Elections

The platform, which was voted on at the Republican state party convention in Houston, was the latest sign of Texas conservatives moving further to the right.The Republican Party in Texas made a series of far-right declarations as part of its official party platform over the weekend, claiming that President Biden was not legitimately elected, issuing a “rebuke” to Senator John Cornyn for his work on bipartisan gun legislation and referring to homosexuality as “an abnormal lifestyle choice.”The platform was voted on in Houston at the state party’s convention, which concluded on Saturday.The resolutions about Mr. Biden and Mr. Cornyn were approved by a voice vote of the delegates, according to James Wesolek, the communications director for the Republican Party of Texas. The statements about homosexuality — as well as additional stances on abortion that called for students to “learn about the Humanity of the Preborn Child” — were among more than 270 planks that were approved by a platform committee and voted on by the larger group of convention delegates using paper ballots. The results of those votes were still pending on Sunday, but Mr. Wesolek said it was rare for a plank to be voted down by the full convention after being approved by the committee.The resolutions adopting the false claims that former President Donald J. Trump was the victim of a stolen election in 2020 as well as the other declarations were the latest examples of Texas Republicans moving further to the right in recent months. Republicans control both chambers of the legislature, the governor’s mansion and every statewide office, and have used their dominance to push tough anti-abortion legislation, create supply-chain problems by temporarily adding additional state inspections at the border and renominate the Trump-backed state attorney general over a member of the Bush family in a primary runoff in May.Mr. Wesolek disputed the notion that the declarations were tied to the state party’s rightward tilt. “That was the will of the body,” Mr. Wesolek said on Sunday. “We pride ourselves on being a grass-roots party.”State party conventions in Texas have at times been venues for publicly airing internal rifts. In 2012, Gov. Rick Perry was loudly booed at the state Republican convention when he said he was backing the powerful lieutenant governor over Ted Cruz in a contested primary for Senate. On Friday, Mr. Cornyn — a key negotiator in the gun talks with Democrats — was booed by convention goers during a speech in which he tried to assure Republicans that the new legislation would not infringe on the rights of gun owners.The state party’s resolution embracing the baseless 2020 stolen-election claims stated that “substantial election fraud in key metropolitan areas significantly affected the results in five key states in favor of” Mr. Biden. The state party, the resolution continued, rejected “the certified results of the 2020 Presidential election, and we hold that acting President Joseph Robinette Biden Jr. was not legitimately elected by the people of the United States.”The resolution encouraged Republicans to “show up to vote” in November, and to “bring your friends and family, volunteer for your local Republicans and overwhelm any possible fraud.”Senator John Cornyn, Republican of Texas, during a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on gun violence in Washington last week.Anna Rose Layden for The New York TimesState Representative Steve Toth, a Republican who represents part of Montgomery County, a Houston suburb, said he left the convention before voting on the resolutions, but he expressed support for them. He said he hoped the Biden resolution would “encourage Republicans and Democrats to come together and to call for a forensic audit” of the 2020 election.Jason Vaughn, 38, a Republican delegate from Houston, claimed credit for adding the “show up to vote” language in the Biden resolution. “My fear is that if we keep telling people the election was stolen, they’re going to not go and vote,” Mr. Vaughn said.Mary Lowe, a delegate from the Fort Worth suburbs who was focused on education issues at the convention, said she was surprised the 2020 election results were a focus of attention by her Republican colleagues. But, she added, “I don’t know too many people that felt that Biden won.”Ms. Lowe, the chairwoman of the Tarrant County chapter of a group known as Moms for Liberty, said she was among those delegates openly critical of Mr. Cornyn. But she added that she was embarrassed by the booing and did not participate in it.