Elections

At a rally in Iowa on Friday, the former president questioned his top Republican rival’s support for the agriculture industry.Donald J. Trump attacked Gov. Ron DeSantis of Florida on Friday over his support for farmers, saying his chief rival for the Republican presidential nomination would be “a catastrophe” for the country’s agriculture industry.Mr. Trump claimed at a rally in Iowa that Mr. DeSantis would outsource American farming jobs overseas and oppose the federal mandate for ethanol, a fuel made from corn and other crops. Support for ethanol, which Iowa is a national leader in producing, is a quadrennial issue in presidential elections in this early voting state.In 2017, Mr. DeSantis supported legislation that would end the renewable fuel standard, a nearly two-decade-old standard that requires refiners to blend biofuel into gasoline nationwide. The policy is opposed by some conservatives, who see the mandate as onerous government regulation.Speaking to more than 2,000 supporters in Council Bluffs, Iowa, on Friday, Mr. Trump rattled off his record of delivering on priorities for conservative farmers, including raising the exemption limit on the estate tax and replacing the North American Free Trade Agreement. Then, he eagerly highlighted what he claimed was his rival’s history of opposing an issue that carries outsize political weight in Iowa.“He has been fighting for years to kill every single job supported by this vital industry,” he said of ethanol. “If he had his way, the entire economy of Iowa would absolutely collapse.”Bryan Griffin, a spokesman for the DeSantis campaign, said in an email that Mr. Trump’s comments were a sign of his “eroding support” in Iowa.“This unfortunately isn’t the first instance of Donald Trump distorting the governor’s record, and we know it won’t be the last,” Mr. Griffin said. “As president, Ron DeSantis will be a champion for farmers and use every tool available to open new markets.” The event marked Mr. Trump’s first large event in the state in nearly four months, after a rally scheduled for May was canceled by the campaign, which cited possible severe weather.Held in a convention hall near the Nebraska border, the rally was packed with voters from the neighboring — and non-early voting — state.“I hope Nebraska is represented here,” Mr. Trump said as the crowd exploded in cheers. “That’s a big contingent.” More

The recommendation for disbarment of Rudolph W. Giuliani followed a hearing where evidence was presented that he had improperly sought to help Donald J. Trump overturn the results of the 2020 election.A legal ethics committee in Washington that oversaw a disciplinary case late year against Rudolph W. Giuliani recommended on Friday that he be disbarred for his “unparalleled” attempts to overturn the 2020 election in favor of his client at the time, President Donald J. Trump.In its recommendation, the panel from the D.C. Bar’s board on professional responsibility said that Mr. Giuliani’s efforts to “undermine the integrity” of the election had “helped destabilize our democracy” and “done lasting damage” to the oath to support the U.S. Constitution that he had sworn when he was admitted to the bar.While the panel acknowledged a record of public service by Mr. Giuliani, a former New York City mayor and U.S. attorney in Manhattan, it also noted that “all of that happened long ago.”“The misconduct here sadly transcends all his past accomplishments,” the panel wrote. “It was unparalleled in its destructive purpose and effect. He sought to disrupt a presidential election and persists in his refusal to acknowledge the wrong he has done.”Mr. Giuliani’s hearing in front of the ethics committee took place in December and focused on the role he had played in bringing a lawsuit in Federal District Court in Philadelphia that sought to delay the certification of the election results in Pennsylvania.The federal judge who heard the Pennsylvania case dismissed it, likening it to a “Frankenstein’s monster” that had been “haphazardly stitched together.” A federal appeals court then upheld the dismissal in a scathing order by a Trump-appointed judge who noted that “calling an election unfair does not make it so.”The legal ethics committee in Washington determined that Mr. Giuliani had filed the suit “when he had no factual basis, and consequently no legitimate legal grounds, to do so.”“He claimed massive election fraud but had no evidence of it,” the panel wrote. “By prosecuting that destructive case Mr. Giuliani, a sworn officer of the court, forfeited his right to practice law.”A local court of appeals in Washington will ultimately decide whether to revoke his license to practice law in the city. He has already had his license suspended in New York. One of his lawyers, Barry Kamins, said he was disappointed in the committee’s recommendation in Washington and would file “a vigorous appeal.”The ethics committee’s recommendation was the latest example of bar authorities seeking accountability for lawyers who tried to help Mr. Trump overturn the results of the election and maintain his grip on power.In March, under a negotiated agreement with state bar officials in Colorado, the lawyer Jenna Ellis acknowledged that she had knowingly misrepresented the facts in several of her public claims that widespread voting fraud led to Mr. Trump’s defeat. Ms. Ellis worked closely with Mr. Giuliani in various attempts to keep Mr. Trump in office.Another lawyer who took part in those attempts, John Eastman, is currently facing a disciplinary hearing by bar officials in California that could lead to the loss of his law license. Mr. Eastman, a law professor, was the architect of a plan to pressure Vice President Mike Pence to use his position as president of the Senate to unilaterally throw the election to Mr. Trump during a joint session of Congress on Jan. 6, 2021.Possible disbarment is not the only legal problem confronting Mr. Giuliani. Late last year, he received a grand jury subpoena from federal prosecutors who are mulling criminal charges related to Mr. Trump’s various attempts to stay in power.Last month, Mr. Giuliani sat for an interview with prosecutors working for the special counsel Jack Smith, who is leading the election interference inquiry. More

