Elections

Nobody knows for sure what will happen in the midterm elections. But if Republicans take one or both houses of Congress, the most important question will be one that is getting hardly any public attention: What will the Biden administration do when the G.O.P. threatens to blow up the world economy by refusing to raise the debt limit?In particular, will Democrats be prepared to take the extraordinary actions the situation will demand, doing whatever it takes to avoid being blackmailed?Notice that I said “when,” not “if.” After Republicans took the House in 2010, they quickly weaponized the debt limit against the Obama administration, using it to extract spending cuts they couldn’t have achieved through normal legislative means. And that was a pre-MAGA G.O.P., one that for the most part didn’t deny the legitimacy of the president and didn’t make excuses for violent insurrections.In fact, I wonder whether Republicans will even seriously try to extract concessions this time around, as opposed to creating chaos for its own sake.Notice also that I said “blow up the world economy,” not merely hamstring the U.S. government. For the consequences of forcing a federal debt default, which is what refusing to raise the limit would do, would extend far beyond the operations of the federal government itself.Let’s back up and talk about why any of this is an issue. U.S. law, for historical reasons, requires in effect that Congress vote on the budget twice. First, senators and representatives enact legislation that sets tax rates and authorizes spending. This legislation ends up determining the federal budget balance. But if we end up running a deficit, Congress must vote a second time, to authorize borrowing to cover that deficit.It’s not clear that this procedure ever made sense. In any case, in modern times the debt limit empowers cowardly posturing: Politicians can claim to be for fiscal responsibility, refusing to vote for a higher debt limit, without specifying how the budget should be balanced.And no, “we should eliminate wasteful spending” isn’t an honest answer. The federal government is basically a giant insurance company with an army: Spending is dominated by Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid and the military, and voters want to maintain all of these programs. There’s surely waste in the government, as there is in any large organization, but even if we could somehow make that waste disappear, it wouldn’t do much to reduce the deficit.Someone seriously worried about the deficit could call for higher taxes. After all, the U.S. tax burden is low compared with other wealthy countries. But Republicans aren’t going to go there.Where will they go? There’s lots of evidence that Republicans will, if they can, try to use the debt limit to extort major cuts in Social Security and Medicare. They probably couldn’t pass such cuts — which would be deeply unpopular — through the normal legislative process, and they certainly wouldn’t have enough votes to override a Biden veto. But the idea would be to force Democrats into complicity, so that the public doesn’t realize who’s responsible for the pain.And that’s a best-case scenario. As I said, the G.O.P. is far more radical now than it was more than a decade ago, and it might well be less interested in achieving policy goals than in blowing up the world economy on a Democratic president’s watch.Why would refusing to raise the debt limit blow up the economy? In the modern world, U.S. debt plays a crucial role: It is the ultimate safe asset, easily converted into cash, and there are no good alternatives. If investors lose confidence that the U.S. government will honor its obligations, the resulting financial storm will make the recent chaos in Britain look like a passing shower.So what should be done to avert this threat? If Republicans do gain control of one or both houses in November, Democrats should use the lame-duck session to enact a very large rise in the debt limit, enough to put the issue on ice for years. Republicans and pundits who don’t understand the stakes would furiously attack this move, but it would be far better than enabling extortion — and would probably be forgotten by the time of the 2024 election.If for some reason Democrats don’t take this obvious step, the Biden administration should be prepared to turn to legal strategies for bypassing the debt limit. There appear to be several loopholes the administration could exploit — minting trillion-dollar platinum coins is the most famous, but there are others, like issuing bonds with no maturity date and hence no face value.The Obama administration was unwilling to go any of these routes, largely, I think, because it believed that they would look gimmicky and undignified, and it preferred to seek compromise. But surely Democrats don’t need to worry about dignity when the other party is ruled by Donald Trump. And in any case, they’re now confronting opponents who aren’t just radical but also anti-democracy; no real compromise is possible.Of course, none of this will be relevant if Democrats hold Congress. But they should prepare for the worst.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

