Elections

[Here’s how to vote in New Jersey, Ohio, Mississippi, Kentucky, and Virginia.]For most New Yorkers, it will be a relatively quiet Election Day, with no presidential, governor or mayoral races on the ballot this year.Polls are open from 6 a.m. until 9 p.m. You can find your polling location online.Absentee ballots can still be mailed in, but they most be postmarked by Tuesday. They can also be dropped off at a poll site in your county or your county board of elections office by 9 p.m. Tuesday.What is on the ballot this year?Your ballot might include races for the New York City Council, district attorney, judges and the two statewide ballot measures.The City Council is led by Democrats, and they are expected to keep control of the legislative body. But some local races have been contentious, and Republicans have been trying to increase their power in a city that has long favored Democrats.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

In the movie “Back to the Future II,” Michael J. Fox’s character, Marty McFly, is transported to the fall of 2015 and encounters a world of self-tying shoes and hoverboards. He finds himself trying to make sense of how people behave and the choices they make.Lately, I too feel like I’ve been transported to autumn 2015.That fall, Republican Party officials, donors and operatives were brimming with hope that the field of presidential contenders facing Donald Trump would shrink, clearing the way for a one-on-one matchup between the then-unthinkable Mr. Trump and a more conventional nominee, like the senators Ted Cruz of Texas or Marco Rubio of Florida. As one Michigan donor put it, “Just like everyone else, I’m waiting for this field to consolidate, and it doesn’t seem to be consolidating.” Arguments ensued over which candidates should take the hint. If only the field were smaller, the thinking went, surely Mr. Trump would be defeated.If only, if only, if only. This line of thinking became an excuse for candidates who didn’t want to take any real swings at Mr. Trump. It was the field — not Mr. Trump — that was the problem. No top contender took him on aggressively. No one really hammered away at his weaknesses in the kind of sustained, nimble assault they would have needed to topple him from his position as the front-runner. And even as Mr. Trump’s opponents dropped out, some of their voters wound up drifting to Mr. Trump as a second choice, keeping him at the head of the pack.Something similar is happening today. From the Republican debates to the campaign trail, the other candidates aren’t making a real attempt to dent the front-runner’s lead; instead, they are sniping at one another, pleading with donors and engaging in magical thinking. While there is some truth that having more candidates helps Mr. Trump win the nomination, consolidating the field alone is not likely sufficient to defeat him.In Iowa, late October polling from NBC News, The Des Moines Register and Mediacom showed Mr. Trump at 43 percent among likely G.O.P. caucusgoers, and an analysis of those voters’ second-choice shows that a sizable number of Ron DeSantis’s voters would simply go to Mr. Trump were the Florida governor to withdraw from the race. And though the former South Carolina governor Nikki Haley has seen her fortunes improve dramatically since her first debate, she still trails Mr. Trump by a wide margin in her home state of South Carolina, according to the latest CNN polling.Mr. DeSantis is hoping for some fresh momentum in Iowa this week with the endorsement of the state’s governor, Kim Reynolds. But without bold new arguments from Mr. DeSantis, Ms. Haley or other rivals, it seems as though Donald Trump is increasingly inevitable as the Republican nominee. A shame, too; there is a sizable portion of the Republican electorate that likes Mr. Trump but claims to be open to a new direction. In early states like Iowa and New Hampshire, CBS News polling recently found that less than a quarter of primary voters are “Trump only” voters. The vast majority are “Trump and …” voters — people who are considering the former president but also alternatives.However, these voters aren’t hearing anyone clearly lay out the case for why a new direction is so critical — and they need to on Wednesday night in the third G.O.P. primary debate.To defeat Mr. Trump, something significant must change. Toughness is required. The math is clear. Mr. Trump’s opponents must take some of his voters from him. Republican candidates must make the case that Mr. Trump is also not the best that voters can do. That means directing at least as much fire at the front-runner as they do at their other