“I don’t believe that booing is polite,” Ms. Lowe said. “I feel elected officials should be treated with proper decorum.”Jamie Haynes, 47, a Republican delegate who lives in the Texas Panhandle with her husband and who says that, together, they own “a lot of guns,” said the boos directed at Mr. Cornyn showed there was a “resounding strong opinion that Republicans do not want their gun rights shaved — not just taken away — but even just shaved in any form.”The resolution rebuking Mr. Cornyn that passed at the convention opposed red flag laws, which allow guns to be seized from people deemed to be dangerous. Those laws, according to the resolution, “violate one’s right to due process and are a pre-crime punishment of people not adjudicated guilty.”The homosexuality plank passed the platform committee by a vote of 17 to 14, according to Mr. Vaughn, an openly gay member of the committee who voted against it.“It does nothing to move us forward as a party and gain voters,” he said in a video of the committee meeting. In an interview, Mr. Vaughn said the shift at the convention was the result of a small number of people who “make the process miserable because they want to do all this extreme, far-right stuff.”Mr. Toth disagreed, saying that on abortion, gay rights and the 2020 election, the Republican Party has been consistent in sticking to its conservative principles. “Defense of marriage? Abortion? Second Amendment? Where have we moved to the right?” he asked. “The Republicans have always been strong defenders of constitutional family values.”One Texas congressman and Democrat, Representative Colin Allred, called the Republican Party’s actions regressive.“The Texas Republican Party is trying to take us back to a time when women couldn’t make decisions about their own bodies and when Americans lived in fear that they would be punished for being themselves,” Mr. Allred said in a statement. More

For the first time in 20 years, a newly-elected French president failed to win an absolute majority in Parliament, forcing President Macron to deal with a defiant left and a resurgent far-right.PARIS — Voters in France’s legislative elections dealt President Emmanuel Macron a serious blow on Sunday as his centrist coalition lost its absolute majority in the lower house of Parliament to a resurgent far-right and a defiant alliance of left-wing parties, complicating his domestic agenda for his second term.With all votes counted, Mr. Macron’s centrist coalition won 245 seats in the 577-seat National Assembly, the lower and more powerful house of Parliament. That was more than any other political group, but less than half of all the seats, and far less than the 350 seats Mr. Macron’s party and its allies won when he was first elected in 2017.For the first time in 20 years, a newly elected president failed to muster an absolute majority in the National Assembly. It will not grind Mr. Macron’s domestic agenda to a complete halt, but will likely throw a large wrench into his ability to get bills passed — shifting power back to Parliament after a first term in which his top-down style of governing had mostly marginalized lawmakers.Mr. Macron’s government will likely have to seek a coalition or build short-term alliances on bills, but it was unclear Sunday night how it might go about doing so.The results were a sharp warning from French voters to Mr. Macron, who just months ago convincingly won re-election against Marine Le Pen, the far-right leader. “The Slap” was Monday’s headline on the front page of the left-leaning daily Libération.Élisabeth Borne, Mr. Macron’s prime minister — who won her own race in Normandy — said on Sunday that the results were “unprecedented” and that “this situation constitutes a risk for our country, given the challenges we must face.”“Starting tomorrow we will work on building a majority of action,” she said, suggesting, without giving details, that the government would work with other political parties to “build good compromises.”Prime Minister Elisabeth Borne gives a speech after initials results in the parliamentary elections, at Matignon Palace in Paris Sunday.Pool photo by Ludovic Marin/EPA, via ShutterstockMr. Macron appeared disengaged from the parliamentary elections and did little campaigning himself, seeming more preoccupied by France’s diplomatic efforts to support Ukraine in its war against Russia — which Sunday’s results should not impact, as French presidents can conduct foreign policy mostly as they please.Speaking on an airport tarmac before a trip to Eastern Europe that took him to Kyiv, the Ukrainian capital, this past week, he had urged voters to give him a “solid majority” in the “superior interest of the nation.”But many French voters chose instead to either stay home — only about 46 percent of the French electorate went to the ballot box, according to projections, the second-lowest participation level since 1958 — or to vote for Mr. Macron’s most radical opponents.Several of Mr. Macron’s close allies or cabinet members who were running in the election lost their races, a stinging rebuke for the president, who had vowed that ministers who failed to win a seat would have to resign. Richard Ferrand, the president of the National Assembly, and Amélie de Montchalin, his minister for green transition, were both defeated.