An impeachment vote against Larry Krasner, the Philadelphia district attorney, points to the potency of an issue that works against Lt. Gov. John Fetterman.There’s an oft-repeated maxim about the political geography of Pennsylvania: It’s Philadelphia and Pittsburgh on each end with Alabama (or Kentucky) in between.In broad strokes, it’s not wrong. Although Pennsylvania was one of the original 13 colonies, it is mountainous and overwhelmingly rural. In today’s political climate, that means a map of the state’s election results looks like a sea of red with a few blue islands.But maps and clichés can be misleading. The southeastern corner of the state, with Philadelphia and its surrounding “collar counties,” is far more populous than Pittsburgh or any of the other blue spots. It’s where statewide elections are won and lost.That geography explains why Dr. Mehmet Oz, the Republican nominee for Senate, and allied groups are spending millions of dollars in the Philadelphia media market to attack Lt. Gov. John Fetterman, the Democratic candidate.And it helps explain why, in mid-September, Republicans — to the puzzlement of some Democrats — largely stopped running ads hammering Fetterman on inflation and increasingly accused him of being soft on crime.One ad sponsored by the Senate Leadership Fund, a group close to Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, raps Fetterman as “dangerously liberal on crime” for his votes in favor of clemency while he served on a statewide parole board. Another accuses him of “releasing felony murderers.” In perhaps the most over-the-top ad, underwritten by the Trump-linked group MAGA Inc., a narrator says, “John Fetterman wants ruthless killers, muggers and rapists back on our streets, and he wants them back now.”Altogether, since Labor Day, Republicans have spent at least $5 million on television ads portraying Fetterman as a far-left radical who wants to let criminals out of jail, according to AdImpact, a media-tracking company.The State of the 2022 Midterm ElectionsWith the primaries over, both parties are shifting their focus to the general election on Nov. 8.The Final Stretch: With elections next month, a Times/Siena poll shows that independents, especially women, are swinging toward the G.O.P. despite Democrats’ focus on abortion rights as voters worry about the economy.Questioning 2020: Hundreds of Republicans on the ballot this November have cast doubt on the 2020 election, a Times analysis found. Many of these candidates are favored to win their races.Georgia Senate Race: The contest, which could determine whether Democrats keep control of the Senate, has become increasingly focused on the private life and alleged hypocrisy of Herschel Walker, the Republican nominee.Jill Biden: The first lady, who has become a lifeline for Democratic candidates trying to draw attention and money in the midterms, is the most popular surrogate in the Biden administration.Fetterman angrily disputes those accusations. But the amount of money pouring in and the ads’ focus on Philadelphia voters suggest that the G.O.P. groups behind them believe they’re working.Why the Philly suburbs matterConsider the difference between Hillary Clinton’s performance in Pennsylvania in 2016, when she lost the state to Donald Trump by more than 44,000 votes, and Joe Biden’s showing there four years later, when he beat Trump by more than 81,000 votes.The main reason Biden did so much better: He ran up huge margins in Philadelphia and its inner-ring suburbs in Bucks, Chester, Delaware and Montgomery Counties, where Trump’s political brand was toxic. Even when you include Berks County, a Republican exurban stronghold, Biden gained nearly 131,000 votes over Clinton’s 2016 results. That number is not far off the total ground — 124,000 votes — that he made up against Trump across the state.But that was a presidential election, with record-shattering turnout and Trump on the ballot. Consider instead the 2016 Senate race, in which Patrick J. Toomey, the Republican, defeated Katie McGinty, the Democrat, by about 87,000 votes. Toomey won Bucks and Chester Counties and kept Delaware and Montgomery Counties relatively close.“Absolutely, crime is hurting Fetterman,” said Josh Novotney, a former Toomey chief of staff who is now a partner at SBL Strategies, a lobbying firm based in Philadelphia.The big question in this year’s Senate race, then, is this: Can Fetterman, a tattooed and hoodie-wearing Bernie Sanders supporter from southwestern Pennsylvania, run up the score in and around Philadelphia as Biden did? And to do that, can he defuse the G.O.P.’s attacks over his crime record?The crime connectionIf there’s one thing we know about suburban voters, it’s that crime is important to them. Along with schools and taxes, it’s often an important reason they don’t live within city boundaries. And if you’ve ever watched the local television news, which millions of older voters still do, you know that crime often leads the broadcast.Polls are one way to measure whether Oz’s attacks are landing. But another is to watch the behavior of suburban politicians on the crime issue. And here, the signs are worrying for Fetterman.In mid-September, the Pennsylvania Statehouse voted to hold Larry Krasner, the progressive district attorney of Philadelphia, in contempt of the legislative body during an impeachment inquiry that has riveted the state’s political class. Republicans blame Krasner for the rise in violent crime in the city, and, fairly or unfairly, many Democrats seem to agree.Last month, the Pennsylvania Statehouse voted to hold Larry Krasner, the progressive district attorney of Philadelphia, in contempt. Republicans blame Krasner for a rise in violent crime.Michelle Gustafson for The New York TimesOf the 58 lawmakers who represent state districts in the collar counties, 37 voted to impeach Krasner on Sept. 13. Twenty-seven of those were Democrats. Even in Philadelphia, where Krasner was re-elected by roughly 40 percentage points last year, nine representatives voted for impeachment.Austin Davis, who is running on Attorney General Josh Shapiro’s ticket to replace Fetterman as lieutenant governor, voted for contempt, too. In 2018, Davis was elected to represent McKeesport in the Statehouse with nearly three-quarters of the vote.The contempt vote was a telling sign that these politicians — who we must assume are focused on their own political survival — view the crime issue as a dangerous one for them politically.After the vote, Krasner held a news conference at which he criticized the Democrats who voted against him as “uninformed.” Others, he said in a revealing comment, were driven by “what they perceive to be the short-term political consequences.”“Certainly, Krasner is the poster child that the G.O.P. uses,” said Larry Ceisler, a Democratic media consultant based in Philadelphia. But he expressed some uncertainty that crime was the main factor driving the poll numbers closer together, as opposed to Fetterman’s inability to campaign as vigorously as he ordinarily might and the natural contours of a marquee Senate race.“Is crime an issue? Yeah,” Ceisler said. But he noted that Fetterman had never been subject to a barrage of negative ads in previous races and that the question for him over the last few weeks of the campaign was: “Does he have a glass jaw or not?”What to readThe Times is offering live coverage of two debates tonight at 7. Gov. Brian Kemp of Georgia, a Republican who is seeking a second term, is facing off against Stacey Abrams, his Democratic opponent. In Ohio, Representative Tim Ryan, a Democrat, and J.D. Vance, a Republican, are holding a forum for the state’s marquee Senate race.Right-wing activists, driven by conspiracy theories about voter fraud, are inserting themselves in the election process, which has put officials on alert for disruptions and a wave of misinformation, Alexandra Berzon and Nick Corasaniti report.In Oregon’s wild governor’s race, an independent candidate is siphoning Democratic votes and Phil Knight, the billionaire Nike co-founder, is pouring in money. Mike Baker and Reid J. Epstein tell us how this may give an anti-abortion Republican a path to victory.A new breed of veterans is running for the House on the far right. Jonathan Weisman writes about the trend, which challenges assumptions that adding veterans to Congress fosters bipartisanship and cooperation.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

