Elections

In some New York City Council races, supporting former President Donald Trump is seen as a positive by voters.For most Democratic candidates running in New York City, criticizing former President Donald J. Trump hardly requires making a studied campaign strategy decision — it’s already a given.But in one of the few competitive races in New York City this year, the Democratic candidate for City Council will not even say how he voted for president, insisting that at the local level, voters in his Brooklyn district still care more about municipal matters. That candidate, Steven Saperstein, is running in one of the few Trump-friendly districts in the city, and as he campaigned down a breezy stretch of boardwalk in Brighton Beach last Sunday, not far from the Trump Village housing complex where he grew up, he couldn’t seem to escape partisan politics.“I’m Republican,” one woman declared.“One hundred and twenty percent,” another proclaimed, before allowing that she would consider Mr. Saperstein anyway.“They’re trying to make it about the presidential election,” Mr. Saperstein said of his Republican opponent, Inna Vernikov, for whom Donald Trump Jr. has recorded a robocall. “People in this district understand and they know that national elections are one thing, but on the local level you have to vote for the person.”Steven Saperstein insists that voters in his district are more concerned about local matters than last year’s presidential election.Nate Palmer for The New York TimesIndeed, for years, New York City voters who favored Republicans for president often still elected Democrats in local races. But in the final days of the fall campaign, Republicans are working to change that in the 48th Council District of Brooklyn, which is home to many Orthodox Jews and Russian and Ukrainian immigrants.If they succeed, that victory will offer one more example of just how polarized, and nationalized, even ultra-local American politics has become.That seat is one of a smattering of City Council districts where there is evidence of Republican life in an otherwise overwhelmingly Democratic city — and it is not the only one attracting attention from major national figures. Senator Chuck Schumer of New York, the Senate majority leader, was slated to campaign on Sunday for a fellow Democrat, Felicia Singh, who is seeking to flip the last Republican-held Council seat in Queens (though the event was pulled following a security threat, Ms. Singh’s campaign manager said).The Republican candidates in New York’s competitive races differ from one another in tone, experience and the local issues that reflect their distinctive districts. But all of those contests, party officials and strategists say, are shaped by the continued salience of public safety in the minds of voters, discussion of education matters like the gifted and talented program that Mayor Bill de Blasio wants to phase out, and intense feelings over vaccine mandates. Some Republicans even argue that the challenging national environment that Democrats appear to be facing may be evident in a handful of city races, too.“This has a lot of likenesses to 2009, when Obama came in on hope and change and then fell flat,” said Nick Langworthy, the chairman of the New York Republican State Committee. “In 2009 we had great gains at the local level, and then had a cataclysm in 2010. Are we facing that, or is there going to be flatness all the way around?”Whatever the turnout, Republicans are virtually certain to be shut out of citywide offices. Indeed, by nearly every metric, the Republican Party has been decimated in the nation’s largest city. They are vastly outnumbered in voter registration and have struggled to field credible candidates for major offices. At the City Council level, Republican hopes boil down to a matter of margins.The most optimistic Republican assessment, barring extraordinary developments, is that they could increase their presence to five from three on the 51-seat City Council, as they did in 2009. But even that would require a surprise outcome in a sleeper race — and it is possible they retain only one seat (setting aside the candidates who are running on multiple party lines).Officials on both sides of the aisle believe a more realistic target for the Republicans is three or four seats, a number that could still affect the brewing City Council speaker’s race and may indicate pockets of discontent with the direction of the city.The most high-profile of those contests is the last Republican-held seat in Queens.Ms. Singh, a teacher who is endorsed by the left-wing Working Families Party, is running against Joann Ariola, the chairwoman of the Queens Republican Party. The race has stirred considerable interest from the left and the right and attracted spending from outside groups.Democrats argue that Ms. Singh’s focus on education, the environment and resources for often-underserved communities best reflects working-class and immigrant families like her own who have changed the makeup of the district.Felicia Singh, center, who is running for City Council, canvasing in her hometown of Ozone Park, Queens.Jackie Molloy for The New York TimesMs. Singh has called Ms. Ariola a Trump Republican and noted her past ties to a district leader who was charged with participating in the Jan. 6 attack on the United States Capitol. Ms. Ariola has said she condemns the insurrection and that no one “should be guilty by association.”Ms. Ariola is pressing a message of strong support for the police, protecting and improving the gifted and talented program, and emphasizing quality-of-life issues.She is casting Ms. Singh as too radical for a district that has been dotted in parts with Blue Lives Matter signage, and she has noted that some of the area’s moderate Democratic officials have stayed on the sidelines — which will surely be a source of tension among Democrats if Ms. Singh loses narrowly.