“We disappointed a certain number of French people, the message is clear,” Olivia Grégoire, a spokeswoman for Mr. Macron’s government, told France 2 television on Sunday.“It’s a disappointing first place, but it’s a first place nonetheless,” she said, adding that Mr. Macron’s coalition would work in Parliament with “all those who want to move the country forward.”Final results gave the alliance of left-wing parties — which includes the hard-left France Unbowed party, the Socialists, Greens and Communists, and is led by the leftist veteran Jean-Luc Mélenchon — 131 seats, making it the biggest opposition force in the National Assembly. The National Rally, Ms. Le Pen’s far-right party, secured 89 seats, a historic record.Jean-Luc Melenchon in Paris on Sunday.Bertrand Guay/Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesÉtienne Ollion, a sociologist teaching at École Polytechnique, said Sunday’s results were “a double surprise.”“It’s the absence of an absolute majority — we saw it coming but did not expect it to be at that level — and on the other hand it’s the strong breakthrough of the National Rally, which is quite spectacular,” he said.With a slim relative majority — the smallest in France’s 63-year-old Fifth Republic, according to Mr. Ollion — and a strong opposition on the left and on the far-right, Mr. Macron’s centrist coalition could struggle to pass bills, potentially forcing him to reach across the aisle to opposing lawmakers on some votes.“The way the president will be able to govern through his prime minister is rather uncertain at the moment,” Mr. Ollion said.It was not immediately clear what other allies Mr. Macron’s coalition might find to form a working majority, although it seemed that the most likely fit would be Les Républicains, the mainstream conservative party, which won 61 seats.Mr. Macron will also be much more dependent on his centrist allies than he was during his first term, especially to pass contentious projects like his plan to raise the legal age of retirement to 65 from 62. That could give more leverage to parties like Horizons, a center-right group founded by Mr. Macron’s former prime minister, Édouard Philippe, who is more of a fiscal hawk. Horizons is expected to win about 25 seats.“We are used to seeing France’s system as centered on the presidency” because it is the most powerful political office in the country, said Olivier Rozenberg, an associate professor at Sciences Po in Paris. But “these legislative elections remind us that our political system is also a parliamentary one at heart.”Mr. Mélenchon and Ms. Le Pen both said on Sunday that they had succeeded in disrupting Mr. Macron’s second term.“The presidential party’s defeat is complete,” Mr. Mélenchon told cheering supporters in Paris. “We reached the political objective that we had set for ourselves.”Mr. Mélenchon failed to achieve his initial goal, which was to seize control of the National Assembly and force Mr. Macron to appoint him prime minister. Major policy differences among coalition members on issues like the European Union could also resurface once the lower house reconvenes later this month.Still, it was a strong showing for left-wing parties that had been largely written off as hopelessly divided during the presidential elections.At the other end of the political spectrum, Ms. Le Pen’s National Rally won many more seats than the handful it has now, and far more than was expected after Ms. Le Pen was defeated by Mr. Macron in the presidential election in April, and then ran a lackluster campaign for the parliamentary one.Ms. Le Pen herself was handily re-elected to her seat in a district in northern France.Marine Le Pen in Henin-Beaumont, northern France, on Sunday.Denis Charlet/Agence France-Presse — Getty Images“This group will be by far the largest in the history of our political family,” she said in a speech on Sunday, promising her supporters that she would defend the party’s hard line on immigration and security.Mr. Macron’s predicament is not unique in modern French history. In 1988, under President François Mitterrand, the Socialist Party was also unable to muster an absolute majority in the National Assembly, forcing it to occasionally poach lawmakers on the left or on the right to pass bills. But that government also had access to tools — like the ability to force a bill through without a ballot, by exposing the government to a confidence vote — that are now far more restricted.Sunday’s vote was also marred by record low turnout, a warning sign for Mr. Macron, who has promised to rule closer to the people for his second term, and a testament to voters’ growing disaffection with French politics.