Aurelia Butler

More stories

  • 175 Shares119 Views

    in Elections

    She Spent Nearly $600,000 on Her Council Race and Lost. Was It Worth It?

    If nothing else, Elizabeth Lewinsohn’s failed bid for a New York City Council seat highlights two great needs: housing and idealistic candidates.Last December, Elizabeth Lewinsohn, a longtime TriBeCa resident, entered the Democratic race to represent her district in New York’s City Council, eventually raising and spending far more money than any of the other 216 people running for the Council. Of the $568,665 her campaign put toward securing the Democratic nomination in a district that covers the bottom tip of Manhattan, $522,000 came from a source with whom she was intimately acquainted: Elizabeth Lewinsohn.The return on investment did not inspire; she effectively spent $72 per vote and lost by 20 points to the incumbent, Chris Marte.City Council races typically generate little civic interest or remarkable dispersions of cash, one of the reasons that the race, which could be seen as a referendum on development, wound up on the radar of people who might have ignored it. Over the past 25 years, only one other campaign, to elect a Stanford-educated lawyer named Kevin Kim, spent more money on a Council bid. Running for a seat in Queens in 2009, he won the primary and then lost to a Republican in the general election.But the scale of Ms. Lewinsohn’s self-financing seems unprecedented in a contest of this kind. She opted out of the city’s matching funds program, which would have limited her spending. The prospect of a political novice beating an incumbent seemed daunting to the point of impossible, she told me, had she kept within the constraints of public financing, which cap spending for primary campaigns to $228,000.To put her gambit in perspective, the former hedge fund manager Whitney Tilson donated just under $15,000 toward his own failed bid to become mayor. Out of four candidates in the Democratic primary for the First District, Ms. Lewinsohn ranked second, despite outspending Mr. Marte, the son of a bodega owner, by nearly $400,000 — roughly the tab she would have run up had she taken the 7,905 people who cast ballots for her to the Odeon for a plate of steak tartare and a glass of Bordeaux.While the paperwork she filed with the city’s Campaign Finance Board identifies her as a “homemaker” (she is married to Jonathan Lewinsohn, an investment manager), Ms. Lewinsohn is, in fact, a quietly accomplished public servant, a graduate of Yale Law School, a former director of policy for the Police Department’s Counterterrorism Bureau, a member of her local community board for 12 years now and a co-founder of Gotham Park, a revived public space under the Brooklyn Bridge.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 Shares129 Views

    in Elections

    C.I.A. Says Its Leaders Rushed Report on Russia Interference in 2016 Vote

    But the new review of the earlier assessment does not dispute the conclusion that Russia favored the election of Donald J. Trump.A C.I.A. review of its assessment of Russian interference in the 2016 election criticized the agency’s leadership at the time for rushing the effort but did not dispute the conclusion that Russia favored the election of Donald J. Trump.The review also criticized John O. Brennan, who was the C.I.A. director when the assessment was written, for his oversight of the project and for too tightly controlling access to sensitive intelligence that formed the basis of the work.The original intelligence review, which was undertaken in the aftermath of the November 2016 vote, came amid concerns about Russian ties to Mr. Trump’s campaign and efforts by the Kremlin to sow dissent during the election.Before the vote, the Obama administration issued warnings about Russian cyberoperations, and the C.I.A. and F.B.I. intensified their scrutiny of Russian activity after the election.Early on, the intelligence assessment, an unclassified version of which was released in January 2017, came under criticism from Republican supporters of Mr. Trump. The criticism continued through his first term, though a bipartisan Senate Intelligence Committee affirmed the judgment of the assessment.John H. Durham, a Justice Department special counsel in the first Trump administration, looked at the C.I.A.’s and other intelligence agencies’ work on the assessment, but made no substantive mention of it in his final report.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 Shares99 Views

    in Elections

    Mamdani Says Trump Is Attacking Him to Divert Focus From G.O.P. Agenda

    Zohran Mamdani, the Democratic nominee for mayor of New York City, has been targeted by the president and other Republicans since his success in the primary.Zohran Mamdani, the Democratic nominee for mayor of New York City, forcefully denounced President Trump on Wednesday for threatening to arrest him and repeating baseless claims that he immigrated to the United States illegally.Speaking after a labor union rally in Manhattan, Mr. Mamdani said that he was running to make New York City a bulwark against “authoritarianism” in Washington. But he also argued that Mr. Trump was targeting him as a way of diverting attention from Republican plans to slash taxes for the rich and social safety net programs for the neediest.“I fight for working people,” Mr. Mamdani said. “Ultimately, it is easier for him to fan the flames of division than to acknowledge he has betrayed those working-class Americans.”The remarks, Mr. Mamdani’s first public comments since clinching his party’s nomination this week, offered an early glimpse at how the New York Democrat may try to blunt Mr. Trump’s extraordinary attacks and use them for his own purposes.The victory by Mr. Mamdani, a 33-year-old democratic socialist, over former Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo and other Democratic rivals has illustrated and even deepened the divisions in American politics, not always along party lines. But few responses have been as ugly or sustained as Mr. Trump’s.“A lot of people are saying he’s here illegally,” Mr. Trump said on Tuesday. “We’re going to look at everything.”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 Shares159 Views