adversaries. Mr. Trump’s strongest rivals have not compellingly answered this question: “If you support Donald Trump’s policies so much, why are you running against him?” It’s time they start giving an answer to voters.Candidates have avoided doing so because striking the right tone in this campaign is incredibly challenging. An attack that is too scathing can inspire a sort of antibody response in Republican voters, backfiring by activating the instinct to defend Mr. Trump. Chris Christie was booed at the Florida Freedom Summit last weekend and hasn’t gained traction in the polls because Republican voters are not looking for a candidate whose primary message is that they have been duped and that Donald Trump is a bad man.At the same time, the rest of the field has treated Mr. Trump far too gently. Speeches like one Mr. DeSantis gave on Saturday, which try to draw a contrast with Mr. Trump without saying his name, haven’t yet moved the needle. Vague platitudes about “fresh leadership” and “someone who can win” have not yet been paired with an effective explanation of why Mr. Trump is neither of those things, and as a result Republican voters don’t believe either is true.To beat Mr. Trump, the strategy can’t be weak or astringent. It should not scold, and certainly not demean the majority of Republican voters who do like Trump. It should take a tone more akin to “I’m not mad, I’m just disappointed” — and lay out why, in a sustained and convincing way every week from now through the Jan. 15 Iowa caucuses.Critically, it must echo and amplify the things that I’ve heard Trump voters who are still shopping around say to each other:But his mouth, they’ll say.“I don’t like when he makes things like a circus.”“It’s just tiring.”These are not attacks from the right flank on policy, nor attacks from centrists on his legal woes — these are truths that many of Mr. Trump’s own supporters will acknowledge in private conversation.Mr. Trump’s opponents should not shy away from pointing out how things were far from perfect during his presidency. As one Trump voter acknowledged in one of our recent Times Opinion focus groups, “He always said everything is wonderful and everything is beautiful and everything is amazing. Come on.”In Wednesday’s debate, even with Mr. Trump absent from the stage, he is looming over his rivals, and it is past the hour for them to act like it. They can try to raise more money, but they cannot raise more time.Take Ms. Haley. She can, for instance, make a strong case for her actions defending Israel during her tenure as U.N. ambassador, noting that while the world may have felt safer under Mr. Trump, his own personal drama with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has blinded him to the importance of supporting one of our most critical allies — and that this kind of self-interested behavior will keep Mr. Trump from doing what is necessary to support our friends and go after our enemies on the world stage in a second term. Based on new polling from The Times and Siena College, she can now also make a clear electability case that has thus far eluded Mr. DeSantis, and note that she is the safer, stronger bet against Mr. Biden in 2024.Taking Mr. Trump on directly is no easy task in a party that would vastly prefer him to be in the White House today. But avoiding the hard road has thus far put his adversaries on the path to defeat. At this stage of the primary, with the lead Mr. Trump holds, there is no longer an excuse for candidates to dance around the question of “Why you … and not Donald Trump?”Kristen Soltis Anderson is a Republican pollster and a moderator of the Times Opinion focus group series.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

Rob Szypko, Carlos Prieto, Stella Tan and Dan Powell and Listen and follow The DailyApple Podcasts | Spotify | Amazon MusicIt’s been one month since the attack on Israel, but Washington has yet to deliver an aid package to its closest ally. The reason has to do with a different ally, in a different war: Speaker Mike Johnson has opposed continued funding for Ukraine, and wants the issue separated from aid to Israel, setting up a clash between the House and Senate.Catie Edmondson, who covers Congress for The Times, discusses the battle within the Republican Party over whether to keep funding Ukraine.On today’s episodeCatie Edmondson, a congressional correspondent for The New York Times.Speaker Mike Johnson’s decision to force a stand-alone vote on aid for Israel has set up a confrontation between the House and Senate over how to fund U.S. allies.Kenny Holston/The New York TimesBackground readingThe Republican-led House approved $14.3 billion for Israel’s war with Hamas, but no further funding for Ukraine.Speaker Johnson’s bill put the House on a collision course with the Senate.There are a lot of ways to listen to The Daily. Here’s how.We aim to make transcripts available the next workday after an episode’s publication. You can find them at the top of the page.Catie Edmondson More

