Elections

Además: Argentina eligió presidente, Acapulco a un mes del huracán Otis y más para estar al día.Donald Trump quiere regresar a la Casa Blanca en enero de 2025.A un año de las elecciones, aún es pronto para saber si la tendencia va a mantenerse, pero un sondeo reciente indica que el expresidente lidera las preferencias en la mayoría de los estados indecisos. Parece que las acusaciones formales en su contra por 91 delitos penales no le han restado apoyo.(Tanto Trump como el presidente Joe Biden son impopulares, según la encuesta Times/Siena. Pero los votantes que están frustrados con la situación actual de EE. UU. no expresan simpatía por Biden).¿Qué planea Trump para un segundo mandato?El expresidente Donald Trump en un discurso el domingo en Edinburg, TexasMichael Gonzalez/Getty ImagesA partir de sus discursos de campaña, así como de las publicaciones de sus páginas de internet, los reporteros de política del Times ofrecen un resumen de sus principales proyectos. A continuación, presentamos una lista de algunas de las medidas que pretende implementar en caso de ganar las elecciones:Modificar al poder ejecutivo para concentrar más poder. Esto involucraría que algunos organismos independientes, como la Comisión Federal de Comunicaciones y la Comisión Federal de Comercio, estén bajo el control presidencial. También ha indicado que planea transformar la burocracia federal.Atacar a los cárteles mexicanos de la droga con el uso de la fuerza militar.Modificar el poder judicial para actuar contra sus oponentes políticos. Según ha afirmado, eso implicaría nombrar un fiscal especial para “ir tras” Biden y su familia.En su primer mandato, las ambiciones de Trump se toparon con asesores jurídicos que impidieron algunas de sus propuestas. Ahora planea nombrar abogados que allanen el camino para llevar a cabo una agenda más radical.Al igual que en su primera campaña, Trump sigue empleando una retórica extrema contra los inmigrantes. Promete realizar “la mayor operación de deportación nacional en la historia de Estados Unidos”. Además, sus planes en materia migratoria incluyen redadas, campamentos y la reactivación del Título 42.Mientras tanto, los asesores de Biden desestiman la tendencia y aseguran que el actual mandatario está en una buena posición para competir en las elecciones.Si alguien te reenvió este correo, puedes hacer clic aquí para recibirlo tres veces por semana.Algo para el Día de Acción de GraciasLo digo todos los años: la fiesta de Acción de Gracias o Thanksgiving es una de mis festividades favoritas del calendario.Es una ocasión secular que reúne a familias o amigos para celebrar la gratitud y compartir una comida. Brinda una buena oportunidad para reflexionar sobre las bondades del año y ser agradecidos, algo que tiene impactos positivos en la salud. Y, de paso, cocinar puede resultar terapéutico.Si estás buscando ideas para el menú de estos días, aquí hay una receta de empanadas de calabaza que me recuerda a Reynosa, el lugar donde crecí. Te invito a participar en los comentarios con tus propias tradiciones de Acción de Gracias.Muchas familias mexicoestadounidenses cocinan a fuego lento calabaza fresca en piloncillo y otras especias; esta receta es más conveniente porque usa calabaza en lata.Bobbi Lin para The New York Times. Estilismo de comida: Maggie Ruggiero.Hoy quiero darte las gracias por ser parte de esta comunidad de lectores. Hace cuatro años que escribo este boletín y me siento muy afortunada de gozar del privilegio de contar con tu atención y poder acompañar tu semana.— More

The New York Times Audio app is home to journalism and storytelling, and provides news, depth and serendipity. If you haven’t already, download it here — available to Times news subscribers on iOS — and sign up for our weekly newsletter.The Headlines brings you the biggest stories of the day from the Times journalists who are covering them, all in about 10 minutes.The Indonesian Hospital in Gaza earlier this month. The enclave has 36 hospitals.Anas al-Shareef/ReutersOn Today’s Episode:Critical Trauma Care Is Not Possible at Any of Gaza’s Hospitals, the W.H.O. Says, by Farnaz FassihiFederal Court Moves to Drastically Weaken Voting Rights Act, by Nick Corasaniti‘Lost Time for No Reason’: How Driverless Taxis Are Stressing Cities, by Yiwen LuEmily Lang More

