Elections

Representative Abigail Spanberger, a Virginia Democrat locked in a competitive battle for re-election, is releasing a new ad that laces into her opponent’s stance on abortion rights, told from the perspective of a rape survivor.Ms. Spanberger is running against Yesli Vega, a Republican supervisor and auxiliary deputy with the Prince William County Sheriff’s Office, who falsely suggested in leaked audio this year that pregnancy from rape may be unlikely — a remark that has since become a flash point in the race.“Yesli Vega said women can’t get pregnant from rape because it’s not happening organically — that made me sick,” says the narrator in the direct-to-camera spot, who identifies herself as Adelle of Prince William County, Va., and says she was raped at age 17. “Yesli Vega would even vote to ban abortion with no exceptions, even for victims of rape. The thought of Yesli Vega in Congress is terrifying.”Ms. Vega’s team has said she does support some exceptions for abortion.Yesli Vega at her primary election night watch party in Woodbridge, Virginia in June. Ms. Vega falsely suggested in leaked audio this year that pregnancy from rape may be unlikely.Pete Marovich for The New York TimesMs. Spanberger’s new ad buy, which her campaign said would begin at more than a half-million dollars, underscores that Democrats in highly competitive races continue to see abortion rights as a galvanizing and persuasive issue in the final stretch of the midterm elections after the overturning of Roe v. Wade. They are seeking to cast Republicans as far outside the mainstream on issues like abortion rights and matters of privacy, while some Republicans like Ms. Vega emphasize issues like cost of living and public safety (Ms. Spanberger, a former C.I.A. officer, has also been vocal on issues like combating crime.). “My opponent has doubted whether women can get pregnant from rape, a notion that denies both science and the experience of far too many survivors of sexual violence,” Ms. Spanberger said in a statement. “In recounting her own experience, Adelle provides a cleareyed assessment of what’s at stake in this election.”Ms. Vega’s team did not immediately respond to a request for comment on the new ad. In a statement over the summer, Ms. Vega said, “as a mother of two children, yes I’m fully aware of how women get pregnant.”More recently, she told reporters, according to Roll Call, “I am pro-life. I always have been and always will be. As a law enforcement officer, I have stood up for the defenseless, the voiceless, and I will continue to do that in every capacity that I can, and that is my comment.” The ad is slated to run at least through most of October, Ms. Spanberger’s campaign said. More

Diana Nguyen and Rachel Quester and Marion Lozano and Listen and follow The DailyApple Podcasts | Spotify | StitcherLatino voters have never seemed more electorally important than in the coming midterm elections: the first real referendum on the Biden era of government.Latinos make up 20 percent of registered voters in two crucial Senate races — Arizona and Nevada — and as much or more in over a dozen competitive House races.In the past 10 years, the conventional wisdom about Latino voters has been uprooted. We explore a poll, conducted by The Times, to better understand how they view the parties vying for their vote.On today’s episodeJennifer Medina, a national politics reporter for The New York Times.Dani Bernal, born in Bolivia and raised in Miami, described herself as an independent who’s in line with Democrats on social issues but Republicans on the economy.Jenna Schoenefeld for The New York TimesBackground readingTwo years after former President Donald Trump made surprising gains with Hispanic voters, Republican dreams of a major realignment have failed to materialize, according to a New York Times/Siena College poll.There are a lot of ways to listen to The Daily. Here’s how.We aim to make transcripts available the next workday after an episode’s publication. You can find them at the top of the page.Jennifer Medina More

At an invitation-only conference in August at a secret location southeast of Phoenix, a group of election deniers unspooled a new conspiracy theory about the 2020 presidential outcome.Using threadbare evidence, or none at all, the group suggested that a small American election software company, Konnech, had secret ties to the Chinese Communist Party and had given the Chinese government backdoor access to personal data about two million poll workers in the United States, according to online accounts from several people at the conference.In the ensuing weeks, the conspiracy theory grew as it shot around the internet. To believers, the claims showed how China had gained near complete control of America’s elections. Some shared LinkedIn pages for Konnech employees who have Chinese backgrounds and sent threatening emails to the company and its chief executive, who was born in China.