The Justice Department also disclosed $616,000 in spending by the special counsel scrutinizing President Biden’s handling of classified files.The investigations into former President Donald J. Trump’s hoarding of government files and his efforts to overturn the 2020 election cost taxpayers about $5.4 million from November through March as the special counsel, Jack Smith, moved toward charging Mr. Trump, the Justice Department disclosed on Friday.Budgeting documents also showed that Robert K. Hur, the special counsel investigating President Biden’s handling of classified documents after he left the vice presidency, spent just under $616,000 from his appointment in January through March.And John H. Durham, who was appointed special counsel during the Trump administration to investigate the Russia inquiry, reported spending a little over $1.1 million from October 2022 to the end of March, representing the first half of the 2022-2023 fiscal year. Mr. Durham’s investigation had ended, but he was writing a final report he delivered in May.The budget disclosures covered an extraordinary period in which the Justice Department had three special counsels — prosecutors who operate with a greater degree of day-to-day autonomy than ordinary U.S. attorneys — at work. With the conclusion of Mr. Durham’s investigation, two such inquiries remain.Last month, Mr. Smith, who was appointed in November, obtained a grand jury indictment against Mr. Trump and an aide, Walt Nauta. The former president faces 31 counts of unauthorized retention of secret national-security documents and six other counts involving accusations of obstructing the investigation and causing one of his lawyers to lie to the government.Mr. Smith has also continued to investigate Mr. Trump and several of his associates over the efforts to overturn the 2020 election results that culminated in the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol by a mob of Trump supporters. Both investigations have involved significant litigation over Mr. Trump’s attempts to block grand-jury testimony by various witnesses under attorney-client privilege.The largest line item of spending by Mr. Smith through the end of March — $2,672,783 — covered personnel compensation and expenses, according to the statement of expenditures. Most of that salary money was to reimburse the Justice Department for employees who already worked for the government and had been detailed to the special counsel’s office.Mr. Smith’s operation also paid $1,881,926 for contractual services, including litigation and investigative support and purchasing transcripts.Mr. Hur’s investigation has been much quieter. Mr. Garland appointed him in January after several classified documents were found at a former office of Mr. Biden’s in Washington and at his home in Wilmington, Del. Mr. Biden and his lawyers, who alerted the government to the discoveries and have portrayed their retention as inadvertent, have said they are cooperating with the investigation.The largest line item in Mr. Hur’s office during the two and a half months covered by the budgeting document was also personnel compensation and benefits, at $346,139. That figure indicates that his operation is significantly smaller than Mr. Smith’s, reflecting the narrower scope of his assignment.Of the three special counsels, only Mr. Durham’s office was operating for the entire six-month period covered by the budgeting documents. His largest expenditure — $544,044 — also covered employee salaries and benefits.To date, Mr. Durham has reported spending about $7.7 million in taxpayer funds since Attorney General William P. Barr gave him special counsel status in October 2020, entrenching him to continue his investigation after Mr. Trump lost the election.Mr. Durham, however, began his assignment in the spring of 2019, and the Justice Department has not disclosed what taxpayers spent on about the first 16 months of his work. That period included trips to Europe as Mr. Barr and Mr. Durham fruitlessly pursued a pro-Trump conspiracy theory that the Russia inquiry had originated in a plot by Western spy agencies.Mr. Durham also later developed two narrow cases accusing nongovernment officials of making false statements, both of which ended in acquittals. More

