Elections

The meeting between Vivek Ramaswamy, a presidential candidate, and Representative Ro Khanna of California, was largely a showcase for Mr. Ramaswamy to try to rescue a flagging campaign.Vivek Ramaswamy, a Republican presidential candidate, and Ro Khanna, a Democratic member of the House, squared off on Wednesday in New Hampshire in what was billed as a civil discussion between two Indian Americans over the future of the United States.But over the course of an hour at Saint Anselm College in Manchester, N.H., Mr. Ramaswamy repeatedly slipped into his stump speech on the “black hole” in America’s collective heart and his belief that the nation was not, as he once thought, the declining Roman Empire, while Mr. Khanna tried to articulate his economic ideas and talk up the record of President Biden against his opponent’s blizzard of words.“It is, I think, regrettable to be carrying the water of Joe Biden when the fact is that everyday Americans know they’re suffering at the hands of policies that came from this administration,” Mr. Ramaswamy snapped back.The appearance of Mr. Khanna, a California Democrat, on a stage in New Hampshire — the second time this year for him — was a testament to the frustrations that he has said he feels about how Mr. Biden and other Democrats have ceded ground to Republicans on putting forth an economic vision. The meeting was initially to be a conversation on race and identity at the University of Chicago, but when Mr. Ramaswamy backed out, Mr. Khanna challenged him on social media — and chased him to the first Republican primary state.On Nov. 30, Gov. Gavin Newsom of California, who has tried to extend the White House’s message to audiences he does not believe it’s reaching, will debate Gov. Ron DeSantis of Florida on Fox News.In the end, the Saint Anselm meeting was largely a showcase for Mr. Ramaswamy to try to rescue a flagging campaign, which has slipped to fourth place in polling averages in the state, behind Mr. DeSantis, Chris Christie, the former New Jersey governor, and Nikki Haley, the former South Carolina governor who has surged into second. All of them are well behind the front-runner, Donald J. Trump.Mr. Ramaswamy demonstrated that his dogged “America First” isolationism has not been jarred by the bloody conflict between Israel and Hamas. At one point, he declared, “I could care less about leading in the Middle East,” saying of Israel, “Let’s get out and let our true ally defend itself.”To that, Mr. Khanna asked: “Why do you have such an impoverished vision of America that the only thing America is going to have is a provincial sense of its own interest?”Mr. Ramaswamy also showed his propensity to not allow the facts to get in the way of his views. When Mr. Khanna boasted of the 13 million jobs that have been created under Mr. Biden, his opponent cautioned that the government was “the sector with by far the greatest growth in jobs.”While it is true that in recent months the government sector has shown signs of recovery, government employment, as of last month, remained below its prepandemic level by 9,000 jobs, while the private sector has now recovered all the jobs lost in the pandemic and then some.Mr. Khanna has been outspoken in challenging his party and his president to get more aggressive in sharing a vision for more inclusive economic growth. He tried again Wednesday, talking up government investment to rebuild manufacturing: “For the Republicans, and I see some of this in what you’ve adopted, they see any problem, and they say let’s cut taxes, let’s deregulate,” Mr. Khanna said. “How is that putting a steel plant up in Johnstown, Pennsylvania?”But he largely missed the opportunity to highlight Mr. Biden’s biggest legislative achievements in industrial policy, which got only glancing references: a $1 trillion infrastructure bill, a $280 billion measure to rekindle a domestic semiconductor industry and the Inflation Reduction Act, with its spending to combat climate change.Meantime, Mr. Ramaswamy’s well-worn talking points dismissing the threat of climate change, calling for eliminating three quarters of the federal government, and cutting education spending largely went unchallenged. More

El expresidente ha experimentado una serie de confusiones que van más allá de su naturaleza discursiva habitual, y sus rivales republicanos han comenzado a señalarlas como signos de declive en su desempeño.Una de las nuevas rutinas cómicas de Donald Trump en sus mítines consiste en imitar al actual presidente de una forma exageradamente caricaturesca, burlándose de la edad de Joe Biden.Con los párpados caídos y la boca abierta, Trump tartamudea y balbucea. Entrecierra los ojos. Agita sus brazos. Arrastra los pies y deambula por el escenario. La multitud explota en risas y aplausos mientras Trump finge confusión, volteando y señalando a seguidores invisibles, como si no se diera cuenta de que les está dando la espalda.Sin embargo, el expresidente también ha cometido deslices en sus recientes eventos de campaña. Trump ha experimentado una serie de confusiones y desarticulaciones generales que van más allá de su naturaleza discursiva habitual, y sus rivales republicanos han comenzado a señalarlas como signos de declive en su desempeño.El domingo, en Sioux City, Iowa, Trump agradeció erróneamente a los seguidores de Sioux Falls, una ciudad de Dakota del Sur ubicada a unos 120 kilómetros de allí, y solo corrigió cuando lo llamaron a un lado del escenario y le informaron del error.La situación fue notablemente similar a una escena ficticia que Trump había representado a principios de este mes, en la que imitó a Biden confundiendo Iowa con Idaho y requiriendo de un asistente para aclarar el error.En las últimas semanas, Trump también les ha dicho a sus seguidores que no voten y afirmó haber derrotado al presidente Barack Obama en unas elecciones. Ha elogiado el intelecto colectivo de un grupo militante respaldado por Irán que históricamente ha sidoenemigo tanto de Israel como de Estados Unidos, y en repetidas ocasiones ha pronunciado mal el nombre del grupo armado que gobierna la Franja de Gaza.“Este es un Donald Trump distinto al de 2015 y 2016: perdió el control de su bola rápida”, afirmó el gobernador de Florida, Ron DeSantis, a los periodistas la semana pasada mientras hacía campaña en Nuevo Hampshire.