Prime Minister Rishi Sunak is 20 percentage points behind in opinion polls. But history suggests the timing of a vote might make a difference.No question in British politics will be more regularly asked, and reliably brushed aside, over the next few months than when Prime Minister Rishi Sunak plans to call the country’s next general election.He must do so by January 2025. The conventional wisdom is that with his Conservative Party trailing the opposition Labour Party by 20 percentage points in the polls, Mr. Sunak will wait as long as he can. Given the fact that Britons do not like electioneering around Christmas or in the dead of winter, that would suggest a vote next fall.But some of Mr. Sunak’s colleagues last week pushed for an earlier timetable. Having lost a critical legal ruling on his flagship immigration policy, the prime minister came under pressure from the right of his party to go to the polls in the spring if the House of Lords blocks the government’s efforts to revamp legislation to deport asylum seekers to Rwanda.Turning the election into a referendum on immigration might deflect attention from the economic woes plaguing Britain. But that assumes voters could be persuaded to swing to the Conservatives out of a fear of asylum seekers crossing the English Channel in small boats, rather than blaming the party for a stagnant economy, a cost-of-living crisis and hollowed out public services.Britain’s Supreme Court last week struck down the policy of deporting asylum seekers to Rwanda as unlawful. But Mr. Sunak has vowed to keep the matter alive by negotiating a new treaty with the East African country that would include a legally binding commitment not to remove migrants sent there by Britain — one of the court’s objections.Mr. Sunak also pledged emergency legislation that would declare Rwanda a safe country for asylum seekers. It remains unclear whether that would survive legal challenges and in the House of Lords, the unelected upper chamber of Parliament that has the right to review the legislation and could block it (though its appetite for a full-scale clash with the government was not clear.)“I know the British people will want this new law to pass so we can get flights off to Rwanda,” Mr. Sunak told reporters last week. “Whether it’s the House of Lords or the Labour Party standing in our way, I will take them on because I want to get this thing done and I want to stop the boats.”Asylum seekers disembark from a lifeboat in Dungeness, England, after being picked up at sea while crossing the English Channel.Henry Nicholls/Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesPolitical analysts say immigration remains a resonant issue in England’s north and Midlands, where support for the Conservatives in 2019 gave the party a landslide general election victory. Those voters, many of whom traditionally supported the Labour Party, were drawn to the Tory slogan, “Get Brexit done.”“Immigration is now the top priority for 2019 Conservative Party voters, above even the cost-of-living crisis and the dire state of the country’s National Health Service,” said Matthew Goodwin, a professor of politics at the University of Kent, who has written about populism and identity politics.“This means, in short, that Rishi Sunak has no way of winning the next election unless he connects with these voters by reducing immigration and regaining control of the country’s borders,” he said. “Yet both of those things currently look unlikely.”Far from accelerating the date of an election, Professor Goodwin argued that the salience of immigration would pressure Mr. Sunak to delay a vote. It will take months to surmount the legal problems with the existing policy, the professor said, let alone begin one-way flights to Rwanda.Other experts are more skeptical that an immigration-dominated election would play to the advantage of the Tories. Most voters view the party negatively on immigration, said Sophie Stowers, a researcher at the U.K. in a Changing Europe, a think tank in London. The number of people crossing the channel has remained stubbornly high since Mr. Sunak became prime minister, while legal migration has soared.