“The strategy has to be to pull out every single Democrat, knowing there are some Democrats that will shift the other way as well, but I think she’s still in a good position,” said Donovan Richards, the Queens borough president and a Democrat.The other race widely seen as competitive is for a seat currently held by the Republican minority leader, Steven Matteo, on Staten Island.David Carr, Mr. Matteo’s chief of staff, is the Republican nominee; Sal F. Albanese, once a Brooklyn city councilman who has run unsuccessfully for mayor several times, is the Democratic nominee; George Wonica, a real estate agent, is running on the Conservative Party line.Unlike in Queens, where there is a clear ideological contrast, the candidates on Staten Island largely agree on several issues roiling New York, including city vaccine mandates, which they oppose. They have also competed vigorously over who is the true law-and-order candidate.Beyond those clearly competitive races, a number of Democrats are running aggressive campaigns even in presumably safe seats. Councilman Justin Brannan of Brooklyn, a candidate for City Council speaker who won his Bay Ridge-area district narrowly in 2017, has maintained an intense pace. Just this weekend he campaigned with Eric Adams, the Democratic nominee for mayor; Letitia James, the state attorney general, who is now running for governor; and Mr. Schumer.“Low-turnout elections are always where surprises happen, and we’ve had a bunch of those in the past few years,” said Kevin Elkins, the political director for the New York City District Council of Carpenters, which is largely supporting Democratic candidates, as well as Ms. Ariola. “Most of the elected officials and candidates who have run before have no interest in being next on that list.”A few districts away from Mr. Brannan’s, Ms. Vernikov was in a heavily Orthodox Jewish part of Midwood recently, meeting with volunteers.Inna Vernikov, a Republican, said voters were more receptive to her when she told them her party affiliation. Nate Palmer for The New York TimesShe has been a registered Democrat and a Republican, and the better-funded Mr. Saperstein has previously run for office as a Republican, further scrambling the political dynamics of the race.But in an interview, Ms. Vernikov said she sometimes found voters to be more receptive when she mentioned her current party affiliation.“When you tell people you’re a Republican in this district, it just changes the tone,” especially with the many voters in the district who fled the former Soviet Union, she said. “They see the Democratic Party moving this country in a very bad direction.”Back in Brighton Beach, Mr. Saperstein wanted to talk about parks, the relationships he has with the Police Department, and cleaning up the boardwalk.That last point was a compelling one for Lidiya Skverchak, a 64-year-old Trump voter. She was slated to receive her next dose of the Moderna vaccine on Election Day and was uncertain whether she would vote, she said. But if she does vote, she will still vote “Democrat, of course Democrat,” in the city elections. Asked about her biggest issue in the race, she, like Mr. Saperstein, kept her focus local.“For this area, there should be more trees,” she said. More

Glenn Youngkin and Terry McAuliffe crisscrossed Virginia on the last weekend of what has become an increasingly close race for governor.MANASSAS PARK, Va. — The high-stakes race for governor of Virginia entered its final stretch with Glenn Youngkin and Terry McAuliffe trading accusations of sowing division, as voters appeared closely divided over returning a Democrat to office or electing a Republican to lead their state for the first time in more than a decade.The size and atmosphere of dueling events during the last weekend of campaigning before Election Day on Tuesday reflected the trends in the most recent polls. Mr. Youngkin, the Republican candidate, greeted crowds of more than 1,000, while Mr. McAuliffe, the Democrat, hustled through sparsely attended events from morning to night.Mr. McAuliffe, who served one term as governor from 2014 to 2018, has displayed a rising sense of urgency lately, dispatching some of the Democratic Party’s biggest stars to campaign for him and push people to vote early. In 11 hours on Saturday, Mr. McAuliffe traveled more than 120 miles, making eight stops in six cities amid a whirlwind day of campaigning in which he urged supporters not to be complacent.“We are substantially leading on the early vote, but we cannot take our foot off the gas,” Mr. McAuliffe told a crowd on Saturday in Norfolk, where he met with labor leaders who were planning to spend the day knocking on doors.He and his allies took it as an encouraging sign that more than 1.1 million of Virginia’s 5.9 million registered voters had cast ballots as of Sunday morning, according to the Virginia Department of Elections.But the energy this weekend was more palpable among Mr. Youngkin and his supporters, who have heeded the Republican’s calls for a new direction in the state’s political leadership after more than a decade of Democratic governors. Mr. Youngkin has framed the election as an opportunity for Virginians to send a message to the nation that Democrats are out of step with the majority of Americans on a number of issues, from how racial inequality is taught in schools to coronavirus-related mandates.“The nation’s eyes are on Virginia,” Mr. Youngkin told an energetic crowd of several hundred people who came to see him on Saturday afternoon in Manassas Park, a city near the suburban Democratic stronghold of Fairfax County outside Washington. In his speeches, he often ascribes a larger significance to his campaign, saying, “This is no longer a campaign. It’s a movement.”Terry McAuliffe, the Democratic candidate for governor, spoke to reporters on Saturday with Bruce Smith, a developer and former N.F.L. defensive end.Kristen Zeis for The New York TimesIt was clear in interviews with voters over the weekend that many Virginians view this election as something symbolically greater than a face-off between two candidates for governor. The contest has exposed the country’s persistent divisions over questions of race, class, privilege and the appropriate role of government, and become an outlet for Virginians to register their dissatisfaction with the political culture.“I’m a Hillary-Biden voter,” said Glenn Miller, a lawyer from McLean, as he walked into a Youngkin rally in southern Fairfax County on Saturday night that drew more than 1,000 people. He explained his tipping point: Working from home and hearing his teenage daughter’s teacher make a comment during a virtual lesson about white men as modern-day slaveholders.