“Might want to book flights back to Wuhan before we hang you until dead!” one person wrote in an email to the company.In the two years since former President Donald J. Trump lost his re-election bid, conspiracy theorists have subjected election officials and private companies that play a major role in elections to a barrage of outlandish voter fraud claims.But the attacks on Konnech demonstrate how far-right election deniers are also giving more attention to new and more secondary companies and groups. Their claims often find a receptive online audience, which then uses the assertions to raise doubts about the integrity of American elections.Unlike other election technology companies targeted by election deniers, Konnech, a company based in Michigan with 21 employees in the United States and six in Australia, has nothing to do with collecting, counting or reporting ballots in American elections. Instead, it helps clients like Los Angeles County and Allen County, Ind., with basic election logistics, such as scheduling poll workers.Konnech said none of the accusations were true. It said that all the data for its American customers were stored on servers in the United States and that it had no ties to the Chinese government.But the claims have had consequences for the firm. Konnech’s founder and chief executive, Eugene Yu, an American citizen who immigrated from China in 1986, went into hiding with his family after receiving threatening messages. Other employees also feared for their safety and started working remotely, after users posted details about Konnech’s headquarters, including the number of cars in the company’s parking lot.“I’ve cried,” Mr. Yu wrote in an email. “Other than the birth of my daughter, I hadn’t cried since kindergarten.”The company said the ordeal had forced it to conduct costly audits and could threaten future deals. It hired Reputation Architects, a public relations and crisis management company, to help navigate the situation.After the conspiracy theorists discovered that DeKalb County in Georgia was close to signing a contract with Konnech, officials there received emails and comments about the company, claiming it had “foreign ties.” The county Republican Party chairwoman, Marci McCarthy, heard from so many members about Konnech that she echoed parts of the conspiracy theory at a public comment period during the county’s elections board meeting.“We have a lot of questions about this vendor,” Ms. McCarthy said.The county signed the contract soon after the meeting.“It’s a completely fabricated issue,” Dele Lowman Smith, the elections board chair, said in an interview. “It’s absolutely bizarre, but it’s part of the tone and tenor of what we’re having to deal with leading up to the elections.”Although Konnech is a new target, the people raising questions about the company include some names notorious for spreading election falsehoods.The recent conference outside Phoenix was organized by True the Vote, a nonprofit founded by the prominent election denier Catherine Engelbrecht. She was joined onstage by Gregg Phillips, an election fraud conspiracy theorist who often works with the group. The pair achieved notoriety this year after being featured in “2000 Mules,” a widely debunked documentary claiming that a mysterious army of operatives influenced the 2020 presidential election.Ms. Engelbrecht and Mr. Phillips claimed at the conference and in livestreams that they investigated Konnech in early 2021. Eventually, they said, the group’s team gained access to Konnech’s database by guessing the password, which was “password,” according to the online accounts from people who attended the conference. Once inside, they told attendees, the team downloaded personal information on about 1.8 million poll workers.A Truth Social account shared the conspiracy theory about Konnech that Gregg Phillips, left on the stage, and Catherine Engelbrecht presented at an event in Arizona in August.Truth SocialThe pair said they had notified the Federal Bureau of Investigation of their findings. According to their story, the agents briefly investigated their claim before turning on the group and questioning whether it had hacked the data.The F.B.I.’s press office said the agency “does not comment on complaints or tips we may or may not receive from the public.”Konnech said in a statement that True the Vote’s claim it had access to a database of 1.8 million poll workers was impossible because, among other reasons, the company had records on fewer than 240,000 poll workers at the time. And the records on those workers are not kept on a single database.The company said it had not detected any data breach, but declined to provide details about its technology, citing security concerns.Konnech once owned Jinhua Yulian Network Technology, a subsidiary out of China, where programmers developed and tested software. But the company said its employees there had always used “generic ‘dummy’ data created specifically for testing purposes.” Konnech closed the subsidiary in 2021 and no longer has employees in China.Konnech sued True the Vote last month, accusing it of defamation, violation of the federal Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, theft and other charges.The judge in the case granted Konnech’s request for an emergency temporary restraining order against the group, writing that Konnech faced “irreparable harm” and that there was a risk that True the Vote would destroy evidence. The order also required True the Vote to explain how it had supposedly gained access to Konnech’s data.True the Vote, Ms. Engelbrecht and Mr. Phillips said they could not comment because of a restraining order issued against them.But in a livestream on social media, Ms. Engelbrecht said the allegations by Konnech were meritless. “True the Vote looks forward to a public conversation about Konnech’s attempts to silence examination of its activities through litigation,” she said.Since the restraining order, True the Vote, Ms. Engelbrecht and Mr. Phillips have told Konnech a new version of their story, changing several important details.Mr. Phillips had explained in a podcast on Aug. 22 that “my analysts” had gained access to the data. But in a letter shared with Konnech’s lawyers, the group claimed that a third party who “was not contracted to us or paid by us” had approached them, claiming it had Konnech’s data. That person, who was unnamed except in a sealed court filing, presented only a “screen share” of “certain elements” of the data. They added that while the group had been provided with a hard drive containing the data, they “did not view the contents,” instead sharing it with the F.B.I.