The bulk of the G.O.P. field is there, with some notable holdouts: Donald J. Trump, the front-runner, and his top rival, Ron DeSantis.While the front-runners in the 2024 presidential race have yet to show up on Threads, the new Instagram app aimed at rivaling Twitter, many of the long-shot candidates were quick to take advantage of the platform’s rapidly growing audience.“Buckle up and join me on Threads!” Senator Tim Scott, Republican of South Carolina, wrote in a caption accompanying a selfie of himself and others in a car that he posted on Thursday — by that morning, the app had already been downloaded more than 30 million times, putting it on track to be the most rapidly downloaded app ever.But President Biden, former President Donald J. Trump and Gov. Ron DeSantis of Florida remain absent from the platform so far.And that may be just fine with Adam Mosseri, the head of Instagram, who told The Times’s “Hard Fork” podcast on Thursday that he does not expect Threads to become a destination for news or politics, arenas where Twitter has dominated the public discourse.“I don’t want to lean into hard news at all. I don’t think there’s much that we can or should do to discourage it on Instagram or in Threads, but I don’t think we’ll do anything to encourage it,” Mr. Mosseri said.The app, released on Wednesday, was presented as an alternative to Twitter, with which many users became disillusioned after it was purchased by Elon Musk in October.Lawyers for Twitter threatened legal action against Meta, the company that owns Instagram, Facebook and Threads, accusing it of using trade secrets from former Twitter employees to build the new platform. Mr. Musk tweeted on Thursday, “Competition is fine, cheating is not.”Mr. Trump has not been active on Twitter recently either, despite Mr. Musk’s lifting the ban that was put on Mr. Trump’s account after the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol. The former president has instead kept his focus on Truth Social, the right-wing social network he launched in 2021.But many of the G.O.P. candidates have begun making their pitches on Threads.Nikki Haley, the former United Nations ambassador and former governor of South Carolina, made a video compilation of her campaign events her first post on the app. “Strong and proud. Not weak and woke,” she wrote on Thursday. “That is the America I see.”Gov. Doug Burgum of North Dakota posted footage of his July 4 campaign appearances in New Hampshire, alongside a message on Wednesday that said he and his wife were “looking forward to continuing our time here.”And Will Hurd, a former Texas congressman, made a fund-raising pitch to viewers on Wednesday.“Welcome to Threads,” he said in a video posted on the app. “I’m looking forward to continuing the conversation here with you on the issues, my candidacy, where I’ll be and everything our campaign has going on.”Francis Suarez, the Republican mayor of Miami, and Larry Elder, a conservative talk radio host, also shared their campaign pitches on the platform, as did two candidates running in the Democratic primary: Robert F. Kennedy Jr., a leading vaccine skeptic, and Marianne Williamson, a self-help author. Even Cornel West, a professor and progressive activist running as a third-party candidate, has posted.Former Vice President Mike Pence and Vivek Ramaswamy, a tech entrepreneur, also established accounts — but have yet to post.Among the holdouts: Former Gov. Asa Hutchinson of Arkansas and former Gov. Chris Christie of New Jersey, both Republicans.The White House has not said whether Mr. Biden will join Threads. Andrew Bates, a White House spokesman, said on Thursday that the administration would “keep you all posted if we do.” More

The defamation case, stemming from a comment Rahul Gandhi made about Prime Minister Narendra Modi, could go to the Supreme Court. It may hurt his ability to run in upcoming elections.Rahul Gandhi, India’s top opposition leader, faced another setback on Friday when a court in the state of Gujarat denied his request to stay his conviction in a defamation case, a move that leaves him at risk of imprisonment and possibly unable to run in national elections next year.Mr. Gandhi, the most prominent leader of the Indian National Congress party, was sentenced to two years in prison in March in connection with a 2019 campaign speech in which he likened Prime Minister Narendra Modi to two Indians accused of swindling money who shared the same last name.A member of Mr. Modi’s party, who also shared the Modi name, argued that the remark was offensive and filed a lawsuit. The sentence, the maximum for defamation cases, automatically disqualified Mr. Gandhi from his seat in Parliament. Members of the opposition have called the case politically motivated.The Gujarat High Court, where Mr. Gandhi had filed a petition seeking a stay on his conviction, said there was no reasonable ground to suspend it. “The conviction is just, proper and legal,” said Justice Hemant Prachchhak, who heard the review plea at the high court.Mr. Gandhi, 53, is out on bail, and his last option is to advance the case to India’s Supreme Court for final review. His party has said he will do so.His case is the latest example of what opposition parties have long accused Mr. Modi of: using branches of the government, including the police and the courts, to quash dissent and bog down political opponents and critics of his government.One of India’s premier law enforcement agencies that answer indirectly to Mr. Modi, the Enforcement Directorate, is being increasingly accused of conducting raids on places connected to political opponents of Mr. Modi’s governing Bharatiya Janata Party, or B.J.P.Mr. Gandhi is among the most vocal of the national opposition leaders, and his legal woes are stymieing him at a time when he was trying to build momentum and to unite various political