Can a Democrat win the Deep South? And other questions to help you make sense of the results. Today is Election Day, and we are using this newsletter to give you a guide. One theme is that Democrats are hoping to continue their strong recent electoral performance despite President Biden’s low approval rating.Why have Democrats done so well in elections since 2022? In part, it’s because voter turnout is modest in off-year elections like today’s. The people who vote tend to be engaged in politics. They are older, more affluent and more highly educated than people who vote only in presidential elections.As the Democratic Party becomes more upscale — the class inversion of American politics that this newsletter often discusses — the party will naturally do better in lower-turnout elections than it once did. But these victories do not necessarily foreshadow presidential elections. The other side of the class inversion is that Democrats are increasingly struggling with lower-income and nonwhite voters, many of whom vote only in presidential elections.Today’s elections still matter for their own sake, of course. Below, we list the questions that can help you make sense of the 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

Voters’ negative perceptions about the economy are weighing on President Biden’s poll numbers. Here’s what his economic policies have, and haven’t, accomplished.President Biden is finding it hard to sell Americans on his economic track record.Kent Nishimura for The New York TimesWhere the economy is working (and where it isn’t) With a year to go before Election Day, polls increasingly show that American voters believe next year will be a rematch between President Biden and Donald Trump — with the former president in the lead in key battleground states despite his legal troubles (more on that below).Biden’s troubles stem in large part from negative perceptions about the economy, even as several indications show that it is performing strongly. Here’s a deeper look at what “Bidenomics” has, and hasn’t, accomplished.On the positive side: jobs. Since Biden took office, employers have created 14 million jobs, and the unemployment rate has been hovering around a 50-year-low for months.The president has also been talking up signature economic accomplishments like the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, which he argues have helped rebuild rural America and invigorated the economy. “Bidenomics is just another way of saying the American dream,” he said in a speech. It’s not a stretch. The economy grew last quarter at nearly 5 percent, belying a global slowdown.On the negative side: inflation. Wages have been growing slowly, but they’ve been offset by rising prices, Biden’s Achilles’ heel. Republicans have blamed the White House’s economic policies for soaring consumer prices, which hit a 40-year high in the summer of 2022.Many economists say global factors are probably more to blame. But the perception of Biden’s culpability here is hurting him.A partial win: the markets. Investors tend to give high marks to presidents whose tenures coincide with strong investment returns. The S&P 500 has gained nearly 15 percent since Biden’s inauguration, weathering much of the slump set off by the Fed’s historic rates-tightening policy. (The bond market has gone in the opposite direction.)That’s decent, but pales in comparison with the Trump years, when the benchmark index climbed more than 65 percent.Biden has been touring the country — on Monday, he was in Delaware to promote federal money flowing to Amtrak, the rail operator — to refocus the public’s perceptions of his economic achievements. Meanwhile, questions swirl over whether Biden can eventually overtake Trump.A reminder: The DealBook Summit is on Nov. 29. Among the guests are Bob Iger of Disney; Lina Khan of the F.T.C.; and David Zaslav of Warner Bros. Discovery. You can apply to attend here.HERE’S WHAT’S HAPPENING Uber’s latest earnings miss expectations. The ride-hailing giant said on Tuesday that it had earned 10 cents per share in the third quarter, below the 12 cents that analysts had forecast. But the company argued that its business showed strong growth in its core mobility division.OpenAI seeks to build on its runaway success. The Microsoft-backed