“There is a representation problem,” said Aude Leroux, 44, who lives in Amiens, Mr. Macron’s hometown in northern France, and shunned the ballot box on Sunday.Ms. Leroux, who was heading over to clothing stalls in one of Amiens’ large open-air markets, said she felt like “the most important matter is already settled,” with the end of the presidential race.But Sunday’s result may prove her wrong, as Mr. Macron could be forced into making compromises to pass bills and as opposition forces are expected to control key committees, such as the powerful finance committee that oversees the state budget.“Incredible opportunities will come your way,” Mr. Mélenchon told his leftist lawmakers on Sunday. “You have at your disposal a magnificent fighting tool.”Adèle Cordonnier More

Mucho antes de que Gustavo Petro surgiera como un candidato de izquierda a la presidencia de Colombia, fue parte del M-19, un grupo guerrillero urbano que buscaba hacerse del poder en nombre de la justicia social.Para algunos votantes colombianos, su pasado es fuente de preocupación luego de décadas de conflicto armado en el país. Para otros, es una señal de esperanza en uno de los países más desiguales de América Latina.El M-19 nació en 1970 en respuesta a un supuesto fraude en las elecciones presidenciales de ese año. Era mucho más pequeño que la principal fuerza guerrillera del país, las Fuerzas Armadas Revolucionarias de Colombia, FARC, que era marxista y se refugiaba en las selvas y en las zonas rurales colombianas.El M-19 era un grupo militar urbano formado por estudiantes universitarios, activistas y artistas que buscaban derrocar a un sistema de gobierno que consideraban que había fracasado en disminuir una brecha crónica entre ricos y pobres.“El M-19 nació en armas para construir una democracia”, le dijo Petro a The New York Times en una entrevista.Inicialmente, el movimiento intentó promover una imagen al estilo Robin Hood: robaban leche de los camiones de los supermercados para distribuirlos en los barrios pobres y, en un acto de rebelión simbólica, sustrajeron de un museo una espada que Simón Bolívar usó en la guerra de independencia de Colombia.Petro, de 62 años, se unió al grupo cuando era un estudiante de economía de 17 años consternado por la pobreza que veía en el pueblo donde vivía, a las afueras de Bogotá.Si bien el M-19 era menos cruel que otros grupos rebeldes, sí llevó a cabo un acto que es considerado como de los más sangrientos de la historia reciente del país: el sitio del Palacio de Justicia en 1985, que llevó a un enfrentamiento con la policía y el ejército y dejó 94 personas muertas.El grupo también robó 5000 armas del ejército colombiano y recurrió al secuestro como un modo de conseguir concesiones del gobierno.Petro, que pasó 10 años en el M-19, sobre todo almacenaba armas robadas por el grupo, dijo Sandra Borda, profesora de ciencias políticas de la Universidad de los Andes en Bogotá.“Lo que es clave es que no era parte del círculo principal de toma de decisiones del M-19. Estaba muy joven en ese momento”, dijo. “Y no participó tampoco en los operativos más importantes del M-19, los operativos militares”.Al momento de la toma del Palacio de Justicia, Petro se encontraba en prisión por su participación en el grupo; ha contado que las autoridades lo golpearon y electrocutaron.Al final, el grupo terminó por desmovilizarse en 1990 en uno de los procesos de paz que se considera entre los más exitosos en la prolongada historia de conflicto del país. Se convirtió en un partido político que ayudó a reescribir la Constitución del país para hacerla más enfocada a la igualdad y los derechos humanos.Petro se postuló al Senado como integrante del partido, con lo que inauguró su carrera política.Sofía Villamil More