“To me, it seems counterintuitive to bring attention to an issue where you have a poor image with the public,” Ms. Stowers said.The question is whether the Conservatives would do even worse if the election were decided on the economy, which matters more than migration to voters at large, according to opinion polls. Mr. Sunak did achieve one of his key economic goals last week, halving the rate of inflation. But he has yet to achieve the other two: reviving growth and reducing public debt.Clothing for sale in London last month. Mr. Sunak did achieve one of his key economic goals last week, halving the rate of inflation.Hannah Mckay/ReutersIt’s not yet clear that the economic news will improve between the spring and fall, analysts said. While inflation has cooled, the lingering effect of higher interest rates — propelled upward by Liz Truss’s market-shaking tax policies last year — is still cascading through the economy in the form of higher home mortgage rates.Historically, many successful prime ministers, including Margaret Thatcher and Tony Blair, called elections earlier than they needed, rather than risk becoming the victim of unforeseen events. They usually opted for the summer months, when the weather — and the public mood — is typically better, although Boris Johnson successfully broke that pattern with his victory in December 2019.Mr. Sunak’s room for maneuver is limited. One option would be holding the vote in May 2024 to coincide with local elections, or in June. Another possibility would be October or November, which would coincide with elections in the United States. But the possibility of a victory by Donald J. Trump could have an unpredictable effect, potentially pushing some British voters to a more centrist option. As a last resort, Mr. Sunak could hold off until Jan. 28, 2025.Some of Mr. Sunak’s predecessors paid a high price for miscalculating the timing of elections. Despite speculation that he would call an election in 1978, the Labour Party prime minister James Callaghan delayed voting until the following year. Labor unrest escalated into what became known as the “winter of discontent,” sweeping Mrs. Thatcher to victory in 1979.Margaret Thatcher, campaigning in 1979, won election as prime minister after the Labour Party incumbent, James Callaghan, decided not to call an election the previous year.Press Association, via Associated PressGordon Brown, another Labour prime minister, had been expected to capitalize on his early popularity by calling an election soon after taking over from Tony Blair in 2007. Instead, he delayed, ultimately losing power in 2010.Theresa May made the opposite decision, calling an early election in 2017 in which she lost her majority, though probably more because of her unpopular agenda and poor campaign skills than bad timing.“Once the election is underway, everything is on the table,” said Peter Kellner, a polling expert. “You lose control of the agenda.”Trying to build an election campaign around the issue of small boats bringing migrants is likely to fail, Mr. Kellner added, suggesting Mr. Sunak will only call an early vote if he calculates he has a realistic prospect of keeping his job.“If, at the point when you have to make a decision, you have no chance of winning, then you might as well wait,” he said, “because maybe there is a five percent chance of winning in six months, and a five percent chance is better than no chance.” More

Pick an animal that best describes the Democratic Party. Pick an animal that bestdescribes the Democratic Party. “A moose.” Christopher, 31, white, Calif. “A bison.” Mary-Beth, 72, white, Mo. “A kangaroo.” Emil, 71, Black, N.Y. The party of the people. The Democracy. The New Dealers. The Democrats have gone by many names over the years, […] More

Democrats and the independents who caucus with them will be playing defense in 23 of the 34 Senate seats on the ballot in the 2024 congressional elections. Four of the 23 are in swing states that President Biden won narrowly in 2020. Three are in states that Donald Trump won in both 2016 and 2020.If Democrats were to lose all seven, a catastrophic defeat, they would start the next session in Congress with a weak minority of senators — its smallest number since the days of President Herbert Hoover — who would nonetheless represent nearly half the population of the United States.Depending on where you stand in relation to partisan politics in this country, you may not find this disparity all that compelling. But consider the numbers when you take political affiliation out of the picture: roughly half of all Americans, some 169 million people, live in the nine most populous states. Together, those states get 18 of the 100 seats in the United States Senate.To pass anything under simple majority rules, assuming support from the sitting vice president, those 18 senators would have to attract another 32 votes: the equivalent, in electoral terms, of a supermajority. On the flip side, it is possible to pass an item out of the Senate with a coalition of members who represent a small fraction of the total population — around 18 percent — but hold an absolute majority of the seats. And this is