opposition groups around his party. He had rallied the public with a grass-roots march across India — some 2,000 miles over five months — during which he railed against Mr. Modi’s power.In actively seeking the public’s support, Mr. Gandhi, the scion of a once-mighty political dynasty, positioned himself as a main challenger to Mr. Modi, who remains popular with Indian voters.After his conviction in March in a lower court, Mr. Gandhi approached the high court in Gujarat seeking a stay of the conviction. As long as that conviction stands, Indian law bars him from competing in elections and from Parliament. “The use of defamation law is being utilized to crush a voice,” Abhishek Manu Singhvi, a member of the Indian National Congress, said after the high court verdict. “But that doesn’t mean Rahul Gandhi is afraid. He will continue to walk on the path of truth.”Lawmakers from the B.J.P. praised Friday’s ruling.One of them, Ravi Shankar Prasad, said Mr. Gandhi’s remarks were a direct attack on members of lower-caste groups, including the one with which Mr. Modi is often associated, who have faced discrimination in India for centuries.“It has become a chronic habit of Mr. Rahul Gandhi to abuse, to defame and shower the worst kind of abuses against eminent leaders and organizations,” he said. More

A pesar de su alianza con los partidarios del derecho al aborto y los defensores LGBTQ, el presidente ha evitado hábilmente verse envuelto en batallas sobre temas sociales muy controvertidos.Hace más de una década, el presidente Joe Biden se adelantó de manera memorable a Barack Obama en cuanto al apoyo al matrimonio entre personas del mismo sexo, pero en un evento para recaudar fondos en junio, cerca de San Francisco, no pudo recordar las letras LGBTQ.Aunque el Partido Demócrata ha hecho que la lucha por el derecho al aborto sea central en su mensaje político, Biden se declaró como “no muy partidario del aborto” la semana pasada.En un momento en el que los partidos políticos estadounidenses intercambian disparos feroces desde las trincheras de una guerra por las políticas sociales y culturales, el mandatario se mantiene al margen.Biden, un hombre blanco de 80 años que no está muy actualizado con el lenguaje de la izquierda, ha evitado en gran medida involucrarse en las batallas contemporáneas sobre el género, el aborto y otros temas sociales muy controvertidos, incluso cuando hace cosas como albergar lo que llamó “la celebración más grande del Mes del Orgullo jamás organizada en la Casa Blanca”.Los republicanos han tratado de empujarlo hacia esa batalla, pero parecen reconocer la dificultad: cuando los candidatos presidenciales del Partido Republicano prometen ponerle fin a lo que califican burlonamente como la cultura “woke”, a menudo apuntan sus dardos no directamente a Biden sino a las grandes corporaciones como Disney y BlackRock o al enorme “Estado administrativo” del gobierno federal. Los estrategas republicanos afirman que la mayor parte del mensaje de su partido sobre el aborto y las personas transgénero está dirigido a los votantes de las primarias, mientras que en las elecciones presidenciales se considera que Biden es mucho más vulnerable en temas relacionados con la economía, el crimen y la inmigración.La protección de Biden contra los ataques culturales podría parecer improbable para un presidente que ha defendido firmemente los derechos de la comunidad LGBTQ, y que es el líder de un partido que saca ventaja de la ola de políticas sobre el aborto y un hombre que le debe su presidencia al apoyo inquebrantable de los votantes negros de las primarias demócratas.A pesar de que a lo largo de los años ha adoptado posiciones que impulsaron a los demócratas —y luego al país— a adoptar actitudes más liberales en temas sociales, Biden se ha mantenido algo distante de los elementos de su partido que podrían plantearle problemas políticos. En junio, la Casa Blanca declaró que le había prohibido la entrada a una activista transgénero que había mostrado su pecho desnudo en su evento del Mes del Orgullo.Y aunque la edad de Biden se ha convertido en una de sus principales debilidades políticas, tanto sus aliados como sus adversarios dicen que también lo protege de los ataques culturales de los republicanos.Biden celebró el Mes del Orgullo en el jardín sur de la Casa Blanca el mes pasado.Pete Marovich para The New York Times“Todo el mundo quiere hablar de la edad que tiene Joe Biden, pero la verdad es que es su edad y su experiencia lo que le permite ser quien es y le permite decir las cosas y ayudar a las personas de una manera que nadie más puede”, afirmó Henry R. Muñoz III, exdirector de finanzas del Comité Nacional Demócrata. En 2017, en la boda de Muñoz, que es gay, Biden fue el oficiante de la ceremonia.Gran parte de la lealtad hacia Biden por parte de los demócratas de la comunidad LGBTQ proviene de su respaldo en 2012 a los matrimonios entre personas del mismo sexo, cuando Obama todavía se oponía oficialmente a eso. La posición de Biden se consideró políticamente arriesgada en ese momento, antes de que la Corte Suprema reconociera en 2015 el derecho de las parejas del mismo sexo a casarse, pero se ha convertido en algo de lo que se jactó durante su campaña de 2020.Biden también ha estado a la vanguardia en el reconocimiento de los derechos de las personas transgénero. En su primera semana en el cargo puso fin a la medida de la era de Donald Trump de prohibir la presencia de soldados transgénero en