborn said in an interview that he would aim to draw a sharp contrast between his working-class background and the profile of Senator Pete Ricketts, the Republican incumbent, who is an heir to billions his father made in the financial services industry.“It’s the C.E.O. from Omaha versus the guy from the shop floor from Omaha, so that’s going be the fundamental difference,” Mr. Osborn said.Mr. Osborn, 50, faces a steep climb against Mr. Ricketts. Republicans have won every House and Senate seat in Nebraska since 2014, when Brad Ashford, a Democrat who had previously been a Republican, won a single term in the House.Mr. Ricketts, 60, who has spent tens of millions of dollars on Nebraska campaigns for himself and other Republicans, is not likely to be surprised by Mr. Osborn, as was Senator Deb Fischer last year, when Mr. Osborn, running a populist campaign, outperformed Vice President Kamala Harris in the state by 13 percentage points. Ms. Fisher defeated Mr. Osborn by 6.6 percentage points.In a campaign announcement video, Mr. Osborn disparages Mr. Ricketts as someone who inherited billions from his father, calls him Wall Street Pete and accuses him of turning his back on Nebraska’s working people. “Bye, Pete,” Mr. Osborn says.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