before we get to the filibuster, which imposes a more explicit supermajority requirement on top of this implicit one.Last week, The Washington Post published a detailed look at the vast disparities of power that mark the Senate, which was structured on the principle of equal state representation: Regardless of population, every state gets two members. A carry-over from the Articles of Confederation, the principle of equal state representation was so controversial that it nearly derailed the Philadelphia Convention, where James Madison and others were trying to build a national government with near total independence from the states.It is not for nothing that in the Federalist Papers, neither Madison nor John Jay nor Alexander Hamilton attempts to defend the structure of the Senate from first principles. Instead, Madison wrote in Federalist No. 62, you should consider it a concession to the political realities of the moment:A government founded on principles more consonant to the wishes of the larger States, is not likely to be obtained from the smaller States. The only option, then, for the former, lies between the proposed government and a government still more objectionable. Under this alternative, the advice of prudence must be to embrace the lesser evil; and, instead of indulging a fruitless anticipation of the possible mischiefs which may ensue, to contemplate rather the advantageous consequences which may qualify the sacrifice.Today, the Senate is a distinctly undemocratic institution that has worked, over the past decade, to block policies favored by a large majority of Americans and even a solid majority of senators. And while there’s no immediate hope of changing it, a cleareyed analysis of the chamber’s structural faults can help answer one of the key questions of American democracy: Who, or what, is this system supposed to represent?As the Post piece notes, equal state representation has never been equitable: “In 1790, Virginia, the most populous state, had roughly 13 times the population of Delaware, the least populous, with a difference of about 700,000 people.” But as the country has grown larger and more diverse, the disparities have grown greater and more perverse. The population difference between the states is so large now that a resident of the least populous state, Wyoming, as many observers have pointed out, has 68 times the representation in the Senate than does a resident of California, the largest state by population. In fact, a state gets less actual representation in the chamber the more it attracts new residents.There is not just a disparity of representation; there is a disparity in who is represented as well. The most populous states — including not only California, but New York, Illinois, Florida and Texas — tend to be the most diverse states, with a large proportion of nonwhite residents. The smallest states by population — like Maine, Vermont and New Hampshire — tend to be the least diverse. And the structure of the Senate tends to amplify the power of residents in smaller states and weaken the power of those in larger states. When coupled with the potential for — and what is in truth the reality of — minority rule in the chamber, you have a system that gives an almost absolute veto on most federal legislation to a pretty narrow slice of white Americans.One response to these disparities of power and influence is to say that they represent the intent of the framers. There are at least two problems with this view. The first is that the modern Senate reproduces some of the key problems — among them the possibility of a minority veto that grinds governance to a halt — that the framers were trying to overcome when they scrapped the Articles of Confederation. The second and more important problem is that the modern Senate isn’t the one the framers designed in 1787.In 1913, the United States adopted the 17th Amendment to the Constitution, providing for the direct election of senators at the ballot box rather than their selection by state legislatures. This change disrupted the logic of the Senate. Before, each senator was a kind of ambassador from his state government. After the amendment went into effect, each senator was a direct representative of the people of that state.If each member was a kind of ambassador, then you could justify unequal voting power by pointing to the equal sovereignty of each state under the Constitution. But if each member is a direct representative, then it becomes all the more difficult to say that some Americans deserve more representation