Elections

Her new role comes as the Senate enters a crucial month in the Democratic drive to enact the most extensive elections overhaul in a generation.WASHINGTON — Vice President Kamala Harris did not come to her role with a list of demands. She wanted to be a generalist, in large part to learn the political rhythms of a president she was still getting to know. In the first few months of her tenure, some of her portfolio assignments were just that: assignments.But on the matter of protecting voting rights, an issue critically important to President Biden’s legacy, Mr. Harris took a rare step. In a meeting with the president over a month ago, she told him that she wanted to take the lead on the issue.Mr. Biden agreed, two people familiar with the discussions said, and his advisers decided to time the announcement of Ms. Harris’s new role to a speech he delivered on Tuesday in Tulsa, Okla. In his remarks, the president declared the efforts of Republican-led statehouses around the country to make it harder to vote as an “assault on our democracy, ” and said Ms. Harris could help lead the charge against them.He also gave a blunt assessment of the task: “It’s going to take a hell of a lot of work.”Back in Washington, the president’s announcement has not clearly illuminated a path forward for Ms. Harris, whose involvement in the issue stands to become her most politically delicate engagement yet. Her new role comes as the Senate enters a crucial month in the Democratic drive to enact the farthest-reaching elections overhaul in a generation, including a landmark expansion of voting rights that is faltering in the Senate.Her office has not yet announced its plans, aside from calls Ms. Harris held with civil rights activists, including Derrick Johnson, the president of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, and a few scheduled meetings with prominent voting rights groups. Her advisers say she will take a wide-ranging approach to the issue by giving speeches, convening stakeholders and using the vice-presidential bully pulpit to raise awareness of the importance of the vote.“The work of voting rights has implications for not just one year down the road or four years down the road but 50 years from now,” Symone Sanders, the vice president’s senior adviser and press secretary, said in an interview on Wednesday. “The president understands that and the vice president understands that, and that’s why we will implement a comprehensive strategy.”The voting rights bill faces a more urgent timeline. The vast majority of the party has agreed to make the bill the party’s top legislative priority, and Senator Chuck Schumer, Democrat of New York and the majority leader, vowed to put it up for a vote later this month so any changes could be put into effect before the 2022 elections.With just weeks to go, it remains far from clear if it can actually pass. Because Republicans have locked arms in opposition, the only path forward would require all 50 Democrats — plus Ms. Harris, who serves as the tiebreaking vote in an evenly divided Senate — to support not only the substance of the bill, but changing the filibuster rule requiring 60 votes to approve major legislation, allowing it to pass with a simple majority instead.A handful of Democratic senators have expressed unease about changing the filibuster, while Senator Joe Manchin III of West Virginia and Senator Kyrsten Sinema, Democrat of Arizona, have been more adamant in their opposition.Mr. Biden has already pledged to sign the bill, which the House passed with only Democratic votes this spring. Known as the For the People Act, the bill would overhaul the nation’s elections system by creating new national requirements for early and mail-in voting, rein in campaign donations and limit partisan gerrymandering. But with the bill all but stalled in the Senate, Mr. Biden has repeatedly expressed concern over its future in his discussions with Democrats.The announcement that Ms. Harris would be working to move the bill forward took many on Capitol Hill by surprise. Ms. Harris and Mr. Schumer spoke on Tuesday — and had plans to hold a follow-up conversation late Wednesday, a White House official said — but it did not appear Mr. Manchin or Ms. Sinema were given a heads up.In a statement, Mr. Schumer said he welcomed Ms. Harris’s help navigating into law an elections overhaul that was “essential to protecting the future of our democracy.”Proponents of the voting legislation took her involvement as a sign that their attempts to build pressure not just on lawmakers, but the White House, were being felt.Senator Chuck Schumer, the majority leader, said he welcomed Ms. Harris’s help navigating into law an elections overhaul that was “essential to protecting the future of our democracy.”Erin Scott for The New York Times“It’s an interesting move given the long odds of anything getting passed and signed into law,” said James P. Manley, who served as a senior aide to former Senator Harry Reid of Nevada, the Democratic leader before Mr. Schumer. “There’s not a lot of cards to play right now, so it shows me they are going to try to raise the public temperature of this thing.”Others pointed out that even though Mr. Biden has decades of experience moving legislation through the Senate, Ms. Harris, the first woman and woman of color to hold her role, comes to the issue with an equally valuable perspective as the country grapples with the ways American policies have marginalized and mistreated Black people.