“There are a lot of people like me who are annoyed,” he said, adding that he was able to vote for Mr. Youngkin because he did not associate him as a Trump Republican. “My problem with Trump was I thought he was embarrassing. I just don’t think Youngkin is going to embarrass me or the state.”The McAuliffe campaign has tried to portray Mr. Youngkin as a Trump acolyte, accusing him of exaggerating fears that children are being divided by race by teachers who are encouraging them to see white people as inherently bad.“He’s got parents fighting parents and parents fighting teachers,” Mr. McAuliffe said over the weekend. “He’s turned our school boards into war zones. It’s all about this critical race theory, which is not taught in Virginia. This is all he talks about. It has never been taught in Virginia. Let’s call it what it is: It’s a racist dog whistle. He’s run a racist campaign from start to finish.”Some Democratic voters said they appreciated the link Mr. McAuliffe was making between former President Donald J. Trump and Mr. Youngkin, who opposes abortion, same-sex marriage and mandates for the coronavirus vaccine.“I see a lot of issues with what’s going on in the national Republican Party,” said Jerry Dalesandro, 59, a retiree from Virginia Beach. “I’m a Biden fan, an Obama fan, but also more just a not-a-Trump fan.”Mr. Youngkin has tried to strike a balance between keeping Mr. Trump close but not too close. The former president recently announced he would speak at a telephone town-hall-style event for Mr. Youngkin on Monday. But the Republican candidate said he would not be participating.For Mr. McAuliffe, the visit to Norfolk was one of several stops he made in southeastern Virginia, where he drew small to modest crowds of 30 to 100 people. The largest crowd on Saturday was at a Black church in Portsmouth, where Mr. McAuliffe was joined by Representative Jim Clyburn of South Carolina, the civil rights leader.Supporters of Mr. Youngkin rallied at an event in Springfield, Va., on Saturday.Kenny Holston for The New York TimesPresident Biden, Vice President Kamala Harris and former President Barack Obama have all visited Virginia as part of the McAuliffe campaign’s push to boost turnout, especially among core Democratic constituencies such as Black voters. But generating enthusiasm has been difficult at times, which was evident on Saturday at a McAuliffe event in Chesapeake. When Mr. McAuliffe went to speak, the crowd yelled “Terry, Terry, Terry” only after a campaign staffer started the chant to ramp up the energy in the room.On the minds of many Democrats was the unpleasant memory of what happened in 2016, when they believed Hillary Clinton was all but certain to win the White House. “You need to remember back how you felt in November of 2016, when we woke up and we realized who was going to be our next president,” Gov. Ralph Northam, who is prohibited from running again because of term limits, told a crowd in Virginia Beach on Saturday. “We do not want to wake up on November the 3rd of this year and have that same feeling.”At the Youngkin events, it was unclear how many people were voters like Mr. Miller, the former Biden supporter now voting for the Republican. Many said they were committed Republicans, and the crowds were more diverse than Republican events typically are.In the Washington suburb of Chantilly, John and Linda Torres of Herndon stood in a parking lot as the crowd of several hundred returned to their cars after a Youngkin rally. Ms. Torres held a Youngkin yard sign and a handful of stickers that read “Latinos for Youngkin.”The couple said they both voted for Mr. Trump, but also for Mr. Obama. They said they disliked Mr. McAuliffe’s stance on vaccine mandates as well as his insistence that Mr. Youngkin was making a problem where one doesn’t exist by criticizing how race is taught in some schools. “I know some people say, ‘Oh, it’s all made up.’ But it’s real,” said Mr. Torres, 41, a veteran.Ms. Torres, 43, a nurse, said she and her husband have considered pulling their two children out of public school and putting them into a Christian one. And that same impulse applied to her views on the state’s political leadership.“We just want it to change,” Ms. Torres said. More

RepublicansRepublican Adam Kinzinger: I’ll fight Trumpism ‘cancer’ outside Congress
One of two GOP members of 6 January panel will retire next year
‘Roadmap for a coup’: inside Trump plot to steal the presidency
Martin Pengelly in New York@MartinPengellySun 31 Oct 2021 11.08 EDTLast modified on Sun 31 Oct 2021 11.10 EDTThe Republican congressman Adam Kinzinger said on Sunday he would fight the “cancer” of Trumpism outside the congressional GOP, after he retires from the House next year. Trump seeking to block call logs and notes from Capitol attack panelRead more“In the House you can fight to try to tell the truth,” the Illinois representative said, speaking to ABC’s This Week. “You can fight against the cancer in the Republican party of lies, of conspiracy, of dishonesty.“And you ultimately come to the realisation that basically it’d be Liz Cheney and a few others that are telling the truth and there are about 190 people in the Republican party that aren’t going to say a word, and there’s a leader of the Republican caucus [Kevin McCarthy, the House minority leader] that is embracing Donald Trump with all he can.”Asked if he had handed Trump a “win” by quitting, he said he “potentially” had but added: “It’s not really handing a win as much to Donald Trump as it is to the cancerous kind of lie and conspiracy, not just wing anymore, but mainstream argument of the Republican party.”Kinzinger and Cheney were among 10 House Republicans who voted to impeach Trump for inciting supporters to attack the Capitol on 6 January, in an attempt to overturn the election.That made Trump’s second impeachment the most bipartisan ever. Seven Republican senators voted to convict, not enough for a required super-majority, ensuring Trump’s acquittal.Another House Republican who voted for impeachment, Anthony Gonzalez of Ohio, has announced his retirement. Trump greeted Kinzinger’s announcement by saying: “Two down, eight to go.” Others including Cheney have attracted challengers.Kinzinger and Cheney are the only Republican members of the House select committee investigating 6 January. McCarthy withdrew co-operation when the speaker, Nancy Pelosi, rejected an attempt to put Trump allies on the panel.Kinzinger told ABC Trump’s lawsuit to stop the committee accessing presidential records held in the National Archives was an attempt to drag proceedings out long enough for Republicans to retake the House next year and thereby kill the investigation.