Elections

Cuando solo habían transcurrido un poco más de seis semanas del inicio de su gestión, la primera ministra británica anunció su renuncia.LONDRES — El colapso político de Liz Truss concluyó con el anuncio de su renuncia el jueves 20 de octubre, poco más de seis semanas después de haberse convertido en la primera ministra del Reino Unido. Sus planes trastabillaron, su propio partido le dio la espalda y proliferaron los pronósticos de comentaristas de todos los ámbitos de que no podría sobrevivir más tiempo que una lechuga fresca. Y así fue.Truss reiteró su determinación de vadear la tormenta política a pesar del clamor generalizado que pedía su renuncia. Por desgracia, la presión aumentaba minuto a minuto… hasta que, en cierto momento, se percató de que no había salida.Si necesitas ponerte al día, a continuación te presentamos una síntesis de los hechos básicos.¿Quién es Liz Truss y cómo se convirtió en primera ministra?El 6 de septiembre, Truss fue designada para remplazar a Boris Johnson, quien fue elegido por los votantes en 2019, pero sufrió una espectacular caída tras una serie de escándalos que no le dejaron más remedio que abandonar el cargo en julio.Los ciudadanos no eligieron a Truss, sino que ascendió al poder gracias a su triunfo en una contienda interna del Partido Conservador para convertirse en su dirigente. Para elegir al sustituto de Johnson, los miembros del partido en el Parlamento seleccionaron, de entre un grupo de candidatos, solo a dos. Estos dos candidatos se sometieron a una votación en la que participaron alrededor de 160.000 miembros del partido que pagan su afiliación (se trata de un grupo nada representativo de una nación de 67 millones de residentes, pues en su mayoría son varones de edad avanzada, blancos y de clase media).Truss, de 47 años, fungió como secretaria de Relaciones Exteriores durante el gobierno de Johnson. Favorecía medidas políticas agresivas, era partidaria del libre mercado y, tras cambiar de opinión, apoyó el brexit, con lo que se ganó al bando de derecha del partido a pesar de su pasado más moderado (antes de integrarse al Partido Conservador, perteneció al Partido Liberal Demócratas, un movimiento de centro, durante sus años de estudiante en la Universidad de Oxford).¿Cómo empezó su declive?Nunca fue una tarea fácil. Cuando Truss asumió el cargo, la nación enfrentaba un panorama económico desastroso, especialmente porque se esperaba que los costos de la energía se elevaran un 80 por ciento en octubre y que volvieran a subir en enero. Esta situación amenazaba con condenar a millones de británicos, que ya sufrían los efectos de la inflación y otros problemas, a condiciones de pobreza extrema que les imposibilitaran calentar su hogar o usar electricidad.Así que, cuando los planes económicos que tanto promovió empeoraron esos problemas, el descontento masivo no se hizo esperar.Sus planes de recortes fiscales, desregulación y uso de préstamos causaron tal alarma entre los inversionistas de todo el mundo, que el valor de la libra británica cayó a niveles récord con respecto al dólar. El Banco de Inglaterra tomó medidas para apuntalar los bonos soberanos, en una intervención extraordinaria con la intención de calmar a los mercados.Esta respuesta demostró que sus ambiciones de libre mercado eran insostenibles. En una decisión humillante, esta semana se vio obligada a revertir casi todos los recortes fiscales, incluido uno aplicable al grupo de mayores ingresos que fue objeto de muchas críticas. Despidió a Kwasi Kwarteng, el ministro de Hacienda encargado de preparar el plan y su aliado cercano, y adoptó políticas económicas promovidas por el Partido Laborista, el partido de oposición.“No es posible dar un giro total como el que ella dio y esperar que tu credibilidad política se mantenga”, dijo Jon Tonge, profesor de política en la Universidad de Liverpool.¿Cómo puso en peligro su cargo?Sus concesiones no lograron apaciguar la rebelión que se propagaba dentro de su propio partido que, como le sucedió a Johnson, tenía el poder para derrocarla.Los conservadores (también conocidos como tories), que ya habían sufrido una marcada caída en sus índices de popularidad en la opinión pública tras los escándalos de Johnson, vieron sus estadísticas hundirse a profundidades impresionantes con los tropiezos de Truss. Una encuesta dada a conocer por Redfield & Wilton Strategies esta semana reveló el porcentaje de aprobación más bajo registrado en la historia para un primer ministro: el 70 por ciento de la población ve con malos ojos a Truss y ese porcentaje incluye al 67 por ciento de los conservadores.Si se celebraran elecciones generales el día de hoy, el 56 por ciento de los votos favorecerían al Partido Laborista, mientras que el 20 por ciento de los electores votarían por el Partido Conservador, según la encuesta.El descontento del Partido Conservador con Truss llegó a su clímax y se vio envuelta en un ambiente palpable de crisis. El miércoles 19 de octubre, explotó en una lucha frenética por su supervivencia. En pleno bombardeo de preguntas de los miembros del Parlamento, declaró: “Siempre lucho, no me doy por vencida”.Entonces, sobrevino una oleada de caos. Suella Braverman, la ministra británica del Interior, que se vio obligada a renunciar a causa del uso indebido de su correo electrónico, aprovechó su carta de renuncia para criticar a Truss, expresando “inquietud por la dirección que ha tomado este gobierno”. Además, una votación sobre el tema de la fracturación hidráulica en el Parlamento se transformó, según la información que circula, en una escena de hostigamiento, gritos, maltrato físico y lágrimas. Más conservadores del Parlamento expresaron abiertamente su deseo de que Truss renunciara al cargo. Y empezaron a correr rumores sobre renuncias al más alto nivel. En ese contexto, resultaba difícil tener información actualizada.