“En 2016, era espontáneo, arrasaba por todo el país”, agregó DeSantis. “Ahora es simplemente un tipo diferente. Y es algo triste de ver”.No se sabe con certeza si los recientes deslices de Trump están relacionados con su edad. Durante mucho tiempo se ha valido de un estilo poco ortodoxo al hablar que le ha servido como una de sus principales ventajas políticas porque lo ha establecido, contra todo pronóstico, como uno de los comunicadores más eficaces de la política estadounidense.Pero, a medida que se intensifica la contienda por la Casa Blanca en 2024, los errores verbales cada vez más frecuentes de Trump amenazan con socavar una de las vías de ataque más potentes de los republicanos, y el objetivo central de su pantomima en el escenario: el argumento de que Biden es demasiado viejo para ser presidente.Biden, abuelo de siete, tiene 80 años. Trump, que tiene 10 nietos, tiene 77.Aunque solo unos pocos años separan a los dos hombres de edad avanzada, los votantes perciben su vigor de manera diferente. Encuestas recientes han revelado que aproximadamente dos de cada tres votantes afirman que Biden es demasiado mayor como para cumplir otro periodo de cuatro años, mientras que solo alrededor de la mitad dice lo mismo sobre Trump.Si esa brecha comienza a reducirse, es Trump quien tiene mucho más que perder en un enfrentamiento electoral presidencial.Trump y el presidente Biden son los favoritos para la nominación de cada partido, estableciendo la probabilidad de una revancha de las elecciones de 2020Michelle Gustafson para The New York TimesSegún un hallazgo no reportado previamente de una encuesta de agosto realizada por The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research, el 43 por ciento de los votantes estadounidenses dijeron que ambos hombres eran “demasiado mayores para cumplir de manera eficiente otro mandato de cuatro años como presidente”. Entre esos votantes, el 61 por ciento afirmó que planeaba votar por Biden, en comparación con el 13 por ciento que dijo lo mismo sobre Trump.La semana pasada, un sondeo del Franklin & Marshall College entre votantes registrados de Pensilvania, uno de estados más disputados de cara a 2024, arrojó resultados similares.Según la encuesta, el 43 por ciento de los habitantes de Pensilvania dijo que ambos hombres eran “demasiado viejos para ejercer otro mandato”. Un análisis de esos datos para The New York Times mostró que Biden aventajaba a Trump entre esos votantes por 66 por ciento a 11 por ciento. Entre todos los votantes del estado, los dos estaban en un empate estadístico.Berwood Yost, el director de la encuesta de Franklin & Marshall, dijo que la amplia ventaja de Biden entre los votantes que estaban preocupados por la edad de ambos candidatos podría explicarse en parte por el hecho de que los demócratas son mucho más propensos que los republicanos a identificar la edad como un problema para el líder de su partido.“Si a Trump comienzan a relacionarlo con el tema de la edad, como sucede con Biden, realmente puede verse perjudicado”, dijo Yost.Steven Cheung, portavoz de la campaña de Trump, señaló que el expresidente mantenía una ventaja dominante en las encuestas sobre las primarias republicanas y que, en las elecciones generales, varias encuestas recientes habían mostrado que tenía una ligera ventaja sobre Biden.“Ninguna de estas falsas narrativas ha cambiado la dinámica de la contienda: el expresidente Trump sigue dominando, porque la gente sabe que es el candidato más fuerte”, señaló Cheung. “El contraste es que Biden se cae sobre el escenario, balbucea durante un discurso, no sabe por dónde caminar y tropieza con los escalones del Air Force One. Eso no se puede corregir y quedará grabado en la mente de los votantes”.Durante mucho tiempo, las habilidades retóricas de Trump se han basado en una mezcla de fuerza bruta y un instinto aparentemente natural para la imprecisión. Esa seductora combinación, perfeccionada tras toda una vida de negociaciones inmobiliarias, escándalos en los tabloides neoyorquinos y el estrellato de un programa de telerrealidad en horario de máxima audiencia, a menudo hace que los votantes oigan lo que quieren oír.El estilo de hablar de Trump ha hecho que sus partidarios, o los votantes que están dispuestos a apoyarlo, a menudo oigan lo que quieren oír.Jordan Gale para The New York TimesLos partidarios de Trump salen de sus discursos llenos de energía. Los votantes indecisos que están abiertos a su mensaje pueden encontrar lo que buscan en su discurso. Los opositores se enfurecen, y cuando le acusan furiosamente de algo que han oído pero que no ha dicho exactamente, Trump convierte la crítica en un dato de que está siendo perseguido, y todo el ciclo vuelve a empezar.Pero los últimos pasos en falso de Trump no pueden clasificarse como vaguedades calculadas.Durante un discurso del 15 de septiembre en Washington, poco después de declarar a Biden como alguien “con problemas cognitivos, incapaz de liderar”, el expresidente advirtió que Estados Unidos estaba al borde de la Segunda Guerra Mundial, la cual terminó en 1945.En el mismo discurso, Trump se jactó de que las encuestas presidenciales lo posicionan por delante de Obama quien, de hecho, no se está postulando para un tercer periodo porque, entre otras cosas, sería ilegal. Volvió a referirse erróneamente a Obama durante una anécdota sobre su victoria en la contienda presidencial de 2016.“Lo hicimos con Obama”, declaró Trump. “Ganamos una elección que todo el mundo decía que no se podía ganar, vencimos a…” Hizo una pausa mientras parecía darse cuenta de su error. “Hillary Clinton”.En un mitin en Florida, el 11 de octubre, días después de un brutal ataque terrorista que dejó sin vida a cientos de israelíes, Trump criticó al país por no estar preparado y arremetió contra su primer ministro, Benjamín Netanyahu. Trump parece haberse enojado con Netanyahu, quien solía ser un aliado cercano, después de que el líder israelí felicitó a Biden por ganar las elecciones de 2020.En el mismo discurso, Trump recurrió una cronología errada de los acontecimientos en Medio Oriente para criticar el manejo de Biden de los asuntos exteriores y, en el proceso, atrajo titulares por elogiar a Hizbulá, el grupo militante respaldado por Irán.La semana pasada, en un mitin celebrado en New Hampshire, Trump elogió a Viktor Orban, el primer ministro húngaro, pero se refirió a él como “el líder de Turquía”, un país localizado a cientos de kilómetros de distancia. Con rapidez, corrigió su error.En otro momento del mismo discurso, Trump lució confundido al decirles a sus partidarios: “Ustedes no tienen que votar, no se preocupen por la votación”. Luego agregó: “Tenemos un montón de votos”.Cheung, el portavoz de la campaña de Trump, dijo que el expresidente “claramente estaba hablando de la integridad electoral y asegurarse de que solo se cuenten los votos legales”.Con Trump, el Partido Republicano ha sufrido una serie de derrotas electorales desde 2016.Doug Mills/The New York TimesEn un discurso del sábado, Trump sonó como si estuviera hablando de hummus cuando pronunció mal “Hamás”, el nombre del grupo islamista que gobierna la Franja de Gaza y que el 7 de octubre ejecutó uno de los mayores ataques contra Israel en décadas.La pronunciación