“Look, they killed an independent commission,” he said. “They’ve killed any attempt to get to the truth. [But] we have sources beyond just those that are kind of making the news, the Steve Bannons, you know, the Archives. We have people coming in and talking to the committee every day.“I think if you look at that archive request and what the former president is trying to block, it is very telling when you look at things like call logs, etc … We are going to fight as hard as we can to get that, and the president has no grounds to claim executive privilege as he is today.”Trump supporters, dominant in a GOP fully under the former president’s control, greeted Kinzinger’s retirement announcement with glee and abuse – despite the fact that as a strong conservative, he mostly voted with Trump during Trump’s time in office. Kinzinger told ABC he intended to stay in politics.“The point is there’s a lot of people that feel politically homeless, there’s a lot of people that feel like something has to change in our politics, and I think it’s important to jump in with both feet and see where that goes. See if there’s that market out there because what’s happening, we’re failing the American people right now.“The political system is failing. And the Republicans in particular.”Tucker Carlson condemned over ‘false flag’ claim about deadly Capitol attackRead moreKinzinger admitted that redistricting by Illinois Democrats that would affect his chances of re-election was part of his decision, saying: “I’m not complaining, it’s redistricting, I get it, it’s being done and abused everywhere. But when Democrats do say they want Republican partners to tell the truth, and then they specifically target me, it makes me wonder.”But he said a stronger push to retire had come from the direction of his party under Trump.“It’s sitting back and saying, ‘OK, what happens if I win again? I go back, probably Republicans will probably be in the majority. I’m going to be fighting even harder … and I haven’t seen any momentum in the party to move away from lies and towards truth.”TopicsRepublicansUS politicsDonald TrumpUS Capitol attacknewsReuse this content More

The finalists in the race to become Seattle’s next city attorney have extreme differences in their views. Some residents are wary of both of them.SEATTLE — In the campaign to become Seattle’s next city attorney, the two candidates would like to tell you that their past remarks are not representative of who they are.One of the candidates, Nicole Thomas-Kennedy, is a self-described “abolitionist” who seeks to upend the criminal justice system. In Twitter posts last year, she celebrated those who set fires at a youth detention facility, called property destruction “a moral imperative” and praised whoever apparently triggered an explosive inside a police precinct as a “hero.” Over that same period, her opponent, Ann Davison, was moving in the opposite direction. A former Democrat, she declared herself a Republican appalled by what she saw as a lack of order in Seattle. In a city where Republicans have long been cast out of city politics, Ms. Davison filmed a why-I’m-not-a-Democrat video for a supporter of Donald Trump who later stormed the Capitol on Jan. 6.Initially viewed as long shots who joined the campaign just hours before a filing deadline, Ms. Thomas-Kennedy and Ms. Davison have emerged as the two finalists to be city attorney, which represents the city in legal matters and leads prosecutions of low-level crimes. The extreme range in their political views has left some residents feeling unmoored ahead of Tuesday’s election. They said they are worried about worsening polarization surrounding the urgent issues facing the city: homelessness, housing affordability, crime, mental health and police reform.“I think a lot of us are disappointed in the choices that we have before us,” said State Senator David Frockt, a Democrat who represents Seattle. “I am wary of both of them.”The campaign has stirred a conversation about what it means to be a Democrat in a city where eight of the nine council members are Democrats —- the only departure being a socialist.Gary Locke, a former Democratic governor who worked as President Obama’s ambassador to China, said he didn’t consider the race through a partisan lens.“Sometimes you have to look at the candidates and their positions, not just at the party label,” Mr. Locke said.Mr. Locke decried Ms. Thomas-Kennedy’s past statements and said her call for fewer prosecutions would exacerbate problems in the city. He has joined with another former Democratic governor, Christine Gregoire, to endorse Ms. Davison.But other Democratic Party groups and leaders have rallied around Ms. Thomas-Kennedy, with each of the Democratic caucuses representing the city’s seven legislative districts endorsing her.Shasti Conrad, the chair of the King County Democrats, who has done consulting work for the Thomas-Kennedy campaign, said she was shocked and disheartened to see Mr. Locke and Ms. Gregoire back a candidate like Ms. Davison. People can’t call themselves Democrats and endorse a Republican for the job, she said, adding that the former governors were simply not in touch with the people living in Seattle.Seattle’s current city attorney, Pete Holmes, ran for re-election but lost in the primary.Elaine Thompson/Associated PressWhile she understands that some people have concerns about Ms. Thomas-Kennedy’s past remarks, she said that when people consider the vision and experience that Ms. Thomas-Kennedy would bring to the office, there was no question about who would be the better choice.