“En resumen, es un caos total, absoluto y abyecto”, dijo un presentador de noticias en iTV. Charles Walker, un legislador conservador, no se contuvo en una entrevista en la BBC.El jueves, Truss anunció que había entregado su renuncia al rey y que el plan era elegir una nueva dirigencia en el plazo de una semana.¿Y ahora qué?Los conservadores planean elegir al próximo primer ministro la próxima semana. (Aquí ofrecemos un listado de los candidatos favoritos).El partido ha optado por un proceso simplificado que fue diseñado para evitar una campaña larga. Los candidatos deben recibir 100 nominaciones entre 357 legisladores conservadores antes de las 2:00 p.m. del 24 de octubre. Si solo un candidato alcanza el umbral, esa persona se convertirá en el primer ministro.Si dos candidatos logran las 100 nominaciones, los legisladores votarán para indicar cuál tiene más apoyo. Si el finalista del segundo lugar no se retira, los aproximadamente 160.000 miembros del partido votarán en una encuesta en línea que finaliza el viernes.Si tres candidatos cruzan el umbral, la votación de los legisladores que se celebrará el 24 de octubre eliminará a un candidato, y los dos primeros clasificados avanzarán a la votación en línea.El candidato ganador será el segundo líder consecutivo del Reino Unido que no ha sido escogido en elecciones generales. Truss seguirá siendo primera ministra hasta que su sucesor sea elegido.Las próximas elecciones generales, en las que podrán participar todos los ciudadanos y el Partido Laborista tendrá una nueva oportunidad para tomar el control, están programadas para enero de 2025, a más tardar. El dirigente conservador podría convocar a elecciones antes, pero no sería nada lógico hacerlo pronto, pues las encuestas indican que el partido sufriría una derrota arrasadora frente al Partido Laborista.Tonge subrayó que una ventaja que tienen los conservadores es el tiempo. En teoría, el partido podría recuperar su credibilidad si la economía se recupera en los siguientes años, señaló.“No creo que el cambio de liderazgo garantice que los conservadores se salven”, aseveró. “Pero es posible que sea una buena medida para limitar los daños”.Daniel Victor es un reportero de temas generales radicado en Londres; ha reportado desde Hong Kong y Nueva York. Se unió al Times en 2012. @bydanielvictor More

After a video emerged on Friday of the Trump-backed candidate for Maryland governor, Dan Cox, accepting a gift from the Proud Boys, the Republican sought to distance himself from the extremist group connected to the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol.The encounter took place on July 19 in Frederick County, Md., as Mr. Cox, a state legislator, was basking in the afterglow of his resounding victory in the Republican primary for governor, according to the video, published by The Washington Post.A young man in a black polo shirt with the extremist group’s insignia on it approached Mr. Cox and shook his hand, the video showed. In his other hand, he was bearing a token of appreciation for Mr. Cox, who has made a litany of false claims about the 2020 election.“Here, this is a present from the Maryland Proud Boys to you,” the man said, drawing a quizzical look from Mr. Cox. “It’s a comb. Proud Boys comb.”In the video, which The Post reported had been publicly accessible on Mr. Cox’s Vimeo account but vanished later on Friday after the newspaper inquired about it, Mr. Cox asked the man his name and said that it was nice to meet him. The man gave only his first name: Henry.In a statement on Friday, Mr. Cox — whose far-right credentials were highlighted by Democrats in the primary, hoping they would become a liability in the blue state’s general election — played down the exchange.“In the noise of the victory celebration, it was hard to hear what was being said,” Mr. Cox said. “I was a surprised by him handing me something, and frankly, I did not even keep the comb. I had never seen him before, and I have not seen him since. I have no affiliation with anyone involved in violence on January 6th, period.”Mr. Cox’s campaign did not answer follow-up questions about the video’s disappearance.In a poll conducted in late September by The Post and the University of Maryland, Mr. Cox trailed his Democratic opponent, Wes Moore, by 32 percentage points in the open-seat race for Maryland’s governorship.As Donald J. Trump’s supporters stormed the Capitol on Jan. 6, Mr. Cox wrote on Twitter that Vice President Mike Pence was a “traitor” because of his refusal to overturn the election of Joseph R. Biden Jr. as president. In a letter to the Maryland General Assembly’s legislative ethics committee, Mr. Cox later expressed his regrets about what he described as a “poor choice of word.”On the day of the Jan. 6 attack, Mr. Cox chartered three buses from his home county to the pro-Trump rally in Washington, but he has said that he did not march to the Capitol.Last year, Mr. Cox said that Mr. Trump was “the only president that I recognize right now” and argued that Mr. Biden had been “installed” in the White House. He has also made false claims about voter fraud in Frederick County.Dozens of members of the Proud Boys, a far-right group, have been indicted in connection with the assault on the Capitol. Several of the group’s leaders are facing charges of seditious conspiracy. Their role in the siege has received major attention from the congressional committee investigating the attack. More