del expresidente llamó la atención del comando de campaña de Biden, que publicó el video en las redes sociales y señaló que Trump sonaba “confundido”.Pero incluso sus rivales republicanos han percibido una oportunidad en el tema de la edad contra Trump, quien ha mantenido un control inquebrantable sobre el partido a pesar de un historial político que en años anteriores habría obligado a los conservadores a considerar otro abanderado. Trump perdió el control del Congreso siendo presidente; fue expulsado a votos de la Casa Blanca; no logró contribuir a generar una “ola roja” de victorias en las elecciones de medio mandato del año pasado y, este año, recibió 91 cargos por delitos graves en cuatro casos penales.Este año, Nikki Haley, de 51 años y exgobernadora de Carolina del Sur, inició su candidatura presidencial pidiendo que los candidatos mayores de 75 años pasaran pruebas de competencia mental, una iniciativa que ha renovado en las últimas semanas.El sábado, Haley atacó a Trump por sus comentarios sobre Netanyahu y Hizbulá, al dar a entender en un discurso ante donantes judíos en Las Vegas que el expresidente no tenía las facultades necesarias para regresar a la Casa Blanca.“Déjenme recordarles una cosa”, añadió con una pequeña sonrisa. “Con todo respeto, yo no me confundo”.Jazmine Ulloa More

In earlier cases, the justices struck down provisions of the trademark law on First Amendment grounds. But the one at issue here seemed likely to survive.The Supreme Court, which has in recent years struck down parts of the trademark law that prohibited registration of immoral, scandalous and disparaging marks, did not appear ready on Wednesday to do the same thing in a case concerning a California lawyer’s attempt to trademark the phrase “Trump too small.”The provision at issue in the case forbids the registration of trademarks “identifying a particular living individual except by his written consent.”There seemed to be consensus among the justices that the provision was different from the ones the court had rejected in 2017 and 2019. Some said that it did not discriminate based on viewpoint, which the First Amendment generally does not allow the government to do. Others added that there is a long history of allowing people to control the use of their names in commercial settings.Some justices pressed a more fundamental objection. Noting that the lawyer, Steve Elster, could use the phrase on merchandise without trademarking it, they wondered whether the First Amendment applied at all.“The question is, is this an infringement on speech?” Justice Sonia Sotomayor said. “And the answer is no.”The contested phrase drew on a taunt from Senator Marco Rubio, Republican of Florida, during the 2016 presidential campaign. Mr. Rubio said Donald J. Trump had “small hands,” adding, “And you know what they say about guys with small hands.”Mr. Elster, in his trademark application, said that he wanted to convey the message that “some features of President Trump and his policies are diminutive.” He sought to use the phrase on the front of T-shirts with a list of Mr. Trump’s positions on the back. For instance: “Small on civil rights.”A unanimous three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ruled that the First Amendment required the trademark office to allow the registration.“As a result of the president’s status as a public official, and because Elster’s mark communicates his disagreement with and criticism of the then-president’s approach to governance, the government has no interest in disadvantaging Elster’s speech,” Judge Timothy B. Dyk wrote for the court.The Biden administration appealed the Federal Circuit’s ruling to the Supreme Court.Malcolm L. Stewart, a deputy solicitor general who was presenting his 100th Supreme Court argument, said that granting Mr. Elster a trademark would allow him to forbid others from using it, diminishing the amount of the political speech the First Amendment is meant to protect.Chief Justice John G. Roberts echoed the point. “Particularly in an area of political expression,” he said, “that really cuts off a lot of expression other people might regard as important infringement on their First Amendment rights.”Justice Elena Kagan asked Jonathan E. Taylor, a lawyer for Mr. Elster, to identify a precedent in which the court had struck down a law conferring a government benefit like trademark registration that did not involve viewpoint discrimination.He replied, “I can’t point you to a case that’s precisely on all fours.”Justice Kagan responded that she could cite many decisions supporting the opposite proposition, naming a half-dozen.Commentary on the size of Mr. Trump’s hands has a long history. In the 1980s, the satirical magazine Spy needled Mr. Trump, then a New York City real estate developer, with the recurring epithet “short-fingered vulgarian.”In 2016, during a presidential debate, Mr. Trump addressed Mr. Rubio’s critique.“Look at those hands, are they small hands?” Mr. Trump said, raising them. “And, he referred to my hands — ‘if they’re small, something else must be small.’ I guarantee you there’s no problem. I guarantee.”If the Supreme Court upholds the provision challenged in the new case, it will be the end of a trend.In 2017, a unanimous eight-justice court struck down a different provision, one forbidding marks that disparage people, living or dead, along with “institutions, beliefs or national symbols.”The decision, Matal v. Tam, concerned an Asian American dance-rock band called the Slants. The court split 4 to 4 in much of its reasoning, but all the justices agreed that the provision at issue in that case violated the Constitution because it took sides based on speakers’ viewpoints.In 2019, the court rejected a provision barring the registration of “immoral” or “scandalous” trademarks.That case concerned a line of clothing sold under the brand name FUCT. When the case was argued, Mr. Stewart told the justices that the term was “the equivalent of the past participle form of the paradigmatic profane word in our culture.”Justice Kagan, writing for a six-justice majority, did not dispute that. But she said the law was unconstitutional because it “disfavors certain ideas.”If the justices were divided in the new case, Vidal v. Elster, No. 22-704, it was over the rationale for ruling to uphold the law before them, not on the outcome.Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr., for instance, asked Mr. Stewart for a theory that would allow him to vote for the government without rejecting a position he had staked out in an earlier case.The justice added that the task was not pressing. “I mean,” he said, “you don’t need my vote to win your case.” More