“Things feel so broken that we need someone who is visionary and need someone who is going to address racial equity and take this office in a direction that will yield better results,” she said.Many local elections around the country on Tuesday have been shaped by debates around crime and how to overhaul the criminal justice system. Seattle’s mayoral election features one candidate, Lorena González, who last year was among those who endorsed a 50 percent cut in the police budget, running against Bruce Harrell, who has campaigned on a message for more police.Seattle recorded more homicides last year than in any year over the past quarter-century, although property crimes that would be handled by the city attorney’s office have not followed a similar rise. In a city that has become one of the nation’s most expensive places to live, there has been a surge in visible homelessness, with researchers counting a 50 percent increase in tents within the urban core since the start of the pandemic.Ms. Thomas-Kennedy was a public defender who said she grew appalled watching how the city handled misdemeanor crimes, prosecuting people for things that were essentially crimes of poverty. She got into the race but didn’t expect to be competitive against the three-term incumbent, Pete Holmes.“I thought I would have a blurb in the voter’s pamphlet about what’s happening at Seattle Municipal Court and how we could be doing things better, but I expected to kind of largely be ignored,” Ms. Thomas-Kennedy said. She said she was surprised to see herself come in first in the primary, carrying 36 percent of the vote, but she said it was evidence of how much people are yearning for substantial change.Ms. Thomas-Kennedy said the tweets she sent last year, before even considering a run for office, came at a time when she was angry after police were shooting tear gas into her neighborhood, forcing her to buy a gas mask for her child. But she said the remarks were inappropriate for someone running for office.“A lot of those things are just hyperbolic,” she said. “They were very flippant. And I will say that I think, more than anything, they were kind of childish. And do I think that’s appropriate for someone that’s running for office? No. Would I tweet like that anymore? No.”While she campaigns on a platform of eventually abolishing the criminal justice system as we know it, she said she knows that the process of reaching her goals won’t happen overnight. She envisions that the city first needs to have systems in place to support health care, education, job training and treatment services.For the city attorney’s office, she said she sees an opportunity to use the office’s civil division to go after corporations who commit wage theft and to protect tenant’s rights. She expects she would still prosecute things like serious assault or repeat DUIs because there aren’t yet alternative systems in place to address those crimes.Seattle Police investigate a shooting in the city’s Pioneer Square neighborhood, where multiple people were shot in July. The city recorded more homicides last year than in any year over the past quarter-century.Bettina Hansen/The Seattle Times, via Associated PressMs. Davison came to the election from an opposite viewpoint: that the city was already letting prosecutions slide in too many cases.Ms. Davison said the office in recent years has focused so much on helping support people accused of crimes and not enough representing the interests of victims of crimes. She contends that the lack of consequences for those committing crimes is making the city less safe. She also said the residents of the city want to see both police reforms and enforcement.Although she is a lawyer, she focuses mostly on civil contract law and arbitration. She said in an interview that she hadn’t handled a case in a courtroom since she left a downtown law firm more than a decade ago. But she contended that such experience isn’t necessary for the job.“The role is being a leader, and you hire subject-matter experts,” Ms. Davison said.A year ago, Ms. Davison was running for the state’s lieutenant governor position as a Republican and recorded a video explaining why she was a former Democrat as part of a “WalkAway” campaign — a pro-Trump effort. The founder of the WalkAway campaign, Brandon Straka, pleaded guilty this year to disorderly conduct during the Jan. 6 riot at the U.S. Capitol.As part of the video, Ms. Davison decried what she said was Democratic leadership in Seattle moving too far to the left.“I just can’t be part of that anymore,” she said. On Twitter, she decried that the far left was pulling the city toward “Marxism.” She joined conservative efforts to repeal a sex-education law.But although she was running as a Republican and courting Republican endorsements, Ms. Davison has tried to distance herself from the declaration. She notes that the office she is running for is technically nonpartisan. She said she actually voted for Joe Biden and voted for the Democratic candidate in the three prior presidential races.Republicans are still supporting Ms. Davison, hoping she has an opportunity to turn what seemed like an unstoppable tide in Seattle. Cynthia Cole, the chair of the King County Republican Party, laughed when she was asked when the last Republican was elected in the city.After some research, she found a Republican that served as mayor in the 1960s. But one did serve in the city attorney position more recently: He departed the office 32 years ago. More

Republicans hope to hit on a recipe for renewal, while Democrats worry that a loss could force them to defend seats in blue states next year.ALEXANDRIA, Va. — During one of the most hectic weeks of her speakership — as she sought to unite her fractious party and corral two sweeping pieces of legislation — Nancy Pelosi made time for a meeting in her Capitol suite with a group of Democratic lawmakers from New Jersey and Virginia bearing an urgent message of their own.They warned Ms. Pelosi that if the candidates for governor in those two states, particularly former Gov. Terry McAuliffe in liberal-leaning Virginia, were to lose on Tuesday, it could have a cascading effect on the party, prompting Democrats to pull back from President Biden and his ambitious agenda, and perhaps even drive some to retirement.Representative Gerald Connolly of Virginia said he used the meeting last Tuesday to urge Ms. Pelosi to pass the bipartisan infrastructure bill, which had already cleared the Senate, and to share his alarm about the party’s fortunes. “You don’t have to be a front-liner to be worried,” he said, invoking the word House Democrats use to describe their most politically at-risk incumbents.Unable to overcome mutual mistrust between a group of House progressives and Senate moderates, however, Ms. Pelosi pulled the public works legislation from consideration hours after Mr. Biden visited the Capitol on Thursday, dashing the group’s hopes of delivering Mr. McAuliffe and other Democrats on the ballot a win after a two-month drumbeat of bad news.The former Virginia governor and his top aides, who have been pushing congressional and White House officials to pass the bill for over a month, were both stunned and infuriated, according to Democrats. They were amazed Ms. Pelosi had been forced to delay the vote for the second time in a month, baffled why the president didn’t make a more aggressive push and despairing about the impact of yet another round of negative stories from Washington.