The prosecution in the seditious conspiracy trial of Stewart Rhodes and other members of the militia introduced evidence that he spent as much as $20,000 on rifles, ammunition and other equipment.In the days before a pro-Trump mob — including members of his own organization — broke into the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, Stewart Rhodes, the leader of the Oath Keepers militia, went on a cross-country weapon-buying spree.Setting out for Washington from Texas, his home state, Mr. Rhodes stopped at least six times, bank records show, purchasing items like assault-style rifles, ammunition and scopes. Sometimes he dropped into gun shops and sometimes he conducted the transactions in parking lots with private sellers he met online.By the time he reached his destination, prosecutors said on Monday at the trial of Mr. Rhodes and four of his subordinates on seditious conspiracy charges, the Oath Keepers leader had spent as much as $20,000 on what amounted to a small arsenal that included at least three rifles and an Israeli-made semiautomatic shotgun.Prosecutors have not yet told the jury precisely what Mr. Rhodes did with the weapons he amassed as he and a lawyer for the Oath Keepers, Kellye SoRelle, made their way from Texas, through Mississippi and Tennessee, to the Hilton Garden Inn in Vienna, Va., where they stayed on Jan. 6.But the purchases took place as Mr. Rhodes was overseeing the creation of what he has called an armed “quick reaction force” that was staged in other hotel rooms in Virginia, ready to rush to the aid of Oath Keepers stationed at the Capitol if they found themselves in need.The armed contingent is central to the Justice Department’s case that Mr. Rhodes and his four co-defendants — Kelly Meggs, Kenneth Harrelson, Jessica Watkins and Thomas Caldwell — committed seditious conspiracy by plotting to use violence to stop the transfer of power from President Donald J. Trump to Joseph R. Biden Jr.While the “quick reaction force” — often referred to as the Q.R.F. — was never deployed to Washington and its weapons remained in Virginia, prosecutors opened the trial two weeks ago by telling the jury that Mr. Rhodes and other Oath Keepers “concocted a plan for an armed rebellion to shatter a bedrock of democracy.”“The point of the Q.R.F. was to prevent Biden from taking power in whatever form that took,” an F.B.I. agent, Sylvia Hilgeman, testified on Monday. “I think the Q.R.F. was meant to occupy D.C.”The government has already described how several Oath Keepers stashed their weapons in rooms at the Comfort Inn in Ballston, Va., six miles from downtown Washington, leaving them in the care of compatriots who were prepared to ferry them across the Potomac River into the city.On Monday, prosecutors showed the jury surveillance camera footage from the Comfort Inn of various Oath Keepers wheeling rifle cases and duffel bags on luggage carts down the hotel’s hallways. The carts were at times so full that one member of the group, Edward Vallejo, had to get a running start to push a cart out of an elevator and move it around a corner.The prosecutors also showed the jury a map put together from cellphone data and credit card records that plotted the movements of more than two dozen Oath Keepers arriving in the Washington area from states such as Florida, Ohio, North Carolina and Arizona.“There were a lot of firearms cases,” a former Oath Keeper testified last week about the quick reaction force. “I had not seen that many weapons in one location since I was in the military.”The armed group is also key to the Oath Keepers’ defense.Phillip Linder, one of Mr. Rhodes’s lawyers, has told the jury that the force was never meant to be used as part of an offensive assault against the Capitol. Rather, Mr. Linder has said, the Oath Keepers were waiting for Mr. Trump to invoke the Insurrection Act — a move, he claimed, that would have given the group standing as a militia to employ force of arms in support of Mr. Trump.Mr. Rhodes did not enter the Capitol on Jan. 6, and none of the Oath Keepers defendants who went into the building that day were believed to have brought weapons.Prosecutors revealed on Monday that one day before the Capitol attack, Mr. Rhodes sent several night-vision devices he had bought to a woman named Marsha Lessard, who ran an organization called the Virginia Freedom Keepers.Ms. Lessard, an associate of Roger J. Stone Jr., a longtime adviser to Mr. Trump, had a permit with other organizers for a protest on the Capitol grounds on Jan. 6. Members of her group also took part in a conference call on Dec. 30, 2020, during which Jason Sullivan, Mr. Stone’s onetime social adviser, urged listeners to “descend on the Capitol” on Jan. 6 and ensure that lawmakers inside “understand that people are breathing down their necks.”Earlier in the day, prosecutors showed the jury some sexually explicit text messages that Mr. Rhodes had swapped with Ms. SoRelle, the lawyer, in the days leading up to Jan. 6, suggesting that the two had more than the usual lawyer-client relationship.The messages were apparently introduced to chip away at one of the Oath Keepers’ possible defenses: that members of the group had been acting on Ms. SoRelle’s professional advice when they believed the “quick reaction force” could have been legally called up by Mr. Trump.Even after fleeing Washington on Jan. 6, Mr. Rhodes continued buying stockpiles of guns and ammunition, the government has said in court papers filed before the trial began. As Mr. Biden’s inauguration neared, Mr. Rhodes — accompanied by Joshua James, an Oath Keepers member from Alabama — made multiple trips to purchase thousands of dollars’ worth of weapons, scopes, magazines, holsters and firearm maintenance equipment.Mr. James pleaded guilty in March to seditious conspiracy and has been cooperating with the government’s prosecution. The jury could soon hear from him and other Oath Keepers who have entered guilty pleas.If Mr. James does appear as a witness, he could tell the jury what he told prosecutors as part of his plea deal: that in the weeks leading up to Jan. 6, Mr. Rhodes told him and his fellow Oath Keepers to be prepared to secure the perimeter of the White House and use “lethal force” to stop anyone, including members of the National Guard, from removing Mr. Trump from the building.Mr. James could also testify that he stored some of Mr. Rhodes’s arsenal in a storage shed in Alabama after Mr. Rhodes instructed him that he should “be prepared for violence in the event of a civil war.”Under cross-examination by James Lee Bright, a lawyer for Mr. Rhodes, Ms. Hilgeman, the F.B.I. agent, acknowledged that as Jan. 6 came to an end, the Oath Keepers took the weapons that they had stashed with the quick reaction force home with them.“So the armed rebellion was unarmed?” Mr. Bright asked.“The armed rebellion wasn’t over,” Ms. Hilgeman said. More