Two governorships are at stake in the South, while Ohio voters will decide whether to enshrine the right to an abortion in the state constitution.Election Day is nearly here, and while off-year political races receive a fraction of the attention compared with presidential elections, some of Tuesday’s contests will be intensely watched.At stake are two southern governorships, control of the Virginia General Assembly and abortion access in Ohio. National Democrats and Republicans, seeking to build momentum moving toward next November, will be eyeing those results for signals about 2024.Here are the major contests voters will decide on Tuesday and a key ballot question:Governor of KentuckyGov. Andy Beshear, left, a Democrat, is facing Daniel Cameron, Kentucky’s Republican attorney general, in his campaign for re-election as governor.Pool photo by Kentucky Educational TelevisionGov. Andy Beshear, a Democrat, is seeking to again defy convention in deep-red Kentucky, a state carried handily by Donald J. Trump in 2020.He is facing Daniel Cameron, Kentucky’s attorney general, who was propelled to victory by an early endorsement from Mr. Trump in a competitive Republican primary in May.In 2019, Mr. Cameron became the first Black person to be elected as Kentucky’s attorney general, an office previously held by Mr. Beshear. He drew attention in 2020 when he announced that a grand jury did not indict two Louisville officers who shot Breonna Taylor.In the 2019 governor’s race, Mr. Beshear ousted Matt Bevin, a Trump-backed Republican, by fewer than 6,000 votes. This year, he enters the race with a strong job approval rating. He is seeking to replicate a political feat of his father, Steve Beshear, who was also Kentucky governor and was elected to two terms.Governor of Mississippi Brandon Presley, a public service commissioner who is related to Elvis Presley, wants to be the state’s first Democratic governor in two decades.Emily Kask for The New York TimesGov. Tate Reeves, a Republican in his first term, has some of the lowest job approval numbers of the nation’s governors.Rogelio V. Solis/Associated PressIt has been two decades since Mississippi had a Democrat as governor. Gov. Tate Reeves, a Republican in his first term, is seeking to avoid becoming the one who ends that streak.But his job approval numbers are among the lowest of the nation’s governors, which has emboldened his Democratic challenger, Brandon Presley, a public service commissioner with a famous last name: His second cousin, once removed, was Elvis Presley.Mr. Presley has attacked Mr. Reeves over a welfare scandal exposed last year by Mississippi Today, which found that millions in federal funds were misspent. Mr. Reeves, who was the lieutenant governor during the years the scandal unfolded, has denied any wrongdoing, but the issue has been a focal point of the contest.Abortion access in OhioAs states continue to reckon with the overturning of Roe v. Wade by the Supreme Court last year, Ohio has become the latest front in the fight over access to abortion.Reproductive rights advocates succeeded in placing a proposed amendment on the November ballot that would enshrine the right to abortion access into the state constitution. Its supporters have sought to fill the void that was created by the Roe decision.Anti-abortion groups have mounted a sweeping campaign to stop the measure. One effort, a proposal to raise the threshold required for passing a constitutional amendment, was rejected by voters this summer.Virginia legislatureIn just two states won by President Biden in 2020, Republicans have a power monopoly — and in Virginia, they are aiming to secure a third. The others are Georgia and New Hampshire.Democrats narrowly control the Virginia Senate, where all 40 seats are up for grabs in the election. Republicans hold a slim majority in the House of Delegates, which is also being contested.The outcome of the election is being viewed as a potential reflection of the clout of Gov. Glenn Youngkin, a Republican with national ambitions.Philadelphia mayorAn open-seat race for mayor in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania’s foremost Democratic bastion, is down to two former City Council members: Cherelle Parker, a Democrat, and David Oh, a Republican.The advantage for Ms. Parker appears to be an overwhelming one in the city, which has not elected a Republican as mayor since 1947.It has also been two decades since Philadelphia, the nation’s sixth most populous city, had a somewhat competitive mayoral race. More

Mike Johnson is the first person to become speaker of the House who can be fairly described as a Christian nationalist, a major development in American history in and of itself. Equally important, however, his ascension reflects the strength of white evangelical voters’ influence in the House Republican caucus, voters who are determined to use the power of government to roll back the civil rights, women’s rights and sexual revolutions.“Johnson is a clear rebuttal to the overall liberal societal drift that’s happening in the United States,” Ryan Burge, a political scientist at Eastern Illinois University, wrote by email in response to my query. “His views are far out of step with the average American and even with a significant number of Republicans.”“Yet, he was chosen as speaker,” continued Burge, who is also a pastor in the American Baptist Church. “If anything, it shows us that white evangelicals still have a very strong hold on the modern Republican Party. They are losing overall market share in the larger culture, but they are certainly taking on an outsized role in Republican politics.”Burge provided The Times with data on the changing religious composition of the Republican electorate. In the 1970s, mainline Protestants dominated at 46 percent, compared with evangelical Protestants at 24 percent and Catholics at 19 percent. By the decade of the 2010s, evangelical Protestants were a commanding 38 percent of Republicans, mainline Protestants had fallen to 17 percent, and Catholics had grown to 25 percent.Robert Jones, the president and founder of the Public Religion Research Institute, described Johnson in an email as “the embodiment of white Christian nationalism in a tailored suit.”What is Christian nationalism? Christianity Today described it as the “belief that the American nation is defined by Christianity, and that the government should take active steps to keep it that way. Popularly, Christian nationalists assert that America is and must remain a ‘Christian nation’ — not merely as an observation about American history, but as a prescriptive program for what America must continue to be in the future.”Johnson’s election as speaker, Jones went on to say, “is one more confirmation that the Republican Party — a party that is 68 percent white and Christian in a country that is 42 percent white and Christian — has embraced its role as the party of white Christian nationalism.”Jones argued that “while Johnson is more polished than other right-wing leaders of the G.O.P. who support this worldview, his record and previous public statements indicate that he’s a near textbook example of white Christian nationalism — the belief that God intended America to be a new promised land for European Christians.”In a long and data-filled analysis posted on Substack on Oct. 29, “Hiding in Plain Sight: The Sources of MAGA Madness,” Michael Podhorzer, a former political director of the A.F.L.