than others on account of arbitrary state borders.This brings us back to our question: Who, or what, is the American system supposed to represent? If it is supposed to represent the states — if the states are the primary unit of American democracy — then there’s nothing about the structure of the Senate to object to.It’s plain as day that the states are not the primary unit of American democracy. As James Wilson of Pennsylvania observed during the Philadelphia Convention, the new national government was being formed for the sake of individuals rather than “the imaginary beings called states.” And as we’ve expanded the scope of democratic participation, we have affirmed — again and again — that it is the people who deserve representation on an equal basis, not the states.There is no realistic way, at this moment, to make the Senate more democratic. But if we can identify the Senate as one of the key sources of an unacceptable democratic deficit, then we can look for other ways to enhance democracy in the American system.I know that, given the scale and scope of the problem, that does not sound very inspiring. But we have to start somewhere.The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. We’d like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips. And here’s our email: [email protected] The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook, Twitter (@NYTopinion) and Instagram. More

Yes, the economy is important, but we found that election subversion attempts appear to matter more to voters than polling suggests.Voters usually penalize those supporting electoral subversion.Ashley Gilbertson for The New York TimesDo abortion and democracy matter to voters?If you look at the results of New York Times/Siena College polling, the answer often seems to be “not really.”Around 40 percent of voters agreed that Donald J. Trump was “bad” for democracy in our latest poll. Only around a quarter said that issues like democracy and abortion were more important to their vote than the economy.But in election after election, the final vote tallies seem to tell a very different story. Last fall, Democrats excelled when abortion and democracy were at stake, even though our pre-election polls offered little indication that these issues were driving voters. It raises the possibility that the usual poll questions simply failed to reveal the importance of abortion, democracy and perhaps other issues as well.With that in mind, we tried an experiment in our latest Times/Siena poll. We looked at the persuadable voters — those who were undecided or who said they were open to supporting the other candidate — and split them into two groups. We gave each group a set of two hypothetical Republican candidates based on views on abortion and democracy.While only an experiment, the findings suggest that democracy has the potential to be an extremely important factor in people’s voting — even among voters who say it’s not important to them at all.Here’s the democracy matchup:Hypothetical A: Would you be more likely to support a Democratic candidate who says Donald Trump is a unique threat to democracy, or a Republican candidate who tried to overturn the 2020 election?Hypothetical B: Would you be more likely to support a Democratic candidate who says Donald Trump is a unique threat to democracy, or a Republican candidate who says we should move on from the 2020 election?If democracy didn’t matter to voters, these two hypotheticals might not yield very different results.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.We are confirming your access to this article, this will take just a moment. However, if you are using Reader mode please log in, subscribe, or exit Reader mode since we are unable to verify access in that state.Confirming article access.If you are a subscriber, please  More

The former president’s doctors have often offered hyperbolic or unverifiable claims in reports about his health.Former President Donald J. Trump posted a fawning but vague health report from his doctor on Monday that declares that Mr. Trump’s health is “excellent” and that he has recently lost weight through an “improved diet” and “daily physical activity.”Mr. Trump’s physician, Dr. Bruce Aronwald, wrote the single-page report over two months after Mr. Trump, 77, underwent a “comprehensive” health examination in September, the document says.In August, Mr. Trump reported to the Fulton County Jail, during an intake process for one of four criminal cases he is facing, that he weighed 215 pounds. That was nearly 30 