    in Elections

    10 Ways of Making Sense of Zohran Mamdani’s Win

    Four years ago, when Eric Adams was elected mayor, New Yorkers were told that it marked the end of a progressive wave that had shaped national Democratic politics at least since the shock election of Donald Trump in 2016. Just five months ago, as Democrats reckoned with the meaning of a second loss to Trump, the refrain was similar: The party had been pulled too far left by its activist flank, which it needed to not just discipline but also perhaps disavow. At the time, Zohran Mamdani was registering just 1 percent support.Now he has won a decisive primary victory by bringing a remarkably novel electorate to the polls. And a lesson of his shock victory is one we probably should have learned several times over the past decade: Politics are fluid, even quicksilver, and the just-so stories we tell ourselves about what is possible and what is not are almost always simplistic and in many cases just plain wrong.New York is only one city, exceptional in many ways, and last week’s was just one election — a primary at that, featuring a front-runner burdened by laziness and a toxic past. And there are obvious reasons to think that the Mamdani playbook now being debated so furiously both by its admirers and by its detractors would not work in other parts of the country — at least, not in all of them. But Mamdani’s triumph is nevertheless, as I wrote a few weeks ago in anticipation, an extremely big deal, elevating an avowed leftist closer to a more consequential executive office than any has held in generations. And though Mamdani’s ascension comes with meaningful risks, it also throws open a whole new horizon of political possibility. Mamdani’s supporters are exhilarated by the fresh air. But the oxygen spent on him by his haters over the past week shows that they, too, think Mamdani’s win is a major national event.Last month, I asked what stories we might tell about a Mamdani victory — for the left, for the city and indeed for the whole country. But election night delivered enough of an earthquake that a number of new and important story lines have emerged since — too many, I think, to organize in any way but as a grab bag of observations. Here are 10.1. The American left has a new face, and New York City is now an extremely high-stakes progressive experiment.These days, with American politics more and more nationalized, every candidate everywhere is, to some extent, required to participate in national debates and be subjected to national scrutiny (on cable news and social media as well as offline). Perhaps in another era or another city an election like this could be cauterized from the national landscape, allowing an experiment in one city to play out on its own terms. Not now.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 Shares119 Views

    in Elections

    Justice Dept. Explores Using Criminal Charges Against Election Officials

    Such a path could drastically raise the stakes for federal investigations of state or county officials, bringing the department and the threat of criminalization into the election system.Senior Justice Department officials are exploring whether they can bring criminal charges against state or local election officials if the Trump administration determines they have not sufficiently safeguarded their computer systems, according to people familiar with the discussions.The department’s effort, which is still in its early stages, is not based on new evidence, data or legal authority, according to the people, speaking on the condition of anonymity to describe internal discussions. Instead, it is driven by the unsubstantiated argument made by many in the Trump administration that American elections are easy prey to voter fraud and foreign manipulation, these people said.Such a path could significantly raise the stakes for federal investigations of state or county officials, thrusting the Justice Department and the threat of criminalization into the election system in a way that has never been done before.Federal voting laws place some mandates on how elections are conducted and ballots counted. But that work has historically been managed by state and local officials, with limited involvement or oversight from Washington.In recent days, senior officials have directed Justice Department lawyers to examine the ways in which a hypothetical failure by state or local officials to follow security standards for electronic voting could be charged as a crime, appearing to assume a kind of criminally negligent mismanagement of election systems. Already, the department has started to contact election officials across the country, asking for information on voting in the state.Ballots from the 2024 general election locked in a secure warehouse area of the Ada County Elections Office in Boise, Idaho, last November.Natalie Behring for The New York TimesWe 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