In a sign that New Hampshire is at risk of falling off the map of Senate battleground states, the main super PAC aligned with Senate Republicans said on Friday that it was canceling $5.6 million in television ads that it had reserved in the state for the final two weeks of the race.Republicans in New Hampshire, which was once seen as one of the party’s top chances to pick up a seat in 2022, nominated Don Bolduc, a Trump-style retired Army general, to run against Senator Maggie Hassan, a Democrat. Mr. Bolduc has sparred with the state’s popular governor, Chris Sununu, a Republican who tagged Mr. Bolduc in turn as a “conspiracy-theory extremist.”National Republicans had spent money late in the race to prevent Mr. Bolduc’s nomination, but he won the primary in September anyway. Mr. Bolduc has promoted hard-right views, suggesting he would consider abolishing the F.B.I. and asserting that the 2020 election was stolen from former President Donald J. Trump — before reversing himself immediately after the primary, and then seeming to backtrack from that reversal. Mr. Bolduc has also been adamant that if he wins, he will not support Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky as the party leader. “As the cycle comes to a close, we are shifting resources to where they can be most effective to achieve our ultimate goal: winning the majority,” said Steven Law, the president of the super PAC, the Senate Leadership Fund, which is aligned with Mr. McConnell.The State of the 2022 Midterm ElectionsBoth parties are making their final pitches ahead of the Nov. 8 election.Where the Election Stands: As Republicans appear to be gaining an edge with swing voters in the final weeks of the contest for control of Congress, here’s a look at the state of the races for the House and Senate.Biden’s Low Profile: President Biden’s decision not to attend big campaign rallies reflects a low approval rating that makes him unwelcome in some congressional districts and states.What Young Voters Think: Twelve Americans under 30, all living in swing states, told The Times about their political priorities, ranging from the highly personal to the universal.In Minnesota: The race for attorney general in the light-blue state offers a pure test of which issue is likely to be more politically decisive: abortion rights or crime.A spokeswoman for Mr. Bolduc said he would continue to meet voters “one by one” in town halls, in defiance of the national group’s vote of no confidence.“General Bolduc has defied the naysayers from the beginning and that’s the same approach he is going to take through the finish line to victory,” the spokeswoman, Kate Constantini, said in a statement.Asked if the Bolduc campaign considered the withdrawal of support to be payback for Mr. Bolduc’s rejection of Mr. McConnell as party leader, Rick Wiley, a senior adviser to Mr. Bolduc, said, “You would have to ask them.”The move by the Senate Leadership Fund comes two weeks after the National Republican Senatorial Committee canceled its television reservations in the state.At the time, Chris Hartline, the communications director for the N.R.S.C., said, “We’re glad to see Republican outside forces showing up in a big way in New Hampshire, with millions in spending pledged to take down Maggie Hassan in the final stretch.”Now those outside forces are retreating, as well.Mr. Hartline said on Friday that “our most recent polling has the race inside the margin of error.”“Don Bolduc is working his tail off and has turned it into a tossup,” he said. “There’s no reason to think he can’t win this race.”The decision puzzled some Republicans. Tom Rath, a longtime Republican activist and leader in New Hampshire, wrote on Twitter of the ad cancellation, “Seems odd given recent polling showing race within the margin.”Matt Schlapp, the chair of the American Conservative Union, called the move “odd” as well, saying the race was “almost tied.”Of Mr. Bolduc, Mr. Schlapp wrote on Twitter while misspelling his name: “If he does pull it out without Senate help he will become their worst nightmare. Keep your eyes on NH.”An internal poll released on Thursday by the Bolduc campaign showed Ms. Hassan leading Mr. Bolduc by 49 percent to 47 percent among likely voters, within the margin of error.Ms. Hassan entered October with $4.8 million. Mr. Bolduc had less than $800,000. More

With voters distracted by other issues and election denial flourishing, the country has what academics call a legitimacy problem.One way to read the striking results of the New York Times/Siena College poll released this week is that democracy is not shaping up to be the driver of votes that many on the left hoped it would be.The obvious reason is that inflation is a far more immediate issue on the minds of most voters, who are watching their savings evaporate or struggling to pay their bills. That’s Abraham Maslow 101: Physiological needs of food and shelter will always take priority over abstractions.But another way to interpret the survey is as yet more confirmation that American democracy is indeed in trouble.In a Twitter Spaces conversation today with Ruth Igielnik, a staff editor for news surveys who worked on this week’s poll, and Nick Corasaniti, a national correspondent on the politics team, we unpacked why, even though 71 percent of voters agreed that democracy was at risk, only 7 percent said that democracy’s fragile state was the most important problem facing the country. You can listen to our discussion here.Ruth noted that voters’ responses to the question “What one or two words do you think summarize the current threat to democracy?” were all over the map.Some said “election deniers” or “Donald Trump,” while others said “Joe Biden,” “inflation and taxes” or “the one percent, a.k.a. Wall Street and hedge funds.” Another person said “our division” — that is, political polarization itself.Nick, who recently returned from a reporting trip in Michigan, added some texture from tagging along during voter canvassing in Detroit and its suburbs, as well as in Saginaw, a city of about 50,000 people in the center of the state. Biden carried Saginaw County by just a few hundred votes in 2020.