el Ejército. En diciembre, promulgó protecciones federales para los matrimonios entre personas del mismo sexo.Al mismo tiempo, Biden no ha adoptado la terminología de los activistas progresistas ni se ha dejado involucrar en debates públicos que podrían dejarlo fuera de la corriente política tradicional. El jueves, después del importante fallo de la Corte Suprema que puso fin a la acción afirmativa en las admisiones universitarias, una periodista le preguntó: “¿Esta es una corte rebelde?”Tras una breve pausa para pensar, Biden respondió: “Esta no es una corte normal”.Biden tampoco recuerda las palabras que la mayoría de los políticos estadounidenses utilizan para describir a la comunidad LGBTQ. En el evento de recaudación de fondos cerca de San Francisco el mes pasado, Biden lamentó la decisión de la Corte Suprema que el año pasado puso fin al derecho nacional al aborto y sugirió que ahora el objetivo de la corte serían los derechos de la comunidad gay.Manifestantes pro-LGBTQ protestaban ante una reunión del grupo conservador Moms for Liberty el viernes en Filadelfia.Haiyun Jiang para The New York TimesParafraseando a dos de los jueces conservadores, Biden afirmó: “No hay ningún derecho constitucional en las leyes para H, B… disculpen, para los gays, lesbianas, ya saben, para todo, todo el grupo. No hay protección constitucional”.Durante una parada en la Feria Estatal de Iowa durante su campaña de 2020, un agitador conservador que seguía a los candidatos presidenciales demócratas le preguntó a Biden: “¿Cuántos géneros existen?”.Biden respondió: “Hay al menos tres. No intentes jugar conmigo, chico”.Luego, tal vez sin darse cuenta de que su inquisidor era un activista de derecha, Biden agregó: “Por cierto, el primero en declararse a favor del matrimonio fui yo”.Sarah McBride, una senadora del estado de Delaware que recientemente comenzó una campaña para convertirse en el primer miembro transgénero del Congreso, afirmó que el lenguaje de Biden le había permitido solidificar a los demócratas en una agenda social progresista y “llegar a comunidades y grupos demográficos que aún no están completamente en la coalición”.“No se deja atrapar por una retórica que no sea comprensible para un votante intermedio”, afirmó McBride.McBride también señaló que la edad de Biden es útil para defender los argumentos de los demócratas sobre temas sociales sin alienar a los votantes escépticos.“Su experiencia le permite decir cosas que creo que se escucharían como más radicales si las dijera un político más joven”, afirmó McBride.Como la mayoría de los estadounidenses han aceptado el matrimonio entre personas del mismo sexo, los conservadores sociales han hecho de la oposición a los derechos de las personas transgénero un pilar de su política. Además, los republicanos que se postulan para remplazar a Biden tienden a centrarse en animar a los votantes de las primarias republicanas en vez de intentar convertir al presidente en un villano.“Es difícil retratar a un hombre blanco de 80 años como un férreo guerrero concienciado”, dijo Whit Ayres, encuestador de los candidatos republicanos desde hace mucho tiempo.El gobernador de Florida, Ron DeSantis, es quizás el principal proveedor del mensaje antiprogresista de los republicanos, lanzando improperios tanto en internet como en discursos. El último viernes de julio, su campaña incluso tachó a Trump de ser demasiado liberal en temas LGBTQ en un video controversial publicado en Twitter.En un mitin celebrado en junio en Tulsa, Oklahoma, DeSantis describió cómo se le acercaban veteranos militares que no querían que sus hijos y nietos se alistaran en las fuerzas armadas debido a los cambios políticos liberales instituidos por los demócratas, aunque el gobernador culpó a Obama tanto como a Biden.“Un ejército progre no será un ejército fuerte”, dijo DeSantis. “Hay que eliminar la politización. Y, en el primer día, arrancaremos todas las políticas de Obama-Biden para volver progre a las fuerzas armadas”.Biden nunca se ha presentado como un guerrero cultural de izquierda. Católico, hace mucho tiempo ha sido cauteloso con lanzarse de cabeza a las disputas por el derecho al aborto. Incluso cuando su campaña y su partido se preparan para hacer de su apuesta a la reelección un referendo sobre los esfuerzos republicanos para restringir aún más el aborto, Biden proclamó ante una multitud de donantes en los suburbios de Washington que él mismo no estaba muy ansioso por hacerlo.“¿Saben?, soy católico practicante”, dijo Biden la semana pasada. “No soy muy partidario del aborto. Pero ¿saben qué? Roe contra Wade estaba en lo correcto”.Durante mucho tiempo esa postura ha causado cierta consternación entre los demócratas. Hubo que esperar hasta junio de 2019, semanas después de comenzar su campaña de 2020 y bajo la inmensa presión de los aliados de su partido, para que Biden renunciara a su apoyo de larga data a la prohibición de la financiación federal de los abortos.Renee Bracey Sherman, fundadora de We Testify, un grupo que comparte historias de mujeres que han abortado, dijo que Biden tendría que adoptar una posición más enérgica a favor del derecho al aborto para animar a los votantes liberales en 2024. Sugirió que, de la misma manera que Biden recibe a equipos deportivos de campeonato en la Casa Blanca, debería invitar a mujeres que han abortado para vayan y cuenten sus historias.“Las elecciones de mitad de mandato muestran que los estadounidenses están con el aborto”, dijo Bracey Sherman. “El aborto tiene un índice de aprobación más alto que él. Debería subirse a la ola del aborto”.Kristi Eaton More