“True the Vote has never obtained or held any data as described in your petition,” they wrote. “This is just one of many inaccuracies contained therein.”The lawsuit did little to slow believers, who continued attacking Konnech. Some employees left the company, citing stress from the crisis, Mr. Yu said. The departures added to the workload among remaining staff just a few weeks before the midterm election.As True the Vote blanketed Konnech’s customers with information requests last year, Mr. Yu sent an email to Ms. Engelbrecht offering his help. True the Vote released that email exchange, including his unredacted email address and phone number, and a trove of other documents related to the company. That gave conspiracy theorists an easy way to target Mr. Yu with threatening messages. He now calls the email he sent naïve.“As we did more research into who they were, it became more and more clear that they had no interest in the truth,” he said. “For them, the truth is inconvenient.”Alexandra Berzon More

No, they are not favored. But the notion of retaining the chamber is not as far-fetched as it once was.House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and the House minority leader, Kevin McCarthy, before the memorial service last month for Queen Elizabeth II in Washington. Republicans are favored to retake the House. Manuel Balce Ceneta/Associated PressThere were more than a few Democrats who were a little miffed about my Friday newsletter on gerrymandering, which argued that Democrats aren’t at a terribly significant structural disadvantage in the race for the House.I understand why Democrats don’t love reading that the obstacles they face — especially unjust ones — aren’t so bad. But underneath what some might read as a dismissal of the seriousness of gerrymandering is a kernel of good news for Democratic readers: Republican control of the House is not a foregone conclusion.No, I’m not saying Democrats are favored. The likeliest scenario is still that Republicans will find the five seats they need to take control. And no one should be surprised if Republicans flip a lot more than that — especially with early signs that the political winds may be starting to shift in ways that might yield some Republican gains in key races (more on this tomorrow).But the idea that Democrats can hold the House is not as ridiculous, implausible or far-fetched as it seemed before the Dobbs ruling overturned Roe v. Wade. It is a real possibility — not some abstraction in the sense that anything can happen.In fact, not much would need to happen at all.If the polls are “right” and Election Day were today, the fight for the House would be very close. It would be a district-by-district battle for control, one in which the race might come down to the strengths and weaknesses of individual candidates and campaigns. With a few lucky breaks, Democrats could come out ahead.The State of the 2022 Midterm ElectionsWith the primaries over, both parties are shifting their focus to the general election on Nov. 8.Sensing a Shift: As November approaches, there are a few signs that the political winds may have begun to blow in a different direction — one that might help Republicans over the final stretch.Focusing on Crime: Across the country, Republicans are attacking Democrats as soft on crime to rally midterm voters. Pennsylvania’s Senate contest offers an especially pointed example of this strategy.Arizona Senate Race: Blake Masters, a Republican, appears to be struggling to win over independent voters, who make up about a third of the state’s electorate.Pennsylvania Governor’s Race: Doug Mastriano, the Trump-backed G.O.P. nominee, is being heavily outspent and trails badly in polling. National Republicans are showing little desire to help him.Those are two huge “ifs,” of course. But with five weeks to go until the election, those “ifs” aren’t exactly a good enough reason to justify writing off the race for the House.How could this be? It’s more straightforward than you might think. Democrats hold a narrow lead on the generic congressional ballot, a poll question asking whether voters would prefer Democrats or Republicans for Congress. If Republicans don’t have a robust structural advantage, as I wrote last Friday, then why wouldn’t the Democrats at least be competitive in the race for Congress? On paper, the Democratic disadvantage is fairly comparable to their disadvantage in the Senate — which most everyone agrees Democrats have a decent chance to hold this cycle.Of course, the reason we think Democrats might overcome their obstacles in the Senate is because we have dozens of polls in critical Senate races. Thanks to those polls, we know Democrats lead in Pennsylvania and Arizona, which we might have assumed were tossups otherwise. In contrast, we have no idea whether Democrats are leading in equivalent races for the House: There are almost no nonpartisan House polls at all, and they’re spread out across many more races.But if Democrats can do what they appear to be doing in the Senate, there’s no reason to assume they couldn’t already be doing something similar in the House. If we had as many House polls as we do in the Senate, perhaps Democrats would appear to be ahead in the race for