“The last two-and-a-half months makes it look like Democrats are in disarray,” said Representative Filemon Vela, a Texas Democrat who has raised money for Mr. McAuliffe.The races for governor in Virginia and New Jersey that occur a year after the presidential election have long been the first political temperature checks on the new White House and Congress, particularly among the election-deciding suburbanites so abundant in both states. But rarely have contests traditionally fought over decidedly local issues been so interwoven with the national political debate and, in the case of Virginia, loomed as so large a portent for the future of both parties.Glenn Younkin, Republican nominee for Virginia governor, spoke at a farmer’s market in Alexandria, Va., on Saturday.Kenny Holston for The New York TimesMr. McAuliffe’s strategy of relentlessly linking his Republican rival, Glenn Youngkin, to Donald J. Trump represents the best test yet of how much of a drag the former president still exerts on his party in blue and purple states. At the same time, Mr. Youngkin’s fancy footwork regarding Mr. Trump — avoiding his embrace without alienating him or his base — and his attacks on Mr. McAuliffe over the role of parents in schools will indicate if G.O.P. candidates can sidestep Trumpism by drawing attention to what they argue is Democratic extremism on issues of race and gender.Far from such old standbys of statewide races as property taxes and teacher pay, the issues in Virginia reflect the country’s canyonlike polarization and what each party portrays as the dire threat posed by the other.To Republicans, Virginia represents the promise of renewal, the chance to rebuild their party in a fairly forbidding state — and without having to make the difficult choice of fully embracing or rejecting Mr. Trump. Addressing supporters near a farmer’s market in Old Town Alexandria Saturday morning, Mr. Youngkin said his victory would send “a shock wave across this country.”Suffering yet another loss here, though, would make it clear to Republicans that they cannot continue to delay their internal reckoning over the former president and that, even in exile, his unpopularity remains the party’s biggest impediment.Because Mr. Biden carried the state by 10 points last year, and Mr. McAuliffe began the race with an advantage befitting the former governor he is, the most significant implications in Virginia are for Democrats. The party is also haunted by recent history: Their loss in the 2009 Virginia governor’s race — the last time Democrats controlled the White House and both chambers of Congress — foreshadowed the party’s electoral wipeout the following year.Mr. McAuliffe spoke with Virginia Beach Councilman Aaron Rouse, Gov. Ralph Northam and Bruce Smith, the former football star who is now a developer, during a visit to Virginia Beach on Saturday.Kristen Zeis for The New York TimesShould Mr. McAuliffe lose or barely win, moderates will demand immediate passage of the infrastructure bill. Liberals will argue that the Democratic Party, and democracy itself, are in such a parlous state that they must push through new voting laws. And strategists across the party’s ideological spectrum will be made to contend with a political playing field in the midterm elections that stretches deeper into blue America.“We’re going to have to change our calculation of what’s a race and look at the districts Trump lost,” said Rebecca Pearcey, a Democratic consultant. “Even if he wins,” she added, referring to Mr. McAuliffe, “we’re going to have to reassess what the map looks like on Wednesday, because Tuesday is not going to be a pretty night.”With Mr. Biden’s approval ratings tumbling among independents thanks to Covid-19’s summer resurgence, the botched Afghanistan withdrawal and rising inflation, Democrats are also bracing for additional retirements among lawmakers who would rather not run in a newly redrawn district or risk ending their careers in defeat.Already, three House Democrats announced their departures earlier this month. Mr. McAuliffe’s defeat in a state Mr. Biden so easily won would likely accelerate that exodus because lawmakers will chalk it up to the president’s unpopularity. “We’re going to see a lot more by the end of the year,” predicted Ms. Pearcey.Ms. Pelosi is acutely aware of these flight risks — she herself is one — and has privately expressed concern about the fallout from Mr. McAuliffe’s race. Last week, she told a Democratic colleague that the House’s failure to pass the infrastructure bill could imperil Mr. McAuliffe, according to a lawmaker familiar with the exchange.Speaker Nancy Pelosi has said that the House’s failure to pass the infrastructure bill could imperil Mr. McAuliffe.Stefani Reynolds for The New York TimesA longtime friend of Mr. McAuliffe’s, Ms. Pelosi headlined a fund-raiser for him last week and has personally given him $250,000 and raised over three times as much. She has also spoken with him by telephone repeatedly about negotiations over the infrastructure bill.A backlash next year may be inevitable in part because, as one longtime Democratic lawmaker noted, the party often suffers at the polls after it pushes an expansive agenda of the sort that congressional Democrats are painstakingly negotiating.“Somebody reminded me: In ’66, after all we did in ’65, we got beat,” Representative Robert C. Scott of Virginia said, referring to the losses Democrats incurred after passing much of the Great Society. “We passed Obamacare and we got beat.”Much as the protracted debate over the Affordable Care Act in 2009 and 2010 overshadowed their economic-recovery legislation then, Democrats this year have been more focused on negotiating their towering twin bills than on promoting their earlier Covid relief legislation.While Democratic lawmakers have dwelled almost exclusively on the infrastructure bill and their broader social welfare and climate proposal — matters on which they have not reached consensus — Americans outside of Washington have grown impatient with the lingering virus and the soaring prices of goods.