La democracia de Guatemala está bajo ataque. En los últimos cuatro años, un grupo de élites poderosas vinculadas con el crimen organizado, conocido como el “pacto de corruptos”, ha ido desmantelando las estructuras democráticas de Guatemala mediante la cooptación de las instituciones judiciales y el arresto y exilio de fiscales, jueces, periodistas y activistas en favor de la democracia. Ahora, como siguiente paso para consolidar su poder, están tratando de manipular las votaciones nacionales, que están en proceso.De cara a las elecciones de 2023, el presidente Alejandro Giammattei nombró en las cortes y en el Tribunal Supremo Electoral funcionarios fieles a él. Luego, el régimen gobernante y sus aliados usaron estas entidades para distorsionar la Constitución y corromper los procesos electorales con la finalidad de inclinar la balanza política a su favor. El poder judicial hizo lo propio: anuló una prohibición constitucional para permitir que la hija de un exdictador aspirara a la presidencia, permitió que se postularan como candidatos algunos aliados del régimen que han sido acusados y condenados por delitos y descalificó a sus rivales con base en cargos fabricados.Es por eso que ni siquiera los observadores más experimentados de la política guatemalteca podrían haber predicho que Bernardo Arévalo —un reformista moderado que se postuló con una plataforma anticorrupción y que tenía tan solo el 3 por ciento en las encuestas antes de la votación— sería uno de los dos candidatos con más votos en la primera vuelta de las elecciones presidenciales, celebrada el 25 de junio. Con el 12 por ciento de los votos, obtuvo un lugar en la segunda vuelta electoral del próximo mes. Su rival, Sandra Torres, del partido Unidad Nacional de la Esperanza, quien consiguió casi el 16 por ciento de los votos, fue primera dama, se ha postulado a la presidencia en tres ocasiones y está alineada con el “pacto de corruptos”. En 2019, se le acusó de financiamiento ilegal de campaña, y a su partido se le ha vinculado con el crimen organizado.El 1 de julio, la Corte de Constitucionalidad de Guatemala ordenó una nueva revisión de las actas donde se certificaron las votaciones en la primera vuelta presidencial luego de que el partido de Torres y sus aliados impugnaron los resultados, incluso cuando otros candidatos ya los aceptaron y las misiones internacionales y nacionales de observación electoral declararon que el proceso fue justo y limpio. Muchos temen que este fallo pueda sentar las bases para más impugnaciones falsas que podrían llegar a anular los resultados, demorar la segunda vuelta o excluir a Arévalo de la contienda. Las denuncias de fraude hacen recordar las que circulaban en Estados Unidos tras la victoria del presidente Joe Biden en 2020, aunque, con todo el aparato judicial de su lado, los negacionistas de las elecciones en Guatemala tienen más probabilidades de salirse con la suya.La situación está generando incertidumbre política, pero los guatemaltecos han demostrado que no están dispuestos a permitir que su democracia muera así de fácil. Los autócratas del país han desplegado toda la fuerza del Estado para robarse las elecciones, pero no son los únicos que se están movilizando. Los ciudadanos están alzando la voz para defender su derecho al voto. Si triunfan, habrán demostrado que es posible resistirse al ascenso del autoritarismo. Este podría ser un momento crítico para los guatemaltecos, uno que resuene en otras partes del mundo donde la democracia está bajo amenaza.Arévalo, exdiplomático, sociólogo y actual diputado en el Congreso de la República, surgió en un paisaje abarrotado de candidatos presidenciales. Venció a su contrincante más cercano, el candidato del partido Vamos de Giammattei, por más de 200.000 votos. Arévalo es miembro del partido de centro Movimiento Semilla, cuyos integrantes tienden a ser jóvenes y está conformado en su mayoría por estudiantes universitarios, profesores, ingenieros y propietarios de pequeñas empresas.Bernardo Arévalo de Movimiento Semilla celebrando los resultados electorales con simpatizantes en Ciudad de Guatemala el 26 de junio.Moises Castillo/Associated PressSandra Torres del partido Unidad Nacional de la Esperanza en Ciudad de Guatemala el 25 de junio.Luis Acosta/Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesPese a ser relativamente desconocido, es el hijo del estimado expresidente Juan José Arévalo, quien en a mediados de la década de 1940 inició un periodo de gobierno reformista en Guatemala conocido como la primavera democrática. En 1954, un golpe de Estado respaldado por la CIA puso un fin abrupto a ese proyecto y dio paso a cuatro décadas de guerra y dictadura represiva.Dado el legado político de su padre, la oleada de popularidad de Arévalo y Semilla en este momento, si bien causa sorpresa, responde a una lógica colectiva. El partido se formó como respuesta a la serie de escándalos de corrupción que convulsionó a Guatemala en 2015. Como movimiento, encauzó el descontento popular para formar un consenso amplio entre quienes se sentían decepcionados de los políticos depredadores y los que estaban desesperados por un futuro político distinto. Tras convertirse en un partido político en 2018, Semilla se ha mantenido fiel a su misión de combatir la impunidad y fortalecer la democracia.En la primera vuelta, demostró ser una alternativa