“I think that Vice President Harris herself personifies the need for voting rights to be extended,” the Rev. Al Sharpton, who attended the speech in Tulsa, said in an interview. “When she’s on the phone or walks into an office, we’re looking at the reason we need voting rights.”Michael Waldman, the president of the Brennan Center for Justice at the New York University School of Law, said that the decision to elevate Ms. Harris as the face of the administration’s work on the issue was a pivotal moment for the Biden White House given the number of voter suppression efforts that were moving forward — 389 bills in 48 states and counting, according to a tracker maintained the Brennan Center.“It has been decades since a Democratic White House has made voting rights and democracy reform a central goal,” Mr. Waldman said, but he added, “the clock is ticking.”Ms. Harris’s impact on the hand-to-hand politics of the Senate is expected to be limited, but she often drew attention to voting rights during her four years as a senator. During her last year in the Senate, Ms. Harris introduced legislation that would expand election security measures, require each state to have early in-person voting periods and allow for an expansion of mail-in absentee ballots.In 2020, Ms. Harris was also a co-sponsor of the John Lewis Voting Rights Act, which would restore a piece of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 that relied on a formula to identify states with a history of discrimination and require that those jurisdictions clear any changes to their voting processes with the federal government. The protections were eliminated by the Supreme Court in 2013.Still, Ms. Harris, who spent a chunk of her time in the Senate running for president, was not known for building especially close relationships with colleagues, and Mr. Manchin and Ms. Sinema are no exceptions.Several Democratic aides who work closely with the senators scoffed on Wednesday at the idea that Ms. Harris, known as a staunch liberal, would be the one to persuade either moderate lawmaker to change the filibuster rule. Nor is Ms. Harris a likely candidate to broker the kind of compromise on the substance of the bill needed to persuade Mr. Manchin, the only Democrat who has not sponsored it, to back it.Ms. Harris’s attempts in February to nudge Mr. Manchin to back the White House’s proposed $1.9 trillion coronavirus rescue package is illustrative.Mr. Manchin was piqued when Ms. Harris appeared, without warning, on a television affiliate in West Virginia to promote the package before he backed it. Though a Democratic aide familiar with the matter, who asked for anonymity to speak candidly, said the episode was now “water under the bridge” it prompted cleanup by top White House officials.Mr. Manchin and Ms. Sinema’s offices declined to comment about Ms. Harris’s new role.Senate Republicans, meanwhile, are doing their best to kill the bill and blunt any Democratic attempt to change the filibuster rule, which would leave their party powerless to stop the passage of sweeping liberal priorities well beyond voting rights.At an event in his home state on Wednesday, Senator Mitch McConnell, Republican of Kentucky and the majority leader, argued that Democrats were inflating the impact of new state voting laws in an attempt to justify an unwarranted and chaotic slew of top-down changes to the way states run elections.“What is going on is the Democrats are trying to convince the Senate that states are involved in trying to prevent people from voting in order to pass a total federal takeover in how we conduct elections,” he told reporters. He said “not a single member” of his party supported the bill.Aware of the daunting path ahead, allies of the White House said that shepherding the bill through Congress was only one piece of the effort. Ms. Harris could be useful in helping ratchet up pressure on private companies, working with civil rights organizations, and engaging local communities over the importance of registering to vote.“She understands the need to engage in what I’d like to call kind of an ‘all of the above approach,’” said Representative Steven Horsford, Democrat of Nevada. “We can’t take anything for granted when we’re talking about having people’s voice heard at the ballot box.” More

Manuel Gonzales, a New Mexico sheriff who is running for mayor of Albuquerque, was interrupted at a campaign event by a flying drone with a sex toy attached to it. A man tried to grab the item, swinging his fist and calling Gonzeles a tyrant.