“If you listen to the Democratic speaking points, it’s all what we haven’t done,” said Mr. Scott, pointing out that the child tax credit enacted in the Covid rescue plan earlier this year was often left unmentioned.Mr. Vela, a moderate who has demanded an infrastructure vote since August, said a McAuliffe defeat should prompt quick passage of that bill, which passed the Senate with 69 votes. “Progressives should wake up and realize that linking the two processes together was a huge mistake,” he said, adding: “That’s from somebody who supports both bills.”But many on the left believe that the party’s vulnerabilities, laid bare by the prospect of defeat in Virginia, where they have not lost a statewide race since 2009, only underscore the need to scrap the Senate filibuster and push through sweeping voting laws that could stave off a disastrous 2022 and long-term loss of power.“A close race in Virginia would signal just how hard the midterms will be for Democrats and the urgency of passing democracy reform,” said Waleed Shahid, a spokesman for the left-wing Justice Democrats who grew up in Virginia.Progressives were already unenthusiastic about Mr. McAuliffe, a fixture of the party establishment and a former national Democratic chairman, and they have been irritated that he did not do more this year to help the party’s state lawmakers hold onto the majority they won in the House of Delegates in 2019.Mr. McAuliffe spoke to supporters in Norfolk, Va., on Saturday.Kristen Zeis for The New York Times“Whatever happens Tuesday, one lesson we already know from Virginia is that we better prioritize winning state legislatures like our democracy depends on it — because it does,” said Daniel Squadron, who runs the States Project, which is dedicated to electing Democrats in statehouses.To Democrats in Northern Virginia, who prospered in the Trump years, there is an especially close connection between what takes place in the nation’s capital and their seats.Mr. Connolly recalled that at the Halloween parade last week in Vienna, Va., a handful of people yelled at him to pass the infrastructure bill, a major quality-of-life issue in his traffic-choked district. “It really got my attention,” he said.Now, he said, he hopes it will not take another high-profile loss in his home state to get his party’s attention.“If past is prologue,” he said, “we cannot have a repeat of what happened in 2009.” More

John Eastman, the author of a memo that some in both parties liken to a blueprint for a coup, sent a hostile email to the vice president’s chief counsel as the mob attacked.WASHINGTON — As a mob was attacking the Capitol chanting “Hang Mike Pence,” a lawyer who plotted with President Donald J. Trump and his allies to try to overturn the 2020 election sent a hostile message to the vice president’s top lawyer, blaming Mr. Pence for the violence.The email, reported by The Washington Post and confirmed by a person briefed on its contents, shows the extent to which Mr. Trump and his advisers sought to pressure the vice president, who was presiding over the certification of the election, to defy the will of the voters and keep Mr. Trump in office.“The ‘siege’ is because YOU and your boss did not do what was necessary to allow this to be aired in a public way so that the American people can see for themselves what happened,” the lawyer, John Eastman, wrote to Greg Jacob, Mr. Pence’s chief counsel.Mr. Pence and Mr. Jacob were in a secure room at the Capitol when Mr. Eastman sent the message, The Post said. Outside, rioters were storming the building where Congress was meeting to certify Joseph R. Biden Jr.’s election, erecting a gallows, hunting for Speaker Nancy Pelosi and forcing lawmakers to evacuate in a scene of violence and mayhem. Police officers recovered guns, knives, Tasers, Molotov cocktails, explosive devices and zip ties in the area.Mr. Eastman rose within Mr. Trump’s legal circle in 2020 from a little-known conservative academic to one of the most influential voices in the president’s ear, writing a memo laying out steps he argued Mr. Pence could take to keep Mr. Trump in power — measures Democrats and anti-Trump Republicans have likened to a blueprint for a coup.The two-page memo written by Mr. Eastman and circulated to the White House in the days before the certification was revealed in the book “Peril” by the Washington Post reporters Bob Woodward and Robert Costa. In the memo, Mr. Eastman argued that as vice president, Mr. Pence was “the ultimate arbiter” of the election, essentially saying he had the power to determine who won, and that “we should take all of our actions with that in mind.”That view was rejected by Mr. Pence and his lawyers as illegal and unethical.Since his memo was made public, Mr. Eastman has sought to distance himself from its contents, arguing that the document was taken out of context. He told National Review that the strategy was not “viable” and would have been “crazy” to pursue.But the email to Mr. Jacob undercuts those comments. Mr. Jacob wrote in a draft opinion article that Mr. Eastman showed “a shocking lack of awareness” as “a band of thugs who had been sold the lie that the vice president had the power to reverse the outcome of the election” stormed the Capitol.“Vice President Pence rejected the spurious legal theories that were pitched to him, and he did his duty,” Mr. Jacob wrote. “An inquiry should be made into whether the president’s outside lawyers did theirs.”Through a spokesman, Mr. Eastman declined to comment.The liberal activist Lauren Windsor recently recorded Mr. Eastman calling Mr. Pence an “establishment guy” and standing by the contents of his memo. “These guys are spineless,” he said of lawmakers who refused to join his plan to overturn the election based on false claims of widespread voter fraud.Trump’s Bid to Subvert the ElectionCard 1 of 6A monthslong campaign. More