pounds less than the White House doctor reported in 2020.But the report on Monday did not include even basic details such as Mr. Trump’s weight, his blood pressure, his cholesterol levels, any prescriptions or even how much weight he had lost. Dr. Aronwald instead wrote that Mr. Trump’s “physical exams were well within the normal range and his cognitive exams were exceptional.”The Trump campaign did not immediately respond to questions about specific details regarding Mr. Trump’s health.The timing of the report appeared to be taking a jab at President Biden on his 81st birthday. While Mr. Trump has repeatedly mocked Mr. Biden’s age, he has had his own verbal stumbles on the campaign trail.Mr. Trump’s doctors — an eclectic group of personal and White House physicians — have previously released memos and reports that have offered few details about his health and included hyperbolic claims and descriptions of his condition as “excellent.”Dr. Harold Bornstein, Mr. Trump’s longtime personal physician, declared in late 2015 that Mr. Trump would be “the healthiest individual ever elected to the presidency.” He then later told The New York Times that Mr. Trump was taking medication for various ailments, including a prostate-related drug to promote hair growth. Dr. Bornstein later said that Mr. Trump sent his bodyguard among others to seize his medical records from Dr. Bornstein’s office after the physician fell from Mr. Trump’s orbit.Dr. Ronny L. Jackson, a White House physician for Mr. Trump, asserted in 2018 that with a better diet, Mr. Trump could have lived to be 200 years old. Another White House physician, Dr. Sean P. Conley, repeatedly misled the public about the severity of Mr. Trump’s illness after he contracted Covid in 2020.Mr. Biden, as president, has undergone annual physical exams and releases significantly more detailed health reports. His latest report, in February, was five pages long, noting specific ailments, like arthritis, and the regimen of tests taken — to detect neurological disorders, for example.But tests and reports have done little to reassure voters that Mr. Biden has not slowed in his senior years, and any slip of the tongue or stumble on a stairway draws further public attention. During remarks at the White House on Monday, he confused Taylor Swift with Britney Spears.Concerns about age and health have been a sore subject for both Mr. Biden and Mr. Trump, who would each be well past 80 by the end of a term in 2029. They have repeatedly dismissed such concerns, and each asserts that he is more than capable of serving another four years in the Oval Office.In one notable episode, Mr. Trump repeatedly bragged in television appearances about acing a cognitive test that looks for signs of conditions like dementia and Alzheimer’s disease, wielding it as proof that he was sharper than Mr. Biden — who at the time was his opponent in the 2020 election.Mr. Trump was particularly boastful of completing a memory test that involved reciting the words “person, woman, man, camera, TV” in the correct order.Recent polls have found that roughly two of every three voters say Mr. Biden is too old to serve another four-year term. About half say the same about Mr. Trump. More

Javier Milei ha dicho que la sociedad es mejor sin Estado. Ahora está a punto de dirigir el de Argentina.Javier Milei se dio a conocer al público argentino como un personaje combativo de la televisión, con un peinado rebelde y una proclividad a insultar a sus críticos. Por eso, cuando el año pasado anunció su candidatura a las elecciones presidenciales de Argentina, muchos lo consideraron un actor secundario.El domingo fue electo como el próximo presidente de Argentina, y ahora tiene la misión de sacar a una de las mayores economías de América Latina de una de sus peores crisis.Muchos argentinos se despertaron el lunes ansiosos, otros esperanzados, pero prácticamente todos tenían dudas sobre lo que les espera.Quizá la única certeza sobre el futuro político y económico del país era que, en tres semanas, un outsider político de extrema derecha con escasa experiencia en la función pública tomará las riendas de un gobierno que se ha comprometido a trastocar.En otras palabras, es el momento Donald Trump de Argentina.Milei, economista libertario y diputado novato, dejó claro en su discurso de victoria del domingo que actuaría con rapidez para modificar el gobierno y la economía. “La situación de la Argentina es crítica”, dijo. “Los cambios que necesita nuestro país son drásticos. No hay lugar para el gradualismo”.Los