The case is a major test of the special counsel, John H. Durham, who was appointed in 2019 to investigate the origins of the F.B.I.’s inquiry into the nature of the Trump campaign’s ties to Russia.ALEXANDRIA, Va. — A Trump-era special prosecutor and a defense lawyer delivered starkly clashing views in closing arguments on Monday about the motives of Igor Danchenko, a Russia analyst who was a key contributor to the so-called Steele dossier.A jury will now decide whether Mr. Danchenko is guilty of lying to the F.B.I. about one of his sources for information in the Steele dossier, a compendium of unsubstantiated assertions that Donald J. Trump and his 2016 campaign were colluding with Russia.The case is a major test of the special counsel, John H. Durham, who was appointed in 2019 to investigate the origins of the F.B.I.’s inquiry into the nature of the Trump campaign’s ties to Russia. An earlier indictment brought by Mr. Durham ended with an acquittal in May, and the trial appears to be his last chance to obtain a conviction in a case he developed.In the closing arguments, a prosecutor working for Mr. Durham asserted that Mr. Danchenko had clearly lied to the F.B.I. and that his false assertions had a material effect. He pointed to part of the dossier that the F.B.I. cited to bolster applications to wiretap a former Trump campaign adviser with ties to Russia.“This defendant’s lies caused intensive surveillance on a U.S. citizen,” said Michael Keilty, an assistant special counsel.In his own remarks, Mr. Durham sought to broaden the case, telling jurors that “the whole house of cards of the dossier crumbles” under the weight of the evidence.But the defense said the government’s own evidence showed that Mr. Danchenko did not lie. The lawyer, Stuart A. Sears, characterized Mr. Danchenko as a valuable and honest asset to the F.B.I. who unwittingly became embroiled in a politically charged investigation. Mr. Durham, he said, was intent on proving crimes “at any cost” and presumed Mr. Danchenko guilty from the start.What to Know About the Trump InvestigationsCard 1 of 6Numerous inquiries. More

The anti-immigrant Sweden Democrats will have a say over new policies for the incoming government under a complicated leadership agreement.STOCKHOLM — Sweden’s Parliament approved a new right-wing government Monday that includes the Liberal and Christian Democrat parties but no formal role for the anti-immigrant Sweden Democrats, without whom the right-wing bloc would not have achieved its narrow victory last month.Despite being the largest party in the bloc after capturing a fifth of the national vote on Sept. 11, the Sweden Democrats will have only a supporting role in the new government, which will be led by the incoming prime minister, Ulf Kristersson of the Moderate Party.Normally, the party with the most votes would be included in the government, but because of ideological differences and the Sweden Democrats’ neo-Nazi roots and anti-liberal policies, the other parties did not want to give them a formal role in the governing coalition, Jonas Hinnfors, a political scientist at the University of Gothenburg, said.“It’s realpolitik,” Mr. Hinnfors said.The Liberal Party conditioned its support for the coalition on excluding the Sweden Democrats from a seat in the government.The price for the Sweden Democrats’ support of the new government, hammered out in a 62-page pact, is high, analysts said, and includes the parties’ cooperation in seven policy areas, including criminal justice and immigration.The document focuses heavily on the areas of crime and immigration, priorities for the Sweden Democrats, and is “very short and rather vague” on other key issues — including tax reform, medical care and education, Mr. Hinnfors said.“There’s nothing about foreign policy, the E.U., NATO or defense spending,” he added, alluding to Russia’s war on Ukraine and the security situation in Europe and the Baltic region, in particular.The pact does call for an inquiry into a ban on begging, driven by the Sweden Democrats and widely criticized by the Liberals.Jimmie Akesson, leader of the Sweden Democrats, touted the pact as a victory that will broadly fulfill his party’s campaign promises.Jimmie Akesson, second from right, the leader of the Sweden Democrats, in Parliament in Stockholm on Monday.Jonathan Nackstrand/Agence France-Presse — Getty Images“A change in government must also entail a paradigm shift when it comes to immigration and integration policy — and for me there is no doubt that this agreement means just that,” he told reporters.The pact covers mostly Sweden Democrats’ policy priorities, including doubling sentences for gang-related crimes, expanding police powers in certain neighborhoods to stop and search people for weapons without probable cause, and restricting immigration to the absolute minimum required by E.U. rules.The agreement also calls for the creation of committees composed of members of the Sweden Democrats and the other three parties to hammer out new government policies.“If there are differences of opinion, they can veto a measure,” said Sverker Gustavsson, a political scientist at Uppsala University, of the Sweden Democrats. The agreement gives the Sweden Democrats exactly what they wanted — the strongest possible influence without the accountability of sitting in the new government, Mr. Gustavsson said. “This gives them a lot of informal power,” he said. “It is an ideal solution for them.”Sweden’s Parliament meeting in Stockholm on Monday.Jonathan Nackstrand/Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesThe Liberal Party appears to have made the most concessions — on criminal justice and individual freedoms. Observers said some of these concessions crossed previous red lines for the party.“We are at the brink of something very different in key respects in Swedish society: how we relate to each other, the forces of the state in relation to individual freedoms and what it is to be a foreigner in this country,” Mr. Hinnfors said.The Sweden Democrats might be more comfortable outside the government, he added. “They are in the ultimate blackmailing position. The government needs them, and they can withdraw support at any moment.”This isn’t the first time a strong far right anti-immigration has held a supporting role in a Scandinavian government without a seat in the cabinet. The Danish People’s Party supported the governing liberal-conservative parties for 10 years until 2011. “They had huge reach over and really dominated Danish politics in immigration policies,” Mr. Hinnfors said. The Parliament voted 176 to 173 in favor of Mr. Kristersson taking the reins as prime minister. He will succeed Magdalena Andersson, who has been prime minister since last November.Amid criticism leveled at the Liberal Party, which many see as going against its own ideology by supporting the governing coalition, Ms. Andersson, said that the Social Democrats were still open to cooperate “with all good forces that want Sweden to become more like Sweden. That goes for the Liberals, too.” More