-C.I.O., argued that the election of Johnson reflects the success of the Christian right in a long-term struggle to wrest control from traditional Republican elites, in battles fought out in Republican primary elections.Over the past two decades, Podhorzer wrote, “the political might of organized right-wing Christianity was successfully redeployed against establishment Republicans.”The decimation of moderate and centrist members of the House was most striking over the election cycles from 2010 to the present, according to Podhorzer: “From 2010 through 2022, a historically high number of House Republicans were defeated in primaries, with the vast majority of successful challenges happening in the most evangelical districts.”The result: When House districts are ranked by the percentage of voters who are white evangelicals, the top quintile is represented by 81 Republicans and 6 Democrats and the second quintile by 68 Republicans and 19 Democrats. The bottom three quintiles are represented by 188 Democrats and 73 Republicans.Not only do Republicans overwhelmingly represent the districts with the most white evangelicals, but those Republicans are deeply entrenched, with little or no danger of losing the general election to a Democrat:“Republicans represent 98 percent of the most evangelical safe districts and 82 percent of the remaining above-median evangelical safe districts,” Podhorzer wrote. “These two categories elected just shy of three-quarters of the Republican Caucus in safe districts.”The MAGA movement, in Podhorzer’s view, was unleashed with the Tea Party movement in 2010, well before Donald Trump emerged as a dominant political figure, and the elevation of Johnson marks the most recent high point in the movement’s acquisition of power: “Mike Johnson becoming speaker is better understood in terms of the ongoing white Christian nationalist takeover of the American government through MAGA,” he writes.White Christian nationalists, Podhorzer contended, “were once reliable votes and loyal foot soldiers for almost any Republican candidate since the 1970s,” but they “rebelled when John McCain and other establishment Republicans treated Obama’s win as legitimate.”From 2010 forward, Podhorzer wrote, “the political muscle provided by white Christian nationalism’s extensive church-based infrastructure in congressional districts, and its national reach through Christian broadcasting and national organizations, has turned MAGA into a ruthlessly successful RINO-hunting machine.”It should not be surprising, Podhorzer said, “to see an election-denying evangelical Christian who favors a national abortion ban, Bible courses in public schools, and ‘covenant marriage,’ and who believes that L.G.B.T.Q. people are living an ‘inherently unnatural’ and ‘dangerous lifestyle’ elevated to the speakership.”There is a strong correlation between election from a district with a high share of white evangelical voters, Podhorzer found, and election denial: “More than three-quarters of those representing the most evangelical districts are election deniers, compared to just half of those in the remaining districts. Fully three-quarters of the deniers in the caucus hail from evangelical districts.”The most recent P.R.R.I. American Values Survey, conducted in late August, “Threats to American Democracy Ahead of an Unprecedented Presidential Election,” further illuminated the priorities of the contemporary Republican electorate.The survey asked respondents whether they would “prefer a presidential candidate who can best manage the economy” or a candidate who will “protect and preserve American culture and the American way of life.”Democrats chose a candidate who can manage the economy 57 to 40, a view shared by independents by a smaller margin, 53 to 45. Republican voters, in contrast, preferred a candidate who will preserve American culture, by 58 to 40 percent.A different P.R.R.I. survey, released on Feb. 8, “A Christian Nation? Understanding the Threat of Christian Nationalism to American Democracy and Culture,” measured support for Christian nationalism based on responses to five statements:The U.S. government should declare America a Christian nation.U.S. laws should be based on Christian values.If the U.S. moves away from our Christian foundations, we will not have a country anymore.Being Christian is an important part of being truly American.God has called Christians to exercise dominion over all areas of American society.On the basis of the responses, P.R.R.I. created four categories:Christian nationalism adherents: the 10 percent of Americans who overwhelmingly either agree or completely agree with the five statements above.Christian nationalism sympathizers: the 19 percent of Americans who agree with these statements but are less likely to say they “completely agree.”Christian nationalism skeptics: the 39 percent of Americans who disagree with the statements but are less likely to completely disagree.Christian nationalism rejecters: the 29 percent of Americans who completely disagree with all five statements in the scale.Among Democrats, the survey found that 15 percent were either adherents (5 percent) or sympathizers (10 percent). Among independents, 23 percent were adherents (6 percent) or sympathizers (17 percent).Among Republican voters, 54 percent were either adherents (21 percent) or sympathizers (33 percent).In a series of questions on racial issues and immigration, Christian nationalist adherents were well to the right of Americans as a whole.Asked whether “discrimination against white Americans has become as big a problem as discrimination against Black Americans and other minorities,” 85 percent of Christian nationalist adherents agreed, compared with 41 percent of all those surveyed.Asked whether they agree or disagree with the statement “immigrants are invading our country and replacing our cultural and ethnic background,” 81 percent of Christian nationalist adherents agreed.Philip Gorski, a sociologist at Yale who has written extensively about Christian nationalism, replied by email to my inquiry about Johnson’s election:He says out loud what most others just feel: that America was founded as a Christian nation, that