If you built a laboratory solely to concoct the most inept, opaque and self-dealing election board imaginable, you would have a hard time outdoing the real-life specimen currently functioning — or more often malfunctioning — in New York City. From massive and illegal voter purges to broken-down voting machines and misaddressed ballots, the fiascoes of the city’s 10-member Board of Elections, which serves an electorate larger than that of most states, have been the stuff of national disgrace for decades.The latest debacle, still raw in voters’ minds, came on Primary Day in June, when the board mistakenly included about 135,000 test ballots in its first full tally of mayoral votes. The error was caught and corrected, but only after hours of confusion and chaos that reminded New Yorkers once again just how decrepit and unreliable their electoral system is.City investigations going back more than 80 years have repeatedly found the agency rife with waste, neglect and incompetence. But the complaints don’t come only from the outside. As one former staffer described it, working for the elections board is like “working in an insane asylum.”If the board somehow survives the Nov. 2 general election without any major screw-ups, it will be thanks to the fact that the outcome in the mayor’s race is all but preordained, and so any errors are likely to be of little consequence.Alas, just as predictable as the board’s chronic incompetence is the refusal of elected officials to do anything about it. Why would they? Many of them are complicit in protecting the city’s twisted political machine that values insiders over voters and incumbency over democracy.The result is an election board that operates like a mafia without the guns. It is staffed with the friends, family members and other unqualified cronies of party bosses. It flouts city laws and actively resists serving the needs of voters in favor of a handful of political power brokers. Worst of all, it operates in an accountability-free zone where even the biggest bungles carry no consequences.Most other large cities and jurisdictions don’t have these problems. As detailed in a new report by the Brennan Center for Justice, they take elections seriously by hiring professionals who know what they’re doing and training those who don’t. Their boards are much smaller and their commissioners can be removed by the same people who appointed them. They provide sufficient funds to run elections smoothly, and they make voting data easily available to the public. All of this is good government 101.It’s not like New York doesn’t know how to do these things. Many of the city’s largest and most important agencies — from education to law enforcement — conduct national searches for their leaders. By contrast, elections commissioners are appointed with virtually no public notice or process. This may please back-room politicians, but it makes New York City a national laughingstock.Maddeningly, the city can’t truly reform this system without state action. Good, then, that New York State has at long last started to drag itself out of the electoral Dark Ages. In 2019, the state adopted an early voting period more than a week long, as well as other measures to encourage turnout and make voting easier. This year, the voters can get in on the action themselves by approving two ballot measures, Proposals 3 and 4, that would allow the state to implement two popular voter-friendly reforms: same-day voter registration and no-excuse absentee balloting.When it comes to the city election board itself, the good news is that most of the board’s dysfunction can be fixed right now, through state law, and without having to resort to the cumbersome process of amending New York’s Constitution.Topping the list of reforms is the need for professionalism and accountability: The commissioners should have résumés that show real experience in administering elections, and they should be appointed, and removable, by local officials who directly answer to the voters. There’s nothing like the threat of real consequences to encourage the hiring of competent people.Reducing the size of the board would help too, by investing more responsibility in each individual commissioner. Dumping the requirement that Democrats and Republicans be equally represented at nearly every level of the agency, not just among commissioners, would allow for staff hires based on actual ability rather than partisan bean counting.Why hasn’t all this happened already? Ask New York State lawmakers, many of whom have long been happy to maintain a status quo that works great for them and their friends, even as it disenfranchises everyone else. But that is starting to change. State Senator Zellnor Myrie, who heads the Elections Committee, has spent months touring the state holding public hearings on election administration reform; he hopes to propose legislation before the end of the year. The Assembly and Gov. Kathy Hochul need to get on board with these efforts and enact major reforms without delay. New Yorkers have waited long enough for functional elections.The bottom line is that the elections board, entrenched in a perpetual culture of self-dealing, cannot fix itself. And while its incompetence has been part of the New York political landscape for generations, this year’s primary calamity should be the final straw. At a moment when the legitimacy of the democratic process is under assault across the country, the nation’s biggest city — home to more than 5.5 million registered voters — must be leading the charge by modeling how an election should be run. At the very least, it should not be bringing up the rear.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

Dysfunctional and collapsing rural towns may test voters’ loyalty to the ruling African National Congress party in nationwide municipal elections on Monday.LICHTENBURG, South Africa — Walking through what could be the charming tree-lined streets of Lichtenburg in South Africa’s rural heartland, pedestrians skirt around piles of uncollected trash. Shop fronts darkened by electricity blackouts line the main road. A recently built community center has been stolen, brick by brick.Mayor Daniel Buthelezi believes he can turn the town around. So does Mayor Tsholofelo Moreo.Two men simultaneously claim to be the mayor of Lichtenburg, a community of about 182,000 people 150 miles west of Johannesburg. Both are members of the African National Congress, or the A.N.C., the party that rules South Africa and this neglected town. More