A.I. start-up said that its chatbot, ChatGPT, now had over 100 million weekly active users, giving it a formidable lead in the race to capture artificial intelligence customers. The company also introduced an online store that will let users build customized chatbots.Striking Hollywood actors push back on studios’ latest contract offer. The SAG-AFTRA union said that the “last, best and final” bid still fell short on key issues like the use of A.I., making it unclear when its nearly four-month strike will end. In other labor news, Starbucks will raise the average salary of hourly workers by at least 3 percent.Trump puts his legal liabilities on displayDonald Trump may be handily leading the 2024 election polls. But his appearance in court on Monday, testifying in a civil fraud lawsuit filed by New York State, appeared to do him no favors in efforts to hold onto his business empire.It was a reminder that, while he’s riding high in the presidential race, the former president still faces a thicket of legal battles that could cost him financially and, perhaps, politically.Here are some notable moments from Trump’s testimony:Trump conceded that he had played a role in valuing his company’s properties, an issue at the heart of the case. (New York prosecutors argue that Trump illicitly inflated his net worth to defraud banks and insurers.) Of the company’s financial statements, he said, “I would look at them, I would see them, and I would maybe on occasion have some suggestions.”But Trump also sought to underplay the importance of those statements, saying they were so riddled with disclaimers that they were “worthless.” He promised, unprompted, that some of his bankers would testify in his defense.Trump also assailed the presiding judge, Arthur Engoron, for having decided before the trial that fraud was committed. Engoron appeared exasperated, telling the former president to answer questions and stop delivering speeches.The testimony was a reminder of his political baggage, which was also an undercurrent of the endorsement of Ron DeSantis on Monday by Kim Reynolds, Iowa’s popular governor. Reynolds, whose state’s caucuses could be crucial in bolstering a Trump rival, said that the U.S. needed a president “who puts this country first and not himself” — a thinly veiled rebuke of Trump.His legal issues don’t appear to have dented his popularity. He has contended that he is being politically persecuted — “People like you go around and try to demean me and try to hurt me,” he told a state lawyer on Monday — an argument that some of his supporters have embraced.In a sign of his enduring political strength, the betting site PredictIt puts Trump’s odds of winning the nomination on Monday at more than four times that of his nearest competitor in its market, Nikki Haley.Dina Powell McCormick, in 2017, when she was a deputy national security adviser during the Trump presidency.Al Drago for The New York TimesExxon Mobil taps a Wall Street and D.C. power player Dina Powell McCormick, a former Goldman Sachs executive and onetime Trump administration official, is joining the board of Exxon Mobil effective Jan. 1. Her appointment comes as energy groups have embarked on a series of big deals on the back of soaring oil prices and bumper profits.Powell McCormick has long been one of the most senior women on Wall Street. Before joining BDT & MSD partners, an investment and advisory firm, earlier this year, she spent 16 years at Goldman Sachs. Powell McCormick led the Wall Street giant’s global sovereign business and sustainability, and she was a member of its management committee, among other roles.Powell McCormick has also been a Washington power player. She has spent more than a dozen years working in government. From 2017 to 2018, she was a deputy national security adviser to Trump and played a significant role on Middle East policy, including efforts to broker a peace deal between Israel and the Palestinians. (Her husband, David McCormick, is a former C.E.O. of the hedge fund Bridgewater and was a Treasury Department official under Hank Paulson. He is running for Senate in Pennsylvania as a Republican.)Powell McCormick’s appointment even won backing from Mike Bloomberg, who is spending billions to fight climate change — a sign of how wide-ranging her political and business relationships are.