In recent months, the conservative personalities Eric Metaxas, Sebastian Gorka and Charlie Kirk have used their nationally syndicated radio shows to discuss baseless claims of rigged voting machines, accuse election officials of corruption and espouse ballot fraud conspiracy theories.Now, the three men are joining a live speaking tour that will take them across Arizona, Georgia, Pennsylvania and other battleground states to promote those views — and Republican candidates — ahead of the Nov. 8 midterm elections.The radio hosts and their tour are united by a common backer: Salem Media Group, a publicly traded media company in Irving, Texas. Mr. Metaxas, Mr. Gorka and Mr. Kirk have contracts with the company, which is also hosting the Battleground Talkers trip. The tour features more than half a dozen other conservative media personalities as well, including Hugh Hewitt and Dennis Prager, who also have deals with Salem.Created as a Christian radio network nearly 50 years ago by two brothers-in-law, Salem has quietly turned into a conservative media juggernaut as it increasingly takes an activist stance in the midterm elections. The company has publicly said it wants a strong turnout of conservative voters for Nov. 8, and its hosts have amplified the messages of conspiracy theorists, including misinformation about the voting process.“The war for America’s soul is on the line,” Salem said in promotional materials for the tour. It added that the radio hosts were traveling to “influence those who are undecided.”Salem, which has a market capitalization of nearly $45 million, is smaller than audio competitors like Cumulus Media and iHeartMedia, as well as conservative media organizations such as Fox News. But it stands out for its blend of right-leaning politics and Christian content and its vast network of 100 radio stations and more than 3,000 affiliates, many of them reaching deep into parts of America that don’t engage with most mainstream media outlets.Salem also operates dozens of religious and conservative websites, as well as podcasts, television news, book publishing and a social media influencer network. The company, which describes its news content as “the antidote to the mainstream media,” has said it reaches 11 million radio listeners.Salem expanded into film this year by financing “2000 Mules,” a widely debunked but popular movie that claimed voter fraud in the 2020 presidential election.Charity Rachelle for The New York TimesThis year, it expanded into film by financing “2000 Mules,” a widely debunked but popular movie that claimed significant voter fraud in the 2020 presidential election. It was directed by Dinesh D’Souza, a conservative figure who has a deal with Salem, and features interviews with others who have shows on Salem. The company plans to publish a book version of the film this month.The general public may not be familiar with Salem, “but their hosts are big names and they have huge reach, which makes them one of the most powerful forces in conservative media that hardly anyone knows about,” said Craig Aaron, president of Free Press, a nonprofit that fights misinformation and supports media competition.The State of the 2022 Midterm ElectionsWith the primaries over, both parties are shifting their focus to the general election on Nov. 8.The Final Stretch: With less than one month until Election Day, Republicans remain favored to take over the House, but momentum in the pitched battle for the Senate has seesawed back and forth.A Surprising Battleground: New York has emerged from a haywire redistricting cycle as perhaps the most consequential congressional battleground in the country. For Democrats, the uncertainty is particularly jarring.Arizona’s Governor’s Race: Democrats are openly expressing their alarm that Katie Hobbs, the party’s nominee for governor in the state, is fumbling a chance to defeat Kari Lake in one of the most closely watched races.Herschel Walker: The Republican Senate nominee in Georgia reportedly paid for an ex-girlfriend’s abortion, but members of his party have learned to tolerate his behavior.Salem did not respond to requests for interviews. Phil Boyce, the company’s senior vice president of spoken word, said in a news release for the battleground states tour that “there has never been a more important midterm election than this one, and Salem is thrilled to be front and center, leading the charge.”Mr. Metaxas, Mr. Prager, Mr. Kirk, Mr. Hewitt and Mr. D’Souza did not respond to requests for comment. In his response for comment, Mr. Gorka said The New York Times was “FAKENEWS fraud.”Sebastian Gorka, a right-wing personality who has a radio show on Salem Media, had former President Donald J. Trump on his show this year.Scott McIntyre for The New York TimesSalem has faced legal challenges as its hosts have discussed conspiracy theories about voter fraud. Eric Coomer, a former executive of Dominion Voting Systems, a maker of election technology, has filed lawsuits against Salem, Mr. Metaxas and several media outlets since 2020 for defamation after being accused on air of perpetuating voter fraud and joining the left-wing antifa movement. Nicole Hemmer, a political historian at Vanderbilt University and author of “Messengers of Right: Conservative Media and the Transformation of American Politics,” said Salem’s effect was far-reaching.“They are using their many different properties for coordinated messaging to promote misinformation, which is undermining democracy,” she said.Salem was started in 1974 with two tiny radio stations in North Carolina owned by two brothers-in-law, Edward G. Atsinger III and Stuart W. Epperson. Over time, they steadily added more stations across the country and sold blocks of airtime for sermons. Salem is now in most major radio markets..css-1v2n82w{max-width:600px;width:calc(100% – 40px);margin-top:20px;margin-bottom:25px;height:auto;margin-left:auto;margin-right:auto;font-family:nyt-franklin;color:var(–color-content-secondary,#363636);}@media only screen and (max-width:480px){.css-1v2n82w{margin-left:20px;margin-right:20px;}}@media only screen and (min-width:1024px){.css-1v2n82w{width:600px;}}.css-161d8zr{width:40px;margin-bottom:18px;text-align:left;margin-left:0;color:var(–color-content-primary,#121212);border:1px solid var(–color-content-primary,#121212);}@media only screen and (max-width:480px){.css-161d8zr{width:30px;margin-bottom:15px;}}.css-tjtq43{line-height:25px;}@media only screen and (max-width:480px){.css-tjtq43{line-height:24px;}}.css-x1k33h{font-family:nyt-cheltenham;font-size:19px;font-weight:700;line-height:25px;}.css-1hvpcve{font-size:17px;font-weight:300;line-height:25px;}.css-1hvpcve em{font-style:italic;}.css-1hvpcve strong{font-weight:bold;}.css-1hvpcve a{font-weight:500;color:var(–color-content-secondary,#363636);}.css-1c013uz{margin-top:18px;margin-bottom:22px;}@media only screen and (max-width:480px){.css-1c013uz{font-size:14px;margin-top:15px;margin-bottom:20px;}}.css-1c013uz a{color:var(–color-signal-editorial,#326891);-webkit-text-decoration:underline;text-decoration:underline;font-weight:500;font-size:16px;}@media only screen and (max-width:480px){.css-1c013uz a{font-size:13px;}}.css-1c013uz a:hover{-webkit-text-decoration:none;text-decoration:none;}How Times reporters cover politics. We rely on our journalists to be independent observers. So while Times staff members may vote, they are not allowed to endorse or campaign for candidates or political causes. This includes participating in marches or rallies in support of a movement or giving money to, or raising money for, any political candidate or election cause.Learn more about our process.The company went public in 1999 as the internet was rising. In its public offering prospectus, Salem said it would focus on acquiring digital platforms and cross-promoting content across its channels to attract new audiences.In 2006, Salem bought the conservative political website Townhall.com; other deals for conservative sites followed, including HotAir, Twitchy and PJ Media. It purchased a publishing company, Eagle Publishing, in 2014 in a deal that included RedState, a conservative blog, and Regnery, a publisher with conservative authors like Ann Coulter and Laura Ingraham. Regnery said last year that it was “proud to stand in the breach” with Senator Josh Hawley, Republican of Missouri, when it agreed to print his book after Simon & Schuster dropped the title in the wake of the Jan. 6 Capitol riot.This summer, Salem said it had added a podcast hosted by two “culture warriors,” Rob McCoy and Bryce Eddy of the talk show “Liberty Station.” In January, the company awarded its Culture Warrior of the Year award to Ron DeSantis, the Republican governor of Florida, who has made a point of goading liberals.More recently, Salem has promoted to advertisers its “360-degree deals,” meaning that it can amplify messages across radio, podcasts, books, film and websites.Salem has said it is “thrilled to be front and center, leading the charge” in next month’s midterm elections.Rebecca Noble for The New York TimesPolitics were not new to Salem’s founders. Mr. Epperson unsuccessfully ran for Congress in 1984 and 1986 as a Republican. Mr. Atsinger contributed to Republican candidates like George W. Bush and Larry Elder, a Salem radio host who mounted a failed campaign in the California governor’s recall election last year. In Washington, Salem fought to remove regulatory hurdles that complicated its acquisition spree.At the beginning of the year, Mr. Atsinger stepped down as Salem’s chief executive and became chairman, succeeding Mr. Epperson, who took on the title of chairman emeritus.Salem’s executives largely stayed out of editorial decisions — until the Trump administration, said Ben Howe, a former employee of RedState; Craig Silverman, a former Salem radio commentator in Denver; and a third former employee, who declined to be identified for fear of retaliation.In July 2017, Salem held an event at the White House, and several radio hosts interviewed top Trump administration officials. At a Salem reception at the Capitol the next day, the Senate Republican leader, Mitch McConnell, and the House Republican leader, Kevin McCarthy, gave speeches.“There was a lot of closeness,” said Mr. Silverman, who attended the events. “McConnell and McCarthy praised Salem, and vice versa. It felt like some sort of team effort.”In April 2018, Salem’s RedState blog fired several employees who had been vocal critics of Mr. Trump. The site’s unofficial slogan had long been “Take on the left. Clean up the right,” said Mr. Howe, a writer for the site who was one of those fired. “But one to two years into office, everything changed. It was like it was no longer good for business to be critical of Trump.”Mr. Silverman said his radio show was cut off in November 2019 as he excoriated Mr. Trump over accusations that the president had pressured Ukraine to investigate Joseph R. Biden Jr., then a Democratic presidential candidate, by withholding aid to the country. Mr. Silverman said he was then fired.“The political environment has never been as interesting and as heated and intense as it is right now,” David Santrella, Salem’s chief executive, said on a recent earnings call.Business Wire, via Associated PressSalem said in press reports at the time that such dismissals were not politically motivated, explaining that it had fired the RedState employees because of financial considerations and Mr. Silverman because he had appeared on non-Salem shows. Mr. Silverman said those appearances were allowed under his contract.As Mr. Trump’s term wound down, Salem ran into financial pressure. In 2019, the company said four board members, including two of the co-founders’ sons, had resigned because “Salem has faced several unique financial headwinds and we are looking for ways to cut costs while not impacting revenue.” Both sons have since returned to the board.In May 2020, the company moved to eliminate new hiring, suspend its dividend, reduce head count, cut pay and request discounts from vendors, blaming the pandemic for forcing it to conserve cash. It reported $11.2 million in forgiven loans from the government’s Paycheck Protection Program.But Salem’s finances have improved since then. Its net income rose to $41.5 million in 2021 from a loss in 2020, while revenue increased to $258.2 million from $236.2 million a year earlier.Salem’s political platforms are a bright spot. On an earnings call in August, Salem executives said that so far this year, political advertisers had spent nearly twice as much on Salem platforms as they did over the same period in the presidential election year of 2020, which had been the “biggest political year ever.” David Santrella, the chief executive, has predicted that “hot button” issues like abortion would probably boost ad revenue.“The political environment has never been as interesting and as heated and intense as it is right now,” he said.Kitty Bennett More