the House as well.On this point, it’s worth pausing on the decision by House Republicans to pull adds in Ohio’s Ninth District. This district voted for former President Donald J. Trump by three percentage points in 2020; it was redrawn to defeat the longtime Democratic incumbent, Marcy Kaptur. But Republicans nominated J.R. Majewski, a stop-the-steal candidate who misrepresented his military service for good measure. The Republicans canceled nearly $1 million in scheduled advertisements.Mr. Majewski may well win in the end, but this is exactly the sort of story we see playing out in the Senate — weak Republican candidates failing to capitalize on their underlying advantages, with well-funded Democratic incumbents positioned to pounce. The district is now characterized as “lean Democratic” by the Cook Political Report.I asked my friend Dave Wasserman, House editor of the Cook Political Report, whether he thought Democrats would appear to lead in the race for the House today if there were robust polling averages in every district, as there are in the Senate. He said they would, with Democrats leading the polls “in maybe 220 to 225 seats,” more than the 218 needed for a majority.The fragmentary nonpartisan House polling we do have is intriguing. These polls don’t say much about any particular district (with the exception of Alaska’s At-Large, another race where the Republicans may be forfeiting what little remains of their structural advantage). But on average, Democrats are running a net 3.9 points behind President Biden — a number that’s essentially consistent with a tied national vote (Mr. Biden won by 4.5 points in 2020) — across the 29 districts where there have been polls since Aug. 1.In the end, most analysts — including me and Mr. Wasserman — still think Republicans are favored to win the House. In this national environment, it would be no surprise if the polls trended toward the Republicans over the next few weeks. If they don’t, we’ll be nervous that the polls are about to be off yet again. That’s not just because the polls have underestimated Republicans in recent cycles, but also because the long history of out-party success in midterm elections weighs heavily on our thinking.But until or unless the polls shift more clearly in the G.O.P.’s favor, there’s no reason to dismiss the prospect of a Democratic House. Not anymore. More

A majority of House Republicans last year voted to challenge the Electoral College and upend the presidential election. A majority of House Republicans last year voted to challenge the Electoral College and upend the presidential election. That action, signaled ahead of the vote in signed petitions, would change the direction of the party. That action, […] More

The two political titans will face off again later this month in a race widely seen as a major test for one of the world’s largest democracies.RIO DE JANEIRO — For months, pollsters and analysts had said that President Jair Bolsonaro was doomed. He faced a wide and unwavering deficit in Brazil’s high-stakes presidential race, and in recent weeks, the polls had suggested he could even lose in the first round, ending his presidency after just one term.Instead, it was Mr. Bolsonaro who was celebrating. While the challenger, Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, a former leftist president, finished the night ahead, Mr. Bolsonaro far outperformed forecasts and sent the race to a runoff.Mr. da Silva received 48.4 percent of the votes, and Mr. Bolsonaro 43.23 percent, with 99.87 percent of the ballots counted, according to Brazil’s elections agency. Mr. da Silva needed to exceed 50 percent to be elected president in the first round.They will face off on Oct. 30 in what is widely regarded as the most important vote in decades for Latin America’s largest nation.That is partly because of the starkly different visions the two men set forth for this country of 217 million people, and partly because Brazil faces a host of challenges, including environmental threats, rising hunger, a sputtering economy and a deeply polarized population.The former president, Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, speaking after election results were announced on Sunday. Mr. da Silva and President Jair Bolsonaro will face each other in a runoff later this month.Victor Moriyama for The New York TimesBut the election will also be widely watched in Brazil and abroad because it is seen as a major test for one of the world’s largest democracies. For months, Mr. Bolsonaro has criticized the nation’s electronic voting machines as rife with fraud — without any evidence — and has suggested that the only way he would lose is if the election is rigged.Mr. Bolsonaro told reporters late Sunday that he “overcame the lies” in the polls and that he felt he now had an advantage in the second round. Even with the positive results, he also suggested there could have been fraud, saying he would wait for the military to check the results. “Our system is not 100 percent ironclad,” he said. “There’s always the possibility of something abnormal happening in a fully computerized system.”Mr. Bolsonaro had claimed for months that the polls were underestimating his support, using his enormous rallies as evidence. Yet, virtually every poll showed him behind. On Sunday, it was clear that he was right. He performed better in all of Brazil’s 27 states than what Ipec, one of Brazil’s biggest polling firms, had predicted a day before the election, exceeding the projections by at least 8 percentage points in 10 states.Pollsters appeared to misjudge the strength of conservative candidates