“We encountered a ton of voters, and not a single one of them brought up any issues of democracy,” Nick said.He added that the organizers, as they prepared the canvassers for what they should expect to encounter, told them: “You’re going to hear about issues like, why are our wages so low when we’re a predominantly union town? Why are prescription drug prices so persistently high? Why are there potholes in the road? Why can’t I get a garbage can?”Lonna Atkeson, who studies political psychology at Florida State University, said voters were just thinking rationally. When it comes to protecting democracy, she noted, each side sees the other as the problem.The State of the 2022 Midterm ElectionsBoth parties are making their final pitches ahead of the Nov. 8 election.Where the Election Stands: As Republicans appear to be gaining an edge with swing voters in the final weeks of the contest for control of Congress, here’s a look at the state of the races for the House and Senate.Biden’s Low Profile: President Biden’s decision not to attend big campaign rallies reflects a low approval rating that makes him unwelcome in some congressional districts and states.What Young Voters Think: Twelve Americans under 30, all living in swing states, told The Times about their political priorities, ranging from the highly personal to the universal.In Minnesota: The race for attorney general in the light-blue state offers a pure test of which issue is likely to be more politically decisive: abortion rights or crime.“So there’s not really much to go on there other than to vote for your own party,” Atkeson said, “whereas the economy is a clear signal. It’s on your doorstep. You feel it every day. Maybe there’s something that can be done about that.”A legitimacy problemMost serious experts on democracy — academics who study governments around the world, and why they fall apart — would say that election deniers are the real danger.And the new Times/Siena poll shows that millions of them are out there, despite zero evidence that the 2020 presidential election was stolen. As Nick wrote in an article explaining the poll results, “Twenty-eight percent of all voters, including 41 percent of Republicans, said they had little to no faith in the accuracy of this year’s midterm elections.”There’s an academic term for that: a legitimacy problem.Seymour Martin Lipset, a sociologist and political scientist who did seminal work on what makes democracies successful, published an influential paper in 1959 called “Some Social Requisites of Democracy: Economic Development and Political Legitimacy.”At the time, he was trying to understand two main questions: why Europe veered toward extremist ideologies like fascism and communism after World War I, and whether the nascent democracies forged by fire and blood in World War II were sustainable.Lipset defined democracy this way: “a political system which supplies regular constitutional opportunities for changing the governing officials.”The United States still meets that pretty basic requirement. Despite Trump’s bellowing about a stolen election, and his efforts to whip up the mob that assaulted the Capitol, Biden duly assumed office in 2021 after a near-disastrous handover of power. The system held, albeit tenuously.But Lipset’s framework should alarm us today because, as the Times poll suggests, nearly half the country still doesn’t consider Biden the legitimate president.Many of Donald Trump’s supporters deny the legitimacy of the last presidential election.Adriana Zehbrauskas for The New York TimesPretend the U.S. is a foreign country; how would we explain what is happening? Two years on, the fever that powered an attempt to interrupt the peaceful transfer of power has not broken, and it’s still being stoked every day by the loser of the previous election.As Lipset wrote, “If a political system is not characterized by a value system allowing the peaceful ‘play’ of power — the adherence by the ‘outs’ to decisions made by ‘ins’ and the recognition by ‘ins’ of the rights of the ‘outs’ — there can be no stable democracy.”Lipset also defined a stable democracy as the absence “of a major political movement opposed to the democratic ‘rules of the game’” — which required, he thought, that “no totalitarian movement, either Fascist or Communist, received 20 percent of the vote.”The one silver lining in the poll? Only 17 percent of the voters who saw democracy as threatened said there was a need to go “outside the law” to fix the problem. And of those voters, just 11 percent said the answer would be to “take up arms/violence/civil war.”Then again, maybe that’s no silver lining at all: By my math, that would still be over a million people. Buckle up.What to read on democracyA South Florida man became the first of 20 defendants ensnared in Gov. Ron DeSantis’s voter fraud dragnet to have charges dropped, ABC News reports.The midterm legal battles have already begun: The Democratic National Committee has filed a court motion to try to stop Republicans in Pennsylvania who want to disqualify mail-in ballots without handwritten dates on them.Tens of thousands of transgender people could be disenfranchised in the November elections because of strict voter ID laws and other rules in their states, according to Rolling Stone.Nonwhite voters were 30 percent more likely to have their vote-by-mail application or ballot rejected compared with white voters in Texas, according to the Brennan Center for Justice, which analyzed data from the March primary.Election offices large and small across the country are contending with internal threats that could undermine the integrity of the midterms: election deniers holding positions of power in them, CNN reports.The head of a major federal union warned this week that demonization of the Internal Revenue Service by some Republicans could put the agency’s employees in danger.Doug Mastriano, the Republican nominee for governor in Pennsylvania, is stepping up his courtship of right-wing fringe