conveniente para los electores frustrados. Aunque el partido en el poder trató de eclipsar a los candidatos ajenos a la clase política dominante y preservar el statu quo, sus maniobras antidemocráticas fueron contraproducentes. Muchos esperaban que las tasas de abstención fueran más altas de lo normal, pero al final el 60 por ciento de los guatemaltecos acudió a las urnas. Casi una cuarta parte de quienes se presentaron votaron en blanco o anularon su boleta para manifestar su enojo ante lo que perciben como un sistema amañado. Ellos, junto con quienes decidieron votar por el último candidato reformista que quedaba, impulsaron a Arévalo a la segunda vuelta.El éxito de Semilla y el contraataque que suscitó incitaron un movimiento ciudadano que está trabajando para asegurarse de que la voluntad del pueblo sea escuchada. Estos ciudadanos han iniciado una campaña en redes sociales, donde publican los registros de las mesas electorales escritos a mano para rebatir las denuncias de fraude. Hay voluntarios supervisando las auditorías del conteo de votos que ordenó la corte. Las organizaciones indígenas prometieron realizar manifestaciones pacíficas en todo el país si las autoridades intentan manipular las elecciones. Hasta miembros de una comunidad empresarial históricamente conservadora declararon su apoyo al movimiento prodemocrático, con un llamado a respetar los resultados electorales y a garantizar que el proceso de la segunda vuelta electoral, programada para el 20 de agosto, transcurra según lo planeado.Ciudadanos protestaron frente al Tribunal Supremo Electoral contra la suspensión de los resultados de las elecciones, en Ciudad de Guatemala este lunes.Esteban Biba/EPA vía ShutterstockLa comunidad internacional también respalda esta iniciativa civil. La Unión Europea, la Organización de los Estados Americanos e incluso Estados Unidos, que se ha mostrado reacio a enfrentarse públicamente con el gobierno de Giammattei, afirmaron la legitimidad de los resultados y denunciaron la interferencia electoral. Otras personas que respaldan la democracia en América Central también están apoyando el movimiento ciudadano emergente en Guatemala, el cual podría servir de modelo para las iniciativas de resistencia ante sus propios dirigentes cada vez más autocráticos.Guatemala encarará obstáculos políticos profundos en las próximas semanas. Aunque los resultados electorales se declaren válidos, Arévalo tendrá que consolidar una alianza amplia antes de la segunda vuelta que pueda unificarse en torno a una apuesta política común, algo que no será nada sencillo en un país que desde hace mucho vive con divisiones étnicas, socioeconómicas e ideológicas.Pero el país ya ha superado obstáculos como estos. Las protestas contra la corrupción de 2015 convocaron a un movimiento popular diverso que derrocó a un presidente y a una vicepresidenta en funciones. Si bien los ocho años transcurridos desde entonces han traído retrocesos brutales hacia la autocracia, la paciencia y perseverancia de los líderes de oposición prepararon el camino para este nuevo impulso democrático.Aun si el calendario electoral continúa según lo planeado y se le permite contender a Arévalo, la campaña de desinformación que pretende vilipendiarlo y sembrar miedo solo se va a intensificar. Además, si logra ganar en la segunda vuelta, su bancada minoritaria en el Congreso y el arraigado poder institucional de la élite corrupta dificultarán sus intentos de gobernar con eficacia.Pero ya habrá tiempo para preocuparnos por las complicadas labores de la gobernanza. Por ahora, los riesgos políticos son más grandes que nunca. Si los negacionistas de las elecciones prevalecen, Guatemala habrá perdido la batalla por la democracia. Pero si sus defensores tienen éxito, esto supondrá un duro golpe para detener la regresión en un país donde, no hace mucho, el ímpetu autócrata parecía irreversible.Anita Isaacs es profesora de ciencias políticas en Haverford College. Rachel A. Schwartz es profesora de estudios internacionales y regionales en la Universidad de Oklahoma, además de autora del libro Undermining the State From Within: The Institutional Legacies of Civil War in Central America. Álvaro Montenegro es un periodista guatemalteco. More

Gov. Ron DeSantis’s wife, Casey DeSantis, held her first solo campaign event in Iowa, connecting with fellow moms and casting her husband as a champion of the “parents’ rights” movement. She was there to woo the conservative moms of Iowa. So Casey DeSantis, the wife of Gov. Ron DeSantis of Florida, wasted no time in talking about her three young children — and how badly she wanted to leave them home.“It’s funny, somebody outside by the snowball machine was asking, ‘Did you bring your kids with you?’” she said, sitting on a small stage on Thursday in suburban Des Moines for her first solo appearance in her husband’s presidential campaign. Her answer was unequivocal: “No.”The last time she had the brilliant idea of doing a campaign event with one of her small children, she told the crowd, was at an event for her husband’s re-election campaign in Florida. For most of her remarks, Madison, then 5, squirmed by her side. In the final moments, Madison tugged on her sleeve and whispered that she had to go to the bathroom, Ms. DeSantis recalled.