across the country. Governors and lawmakers supported by Mr. Bolsonaro also outperformed polls, winning many of their races on Sunday.Cláudio Castro, the right-wing governor of Rio de Janeiro state, was re-elected in a landslide, with 58 percent of votes, 11 percentage points more than Ipec’s projection. At least seven of Mr. Bolsonaro’s former ministers were also elected to Congress, including his former environment minister, who oversaw skyrocketing deforestation in the Amazon, and his former health minister, who was widely criticized for Brazil’s delay in buying vaccines during the pandemic.Antonio Lavareda, the president of Ipespe, another top polling company, defended his firm’s research, pointing out that it had predicted Mr. da Silva would finish with 49 percent, versus the 48 percent he received. Yet Ipespe also predicted Mr. Bolsonaro would receive 35 percent of the vote, more than 8 percentage points below his actual support. The poll’s margin of error was 3 percentage points. (That trend played out across the polls; they were nearly accurate on Mr. da Silva’s support, but far off on Mr. Bolsonaro’s.)Mr. Lavareda speculated that many voters who had said they would vote for less popular candidates had switched to Mr. Bolsonaro — or that they had lied to the pollsters.Outside Mr. Bolsonaro’s home in a rich, beachside neighborhood in Rio de Janeiro, his supporters gathered to celebrate, dancing and drinking out of plastic cups of beer. Many were wearing the bright yellow jerseys of Brazil’s national soccer team, which has become a sort of uniform for many of Mr. Bolsonaro’s supporters. (The president wore one to vote, over what appeared to be a flak jacket or protective vest.)“We expected he would have an advantage of 70 percent” of the votes, said Silvana Maria Lenzir, 65, a retiree with stickers of Mr. Bolsonaro’s face covering her chest. “Polls do not reflect reality.”President Jair Bolsonaro at a rally in Campinas, São Paulo state, last month.Victor Moriyama for The New York TimesStill, over the next four weeks, Mr. Bolsonaro will have to make up ground on Mr. da Silva, who held the top spot on Sunday. The right-wing president is trying to avoid becoming the first incumbent to lose his re-election bid since the start of Brazil’s modern democracy in 1988.At the same time, Mr. da Silva is trying to complete a stunning political revival that years ago had seemed unthinkable.While Mr. da Silva ended the night as the front-runner, his speech to supporters took on a somber tone. But he said he welcomed the chance to now debate Mr. Bolsonaro one-on-one.“We can compare the Brazil he built and the Brazil we built,” he said. “Tomorrow the campaign starts.”A former metalworker and union leader with a fifth-grade education, Mr. da Silva led Brazil during its boom in the first decade of the century. He was then convicted on corruption charges after he left office and spent 580 days in prison. Last year, the Supreme Court threw out those charges, ruling the judge in his cases was biased, and voters have since rallied behind the man known simply as Lula.The two men are the country’s most prominent — and polarizing — politicians. The left in Brazil views Mr. Bolsonaro as a dangerous threat to the nation’s democracy and its standing on the world stage, while the country’s conservatives see Mr. da Silva as an ex-convict who was a central part of a vast corruption scheme that helped rot Brazil’s institutions. Mr. da Silva, 76, is pitching voters on a plan to raise taxes on the rich to expand services for the poor, including widening the social safety net, increasing the minimum wage and feeding and housing more people.Supporters of Mr. da Silva’s Workers’ Party reacting to election results in Brasília, on Sunday.Dado Galdieri for The New York TimesMr. da Silva has built his campaign around broad promises for a better future, including a pledge that all Brazilians should be able to enjoy three meals a day. His rallies have also heavily leaned on his Everyman image, with plenty of references to beer, cachaça and picanha, Brazil’s most famous cut of meat.Mr. Bolsonaro, 67, has made his campaign about protecting Brazil’s conservative traditions from what he says are threats from leftist elites. He has made his campaign slogan “God, family, homeland and liberty,” and he has vowed to fight against things like legalized drugs, legalized abortion, transgender rights and restrictions on freedom of religion and free speech. Mr. Bolsonaro wants to further increase access to firearms, repeating in his stump speech that “armed people will never be enslaved.” One of his main accomplishments during his first term was soaring gun ownership.Facing a wide gap in polls, Mr. Bolsonaro recently expanded social welfare for poor families, and he has pledged to continue those policies during his second term.Mr. Bolsonaro has also said he wants to sell Brazil’s state-owned oil company, make it easier to mine in the Amazon rainforest and continue to reduce regulations on industry. Many businesses have welcomed Mr. Bolsonaro’s free-market approach, but it has led to soaring environmental destruction.Supporters of President Jair Bolsonaro cheering in Brasília, on Sunday.Dado Galdieri for The New York TimesThe election could be consequential for the world’s largest rainforest. While Mr. Bolsonaro has said he would crack down on environmental violations, he has cut funding and staffing for the agencies tasked with enforcing environmental laws, while casting doubt on statistics that show the destruction of the forest during his first term.Mr. da Silva campaigned on a promise