mercados aplaudieron su elección, y las acciones y bonos argentinos subieron en las bolsas estadounidenses (el mercado argentino estaba cerrado por un feriado). Incluso sin tener claro lo que puede lograr, los mercados parecen considerarlo una mejor apuesta económica que sus predecesores, en su mayoría de izquierda.Las políticas económicas fracasadas —incluidos el gasto excesivo, las medidas comerciales proteccionistas, la asfixiante deuda internacional y la impresión de más pesos para pagarla— han llevado al país de 46 millones de habitantes a una caída económica en picada.La inflación anual ha superado el 140 por ciento, la tercera tasa más alta del mundo, dejando a muchos argentinos dispuestos a gastar o convertir sus pesos a dólares estadounidenses o criptomonedas tan rápido como les sea posible, mientras que el creciente número de pobres del país hace fila en los bancos de alimentos y comedores de beneficencia.Personas recogiendo productos descartados frente al mercado central de Buenos Aires. La inflación anual ha superado el 140 por ciento; es la tercera tasa más alta del mundo.Tomas Cuesta/Getty ImagesPara solucionarlo, Milei ha propuesto convertir la 22ª economía del mundo en un laboratorio de ideas económicas radicales que en gran medida no se han probado en ningún otro lugar.Milei, de 53 años, ha dicho que quiere recortar el gasto y los impuestos, privatizar empresas estatales, eliminar 10 de los 18 ministerios federales, pasar las escuelas públicas a un sistema de vouchers, hacer que el sistema público de asistencia a la salud esté basado en seguros, cerrar el banco central y sustituir el peso argentino por el dólar estadounidense.Se identifica como “anarcocapitalista”, que, según ha dicho, es una corriente libertaria radicalmente librecambista que cree que “la sociedad funciona mucho mejor sin Estado que con Estado”.Ahora es el jefe del Estado.“Este es un escenario completamente nuevo en el que nunca hemos estado”, dijo María O’Donnell, periodista política y locutora de radio argentina. “Milei tiene estas ideas tan extravagantes que nunca hemos visto aplicadas en ningún lugar del mundo”.Ha habido poco consenso entre los economistas sobre el mejor camino a seguir para Argentina, pero pocos habían sugerido el enfoque de Milei antes de que llegara a la escena; y pocos saben qué esperar ahora que estará a cargo.El lunes por la mañana, Milei empezó a tambalear en algunas de sus promesas electorales. En una entrevista radiofónica, afirmó que la legislación argentina le impediría privatizar la salud y la educación. En otra, cuando se le preguntó por su plan para utilizar el dólar estadounidense, respondió que “la moneda que se elija es la moneda que elijan los argentinos”.¿Qué significa eso? “No estoy seguro de que lo sepa”, dijo Eduardo Levy Yeyati, economista y profesor argentino.Levy Yeyati lo interpretó como una señal de que Milei se propondría en primer lugar eliminar la mayoría de las restricciones al comercio de divisas, que el gobierno argentino ha impuesto como parte de su esfuerzo por apuntalar el valor del peso argentino. Otros comentarios de Milei el lunes parecieron apoyar esa idea.El Banco Central de Argentina en Buenos Aires. Milei ha dicho que le gustaría sustituir el peso argentino por el dólar estadounidense.Agustin Marcarian/Reuters“Argentina ha sido históricamente un laboratorio de ideas extrañas”, dijo Levy Yeyati, pero muchas de ellas nunca se llevan a la práctica debido a la realidad económica y política.Dijo que cree que ocurrirá lo mismo con Milei, al menos al principio. “Habrá un chequeo de realidad”, dijo. “Se seguirá hablando de la mayoría de estas propuestas, pero será difícil ejecutarlas en el primer año”.Se espera que Milei tenga que llegar a acuerdos políticos para llevar a cabo sus planes, ya que su partido, con dos años de existencia, apenas controla el 10 por ciento de los escaños del Senado y el 15 por ciento de los de la Cámara de Diputados.Lo más probable es que para gestionar muchos de esos acuerdos se valga de Mauricio Macri, expresidente de Argentina, un conservador que ha mantenido un amplio control sobre un gran partido político. Ambos se reunieron el domingo por la noche.Fernando Iglesias, diputado de ese bloque conservador, dijo que él y sus colegas estaban deseosos de ayudar a Milei a arreglar el país. “Es cierto que tiene el hándicap de la inexperiencia”, añadió, “pero tengo la esperanza de que pueda armar un equipo razonable de gobierno y hacer los cambios que necesita el país”.Aunque muchas de las personas clave de la campaña de Milei