For the first time in Colombia’s history, a Black woman is close to the top of the executive branch.Francia Márquez, an environmental activist from the mountainous department of Cauca in southwestern Colombia, has become a national phenomenon, mobilizing decades of voter frustration, and becoming the country’s first Black vice president on Sunday, as the running mate to Gustavo Petro. The Petro-Márquez ticket won Sunday’s runoff election, according to preliminary results. Mr. Petro, a former rebel and longtime legislator, will become the country’s first leftist president. The rise of Ms. Márquez is significant not only because she is Black in a nation where Afro-Colombians are regularly subject to racism and must contend with structural barriers, but because she comes from poverty in a country where economic class so often defines a person’s place in society. Most recent former presidents were educated abroad and are connected to the country’s powerful families and kingmakers.Despite economic gains in recent decades, Colombia remains starkly unequal, a trend that has worsened during the pandemic, with Black, Indigenous and rural communities falling the farthest behind. Forty percent of the country lives in poverty.Ms. Márquez, 40, chose to run for office, she said, “because our governments have turned their backs on the people, and on justice and on peace.”She grew up sleeping on a dirt floor in a region battered by violence related to the country’s long internal conflict. She became pregnant at 16, went to work in the local gold mines to support her child, and eventually sought work as a live-in maid.To a segment of Colombians who are clamoring for change and for more diverse representation, Ms. Márquez is their champion. The question is whether the rest of the country is ready for her.Some critics have called her divisive, saying she is part of a leftist coalition that seeks to tear apart, instead of build upon, past norms.She has also never held political office, and Sergio Guzmán, director of Colombia Risk Analysis, a consulting firm, said that “there are a lot of questions as to whether Francia would be able to be commander in chief, if she would manage economic policy, or foreign policy, in a way that would provide continuity to the country.”Her more extreme opponents have taken direct aim at her with racist tropes, and criticize her class and political legitimacy.But on the campaign trail, Ms. Márquez’s persistent, frank and biting analysis of the social disparities in Colombia cracked open a discussion about race and class in a manner rarely heard in the country’s most public and powerful political circles.Those themes, “many in our society deny them, or treat them as minor,” said Santiago Arboleda, a professor of Afro-Andean history at Simón Bolívar Andean University. “Today, they’re on the front page.” More

PARIS — The French far right was projected to win a record number of seats in the election on Sunday, which could make it the third biggest political force in Parliament. It will also secure enough seats to form a parliamentary group for the first time since the 1980s, reflecting its solid political foothold and highlighting the success of Marine Le Pen’s longtime efforts to moderate her party’s image.Ms. Le Pen’s party, the National Rally, was expected to win between 75 and 100 seats in the 577-seat National Assembly, according to preliminary projections. The party needs to secure only 15 seats to become a parliamentary group, a designation that would give it more public funding and speaking time, and specific legislative powers such as creating special committees.That result came despite a lackluster legislative campaign by Ms. Le Pen.After her loss to Emmanuel Macron in the presidential election in April, Ms. Le Pen all but disappeared from the political stage, resurfacing only in May to acknowledge on television that Mr. Macron would most likely secure a majority in Parliament — indirectly conceding defeat in advance.For several weeks, the National Rally campaigned without any real leadership, failing to drive the public debate around its favorite themes of economic insecurity, immigration and crime. Instead, much of the momentum has been with a coalition of left-wing parties that managed to overtake the far right as the main opposition force to Mr. Macron.Still, Ms. Le Pen’s party secured about 19 percent of the vote in the first round of the parliamentary elections last week, about a six-point increase from five years ago, allowing 208 of its candidates to advance to a runoff, up from 120 in 2017.And the seats the National Rally was expected to capture on Sunday will be a significant increase from the eight seats it currently holds.