the founders were “evangelical” Christians, that the founding documents were based on “biblical principles,” that God has entrusted America with a divine mission, that he has blessed America with unique power and prosperity and that those blessings will be withdrawn if America strays off the straight and narrow path of Christian morality. And that it is every good Christian’s duty to make America Christian again.Christian nationalism, in Gorski’s view,is no longer operating beneath the surface or in the background. It’s now front and center at commanding heights of power. It will now be much harder for right-wing Christian activists to claim that Christian nationalism is a fringe phenomenon or a left-wing smear job. In 2021, it was still hard to find an avowed Christian nationalist in the top ranks of the G.O.P. Not anymore.Gorski wrote that Johnsonlikes to say that the United States is a “republic” and not a “democracy.” By this, he means that the majority does not and should not get its way. That would be democracy. A republic means rule by the virtuous, not the majority. And the virtuous are of course conservative Christians like him.Eric Schickler, a political scientist at the University of California, Berkeley, stressed in an email his view that Johnson’s election as speaker demonstrated once again the weakness of the centrist wing of the House Republican caucus, writing that the elevation of the Louisiana Republicanreinforces the message that the most conservative voices in the Republican Party have decisive influence on the party in the House of Representatives. Less conservative members from swing districts have repeatedly made noises, suggesting that they were willing to wield power to ensure that leaders would reflect their needs — but once again, when push came to shove, they gave in despite having the numbers to hold the balance of power in the House.In addition, the “entire episode” — from the ousting of Kevin McCarthy on Oct. 3 to the election of Johnson on Oct. 25 — reflects the collapse of the unwritten rule that “majority party members would stick together on the floor in speakership contests.” There is no way, Schickler added, that “the Freedom Caucus would have voted for a member seen as distant from them on key issues.”Does Johnson’s election as speaker improve Democrats’ chances to retake the House in 2024? I asked.Schickler: “It is hard to know. Johnson starts with such a low profile, it is not clear whether Democrats will be able to make him a target.”Johnson’s relative anonymity in the House served him well in his bid for the speakership, insulating him from acrimony. More recently, however, some of Johnson’s out-of-the-mainstream views and alliances have begun to surface.In a July 20, 2005, opinion essay for The Shreveport Times, Johnson argued:All of us should acknowledge the real emotion and strife of the homosexual lifestyle and should certainly treat all people with dignity, love and respect. But our government can never provide its stamp of approval or special legal sanction for behavior patterns that are proven to be destructive to individuals, to families and to society at large. Your race, creed and sex are what you are, while homosexuality and cross-dressing are things you do.“We must always remember,” Johnson concluded, “that it is not bigotry to make moral distinctions.”A year earlier, Johnson wrote, in another opinion essay:The state and its citizens have a compelling interest in preserving the integrity of the marital union by making opposite sex marriage the exclusive form of family relationship endorsed by government. Loss of this status will de-emphasize the importance of traditional marriage to society, weaken it, and place our entire democratic system in jeopardy by eroding its foundation.It would be difficult to overestimate the dangers Johnson foresaw. “Society,” he wrote,cannot give its stamp of approval to such a dangerous lifestyle. If we change marriage for this tiny, modern minority, we will have to do it for every deviant group. Polygamists, polyamorists, pedophiles and others will be next in line to claim equal protection. They already are. There will be no legal basis to deny a bisexual the right to marry a partner of each sex, or a person to marry his pet. If everyone does what is right in his own eyes, chaos and sexual anarchy will result. And make no mistake, the extremists who seek to redefine marriage also want to deny you the right to object to immoral behavior. Our precious religious freedom hangs in the balance.In an Oct. 26 interview with Sean Hannity of Fox News after he was elected to the leadership post, Johnson described his faith in the Bible as his exclusive guide in life:What does Mike Johnson think about any issue under the sun? Go pick up a Bible off your shelf and read it. That’s my worldview. That’s what I believe.On Oct. 27, my Times colleagues Annie Karni, Ruth Graham and Steve Eder reported on a 2006 essay that Johnson posted on Townhall, a right-wing website.In it, they wrote, “Johnson railed against ‘the earnest advocates of atheism and sexual perversion’. He also decried ‘This sprawling alliance of anti-God enthusiasts’ that ‘has proven frighteningly efficient at remaking America in their own brutal, dehumanizing image.’”“In the space of a few decades,” Johnson added, “they have managed to entrench abortion and homosexual behavior, objectify children into sexual objects, criminalize Christianity in the popular culture, and promote guilt and self-doubt as the foremost qualities of our national character.”In lectures, Karni, Graham and Eder wrote, “Johnson has lamented that ‘There’s no transcendent principles anymore. There’s no eternal judge. There’s no absolute standards of right and wrong. All this is exactly the opposite of the way we were founded as a country.’”David Corn, the Washington bureau chief for Mother Jones, reported in an Oct. 28 article that in a series of seminars Johnson and his wife, Kelly, a Christian counselor, conducted — “Answers for Our Times” — the couple addressed such questions as:What is happening in America and how do we fix it? Can our heritage as a Christian Nation be preserved? How should Christians respond to the changing culture? What does the Bible say about today’s problems and issues?In May 2019, Johnson described the goal of the seminars to the Louisiana Baptist Message: “Our nation is entering one of the most challenging seasons in its history, and there is an urgent need for God’s people to be armed and ready with the truth.”For Johnson, the obligation “to be armed and ready with the truth” led him to become a leader of the election denial movement. In December 2020 he recruited 125 fellow House Republicans to sign on to his lawsuit seeking to persuade the Supreme