to eradicate illegal mining and logging, and said he would push farmers to use areas of the forest that had already been cleared.Mr. da Silva’s election would extend a string of leftist victories across Latin America, fueled by a wave of anti-incumbent backlash. If elected, six of the region’s seven largest countries will have chosen leftist leaders since 2018.Mr. Bolsonaro’s first term has been marked by turmoil, including clashes with the courts, corruption scandals and a pandemic that killed more people than anywhere other than the United States. But it has been his suggestions that he won’t relinquish power if he is voted that has alarmed many Brazilians and the international community.Last year, Mr. Bolsonaro told his supporters there were three outcomes to the election: He wins, he is killed or he is arrested. He then added, “Tell the bastards I’ll never be arrested.”Mr. Bolsonaro has questioned Brazil’s electronic voting machines for years, despite the fact that there has been no evidence of widespread fraud in the system since Brazil began using it in the late 1990s.Four days before Sunday’s vote, his political party released a two-page document that claimed, without evidence, that some government employees and contractors had the “absolute power to manipulate election results without leaving a trace.” Election officials called those claims “false and dishonest” and “a clear attempt to hinder and disrupt” the election.A day later, at the final debate before Sunday’s vote, Mr. Bolsonaro was asked directly if he would accept the election’s results. He did not answer.Inspecting, testing and sealing electronic voting machines in São Paulo, last month.Victor Moriyama for The New York TimesFlávia Milhorance More

Plus Brazil votes in national elections and China wrestles with Covid fatigue.Soccer fans carried an injured man away from the stadium.Yudha Prabowo/Associated PressAn Indonesian stadium tragedyAt least 125 people died when soccer fans rushed the field after a professional soccer match in Malang, Indonesia, on Saturday. Many were trampled.The police fired tear gas into the tightly packed crowds, leading to a stampede. Survivors said that the gas was fired indiscriminately into the stands, forcing the overcapacity crowd to rush for the exits. Many are angry at the police response, which observers said had made the situation worse.“If there wasn’t any tear gas shot into the stands, there would have not been any casualties,” one man said, adding that people had “panicked” and rushed to the field to save themselves. When he tries to sleep, he said, he still hears people screaming.Reaction: Rights organizations condemned the use of tear gas, which is prohibited by FIFA, soccer’s global governing body. One policing expert said that using tear gas, which is designed to disperse crowds, in secure areas where people have nowhere to go is “incredibly, incredibly dangerous.”Analysis: The combination of large crowds and aggressive policing can prove disastrous, writes Rory Smith, my colleague who covers soccer, in an analysis. When tragedies occur, he writes, “they tend to be the consequence not of fan violence but of failures of policing, security and crowd management.”Background: Soccer violence has long been a problem for Indonesia, where violent rivalries between major teams are common. Worldwide, Saturday’s match was among the deadliest episodes in the history of the sport. After a decade of overlapping crises, Brazilians lined up to cast votes yesterday. Dado Galdieri for The New York TimesBrazil votes in national electionsBrazilians cast votes yesterday in the country’s most consequential election in decades. Here are live updates.Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, a former leftist president once imprisoned amid a corruption scandal, is seeking to oust Jair Bolsonaro, the far-right populist president who has questioned the election’s integrity and has long trailed in the polls. (It’s basically a two-man race, although nine other people are on the ballot.) The State of the WarAnnexation Push: After Moscow’s proxies conducted a series of sham referendums in the Ukrainian regions of Zaporizhzhia, Kherson, Luhansk and Donetsk, President Vladimir V. Putin declared the four territories to be part of Russia. Western leaders, including President Biden in the United States, denounced the annexation as illegal.Retreat From Key City: Russian forces withdrew from the strategically important city of Lyman, in Donetsk Province, on Oct. 1. The retreat was a significant setback for Moscow, coming just a day after Mr. Putin declared the region to be Russian territory.U.S. Military Aid: The Pentagon seems to be preparing to overhaul how the United States and its allies train and equip the Ukrainian military, reflecting what officials say is the Biden administration’s long-term commitment to supporting Ukraine in the war.Russia’s Draft: The Kremlin has acknowledged that its new military draft is rife with problems, as protests have erupted across Russia, recruitment centers have been attacked and thousands of men have left the country.The next president will face an economic crisis, surging Amazon deforestation and lingering questions over the health of one of the world’s biggest democracies. An alarming question now hangs over the vote: Will Bolsonaro accept the results?Context: Bolsonaro has been casting doubt on the security of Brazil’s electronic voting system for months. On the eve of the election, his party did so again. He has, in effect, said that the only way he would lose is if the election were stolen from him.Climate: The