“This group will be by far the largest in the history of our political family,” Ms. Le Pen said in a speech on Sunday.She added that her party had achieved the three objectives it had set itself: to prevent Mr. Macron from securing an absolute majority; to continue restructuring France’s political landscape; and to build a strong opposition group.Forming an official group in Parliament is crucial for the National Rally, which has long struggled financially, and will help raise its profile. The last time the far right secured such a group was when Jean-Marie Le Pen, Ms. Le Pen’s father, led 35 lawmakers into Parliament in 1986.The legislative elections this month have also cemented Ms. Le Pen’s overwhelming dominance on the right of the political spectrum. Éric Zemmour, a far-right pundit and her main competitor during the presidential election, was knocked out in the first round, as were all of his party’s candidates. More

Kinzinger: Trump’s actions surrounding January 6 amount to ‘seditious conspiracy’Republican member of the Capitol attack panel also says Trump’s actions surrounding the deadly riot had ‘criminal involvement’ A Republican member of the congressional committee investigating the January 6 attack on the Capitol said on Sunday that he believes Donald Trump’s actions surrounding the deadly riots amount to “seditious conspiracy” and “criminal involvement by a president”.Illinois congressman Adam Kinzinger’s remarks on ABC’s This Week came after three hearings held by the House January 6 committee presented searing testimony and mounting evidence about Trump’s central role in a complex plot to overturn his defeat at the hands of Joe Biden in the 2020 presidential election.While he was only one of at least four committee members scheduled to appear on the national news network’s Sunday talkshows, Kinzinger’s comments stood out for their candor and because they came from within the ex-president’s own political party.Searing testimony increases odds of charges against Trump, experts sayRead more“I certainly think the president is guilty of knowing what he did, seditious conspiracy, being involved in … pressuring the [justice department], vice-president [Mike Pence], et cetera,” Kinzinger said. “Obviously, you know, we’re not a criminal charges committee, so I want to be careful in specifically using that language, but I think what we’re presenting before the American people certainly would rise to a level of criminal involvement by a president.”Kinzinger also said that Trump’s actions, as portrayed by the committee, show he “definitely” failed to maintain his oath to uphold the US constitution.“The oath has to matter here,” Kinzinger said. “Your personal demand to stand for the constitution has to matter.”Just three days earlier, the third of six scheduled hearings by the committee examining the Capitol attack saw a former attorney to Pence recount how Trump unsuccessfully helped pressure Pence into unlawfully blocking the congressional certification of Biden’s win on the day of the riots.January 6 hearings make for gripping TV, but are voters paying attention? Read moreOne of the prongs of that plan involved sending fake pro-Trump electors from states that Biden to substitute electors pledged to Biden, which the justice department has been investigating for months now. Another prong, broadly, centered on Trump’s relentless but baseless claims that electoral fraudsters had stolen the race from him, even as his attorney general, William Barr, dismissed that argument as complete “bullshit”.Kinzinger said the only logical outcome to claims of a rigged presidential election was the mob of hundreds storming the Capitol – shortly after Trump urged his supports to “fight like hell” – in the attack to which a bipartisan Senate report connected seven deaths.The congressman added that there is more where that came from unless the country can “get a grip on telling people the truth” about things like valid election results, even when their preferred candidate lost.“There is violence in the future – I’m going to tell you,” said Kinzinger, one of two Republicans on the nine-member select committee.As Kinzinger told This Week’s host George Stephanopoulos, the January 6 committee can’t file criminal charges against Trump. And the panel chairman, Mississippi congressman Bennie Thompson, said he doesn’t expect he and his colleagues to make a referral for charges to the justice department, which is the sole entity with the power to prosecute Trump.Nonetheless, Kinzinger’s comments on Sunday made clear what he and others on the committee think federal prosecutors should do even without a formal recommendation for charges.Pence himself, as of Sunday, hadn’t appeared at the January 6 hearings. But one of the Democrats on the select committee, Adam Schiff, said the panel hadn’t ruled out subpoenaing him to testify. Trump, for his part, has condemned the work of the January 6 committee as a “one-sided witch-hunt”.At a speech in Tennessee on Friday, he singled out Kinzinger for crying during another hearing last year about the Capitol attack.