figures, including adherents of the QAnon conspiracy theory, The Philadelphia Inquirer reports.viewfinderSupporters of Stacey Abrams at a campaign event in Athens, Ga.Gabriela Bhaskar for The New York TimesOn the trail in GeorgiaA couple of hundred people had gathered to wait for a glimpse of Stacey Abrams by the time her purple bus pulled up in College Square in Athens, Ga. Abrams’s supporters have often spoken to me about how inspiring it is for them to see her running for office when for so long Black women have organized politically behind the scenes.I crept to the center of the crowd for a photo of Abrams as she spoke. At one point, I turned around and captured this image of a group of racially diverse and multigenerational women. To me, it represented a key group of her supporters and their feelings about her candidacy and the future.Thank you for reading On Politics, and for being a subscriber to The New York Times. — BlakeRead past editions of the newsletter here.If you’re enjoying what you’re reading, please consider recommending it to others. They can sign up here. Browse all of our subscriber-only newsletters here.Have feedback? Ideas for coverage? We’d love to hear from you. Email us at [email protected]. More

A senior adviser to Doug Mastriano, the Republican nominee for governor in Pennsylvania, on Friday seemed to openly question the faith of Mr. Mastriano’s Democratic opponent, Josh Shapiro, who is Jewish, in a contest that has been shaped more by concerns over antisemitism than perhaps any other major race in the country.“Josh Shapiro is at best a secular Jew in the same way Joe Biden is a secular Catholic,” Jenna Ellis, a former lawyer for the Trump campaign who worked to overturn the 2020 election, wrote on Twitter, commenting on a headline that noted Mr. Shapiro’s faith. Ms. Ellis branded the two Democrats as “extremists,” pointing to gender surgery for minors and distorting their positions on abortion rights.“Doug Mastriano is for wholesome family values and freedom,” wrote Ms. Ellis, who is not Jewish.Mr. Shapiro, 49, the state’s attorney general, is an observant Jew whose faith is a central part of his public identity. He keeps kosher, prioritizes Sabbath dinner with his family and is a Jewish day school alum. “These attacks on Attorney General Shapiro and on all people of faith are another reminder of the stakes of this race,” said Manuel Bonder, a spokesman for the Shapiro campaign. “Our campaign is staying focused on bringing people together to defeat Mastriano’s dangerous extremism.”Mr. Mastriano, a far-right Republican who promotes Christian power and disdains the separation of church and state, has alarmed a broad swath of Pennsylvania’s Jewish community with his rhetoric and his associations.The State of the 2022 Midterm ElectionsBoth parties are making their final pitches ahead of the Nov. 8 election.Where the Election Stands: As Republicans appear to be gaining an edge with swing voters in the final weeks of the contest for control of Congress, here’s a look at the state of the races for the House and Senate.Biden’s Low Profile: President Biden’s decision not to attend big campaign rallies reflects a low approval rating that makes him unwelcome in some congressional districts and states.What Young Voters Think: Twelve Americans under 30, all living in swing states, told The Times about their political priorities, ranging from the highly personal to the universal.In Minnesota: The race for attorney general in the light-blue state offers a pure test of which issue is likely to be more politically decisive: abortion rights or crime.He has attacked Mr. Shapiro for attending and sending his children to a Jewish day school that Mr. Mastriano called a “privileged, exclusive, elite” school and said it evinced Mr. Shapiro’s “disdain for people like us,” remarks that seemed to be a dog whistle.His campaign also paid $5,000 to the far-right social media platform Gab, on which the man accused of perpetrating the October 2018 Pittsburgh synagogue shooting — believed to be the deadliest antisemitic attack in American history — had posted antisemitic screeds. In defending Mr. Mastriano and responding to backlash, the platform’s founder, Andrew Torba, deployed antisemitic language.Mr. Mastriano, after a bipartisan outcry, released a statement saying that he rejected “antisemitism in any form.” But a late September campaign finance report showed that Mr. Mastriano had accepted a $500 donation from Mr. Torba in July. Jonathan Greenblatt, the chief executive of the Anti-Defamation League, wrote on Twitter that “the Mastriano campaign that repeatedly has employed anti-Jewish stereotypes and engaged with antisemites has no grounds to comment” on Mr. Shapiro’s level of observance.The Mastriano campaign did not respond to questions about why it was important to question Mr. Shapiro’s faith or how he practices it, or what it means to be “at best” a secular Jew or Catholic. Efforts to seek comment from Ms. Ellis were not immediately successful, but on Twitter she rejected criticism of her remarks. Mr. Biden often referenced his religion on the campaign trail, and he is a regular churchgoer who once memorably defended the Democratic Party as one of faith.“The next Republican that tells me I’m not religious, I’m going to shove my rosary beads down their throat,” Mr. Biden said in 2005, according to The Cincinnati Enquirer.Mr. Biden supports abortion rights. But his views on the matter have evolved over his decades in public life and he has been open about his struggles to reconcile the teachings of his faith with the complexities of the abortion issue.Separately, the Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia released a statement in response to a “false and hurtful statement” from Mr. Mastriano, without mentioning him by name.Mr. Mastriano recently made false claims that the hospital “is grabbing homeless kids and kids in foster care, apparently, and experimenting on them with gender transitioning.”The hospital, responding to a question about Mr. Mastriano’s remarks, said in the statement that “providing the best and most compassionate care to all children, inclusive of their gender identity, is central to the mission and values of Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia.” It added: “We stand in complete support of our colleagues and the patients and families they serve. We admire their strength and resilience during this ongoing period of difficulty.” More