“Dina has been a close partner for years through her role as global head of sustainability at Goldman Sachs,” Bloomberg said, “and we have teamed up to create new partnerships that invest in market-driven ways to create clean energy and advance climate transition goals.”Energy giants are on a deal spree. Exxon reported quarterly profits of $9.1 billion last month, as oil prices have surged and demand has skyrocketed after Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. In October, Exxon agreed to acquire the shale oil specialist Pioneer Natural Resources for around $60 billion and Chevron struck a $53 billion deal to buy Hess. Exxon’s board had been in the spotlight over the energy transition. Engine No. 1, an activist investor, won three seats after targeting the company over its governance and environmental track record. But two years later, the firm changed course, saying that Exxon had made big changes. Exxon, however, has resisted calls to pour more money into renewable energy, arguing that its money is better on low-carbon investments.Tracing WeWork’s rise and spectacular fallWeWork finally filed for bankruptcy protection on Monday, after years of struggling with crushing debt and the coronavirus pandemic’s emptying out of office spaces — and that’s even after it had abandoned the runaway growth it pursued under its co-founder, Adam Neumann.The company that sought Chapter 11 is a shell of the real estate juggernaut that first sought to go public at a $47 billion valuation. (Its stock is down 98 percent this year.) Here’s how the business once lauded by the Japanese tech investor SoftBank as a revolution went astray.WeWork has been on its heels since it scrapped its I.P.O. plans in 2019. The company had been riding high, buoyed by Neumann’s promises that the start-up — whose business involved leasing out office space for co-working — would “elevate the world’s consciousness.” But then:Prospective investors blanched at the company’s steep losses, lax corporate governance and the controversies that dogged Neumann. (Activities on private jets were among them.) And the S.E.C. criticized the company’s disclosure involving mismatches between long-term financial obligations and its short-term assets. Neumann stepped down after WeWork shelved its I.P.O., and SoftBank provided it with a multibillion-dollar lifeline.Under a new C.E.O., Sandeep Mathrani, WeWork confronted the devastating effect of pandemic lockdowns and the rise of remote working. The company went public — via a blank-check vehicle — in 2021, while it started closing locations and renegotiating leases.Mathrani left in May, reportedly after clashing with SoftBank. His replacement, David Tolley, has kept trying to right the ship, but WeWork warned in August that there was “substantial doubt” about its future. Last month, it said it would miss interest payments on its debt.WeWork’s filing raises questions about the fate of commercial real estate. The company noted on Monday that it had reached agreements with about 92 percent of creditors holding secured debt. Its restructuring involves reducing its real estate portfolio.The company is one of the largest corporate tenants in New York and London, and any move to shed more of its leases would hurt commercial landlords that are themselves struggling to pay their debts.THE SPEED READ DealsResearch analysts at some of the banks that took Birkenstock public wrote in their initial reports on the sandal maker that its I.P.O. was valued too high. (Bloomberg)“Warring Billionaires, a Rogue Employee, a Divorce: One Hedge Fund’s Tale of Woe” (NYT)PolicyIntel is reportedly the leading candidate to land billions of dollars in federal funding to build secure plants to make chips for use by the U.S. military and intelligence agencies. (WSJ)A man who posed as a billionaire rabbi and made a $290 million takeover bid for the retailer Lord & Taylor was sentenced to more than eight years in prison. (Bloomberg)Best of the restDisney hired Hugh Johnston, the longtime finance chief at PepsiCo, as its new C.F.O. (CNBC)The founder of the dating app Bumble, Whitney Wolfe Herd, is stepping down as C.E.O. (NYT)We’d like your feedback! Please email thoughts and suggestions to [email protected]. More

new video loaded: More