“This guy’s got a mental disorder,” Trump said of Kinzinger. “He cries. Every time this guy gets up to speak, he starts crying.”Kinzinger’s decision to go on the offensive against Trump – whom many Republicans still support vehemently – are not without peril. On Sunday, he recounted how someone had recently mailed to the congressman’s home a note threatening to execute him, his wife and their five-month-old son.“This should be a position where you can tell the hard truth, and unfortunately, my party has utterly failed the American people at truth,” Kinzinger said. “It makes me sad. But it’s a fact.”TopicsJanuary 6 hearingsUS Capitol attackDonald TrumpRepublicansUS politicsnewsReuse this content More

Uno de los candidatos es Gustavo Petro, un exguerrillero y senador con una larga trayectoria que durante mucho tiempo ha tratado de convertirse en el primer presidente de izquierda del país, y propone una transformación del sistema económico.El otro es Rodolfo Hernández, un magnate de la construcción y estrella de las redes sociales que recientemente se ha convertido en el fenómeno político más disruptivo del país. Ha atraído a los votantes con promesas de “austeridad total” y un enfoque de combate contra la corrupción.Lo que está en juego en las elecciones presidenciales del domingo es el destino del tercer país más poblado de América Latina, donde la pobreza y la desigualdad han aumentado durante la pandemia y las encuestas muestran una creciente desconfianza en casi todas las instituciones importantes. Las protestas antigubernamentales del año pasado hicieron que cientos de miles de personas salieran a las calles en lo que se conoció como el “paro nacional”, y cuya sombra se cierne sobre la votación del domingo.“El país entero está pidiendo un cambio y eso es clarísimo”, dijo Fernando Posada, un politólogo colombiano.Los candidatos llegan a la elección prácticamente empatados en las encuestas, por lo que el resultado podría ser tan reñido que tomará días determinar un ganador.Quien finalmente obtenga la victoria tendrá que abordar los problemas más apremiantes del país y sus repercusiones globales, como la falta de oportunidades y el aumento de la violencia, que han hecho que un número récord de colombianos migre hacia Estados Unidos en los últimos meses; además se han registrado altos niveles de deforestación en la Amazonía colombiana, un territorio crítico para la lucha contra el cambio climático, y las crecientes amenazas a la democracia, que forman parte de una tendencia en la región.Los dos candidatos inspiran ira y esperanza entre los votantes. La elección ha dividido a las familias, domina la conversación nacional e inspiró una serie de memes que conforman un retrato del estado de ánimo nacional: En TikTok, Hernández califica como “relocos” a sus críticos, mientras Petro promociona una canción que fomenta un cambio a la práctica ilícita de la compra de votos.“Túmbalos tú primero”, dice el estribillo, refiriéndose al poder establecido político del país, “cógele la plata y vota por Petro”.Ambos candidatos dicen que se enfrentan a una élite conservadora que ha controlado el país durante generaciones.Algo que los diferencia es lo que creen que es la raíz de los problemas del país.Petro piensa que el sistema económico está roto, que depende demasiado de la exportación de petróleo y de un negocio floreciente e ilegal de cocaína que, según él, ha hecho que los ricos sean más ricos y los pobres más pobres. Exige detener las nuevas exploraciones petroleras, un cambio hacia el desarrollo de otras industrias y una expansión de los programas sociales, mientras impone impuestos más altos para los ricos.“Hoy lo que tenemos es un resultado de esto que yo llamo el agotamiento del modelo”, dijo Petro en una entrevista, refiriéndose al sistema económico actual. “El resultado final es un empobrecimiento brutal”.Sin embargo, su ambicioso plan económico ha suscitado preocupaciones. Un exministro de Finanzas definió su plan energético como un “suicidio económico”.Hernández no quiere reformar el marco económico, pero dice que es ineficiente porque está plagado de corrupción y gastos frívolos. Ha pedido que algunos ministerios se fusionen, propone eliminar algunas embajadas y despedir a los empleados gubernamentales ineficientes, y el dinero que se ahorre con esas medidas se utilizará para ayudar a los pobres.