Las autoridades brasileñas han otorgado al jefe de elecciones un amplio poder para ordenar la retirada de contenidos digitales en un intento de combatir la creciente desinformación antes de las elecciones de este mes.RÍO DE JANEIRO —Las autoridades brasileñas, que se enfrentan a un torrente de desinformación en línea antes de las elecciones presidenciales del país, concedieron al jefe de elecciones de la nación el poder unilateral para ordenar a las empresas tecnológicas que retiren muchos mensajes y videos de la red, una de las medidas más agresivas adoptadas por cualquier país para combatir la información falsa.En virtud de las normas aprobadas el jueves, el jefe de las elecciones puede ordenar la remoción inmediata de los contenidos que considere que han violado las órdenes de retirada anteriores. Las redes sociales deben cumplir esas exigencias en un plazo de dos horas o se enfrentan a la posible suspensión de sus servicios en Brasil.La medida es la culminación de una estrategia cada vez más enérgica por parte de las autoridades electorales de Brasil para reprimir los ataques divisivos, engañosos y falsos que han inundado la carrera presidencial del país en los últimos días, incluidas las afirmaciones de que los candidatos son satanistas, caníbales y pedófilos.Pero al permitir que una sola persona decida lo que se puede decir en internet en el período previo a las elecciones, que se celebrarán el 30 de octubre, Brasil se ha convertido en un caso de prueba en un debate mundial cada vez más intenso sobre los límites de la lucha contra las “noticias falsas”.La decisión provocó indignación entre los partidarios del presidente de derecha Jair Bolsonaro, así como la preocupación de muchos expertos en derecho digital y derechos civiles, que dijeron que representaba una expansión de poder potencialmente peligrosa y autoritaria que podría ser abusada a fin de censurar puntos de vista legítimos e influir en la contienda presidencial.El presidente Jair Bolsonaro en un acto de campaña en São Paulo el jueves.Fernando Bizerra/EPA, vía ShutterstockEl jefe de las elecciones, Alexandre de Moraes, también es juez del Tribunal Supremo de Brasil, lo que lo ha colocado en el centro de otra lucha sobre la creciente autoridad del tribunal.Como juez de la corte, ha ordenado investigaciones sobre Bolsonaro y ha encarcelado a algunos de los partidarios del presidente, acusados de lo que Moraes dijo que eran ataques a las instituciones democráticas de la nación.Moraes ha sido quizás el contrapeso más eficaz a Bolsonaro, que durante años ha atacado a la prensa, los tribunales y los sistemas electorales del país. Pero en el proceso, el juez ha suscitado la preocupación de que sus esfuerzos por proteger la democracia del país la hayan erosionado.“Es un acto de malabarismo muy complicado”, dijo Philip Friedrich, analista de elecciones y tecnología en Freedom House, un grupo estadounidense que promueve la expansión de la democracia. “Se trata de proteger la integridad de las instituciones democráticas de Brasil y el derecho de la gente a la libertad de expresión, y al mismo tiempo mantener a la gente segura en línea”.Carlos Affonso Souza, profesor de derecho de la Universidad Estatal de Río de Janeiro, dijo que el fallo del jueves “podría ir demasiado lejos, dependiendo de cómo” Moraes ejerza su poder.Aun así, la medida fue aplaudida por muchos en Brasil, que la consideran como una herramienta necesaria para combatir una avalancha de denuncias falsas de los partidarios de Bolsonaro que no ha hecho más que ganar velocidad en los últimos días.Las nuevas reglas fueron aprobadas por unanimidad por los siete jueces federales que integran el tribunal electoral de Brasil. Cuando propuso las reglas en una sesión del tribunal el jueves, Moraes dijo que las denuncias por desinformación habían aumentado casi 17 veces en comparación con las elecciones pasadas.“Ha habido una proliferación no solamente de noticias falsas, sino de la agresividad de estas noticias, de este discurso de odio, que todos sabemos que no conduce a nada más que a una erosión de la democracia”, dijo. “Por eso precisamente necesitamos una vía más rápida”.Otra jueza, Cármen Lúcia, dijo durante la audiencia que estaba preocupada por las implicaciones de las medidas recientes del tribunal electoral para combatir la desinformación. “El regreso de la censura no puede permitirse bajo ningún argumento en Brasil”, dijo.En una entrevista con un pódcast el jueves, Bolsonaro dijo que las autoridades electorales estaban moviendo a Brasil hacia un “estado dictatorial” y que “después de las elecciones, dependiendo de quién gane, vamos a poner fin a esto”.El año pasado, Bolsonaro pidió al Senado de Brasil que llevara a juicio político y destituyera a Moraes, pero fue rechazado.Bolsonaro se enfrenta el 30 de octubre al expresidente de izquierda Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva en una votación que se considera la más importante de Brasil en décadas y una prueba clave para una de las mayores democracias del mundo.Según las nuevas normas de internet, los poderes ampliados del jefe de las elecciones están en vigor durante las campañas electorales. Los poderes caducarán después de la votación presidencial, pero volverán a entrar en vigor en campañas futuras.El