future of the Amazon rainforest may be at stake. Deforestation of the world’s largest rainforest has hit 15-year highs under Bolsonaro, who has weakened environmental protections and wants the rainforest opened up to mining, ranching and agriculture.Pakistani farmers tried to salvage what is left from a cotton field.Kiana Hayeri for The New York TimesPakistan’s floods worsen debtsPakistan’s recent, record-shattering floods have submerged its fields and its small farmers deeper into debt with their landlords.Many are in sharecropping arrangements and already owed hundreds or thousands of dollars. Landlords offer farmers loans to buy seeds and fertilizer each planting season. In exchange, farmers cultivate their fields and earn a small cut of the harvest, a portion of which goes toward repaying the loan.Now, their summer harvests are in ruins. Unless the water recedes, they will not be able to plant the wheat they harvest each spring. Even if they can, the land is certain to produce less after being damaged by the floodwaters.Details: One 14-year-old recently waded through waist-deep water filled with snakes to pick cotton. “It was our only source of livelihood,” she said. In the hardest-hit regions, where the floods drowned villages, authorities warn that the waters may not fully recede for months.Analysis: As extreme weather events become increasingly common, the cycle is worsening. Pakistan’s floods were especially cataclysmic because of a combination of heavy glacier melt and record monsoon rains, which scientists say were both intensified by climate change.THE LATEST NEWSAsia PacificLiu Jingyao filed a civil suit against Richard Liu. Lawyers said the parties had agreed to “set aside their differences” in order to avoid further pain and suffering. Caroline Yang for The New York TimesRichard Liu, a Chinese billionaire, reached a settlement with Liu Jingyao, a former University of Minnesota student who had accused him of rape. The case has been seen as a landmark in China’s struggling #MeToo movement.North Korea launched two ballistic missiles into the ocean on Saturday, the country’s fourth test since Sunday of last week.Thailand’s Constitutional Court ruled on Friday that Prayuth Chan-ocha, the prime minister who took control in a 2014 coup, can stay in power. The decision is expected to revive the pro-democracy protests that rocked Bangkok in 2020.A suicide attack in Kabul on Friday killed at least 19 people, mostly young female students. The U.S. and 14 Pacific Island nations signed a broad partnership agreement last week designed to counter China.The War in UkraineHere are live updates.Russian forces retreated from Lyman, a key Ukrainian city, one day after Vladimir Putin illegally declared control of the Donbas region. The loss further imperils the Kremlin’s grip on Donbas.Pope Francis appealed yesterday to Putin and Volodymyr Zelensky, Ukraine’s president, to end the war.Ukraine applied to join NATO. Yesterday, nine European leaders expressed support for the bid, which is likely to face hurdles.Each day, about 10,000 Russian men are trying to cross into Georgia to flee draft orders. “I do not support the war, and I do not want to go kill Ukrainians,” one said.World NewsDamage from Hurricane Ian in Florida.Hilary Swift for The New York TimesThe death toll in Florida from Hurricane Ian grew to about 80. Burkina Faso has weathered its second coup in ten months. Yesterday, the army officer who seized power in January conceded that he too had been ousted by mutinying soldiers.Uganda is racing to control a deadly Ebola outbreak.Venezuela and Iran released American prisoners over the weekend.What Else Is HappeningIran’s long economic decline is fueling a widespread protest movement, which continues despite heavy crackdowns.Nick Kyrgios, the Australian tennis star, is set to face a charge of assaulting a former girlfriend.“Saturday Night Live” kicked off its new season. Eight veteran cast members have left the show this year.A Morning ReadA line at a Covid testing site in Beijing in June.Kevin Frayer/Getty ImagesMy colleague Vivian Wang, a Times correspondent in China, described the grinding reality of life under Covid. People schedule lunch breaks around completing mandatory tests and buy second freezers to stock up on groceries for future lockdowns.“The disruptive becomes typical; the once-unimaginable, reality,” she writes.ARTS AND IDEASAsia beckons againSeveral Asian destinations are loosening their Covid restrictions on international travel. Our Travel desk looked at how four destinations were preparing for the return of tourism.Kyoto, one of Japan’s most-visited cities, wants to bring back tourists but avoid Instagram-driven excesses. (“Kyoto isn’t a tourist city, it’s a city that values tourism,” the mayor said.) Koh Tao, a Thai island, is trying to balance tourism with an environmental focus. On the edge of Delhi, a contemporary art scene and a burgeoning cosmopolitan class are taking shape. And rural South Korea offers serene, unhurried nature.The Travel desk also asked five photographers who live in Asia to share their favorite foods from India, Thailand, Singapore, Japan and South Korea. And they offer advice on budget travel, translation apps and some great new hotels.PLAY, WATCH, EATWhat to CookChris Simpson for The New York TimesMini bibingkas — Filipino coconut cakes — are fluffy and perfect for sharing, Ligaya Mishan writes.What to ReadRead your way through Rome.What to WatchIn “Bros,” a gay romantic comedy, a man who has sworn off relationships finds himself falling in love.Now Time to PlayPlay the Mini Crossword, and a clue: In the know (five letters).Here are the Wordle and the Spelling Bee.You can find all our puzzles here.That’s it for today’s briefing. See you next time. — AmeliaP.S. I am now officially the lead writer of this newsletter! If you have feedback or suggestions, I’d welcome them. Please write to me: [email protected] latest episode of “The Daily” is on Hurricane Ian.You can reach Amelia and the team at [email protected]. More