“El sentimiento que tienen es que yo tengo la posibilidad de enfrentarme a esa camarilla de politiqueros, sacarlos del poder para poder reivindicar los derechos de los más pobres”, dijo sobre sus seguidores.Sus críticos dicen que está proponiendo una forma brutal de capitalismo que dañará a la nación.Antiguos aliados y colaboradores de Petro lo acusan de una arrogancia que lo lleva a ignorar a sus asesores y batallar para construir equipos. Hernández suele ser criticado por sus vulgaridades y su carácter dominante, además ha sido acusado de cargos de corrupción, con un juicio que está fijado para el 21 de julio. Aunque, él dice que es inocente.Sin importar el resultado, el país tendrá por primera vez a una mujer negra como vicepresidenta: Francia Márquez, una activista ambiental, forma parte de la candidatura de Petro, y Marelen Castillo, una exvicerrectora universitaria participa en la candidatura de Hernández.En mayo, durante la primera vuelta de la votación, Yojaira Pérez, de 53 años, en el norteño departamento de Sucre, calificó su voto por Petro como una especie de retribución, reflejando el estado de ánimo de un electorado que ha impulsado las candidaturas de ambos hombres.“Sabemos que hay que castigar a los mismos que han sido dominantes de Colombia, que han querido gobernar y manejar a Colombia como si Colombia fuera un títere y nosotros fuéramos títeres de ellos”, dijo. More

The two candidates competing to become Colombia’s next president — Gustavo Petro, a leftist and a former insurgent, and Rodolfo Hernández, a wealthy businessman — are not known for pulling punches.Mr. Petro, a long time senator, has risen through the political ranks as an aggressive voice railing against the right and the political elite. Mr. Hernández has rapidly gained traction with his unvarnished way of speaking and popular TikTok videos.But with polls showing a tight race the candidates have engaged in an intense mudslinging campaign of personal attacks, rumors, accusations and in stoking controversies for political gain.Colombians “have a history of polarization, but in this final stretch of the campaign, it has gotten even harsher and dirtier,” said Daniel García-Peña, a political analyst.Mr. Petro has long been criticized for his past membership in the M-19 guerrilla group and for some of his stumbles as mayor of Bogotá.A more recent scandal that has drawn attention involves videos surreptitiously recorded early in the presidential election and leaked to the news media showing members of Mr. Petro’s campaign discussing how to smear opponents.Mr. Petro is never heard speaking on camera and Mr. Hernández is not mentioned — at the time, he was not yet considered a serious contender.Still, Mr. Hernández, who was in Miami at the time the videos became public, cited them to declare that he feared for his safety and would not return to Colombia until after the vote.“Petro and the politicians surrounding him demonstrated that they are a criminal gang without limits,” he said. “At this moment, I am certain that my life is at risk. It’s clear that anything could happen, even the most serious thing.”Nevertheless, he returned to Colombia a few days later.Mr. Petro claimed that the secretly recorded videos were illegal and on Twitter said that if he was found to have committed a single crime “I am willing to give up my campaign.”Gustavo Petro at a campaign event last month in Cartagena.Federico Rios for The New York TimesFor his part Mr. Hernández has come under scrutiny for promoting an anti-corruption message at the same time he stands indicted on political corruption charges related to his time as mayor of Bucaramanga, a midsize city, north of Bogotá, the capital.Mr. Hernández is accused of pushing officials to award a lucrative contract to a specific company that would provide a financial benefit for his son.Mr. Hernández, whose trial is scheduled to begin July 21, has proclaimed his innocence. “I didn’t steal anything,” he told The Times.Mr. Petro has used the case to respond to accusations from Mr. Hernández that he ran a corrupt government when Mr. Petro was mayor of Bogotá. “No criminal investigation against me has ever prospered,’’ Mr. Petro said on Twitter. “It’s you who’s being charged with corruption by judges.”The volley of accusations and controversies swirling around the election could further erode voters faith in their government, Mr. García-Peña said.A poll in May by the Spanish newspaper El País showed that just 17 percent of Colombians said they were happy with the state of democracy in their country.“It’s a turbulent moment, a complicated moment,’’ Mr. García-Peña said, “where these levels of aggression that have defined the campaign will surely continue on in the next government.” More