carecen también de experiencia de gobierno, ellas lo han presentado como una ventaja, no como un inconveniente, y los votantes han estado de acuerdo.Una persona que casi con toda seguridad tendrá influencia en el nuevo gobierno es la hermana de Milei, Karina Milei, que dirigió su campaña y a quien él ha descrito como su asesora más importante.En una entrevista televisiva de 2021, llegó a compararla con Moisés, la figura bíblica portadora del mensaje de Dios. “Kari es Moisés”, dijo con lágrimas en los ojos. “Yo soy el divulgador, nada más”.Karina Milei ha sido un enigma en Argentina, siempre presente al lado de Milei pero sin hablar casi nunca en público. No se sabe mucho de su pasado, más allá de informes no confirmados en los medios de comunicación argentinos de que estudió relaciones públicas en la universidad, dirigió un negocio de cupcakes y fue copropietaria de una tienda de neumáticos. La campaña de Milei dijo que ella ayudaría en la transición.La hermana de Javier Milei, Karina, saliendo de un hotel de Buenos Aires el lunes. Ella dirigió la campaña de su hermano y se espera que también lo haga con la transición.Luis Robayo/Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesMilei anunció el lunes que su ministro de Justicia sería Mariano Cúneo Libarona, un abogado convertido en comentarista de televisión que saltó a la fama por defender a famosos, incluido el representante de la estrella del fútbol Diego Maradona en un caso de drogas en 1996.Su nueva ministra de Relaciones Exteriores, Diana Mondino, economista, declaró a la prensa que uno de los principales objetivos del gobierno en política exterior sería poner fin a la mayoría de las regulaciones sobre importaciones y exportaciones. También dijo que Argentina probablemente no entraría en el club BRICS de naciones emergentes, como se había anunciado en agosto.“No entendemos, con la información pública de la cual se dispone ahora, cuál sería la ventaja para Argentina”, dijo a los periodistas en el mitin de la victoria de Milei el domingo. “Si ustedes me pueden explicar a mí qué son las BRICS, aprovecho y aprendo”.La compañera de fórmula de Milei, Victoria Villarruel, ha pasado gran parte de su carrera dirigiendo una organización que reconoce a las víctimas de atentados perpetrados por guerrillas izquierdistas, que los militares argentinos utilizaron como justificación de su sangrienta dictadura de 1976 a 1983.Villarruel, que procede de una familia de militares argentinos, lleva mucho tiempo asegurando que se han exagerado las atrocidades de la dictadura, al afirmar que desaparecieron 8500 personas, a pesar de que los archivos desclasificados muestran que incluso los militares admitieron, a solo dos años de su gobierno, que la cifra era de 22.000.Villarruel y Milei fueron elegidos juntos para la Cámara de Diputados de Argentina en 2021, los dos primeros escaños que consiguió su partido, La Libertad Avanza.Milei ha pasado poco tiempo en el Congreso desde entonces, y propuso su primer proyecto de ley apenas a principios de este mes, al pedir al gobierno que haga más para traer a casa a los aproximadamente 25 argentinos retenidos como rehenes por Hamás.Simpatizantes de Milei celebrando en Buenos Aires el domingo por la noche. Los argentinos estaban aturdidos el lunes al pensar sobre lo que Milei podría traer, tanto lo positivo como lo negativo.Adriano Machado/ReutersEn todo el país, los argentinos estaban aturdidos el lunes al pensar sobre lo que Milei podría traer, tanto bueno como malo.Micaela Sánchez, de 31 años, actriz y profesora de teatro, dijo que ella y muchos amigos estaban preocupados por las promesas de Milei de modificar el gobierno, su historial de ataques a adversarios políticos y sus comentarios restando importancia a las atrocidades de la dictadura.“Es realmente un panorama desolador y aterrador para todas las personas que trabajamos en la cultura, que trabajamos con gente, para quienes educamos, para quienes están en salud”, comentó. “Lo único que puedo decir es que estoy muy asustada y muy triste”.Pero Yhoel Saldania, de 27 años, propietario de una tienda, dijo que mantener a Argentina como está habría sido mucho más arriesgado que apostar por Milei. “Los otros gobiernos prometen y prometen, y nada cambia”, dijo. “Queremos un cambio de verdad”.Jack Nicas es el jefe de la corresponsalía en Brasil, que abarca Brasil, Argentina, Chile, Paraguay y Uruguay. Anteriormente reportó de tecnología desde San Francisco y, antes de integrarse al Times en 2018, trabajó siete años en The Wall Street Journal. Más de Jack Nicas More