Clarence and Virginia (Ginni) Thomas don’t discuss their dueling efforts to destroy our democracy when they come home from a day of wreaking havoc.That’s what Ms. Thomas, a conservative activist and an adherent to the lie that Donald Trump won the last election, wants us to believe. That’s essentially what she told the House committee investigating the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol when it interviewed her last week.I don’t believe that any more than I believe Trump can declassify documents with his mind.Why does this matter? Because Ms. Thomas pressed the White House and various state legislators to overturn the 2020 election, and her husband has refused to recuse himself from election-related cases. In fact, Justice Thomas was the Supreme Court’s lone dissent when it rejected Trump’s efforts to withhold documents from the Jan. 6 committee.In March, The National Law Journal spoke with several experts who agreed that Justice Thomas should have recused himself from the case. One called his refusal to do so “arguably unprecedented.”Ms. Thomas didn’t just encourage people to overturn the election; she was at the Stop the Steal rally from which the insurrection sprang on Jan. 6, although she told The Washington Free Beacon that she returned home before Trump took the stage.In other words, Ms. Thomas is a one-woman constitutional crisis.According to The New York Times, during her testimony before the committee, Ms. Thomas repeated her assertion that the 2020 election was stolen from Trump. That is a lie. She knows it, and we know it.Because she is repeating this lie, I can’t believe anything she says without proof. Therefore, her claim that she never discussed her election subversion activities with her husband rings hollow.Did she also not share with him her seemingly deranged Facebook posts framing the teenage survivors of the Parkland shooting as “dangerous to the survival of our nation” or espousing the conspiracy theory that Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton wiretapped Trump?Is the Thomas household just silent, filled only with the hum of grievance and betrayal? Or do these spend their time talking in trivialities, reminiscing about their polar opposite upbringings — him born in the predominately Black, Gullah community of Pin Point, Ga., her born in predominantly white Omaha, Neb., which at the time was facing its own racial tensions?Maybe they share maleficent chuckles recalling how he rebuffed questions at his confirmation hearing in 1991 over the allegations that he sexually harassed Anita Hill, calling it, absurdly, a “high-tech lynching,” or how Ms. Thomas in 2010 left a voice mail message for Hill, demanding that she apologize to her husband.According to The Times, the message was: “Good morning, Anita Hill. It’s Ginni Thomas. I just wanted to reach across the airwaves and the years and ask you to consider something. I would love you to consider an apology sometime and some full explanation of why you did what you did with my husband.”What?! Ma’am, if you don’t stop playing on that lady’s phone!The ask was brazen. It was disrespectful. It was delusional. But that’s Ginni Thomas.Sure, maybe the woman with the audacity to call her husband’s accuser and ask that person to apologize to the man she says abused her is too bashful at home to raise her most recent antics with her husband. But it seems unlikely; for years, journalists have documented how close and forthright Justice and Ms. Thomas are with each other. As early as 1991, the year he was confirmed, one of his longtime friends, Evan Kemp, told The Washington Post that she was the one person he really listened to.In the same article, one of Ms. Thomas’s aunts is quoted as saying Justice Thomas “was so nice, we forgot he was Black.” She added, “And he treated her so well, all of his other qualities made up for his being Black.”Can you imagine? How must it feel to marry into a family where people think of your Blackness as a weight on the wrong side of the scales and you have to achieve at the highest level to balance it out? Of course, Justice Thomas may not object to that characterization. But he and his wife may still spend their quiet time unpacking it.Ms. Thomas is not a minor player and outside agitator. She is connected and influential. According to The Times, she led a group of hard-right activists in a White House meeting with Trump where “members of the group denounced transgender people and women serving in the military.”According to the paper, one of the people the group asked to have at the meeting was an assistant Ms. Thomas hired after the conservative group Turning Point USA fired the person for texting a colleague, “I hate Black people.”Since Ms. Thomas is married to a Black man, I can’t make any of that make sense. Maybe, like her aunt, she forgot Justice Thomas was Black.But the major issue remains: The wife of a Supreme Court justice has been actively engaged in trying to overturn an election, and the justice won’t recuse himself from any cases related to that issue. They are Mr. and Mrs. Mutiny.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 and Twitter (@NYTopinion), and Instagram. More