  • 138 Shares189 Views

    in Elections

    The Streets Are Safer This Year for Drivers, Cyclists and Pedestrians

    There have been 87 traffic deaths in the city so far this year, the lowest number since 2018. Officials credit the Vision Zero program and congestion pricing.Good morning. It’s Wednesday. Today we’ll look at street fatalities in the first six months of 2025, which fell to a number not seen since 2018. We’ll also get details on Zohran Mamdani’s win in the Democratic primary, which is now official.Hilary Swift for The New York TimesTo city transportation officials, 2025 looks a lot like 2018. So far, anyway.In the first half of this year, 87 traffic deaths were recorded on New York City streets. That was the same number as in the first six months of 2018, which went on to become the safest year since the city began keeping records on traffic fatalities 115 years ago, with 206 deaths on city streets.As that total suggests, the statistics may look different by the end of the year. Crashes and collisions typically rise in the summer, and the second half of a year usually outpaces the first.But for now, city officials are encouraged, with Ydanis Rodriguez, the transportation commissioner, saying in a statement that the city’s streets are “are safer than ever” for everyone on them — pedestrians, cyclists and drivers. The 87 deaths from January through June compared with the 128 reported in the first six months of last year, which ended with 251 fatalities in all.Of the 87:51 were pedestrians, compared with 63 in the first half of last year.15 were drivers or passengers in cars or S.U.V.s, down from 29 in the first six months of 2024.20 were people on what the city calls “motorized two-wheelers,” a category that includes e-bikes, scooters, mopeds and motorcycles. That was down from 33 from January to June a year ago.So far in 2025, one cyclist on a conventional, nonelectric bike has been killed. There were three such deaths in the first half of 2024, six in the comparable months of 2023 and 11 from January to June 2019.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

  • 138 Shares119 Views

    in Elections

    Trump Faces the Biggest Test Yet of His Second-Term Political Power

    If President Trump gets his domestic policy bill over the finish line, it will be a vivid demonstration of his continuing hold over the Republican Party.President Trump has gotten almost everything he has wanted from the Republican-controlled Congress since he took office in January.G.O.P. lawmakers approved his nominees, sometimes despite their doubts. They ceded their power over how federal dollars are distributed, impinging on constitutional authority. And they have cheered his overhaul of the federal bureaucracy, even as he has bypassed the legislative body’s oversight of federal agencies.But now, Mr. Trump is pressuring Republicans to fall in line behind his sprawling domestic policy bill, even though it has elements that could put their party’s hold on Congress in greater peril in next year’s midterm elections. Fiscal hawks are appalled by estimates that the bill would add at least $3.3 trillion to the country’s ballooning debt, while moderate Republicans are concerned about the steep cuts to the safety net.Yet Mr. Trump is still getting his way — at least so far. The Senate narrowly passed the bill Tuesday, with Vice President JD Vance breaking the tie. The bill now heads back to the House, where the president can only lose three votes, and where anger among both moderates and conservatives about changes made by the Senate is running high.Getting the bill through the House may be the biggest test yet of Mr. Trump’s second-term political power. If he gets the bill over the finish line, it will be another legislative victory and a vivid demonstration of his continuing hold over the party.The process of driving the legislation forward has exposed deep divisions among congressional Republicans, as well as concern about the huge political risks of supporting the bill. In the end, fear of crossing Mr. Trump kept defections in the Senate to a barely manageable level.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 Shares189 Views

    in Elections

    New Yorkers Embraced Ranked-Choice Voting. Mamdani’s Win Proves It.

    Here are five takeaways from New York City’s second experience with ranked-choice voting, and how it helped Zohran Mamdani secure a decisive victory.Four years ago, New Yorkers had their first brush with ranked-choice voting, but few seemed ready to embrace it. Voters seemed puzzled by the process, and the Democratic mayoral candidates were hesitant to work together and make cross-endorsements to help each other.This year was different.All the campaigns tried to game the system, which allows voters to rank up to five candidates in order of preference. Organizations made group endorsements; campaigns told voters to avoid ranking specific candidates; and several contenders made cross-endorsement deals.Most of this benefited Zohran Mamdani, a state assemblyman and democratic socialist who officially won the Democratic primary for mayor on Tuesday after ranked choices were counted.He received nearly 100,000 additional votes from New Yorkers who ranked him lower on their ballots.Those votes helped Mr. Mamdani beat his main rival, former Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo, by 12 percent — a decisive victory that shocked Democrats in the city and across the nation.Here are five takeaways from the ranked-choice count.Brad Lander, left, and Zohran Mamdani reached a cross-endorsement deal that added ranked-choice votes for Mr. Mamdani.Hiroko Masuike/The New York TimesLander’s Endorsement Helped MamdaniFor much of the campaign, Brad Lander, the city comptroller, was stuck in third place.The only citywide elected official in the race, Mr. Lander was expected to be the standard-bearer for the left flank of the party. But Mr. Mamdani’s charisma, social media savvy and focus on affordability catapulted him past Mr. Lander in the polls.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