On the eve of a primary runoff election in June, a Republican candidate for secretary of state of South Carolina sent out a message to his supporters on Telegram.“For all of you on the team tomorrow observing the polls, Good Hunting,” wrote Keith Blandford, a candidate who promoted the falsehood that the 2020 election was stolen from Donald J. Trump. “You know what you are looking for. We have the enemy on their back foot, press the attack.”The next day, activists fanned out to polling places in Charleston, S.C., demanding to inspect election equipment and to take photographs and video. When election workers denied their requests, some returned with police officers to file reports about broken or missing seals on the machines, according emails sent from local officials to the state election commission. There were no broken or missing seals.After Mr. Blandford lost, the activists posted online a list of more than 60 “anomalies” they observed, enough to have changed the outcome of races, they said. They called the operation a “pilot program.”The episode is one of many warning signs that has election officials on alert as voting begins for midterm elections, the biggest test of the American election system since Mr. Trump’s lies about the 2020 results launched an assault on the democratic process.In the two years since, groups of right-wing activists have banded together, spreading false claims of widespread fraud and misconduct in elections. Now those activists are inserting themselves in the vote count, with a broad and aggressive effort to monitor voting in search of evidence that confirms their theories.Many of the activists have been mobilized by some of the same people who tried to overturn Mr. Trump’s defeat in 2020.Their tactics in primary elections have officials braced for a range of new challenges, including disruptive poll watchers and workers, aggressive litigation strategies, voter and ballot challenges and vigilante searches for fraud.Many of the election activists have been mobilized by the same people who tried to overturn Donald J. Trump’s defeat in 2020.Tamir Kalifa for The New York TimesBoth Republican and Democratic election officials say the efforts are unlikely to cause widespread disorder or disruptions. They are prepared to accurately count the tens of millions of votes expected to be cast in the coming weeks, they said. But episodes such as the one in South Carolina come with consequences, spawning misinformation and spreading doubt about results, particularly in close races.“In a way, it’s the manifestation of a self-fulfilling prophecy,” said Tammy Patrick, who works with election officials as a senior adviser at the Democracy Fund. Activists primed to see misconduct are more likely to blow minor errors out of proportion and cause disruptions “that will just bolster their claims,” she said.Interviews with election officials and activists, public records and planning emails obtained by The New York Times show that the extensive network of organizers includes Republican Party officials, mainstream conservative groups and the most conspiracist corners of the election denial movement.The groups appear to be building on the tactics used two years ago: compiling testimony from G.O.P.-allied poll workers, the temporary employees who run polling places, and poll watchers, the volunteers who monitor operations, to build challenges and contest results.“We are 100 times more prepared now,” said Stephen K. Bannon, a former adviser to Mr. Trump who was involved in efforts to overturn the 2020 election, in an interview. Mr. Bannon now hosts a podcast that has become a clearinghouse for right-wing election activists. “We’re going to adjudicate every battle. That’s the difference.”Both Democrats and Republicans have long enlisted poll watchers and poll workers to oversee voting and always plan ahead for disputes ahead of major elections. But this year, officials are grappling with the prospect that those efforts may be driven by activists who spread fantastical or debunked theories.Officials saw evidence of the new organizing in primary elections. In Michigan, a poll worker was charged with tampering with an election computer. In Texas, activists followed election officials back to their offices and tried to enter secured areas. In Alabama, activists tried to insert fake ballots into a machine during a public testing process ahead of the primary.In Kansas, activists funded a recount of a ballot measure on abortion rights that required Johnson County to count a quarter million ballots by hand, even though the measure failed by 18 percentage points. Fred Sherman, the county’s elections chief, said that some of the workers involved in the count appeared to be election deniers. He called the police to remove one who breached security, he said. The recount went smoothly, he added, but was “terrifying.”Employees sorted freshly created mail-in ballots last week.Rebecca Noble for The New York Times“We have to be mindful we may have people who may not have the best of intentions from an election integrity standpoint,” Mr. Sherman said..css-1v2n82w{max-width:600px;width:calc(100% – 40px);margin-top:20px;margin-bottom:25px;height:auto;margin-left:auto;margin-right:auto;font-family:nyt-franklin;color:var(–color-content-secondary,#363636);}@media only screen and (max-width:480px){.css-1v2n82w{margin-left:20px;margin-right:20px;}}@media only screen and (min-width:1024px){.css-1v2n82w{width:600px;}}.css-161d8zr{width:40px;margin-bottom:18px;text-align:left;margin-left:0;color:var(–color-content-primary,#121212);border:1px solid var(–color-content-primary,#121212);}@media only screen and (max-width:480px){.css-161d8zr{width:30px;margin-bottom:15px;}}.css-tjtq43{line-height:25px;}@media only screen and (max-width:480px){.css-tjtq43{line-height:24px;}}.css-x1k33h{font-family:nyt-cheltenham;font-size:19px;font-weight:700;line-height:25px;}.css-1hvpcve{font-size:17px;font-weight:300;line-height:25px;}.css-1hvpcve em{font-style:italic;}.css-1hvpcve strong{font-weight:bold;}.css-1hvpcve a{font-weight:500;color:var(–color-content-secondary,#363636);}.css-1c013uz{margin-top:18px;margin-bottom:22px;}@media only screen and (max-width:480px){.css-1c013uz{font-size:14px;margin-top:15px;margin-bottom:20px;}}.css-1c013uz a{color:var(–color-signal-editorial,#326891);-webkit-text-decoration:underline;text-decoration:underline;font-weight:500;font-size:16px;}@media only screen and (max-width:480px){.css-1c013uz a{font-size:13px;}}.css-1c013uz a:hover{-webkit-text-decoration:none;text-decoration:none;}How Times reporters cover politics. We rely on our journalists to be independent observers. So while Times staff members may vote, they are not allowed to endorse or campaign for candidates or political causes. This includes participating in marches or rallies in support of a movement or giving money to, or raising money for, any political candidate or election cause.Learn more about our process.Election officials have spent months preparing for the new challenges. Some have participated in exercises organized by the F.B.I. on how to handle threats, including physical aggression toward election workers. They have held “de-escalation” training for their staff. Some have changed the layout of their offices, adding fences and other barriers that can protect workers.“When people see everyone working hard and ethically and toward the same goal — who wants to disrupt that?” said Stephen Richer, the recorder of Maricopa County in Arizona, whose county election offices were surrounded by protesters following the 2020 election.Activists say they are trying to ensure that all rules are followed and only eligible voters cast ballots.“We have people trained in the law so they can then observe and document and report when things are not being conducted according to the law,” Cleta Mitchell, an organizer of one of the national groups involved in training activists and a lawyer who assisted Mr. Trump in his failed 2020 challenges, said recently on Mr. Bannon’s podcast. Ms. Mitchell said her network had trained more than 20,000 people into what she has described as a “citizens’ detective agency.”She did not respond to requests for comment.In many places, political parties have a direct role in recruiting poll workers and monitors. The Republican National Committee said it has placed more than 56,000 workers and monitors in primary and special elections this year. Emma Vaughn, an R.N.C. spokeswoman, said the committee was expecting more for the general election, but did not have a precise number. In several battleground states, the committee has also hired “election integrity” officials.The Democratic National Committee has also expanded its operations, hiring 25 “voter protection” directors and 129 staff members in states across the country. The committee did not provide the total number of poll workers or monitors it recruited.Stephen K. Bannon’s podcast has become a clearinghouse for information on election activism. Kenny Holston for The New York TimesObservers watched as voters cast ballots at Rancho High School on Election Day in Las Vegas in 2020.Bridget Bennett for The New York TimesNinety-six election lawsuits have been filed, according to a tally by Democracy Docket, a left-leaning election legal group.In a replay of 2020, much of the litigation is focused on absentee ballots: More than half of the lawsuits filed by Republican-aligned groups are disputes over mail voting rules, such as how to fix errors on a ballot, whether ballots with small errors should be counted or when a ballot comes too late to count, according to Democracy Docket.Some voting rights advocates and Democratic groups say they are also watching for a replay of 2020, when Mr. Trump and his allies tried to stop the results from being certified.“There’s the underlying concern about in some of these places, where you’ve got political people certifying the election, whether they’ll certify the election and then what the crisis will be,” said Jonathan Greenbaum, chief counsel for the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, a nonpartisan group.Some of the people involved in the 2020 challenges are now leading organizers.Patrick Byrne, the former chief executive of Overstock.com and a prominent purveyor of election conspiracy theories, is recruiting activists through his group, the America Project. Michael Flynn, Mr. Trump’s first national security adviser, is a co-founder and is advising the group. (Both men attended a December 2020 meeting at the White House, where Mr. Flynn urged Mr. Trump to seize voting machines.)In Michigan, a state party official is identified as the state director of America Project’s effort — called Operation Eagles Wings — in documents. That official also coordinates with Ms. Mitchell’s Election Integrity Network, which hosts strategy calls and training sessions, according to emails obtained by The Times.On his “War Room” podcast, Mr. Bannon tells listeners that Democrats will only win elections if they steal them. He and his allies can prevent that “by taking over the election apparatus,” he said on his show earlier this month.Freshly printed mail-in ballots in Phoenix.Rebecca Noble for The New York TimesA volunteer poll watcher in Wilkes-Barre, Pa., in 2020.Robert Nickelsberg for The New York TimesMr. Bannon has been directing followers to websites that encourage a sort of election vigilantism. The Gateway Pundit, a right-wing website, urges activists to demand that observers be allowed to watch as ballots are loaded onto trucks at post offices and to insist that they get closer to the ballot counting than the rules allow.Mr. Bannon has also urged his listeners to take over local parties, which in some states have a role in selecting poll workers.In El Paso County, Colo., the head of the local G.O.P., who has aligned with influential election deniers, asked the county clerk to remove several longtime poll workers whom she described in an email as “unfaithful” to the party. The clerk, Chuck Broerman, said he reluctantly fulfilled the request because he was required to by law.A Trump supporter outside the Arizona State Capitol in Phoenix in 2020.Adriana Zehbrauskas for The New York Times“The individuals they are removing have been longstanding dedicated hard-working Republicans,” said Mr. Broerman, who is also a former county party chairman.In North Carolina, a right-wing group dedicated to “election integrity” said it trained 1,000 poll watchers in the state, with help from Ms. Mitchell’s network. Some became the subject of dozens of complaints during the primary.In Pasquotank County, one was “intimidating poll workers, leaving the enclosure several times to ‘report to headquarters,’” according to complaints obtained by The Times.To address the complaints, the state drafted a proposal of changes that would have made it easier to remove a poll watcher for misbehavior. These were rejected by the Republican-controlled rules commission after a torrent of emails and public testimony from local activists to the commission.Ms. Mitchell was among those who chimed in. The changes were trying to curb “the enthusiastic interest” that citizens had in the election process, she said. More