“What you’re having, moms, is one of those out-of-body experiences. Do I need to get up? Do I need to walk her?” she said, as the audience roared. “Like, what is happening?”Widely considered to be her husband’s most important adviser, Ms. DeSantis is the “not-so-secret weapon,” the “second in command” and the “primary sounding board” of his political operation. Now, in the early weeks of his presidential campaign, she’s added yet another position to her portfolio: humanizer-in-chief.Deploying a spouse to try to soften a prickly political image is a tried-and-true tactic of presidential politics. In 2007, Michelle Obama charmed Democratic primary voters with an everywoman pitch devised to ground her husband’s unusual life story. Four years later, Ann Romney toured Iowa and New Hampshire, offering “the other side of Mitt” — a caring, empathic family man who did not fit the caricature of the heartless corporate raider drawn by his rivals. And in the final days of the 2016 campaign, Melania Trump made a rare campaign appearance in the Philadelphia suburbs to counter her husband’s coarse image with female voters.But rarely does this strategy appear quite so early in the primary campaign, a reflection both of Mr. DeSantis’s struggles to connect with voters and the central role his wife has long played in his political career.During her husband’s first congressional race, Ms. DeSantis, then a local news reporter, crisscrossed neighborhoods in their northeastern Florida district on an electric scooter, knocking on doors and making his case. Years later, when he ran for governor, she narrated his most attention-grabbing campaign ad, a 2018 spot in which he encouraged their then-toddler to “build the wall” with large cardboard blocks. Her role expanded along with his: After he won, she secured a prime office in the governor’s Capitol suite, participated in personnel interviews as he hired staff for his new administration and shared the podium at hurricane briefings — some of the most high-profile gubernatorial appearances in storm-prone Florida.In recent weeks, she has joined her husband in embracing the quirky traditions of the early-state primary circuit, praising Iowa’s gas-station pizza and making headlines for sporting a black leather jacket emblazoned with an unofficial campaign slogan “Where Woke Goes to Die” at an annual motorcycle-themed Republican fund-raiser in Des Moines.Her high-profile role has created a war of conflicting spin, as supporters and detractors offer their assessment of the couple’s professional partnership. She’s his greatest asset. Or, depending on who’s opining, maybe his greatest liability. She’s the antidote to his much-documented struggles to connect. Or a virus infecting his insular campaign, encouraging her husband’s distrust of those outside his tight-knit political orbit.Yet for Mr. DeSantis, the hope is simply that his wife can offer a way to secure the holy grail of presidential campaigns: relatability.That message wasn’t subtle on Thursday in Johnston, Iowa, where Ms. DeSantis appeared alongside the state’s Republican governor, Kim Reynolds, for a question-and-answer session. “How in the world do you do it?” gushed the governor, herself a mother of three daughters and a grandmother to 11 grandchildren.“It’s a little bit of organized chaos. I’m not going to lie,” said Ms. DeSantis, before launching into a series of stories about her three young children — Madison, Mason and Mamie — and their adventures in the governor’s mansion.Then, it was down to business. Ms. DeSantis had come to officially roll out “Mamas for DeSantis,” a national version of the statewide group she started during her husband’s re-election bid in 2022. In her remarks, Ms. DeSantis attempted to position him as an avatar for the conservative anger at school administrators and school boards that exploded during the pandemic.Much of her remarks were focused on a loose social agenda often described as “parents’ rights,” a hodgepodge of a movement that includes efforts to limit how race and L.G.B.T.Q. issues are taught, attacks on transgender rights, support for publicly funded private school vouchers and opposition to vaccine mandates.“I care about protecting the innocence of my children and your children,” she told the audience on Thursday. “As long as I have breath in my body I will go out and I will fight for Ron DeSantis, not because he’s my husband — that is a part of it — but because I believe in him with every ounce of my being.”It was a message that resonated with some in the audience, which included many who were affiliated with Moms for Liberty, a group that’s emerged as a conservative powerhouse on social issues. Mr. DeSantis, said Elicha Brancheau, a member of Moms for Liberty, has been a strong champion for parents’ rights, and she said she was impressed by his wife’s commitment to the issue.“I like her a lot. She’s so smart, well-spoken,” said Ms. Brancheau, who met Ms. DeSantis before the event. “I love the dynamic of their family.”Not everyone was as convinced.Malina Cottington, a mother of five who started home-schooling her children after the pandemic, said she was seeking a candidate who would take the strongest position on preserving what she described as parental rights. She was impressed by Mr. DeSantis but liked the bolder plan of one of his Republican rivals, Vivek Ramaswamy, the multimillionaire entrepreneur and author who has pledged to abolish the Department of Education.“I think we need something that drastic,” said Ms. Cottington, 42, who lives in suburban Des Moines. “We just want to be able to make sure we can raise our kids the way we want to raise them.” More