Frustration with the two men likely to be the major parties’ nominees has led voters to entertain the idea of other options, New York Times/Siena College polls found.A looming rematch next year between President Biden and former President Donald J. Trump has left voters deeply dissatisfied with their options, longing for alternatives and curious about independent candidates like Robert F. Kennedy Jr., according to new polls of six battleground states conducted by The New York Times and Siena College.Both Mr. Biden and Mr. Trump are viewed unfavorably by a majority of voters in these states, one-fifth of voters don’t like either of them, and enthusiasm about the coming election is down sharply compared with a poll conducted before the 2020 contest.That frustration and malaise have prompted voters to entertain the idea of other options. When asked about the likeliest 2024 matchup, Mr. Biden versus Mr. Trump, only 2 percent of those polled said they would support another candidate. But when Mr. Kennedy’s name was included as an option, nearly a quarter said they would choose him.That number almost surely inflates the support of Mr. Kennedy, the political scion and vaccine skeptic, because two-thirds of those who said they would back him had said earlier that they would definitely or probably vote for one of the two front-runners.The polling results include registered voters in Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Nevada, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin. The findings suggest that Mr. Kennedy is less a fixed political figure in the minds of voters than he is a vessel to register unhappiness about the choice between Mr. Biden and Mr. Trump.A Fifth of Voters in Battleground States Dislike Both Leading CandidatesRespondents’ opinions of President Biden and former President Donald J. Trump More

El martes se celebran comicios importantes en todo el país, entre ellos unas votaciones en Virginia que podrían ser cruciales para el acceso al aborto en el estado.El martes, los votantes en Ohio, Kentucky, Virginia, Misisipi y otros puntos de Estados Unidos irán a las urnas para unas elecciones locales, las cuales no deben confundirse con las principales votaciones del país, que se celebrarán en 2024. Estas votaciones, no obstante, ofrecerán algunas pistas sobre la potencia del aborto como tema mobilizador frente al lastre de los bajos niveles de aprobación del presidente Joe Biden en un momento en que los políticos se preparan para los comicios presidenciales del próximo año.Los resultados podrían determinar si es que los demócratas se afianzan en su enfoque hacia temas clave como el aborto, un asunto positivo para el partido en un nuevo sondeo New York Times/Siena que mostró que Donald Trump va por delante de Biden en cinco estados indecisos (o pendulares) a un año de las presidenciales.Aquí algunos temas para tener en cuenta:Acceso al aborto versus la impopularidad de Biden en Virginia y KentuckyEl martes se deciden en las urnas los 140 curules de la Asamblea General de Virginia. Glenn Youngkin, el gobernador republicano y con relativa popularidad en ese estado de tendencia demócrata, espera quedarse con el senado del estado y asegurar el control total republicano de Richmond. De lograrlo, Youngkin vería un impulso para sus ambiciones a nivel nacional.Pero la campaña de los demócratas se está enfocando en el derecho al aborto, advirtiendo que si los republicanos asumen el control pondrían fin al acceso al aborto en el último estado del sureste en donde aún queda.Youngkin está poniendo a prueba una concesión que los republicanos a nivel nacional esperan logre convencer a los votantes luego de que su partido perdió mucho apoyo desde que la Corte Suprema rescindió el derecho constitucional al aborto. Dicho compromiso consiste en prohibir el acceso al aborto luego de 15 semanas de gestación, con excepciones en caso de violación, incesto y riesgo a la vida de la madre. Los demócratas dicen que se trata de una artimaña, pero deben sobreponerse al lastre de la impopularidad de Biden.En Kentucky se desarrolla una dinámica similar. En ese estado los demócratas se han apoyado fuertemente en el tema del aborto, en especial para perjudicar al retador republicano que busca la gobernación, Daniel Cameron. Cameron es el actual fiscal general del estado y ha tenido que defender la prohibición total de Kentucky al aborto. El gobernador titular, el demócrata Andy Beshear, sigue siendo popular, tiene antecedentes familiares en política (su padre, Steve Beshear también fue gobernador) y una reputación de moderado que le ha blindado contra los ataques que lo acusan de ser laxo en materia de delincuencia y apoyar los derechos “radicales” de las personas transgénero.Beshear ha liderado consistentemente en los sondeos, pero su afiliación política es un riesgo en Kentucky, un estado en el que el expresidente Donald Trump ganó por unos 26 puntos porcentuales en 2020. Los últimos sondeos del ciclo apuntaban a un empate técnico.