Court to overturn the election results.He told his colleagues that “the initiative had been personally blessed by Mr. Trump, and that the former president was ‘anxiously awaiting’ to see who in Congress would defend him,” The Times reported.In the Supreme Court brief that Johnson filed on Dec. 10, 2020, he argued that the election hadbeen riddled with an unprecedented number of serious allegations of fraud and irregularities. National polls indicate a large percentage of Americans now have serious doubts about not just the outcome of the presidential contest, but also the future reliability of our election system itself. Amici respectfully aver it is the solemn duty of this Court to provide an objective review of these anomalies and to determine for the people if indeed the Constitution has been followed and the rule of law maintained.On Dec. 11, in a brief unsigned order, the Supreme Court dismissed the suit, but Johnson won recognition from his fellow Republicans in the House for his fealty to Trump.Asked shortly after he was elected speaker whether he continued to believe that the 2020 election was stolen, Johnson told a Washington Post reporter: “We’re not talking about any issues today,” adding only, “My position is very well known.”In theory, at least, it is difficult to understand how Johnson can justify his support for Trump, whom Peter Wehner, a senior fellow at the Trinity Forum and a contributing writer for Times Opinion, described this way in The Atlantic in 2020:A man whose lifestyle is more closely aligned with hedonism than with Christianity, Trump clearly sees white evangelicals as a means to an end, people to be used, suckers to be played. He had absolutely no interest in evangelicals before his entry into politics and he will have absolutely no interest in them after his exit. In fact, it’s hard to imagine a person who has less affinity for authentic Christianity — for the teachings of Jesus, from the Sermon on the Mount to the parable of the good Samaritan — than Donald Trump.Johnson’s ascent to the top job in the House also raises a larger, more encompassing question: Will voters care in 2024 (and beyond) that one of America’s two major political parties has been taken over by an alliance of MAGA forces and their white evangelical allies, who have clearly indicated their willingness to abandon democratic norms — that is, democracy itself — in the pursuit of power?Polling suggests that this is a far from settled question.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

Donald Trump’s former attorney Jenna Ellis scrambled to secure a plea deal for herself in the Georgia election subversion case after watching two other indicted lawyers fold, it was revealed on Wednesday.The haste in which her legal team acted to snag an advantageous agreement for their client was laid out by Ellis’s own attorney Frank Hogue in an exclusive interview with the Atlanta Journal-Constitution.He said surprise guilty pleas by Sidney Powell and Kenneth Chesebro, charged alongside Trump in Fulton county over the former president’s efforts to overturn his 2020 election defeat to Joe Biden, injected urgency into discussions with the prosecutor, Fani Willis.“I think what really accelerated it was Powell and Chesebro falling as they did, one right after the other. It looked like timing was of the essence for us,” Hogue told the Journal-Constitution.A tearful Ellis, 39, pleaded guilty to one felony count of aiding and abetting false statements and writings last week, becoming the fourth of 19 defendants to admit a role in the plot by Trump and his allies to keep him in office.She avoided a trial and the possibility of up to a five-year prison sentence. Her cooperating with prosecutors could include her testifying against Trump in his upcoming trial on 13 charges including racketeering, forgery, perjury, filing false documents and false statements.Negotiations took place over a three-day period, Hogue said, although he did not say if they were initiated by the prosecution or defense. Originally, he said, Willis offered a deal in which Ellis would plead guilty to an offense under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (Rico) often used in mob prosecutions.“That was about a three-second conversation. Long enough to say, ‘No, we’re not doing Rico,’” he said.The final deal was struck on the afternoon of 23 October, and announced in court the following morning, he told the newspaper’s legal podcast Breakdown.Hogue said it was “a good deal” for Ellis, because it ensured she was able to keep her license to practice law or maintain a pathway to earning it back if it was surrendered.“To get out of it with five years’ probation, terminate in three, which I’m sure it will for her, and the restitution and the other conditions of probation, none of it’s onerous for her,” he said.“She’s already back in Florida and resuming her life and doesn’t have to face any of this any more. So for her, my feeling is it’s a good result.”Unlike Chesebro and Powell, Ellis chose to read out in court a personal apology. Wiping away tears, she said she looked back at her experience with “deep remorse”.“I relied on others, including lawyers with many more years of experience than I, to provide me with true and reliable information,” she said.“What I should have done, but did not do, was make sure that the facts the other lawyers alleged to be true were in fact true. In the frenetic pace of attempting to raise challenges to the election in several states, including Georgia, I failed to do my due diligence.”In a radio appearance last month, Ellis said she also regretted ever becoming part of Trump’s team of lawyers. Instead, she switched allegiance to the Florida governor, Ron DeSantis, who is challenging Trump for the Republican 2024 presidential nomination.“Why I have chosen to distance is because of [Trump’s] frankly malignant narcissistic tendency to simply say that he’s never done anything wrong,” she said on her American Family Radio show.Ellis could be a star witness against Trump and the former New York mayor Rudy Giuliani, an alleged mastermind of the election plot who pleaded not guilty last month to 13 charges, including one of racketeering. Asked if Giuliani should be worried, Hogue said: “I think he should be. I think there’s enough for Mayor Giuliani to worry about that wouldn’t have anything to do with Jenna Ellis.“She wouldn’t be a help to him, I don’t think, if she was to be called as a witness,” he added. “But I think his troubles extend far beyond her.” More