In September, we convened a group of 10 Latino voters from Texas, Florida and Arizona, a collection of Democrats, Republicans and independents who planned to vote or were open to voting for Republican candidates in this year’s midterm elections.

“Is there anything that you think the Republican Party does that is off-putting to Latino voters?” our moderator asked. “Is there anything about the way Democrats talk to or talk about the Latino community that turns off Latino voters, in your view?”

“When Trump said Mexicans were rapists — even though he probably didn’t mean all of us — it still left a bad taste in my mouth. You know, a lot of people clapped for that. So I was like, ‘OK, that’s how it is,’” one participant said.

“When the first lady referred to us as unique as breakfast tacos, that kind of stands out in my mind,” another participant said, referring to Jill Biden’s remarks this year at a conference for UnidosUS, a Latino civil rights group.

Several of them said neither party really spoke to them in a personal, informed way. Part of the problem is that there’s no one way to talk to Latino voters, because — as our participants reminded us — there’s no one typical Latino voter. “There’s a whole spectrum of Hispanics,” one participant said. And maybe the distinction between Latino voters and other voters shouldn’t be made at all: “We are Americans first,” another participant said.

What’s clear is that both parties have an opportunity to connect with voters like the ones we spoke to, both to solidify their support and to clear up misconceptions. Our participants thought Republicans were stronger on a variety of issues, such as crime and safety, gun control, national security, immigration and the economy. But on the issue of abortion, most of them favored Democrats. One participant thought that Democrats in general supported defunding the police, and another said of Donald Trump’s comments about Mexicans, “I feel like he just said what other people were thinking.”

It’s a cliché at this point to say that Latino voters are politically powerful, that they often hold complicated political positions, that it’s not a given that they’ll vote for Democrats. What comes after these clichés will become clearer only in the coming weeks, months and years, as politicians, news outlets and the country pay more attention to voters like these participants.

Lenin

33, Texas, independent, insurance sales

Orlando

53, Florida, independent, computer-aided design drafter

Lourdes

42, Texas, leans Democratic, receptionist

Sally

60, Texas, Republican, airline assistant

Christina

43, Texas, leans Republican, homemaker

Kelly

38, Texas, independent, recruiter

Jerry

22, Florida, Republican, banker

José

39, Florida, leans Democratic, finance

John

58, Arizona, Republican, photographer

Cindy

35, Florida, leans Republican, financial case manager More