¿Los votantes de Ohio apoyarán el derecho al aborto?Desde el ascenso de Trump, Ohio ha sido un estado republicano de manera predecible, pero el martes se realizará un referéndum para establecer el derecho al aborto bajo la constitución estatal que podría ser la prueba más pura de la postura de los republicanos en el asunto. O no.Cuando se ha consultado a los votantes directamente sobre el asunto del aborto en la papeleta, los grupos a favor del derecho al aborto han tenido una racha ganadora desde que la Corte Suprema revocó el fallo Roe contra Wade y retiró las protecciones constitucionales al procedimiento. Incluso en estados profundamente republicanos como Kansas, los votantes apoyaron de forma abrumadora el derecho al aborto. Pero quienes se oponen al aborto lograron victorias impotantes previo al referéndum del martes. En esta contienda, los votantes tendrán que votar “sí” a un cambio constitucional. Históricamente los electores de Ohio han tendido a rechazar las enmiendas que se deciden en en las urnas.Si bien la enmienda establecería el “derecho a tomar y llevar a cabo sus propias decisiones reproductivas”, también permite explícitamente que el estado prohíba el aborto después de la viablidad, o cerca de las 23 semanas, cuando el feto puede sobrevivir fuera del útero, a menos que el médico de la gestante determine que el procedimiento es “necesario para proteger la vida o la salud de la paciente embarazada”. Pero en la papeleta, los votantes verán un resumen del secretario del estado, Frank LaRose, un republicano que se opone al aborto, que dice que la enmienda “permitiría siempre que un niño nonato sea abortado en cualquier momento del embarazo, sin importar la viabilidad”.Ambos bandos han acusado al otro de desinformar y de llevar a cabo tácticas sucias.En Misisipi: una prueba a la ampliación de Medicaid, y un escándaloLa prohibición al aborto en Misisipi ocasionó la caída del fallo Roe versus Wade cuando la Corte Suprema se puso del lado de Thomas E. Dobbs, funcionario de salud del estado, en el caso Dobbs versus Jackson.Este estado del sur profundo del país ahora enfrenta una batalla campal por la gobernación, pero los candidatos no se han centrado en el aborto, ya que tanto el gobernador actual, el republicano Tate Reeves, como su rival demócrata, Brandon Presley, se oponen al procedimiento.En lugar de ello, el sorprendente desafío de Presley ha sido avivado de forma potente por su impulso para ampliar Medicaid según lo establecido por la Ley de Cuidado de Salud a Bajo Precio (Affordable Care Act) y un escándalo de corrupción en el que se malgastaron 94 millones de dólares federales destinados a las comunidades pobres de Misisipi en proyectos como unas instalaciones de voleibol colegial propuestas por Brett Favre, el mariscal de campo superestrella ya retirado.Reeves nunca estuvo directamente involucrado en el escándalo, pero sí despidió a un abogado investigador justo después de que el abogado emitió un citatorio que podría haber brindado detalles sobre la participación de habitantes destacados de Misisipi.“Si crees que Tate Reeves atacará la corrupción, tengo una propiedad de playa en Nettleton para venderte”, dijo Presley este mes en un debate, haciendo alusión al noreste del estado.Presley es integrante de la Comisión de la Función Pública de Misisipi y tiene una clase única de reconocimiento de marca: es primo segundo de Elvis Presley.Pero en Misisipi, Reeves cuenta con tres ventajas que podrían ser insuperables: la titularidad como gobernador, la “R” de su afiliación partidista en la papeleta y el apoyo de Trump, que en las elecciones de 2020 ganó en el estado por casi 17 puntos porcentuales.Más iniciativas en la papeleta: riqueza, retiro y marihuana recreativaEl martes los votantes tomarán bastantes decisiones de manera directa en las urnas sin pasar por las autoridades electas. Además del aborto, la iniciativa que más atención atrae estará en Ohio, donde se decidirá si el cannabis debe legalizarse para consumo recreativo. Si los votantes están de acuerdo, Ohio sería el 24avo estado en legalizar la marihuana. Eso podría presionar al Congreso para que avance con la legalización que busca liberalizar las restricciones a las operaciones bancarias interestatales para las empresas que se dedican legalmente al cannabis.Los texanos van a decidir la suerte de 14 enmiendas constitucionales, entre ellas una que prohibiría al estado imponer un tributo “a la riqueza” o cobrar impuestos sobre el valor de mercado de los activos que se poseen pero no se venden. Los activistas liberales y algunos senadores demócratas destacados, como Elizabeth Warren de Massachusetts, han apoyado ese tipo de impuestos como la única forma de acceder al patrimonio de los multimillonarios, que pagan impuestos sobre la renta mínimos pero que llevan lujosos estilos de vida gracias a una riqueza vasta y sin carga impositiva.Los texanos también van a decidir si aumentan la edad de jubilación obligatoria para los jueces estatales de 75 a 79 años. More