expresidente Lula da Silva hacía campaña en Río de Janeiro el jueves.Ricardo Moraes/ReutersEl tribunal electoral ya ha prohibido las publicaciones que han calificado a Bolsonaro de pedófilo, una afirmación que se aceleró en los últimos días tras la aparición de un vídeo en el que el presidente dice que hubo “una atraccion mutua” entre él y dos adolescentes. El tribunal también ha ordenado retirar contenidos que digan que Da Silva es corrupto. Da Silva cumplió condena en prisión por cargos de corrupción, que posteriormente fueron anulados.Los partidarios de ambos bandos han difundido mentiras, pero el volumen de información engañosa de la derecha ha superado con creces al de la izquierda, dijo Tai Nalon, directora de Aos Fatos, una organización brasileña de verificación que ha seguido de cerca las afirmaciones falsas de la campaña.Los partidarios de Bolsonaro han difundido la mentira de que Da Silva planea cerrar las iglesias si es elegido, lo que llevó al expresidente a lanzar una carta pública insistiendo en que no lo haría. El viernes, muchos miembros de la derecha comenzaron a publicar imágenes en las que se afirmaba falsamente que estaban siendo censurados directamente por los funcionarios electorales.Bolsonaro también ha atacado las máquinas de votación electrónica de Brasil al afirmar que están plagadas de fraude, a pesar de la falta de pruebas, y sus partidarios han difundido teorías de la conspiración infundadas que afirman que la izquierda está planeando robar las elecciones.Da Silva aventajaba a Bolsonaro en cinco puntos porcentuales tras la primera vuelta, pero en los últimos días los sondeos sugieren que la diferencia se está reduciendo.La desinformación también empañó las elecciones presidenciales de 2018 que ganó Bolsonaro, lo que llevó a los funcionarios electorales a adoptar una postura más agresiva durante esta campaña.Esta semana, el tribunal electoral restringió a uno de los mayores medios de Brasil para que no describiera a Da Silva como corrupto, y bloqueó a un destacado canal de YouTube de derecha por publicar un documental sobre un intento de asesinato contra Bolsonaro en 2018. Bolsonaro y sus partidarios han acusado al tribunal de tratar de favorecer a Da Silva.Preparando las máquinas de votación electrónica en Brasilia el miércoles.Evaristo Sa/Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesA pesar de los esfuerzos del tribunal electoral por intervenir, han proliferado los contenidos falsos y engañosos, lo que ilustra la lucha a la que se enfrentan los funcionarios y las empresas tecnológicas para frenar la desinformación que se propaga más rápido de lo que pueden actuar y que se comparte cada vez más fuera de su alcance.Por ejemplo, gran parte de la desinformación en Brasil se comparte en WhatsApp, la aplicación más popular del país. Como WhatsApp encripta los mensajes, la empresa y los funcionarios no pueden ver los mensajes que los usuarios comparten entre sí, lo que complica su capacidad para combatir la información falsa.WhatsApp ha modificado su aplicación para frenar la propagación, por ejemplo, al poner límites al tamaño de los grupos y al número de veces que se puede reenviar un mensaje, pero la desinformación sigue siendo un problema, según los investigadores.Google y Meta, propietaria de WhatsApp, Facebook e Instagram, declinaron comentar. La campaña de Da Silva no respondió a las solicitudes de comentarios.Según las nuevas normas, si una empresa tecnológica se niega repetidamente a cumplir las órdenes de Moraes, este puede “suspender el acceso a los servicios” de la plataforma en Brasil por hasta 24 horas.A principios de este año, De Moraes dijo que planeaba bloquear Telegram, el servicio de mensajería con millones de usuarios en Brasil, después de que la empresa no siguiera sus órdenes de eliminar la cuenta de un destacado partidario de Bolsonaro acusado de difundir desinformación. (Moraes actuaba entonces en calidad de juez del Supremo Tribunal). Moraes revocó esa prohibición varios días después, después de que Telegram aceptara cambios.Affonso Souza, el profesor de derecho en Río de Janeiro, dijo que dado el plazo de dos horas para cumplir con las órdenes de Moraes —y solo una hora en la víspera de las elecciones— Moraes podría intentar bloquear una plataforma en los últimos días de la campaña. “Eso definitivamente agregaría combustible al fuego para los partidarios de Bolsonaro”, dijo.André Spigariol More

Former Prime Minister Boris Johnson and the man who helped oust him from his job, the former Finance Minister Rishi Sunak, are seen as two of the top contenders within the governing Conservative Party.LONDON — The race to succeed Liz Truss as Britain’s prime minister was already gathering pace on Friday morning, potentially pitting the former prime minister, Boris Johnson, against the man who helped oust him from Downing Street just a little more than three months ago, the former finance minister, Rishi Sunak.Penny Mordaunt, now a senior minister, was also seen as a serious potential contender in an election that will be conducted within the governing Conservative Party, which controls the government and can select a prime minister without calling a general election.The next government leader faces a formidable task as Britain heads into an economic slowdown with inflation surging, borrowing costs rising and a winter likely to be dominated by labor strikes and worries about energy supplies.Ahead of what could be a head-on battle against Mr. Johnson, Mr. Sunak’s supporters are presenting him as the safe pair of hands, the man who can restore stability following the crisis precipitated by Ms. Truss’s government when it announced unfunded tax cuts last month, sending financial markets into a tailspin. The British pound plummeted and borrowing costs soared.Less than seven weeks after she took office, Ms. Truss resigned on Thursday — the shortest-serving prime minister in British history.This summer, after Mr. Johnson was forced to resign, Mr. Sunak ran to succeed him but lost out to Ms. Truss. During that leadership contest he gave a prophetic warning of the risks of her economic program, including the tax cuts that ended up rattling the markets.So the appointment of Mr. Sunak, an experienced former chancellor of the Exchequer, might reassure financial markets enough to give a new government more leeway when it comes up with a new budget plan.