The president’s push to focus attention on the domestic economy comes as his administration has been dealing with events overseas after the terrorist attacks in Israel.The White House on Wednesday will announce more than $5 billion in funding for agriculture, broadband and clean energy needs in sparsely populated parts of the country as President Biden travels to Minnesota to kick off an administration-wide tour of rural communities.The president’s efforts to focus attention on the domestic economy ahead of next year’s campaign come after three weeks in which his administration has been seized by events overseas following the terrorist attacks in Israel and the state’s subsequent military action in Gaza.The trip will take place as Mr. Biden is urging Congress to quickly pass a $105 billion funding package that includes emergency aid to Israel and Ukraine, two conflicts he has described as threats to democracy around the globe.But the president and his aides are well aware that his hopes for a second term are likely to be determined closer to home. Rural voters like the ones he will address at a corn, soybean and hog farm south of Minneapolis are increasingly voting Republican. A recent poll showed that most voters had heard little or nothing about a health care and clean energy law that is the cornerstone of Mr. Biden’s economic agenda. And the president even faces a challenge within his own party, from Representative Dean Phillips of Minnesota, who announced his long-shot presidential bid last week.Karine Jean-Pierre, the White House press secretary, declined on Tuesday to speak about campaign issues, citing the Hatch Act, which limits political activity by federal officials, but said that Mr. Biden “loves Minnesota.” Administration officials have said Mr. Biden’s trip was planned before Mr. Phillips announced his candidacy.The White House has called the next two weeks of events the “Investing in Rural America Event Series.” It includes more than a dozen trips by Mr. Biden as well as cabinet secretaries and other senior administration officials. The White House said in a statement that the tour would highlight federal investments that “are bringing new revenue to farms, increased economic development in rural towns and communities, and more opportunity throughout the country.”Mr. Biden will be joined on Wednesday by Tom Vilsack, the agriculture secretary. Against the backdrop of a family farm that uses techniques to make crops more resilient to climate change, they will announce $1.7 billion for farmers nationwide to adopt so-called climate-smart agriculture practices.Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack will join President Biden in Minnesota and later travel to Indiana, Wyoming and Colorado.Haiyun Jiang for The New York TimesOther funding announcements include $1.1 billion in loans and grants to upgrade infrastructure in rural communities; $2 billion in investments as part of a program that helps rural governments work more closely with federal agencies on economic development projects; $274 million to expand high-speed internet infrastructure; and $145 million to expand access to wind, solar and other renewable energy, according to a White House fact sheet.“Young people in rural communities shouldn’t have to leave home to find opportunity,” Neera Tanden, director of the White House Domestic Policy Council, said Tuesday on a call with reporters.She said federal investments were creating “a pathway for the next generation to keep their roots in rural America.”Gov. Tim Walz of Minnesota, a Democrat, said he expected Mr. Biden to face serious headwinds in rural communities, in large part because of inflation levels.“It is a little challenging, there’s no denying, when prices go up,” Mr. Walz said. “The politics have gotten a little angrier. I think folks are feeling a little behind.”But Mr. Walz also praised Mr. Biden for spending time in rural communities. “Democrats need to show up,” he said.Kenan Fikri, the director of research at the Economic Innovation Group, a Washington think tank, said the Biden administration had made sizable investments over the past two and a half years in agriculture, broadband and other rural priorities.“The administration has a lot to show for its economic development efforts in rural communities,” he said, but “whether voters will credit Biden for a strong economic performance is another question.”Later in the week Mr. Vilsack will travel to Indiana, Wyoming and Colorado to speak with agricultural leaders and discuss land conservation. Deb Haaland, the interior secretary, will go to her home state of New Mexico to highlight water infrastructure investments.Energy Secretary Jennifer M. Granholm will be in Arizona to talk about the electricity grid and renewable energy investment in the rural Southwest.The veterans affairs secretary, Denis McDonough, plans to visit Iowa to discuss improving access to medical care for veterans in rural areas. Isabel Guzman, who leads the Small Business Administration, will travel to Georgia to talk about loans for rural small businesses.Miguel A. Cardona, the education secretary, will go to New Hampshire to promote how community colleges help students from rural areas. Xavier Becerra, the secretary of health and human services, will be in North Carolina to talk about health care access in rural areas. More

How Did Democrats Lose Control of State Agriculture Policy?Democrats once dominated statewide elections for the influential post of agriculture commissioner. Now they’re hoping to win just one.Kentucky is one of 12 states with elected agriculture commissioners. Clockwise from top left: A soybean farm in Adairville; harvesting apples in Nancy; a tractor caution sign in Pulaski County; a livestock auction in Somerset.Nov. 1, 2023Jonathan Robertson was preparing to start the workday on his family cattle farm when a campaign ad in the race for agriculture commissioner of Kentucky flashed across his television.He couldn’t hear the narrator, but he noticed that the candidate — the name was Shell, he believed — was shown on the screen baling hay and driving farm equipment.“I haven’t heard anything about who’s running,” Mr. Robertson, 47, recalled a few hours later, stopping with his brother for the $5.99 lunch special at the Wigwam General Store in Horse Cave., Ky. “Who’s his opponent?”Neither Mr. Robertson nor his brother, Josh, 44, knew who was in the race, but they had no doubt how they would vote: “I’m a straight-ticket Republican,” Josh said.Democrats face daunting odds in races for the under-the-radar but vitally important position of state agriculture commissioner — and not just in Kentucky, where the two people competing on Nov. 7 are Jonathan Shell, a former Republican state legislator, and Sierra Enlow, a Democratic economic development consultant.Jonathan Shell, the Republican candidate for Kentucky agriculture commissioner, is a former state legislator and a fifth-generation farmer.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