“Rishi is the experienced leader to sort the economy, lead effectively, get us back into political contention and unite the Party and country,” wrote Bim Afolami, a Conservative lawmaker, on Twitter.Rishi Sunak, one of the possible candidates for prime minister, meeting with supporters in August in Birmingham, England.Susannah Ireland/Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesBut the prospect of an extraordinary return for Mr. Johnson, who left Downing Street less than two months ago under a sizable cloud, has galvanized the looming contest.Reinstalling him would be a risk for the Conservative Party because he quit after a succession of ethics scandals and is still being investigated by a parliamentary committee over claims he misled lawmakers about lockdown-busting parties at his Downing Street office and residence.More on the Situation in BritainA Rapid Downfall: Liz Truss is about to become the shortest-serving prime minister in British history. How did she get there?Lifelong Allowance: The departing prime minister is eligible for a taxpayer-funded annual payout for the rest of her life. Some say she shouldn’t be allowed to receive it.Staging a Comeback?: When Boris Johnson left his role as prime minister in September, he hinted he might return. He is now being mentioned as a successor to Ms. Truss.Mr. Johnson has been on a Caribbean vacation. But his father, Stanley Johnson, did little to dispel the impression that his son was preparing a comeback attempt. He told Britain’s ITV television network on Friday: “I think he’s on a plane, as I understand it.”By the time he left office, Mr. Johnson, always a polarizing figure, was deeply unpopular with voters, according to opinion polls. He tarnished his party’s reputation and dozens of members of his government resigned.But since then, the Conservative Party’s support has collapsed. A new opinion poll showed the party plunging to a new low in support of just 14 percent.Mr. Johnson’s supporters argue that because he won a landslide election victory in 2019, he has a mandate from the voters, and his brand of optimism could help rally the Conservatives.If he were to run, he would be seen as the clear favorite as he remains popular among party members who could make the ultimate decision.Boris Johnson on his last day in office in September.Leon Neal/Getty ImagesIt was they who, during the summer, rejected Mr. Sunak in favor of Ms. Truss when the two reached the final stages of the last leadership contest. One of the main reasons for his failure was the perception among party members that Mr. Sunak betrayed Mr. Johnson by resigning from his cabinet, prompting the crisis that destroyed his leadership.Even before formal declarations by any candidates, their allies were canvassing lawmakers, who in some cases offered their public support.Among those urging Mr. Johnson to run are Jacob Rees-Mogg, the business secretary, who wrote on Twitter that he was supporting the former prime minister under the hashtag #BORISorBUST. Nadine Dorries, another strong supporter in Parliament, described him as a “known winner.”More centrist lawmakers might also be tempted to support Mr. Johnson because of his history of success in elections before his recent ethics scandals. But his critics say he would struggle to unite his colleagues, and one Conservative lawmaker, Roger Gale, has said he would resign from the party if Mr. Johnson returned.Ms. Mordaunt, who finished third in the summer leadership contest, has good communication skills and has raised her profile in recent weeks, including this week when she appeared in Parliament to defend the government.She is relatively untested at the highest reaches of government. But her supporters argue that she has more experience than former prime ministers like Tony Blair and David Cameron who never held ministerial positions before taking power, having been in opposition.And Ms. Mordaunt might be the best placed of the possible contenders to manage a fractured Conservative Party.“Penny is the best candidate to unite our party and lead our great nation,” said Bob Seely, one of her supporters and a member of Parliament.Britain’s leader of the House of Commons, Penny Mordaunt, is another potential candidate for prime minister. Daniel Leal/Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesNone of the likely front-runners have yet declared, but by Monday afternoon, contenders must have nominations from at least 100 of the 357 Conservative lawmakers, a number intended to speed up the contest by limiting potential candidates to a maximum of three.If only one politician passes that threshold, he or she will become prime minister on Monday. If there are two or three, Conservative lawmakers will vote on Monday and the top two will then go for a final decision on Oct. 28 in a vote by about 170,000 Conservative Party members — unless one withdraws voluntarily.Other possible candidates include the home secretary, Suella Braverman, who was fired by Ms. Truss on Wednesday, and Kemi Badenoch, the international trade secretary. However, on the evidence of their performance in the summer leadership contest, neither is seen as likely to reach the threshold of 100 nominations.On Friday, the defense secretary, Ben Wallace, ruled himself out of the contest, and said he was leaning toward support for Mr. Johnson. More