The campaign group for Gonzales said the Democrat was unharmed and ‘will not be intimidated’

Kerfuffle after drone carrying sex toy disrupts Albuquerque mayoral event More

The Stanford student sent a satirical flier that drew a complaint from the conservative group. The university then placed a hold on his diploma.It was the final day of classes at Stanford Law School, May 27, when Nicholas Wallace said he was blindsided by a message from one of the deans informing him that his graduation was in jeopardy for potential misconduct.His offense: sending an email flier to fellow law students in January that he pretended was from the Federalist Society, a prominent conservative and libertarian group with a chapter at the law school.The satirical flier promoted a discussion about the Jan. 6 insurrection at the U.S. Capitol, featuring Senator Josh Hawley, Republican of Missouri, and the Texas attorney general, Ken Paxton. The title of the mock event: “The Originalist Case for Inciting Insurrection.”The chapter’s leaders were not amused. They filed a complaint on March 27 with the university, which said in a message to Mr. Wallace that it wasn’t until May 22 that the complainants had asked the administration to pursue the matter.“I was astounded,” Mr. Wallace, 32, said in an interview on Wednesday. “I couldn’t believe that without any more than this letter of concern they placed my graduation and everything I’ve worked for for the last three years, they’ve placed that under threat.”Mr. Wallace’s predicament drew national attention from both free speech groups and conservatives. It served as another example of the intense debate over political speech on college campuses in America.In response to questions on Wednesday, a spokesman for Stanford University said in an email that Mr. Wallace would be allowed to graduate after all after administrators consulted with the university’s legal counsel, who concluded the matter involved issues of protected speech.“In cases where the complaint is filed in proximity to graduation, our normal procedure includes placing a graduation diploma hold on the respondent,” said the spokesman, E.J. Miranda. “The complaint was resolved as expeditiously as possible, and the respondent and complainant have been informed that case law supports that the email is protected speech.”Mr. Miranda said that the university would also review its procedures for placing holds on student diplomas in judicial cases close to graduation.The president of the campus chapter of the Federalist Society did not respond to a request for comment on Wednesday night.Mr. Hawley, who received his undergraduate degree from Stanford University, was widely criticized for objecting to the certification of the presidential election results. Mr. Paxton has drawn scrutiny for his appearance at a rally in support of Donald J. Trump in Washington on the day of the siege.Representatives for Mr. Hawley and Mr. Paxton did not immediately respond to requests for comment on Wednesday night.Grabbing attention itself was Mr. Wallace’s satirical flier, which he said he had emailed to a Listserv forum for law school students on Jan. 25, nearly three weeks after the deadly riot at the U.S. Capitol.The flier said that the event was being presented by the Federalist Society on Jan. 6.“Riot information will be emailed the morning of the event,” the flier said, offering Grubhub coupons to the first 30 students who R.S.V.P.’d for the fictitious program. “Although widely believed to conflict in every way with the rule of law, violent insurrection can be an effective approach to upholding the principle of limited government.”Two days after the satirical flier was sent by Mr. Wallace, it was the focus of a fact check article by USA Today, which reported that the email was a form of satire.In a complaint to the university, unidentified officers of the Federalist Society chapter said that Mr. Wallace’s email had caused significant harm and had led other organizations to cancel their events with the group.“Wallace defamed the student group, its officers, Senator Josh Hawley, and Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton,” the complaint said. “Wallace, impersonating the Stanford Federalist Society, wrote on the flyer that ‘Riot information will be emailed the morning of the event,’ insinuating that the student group was encouraging and hosting a riot. He also wrote that Attorney General Paxton advocates for ‘overturn[ing] the results of a free and fair election’ by ‘calling on a violent mob to storm the Capitol.’ And he wrote that Senator Hawley believes that violent insurrections are justified.”The names of the complainants were redacted from the complaint, which was posted online on Monday by the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education, a group working to defend free speech on college campuses. Mr. Wallace had sought the group’s help.“By instituting an investigation and placing a hold on Wallace’s degree days before his graduation, Stanford betrays its legal and moral commitments to respect its students’ expressive rights,” the group said in a letter on Tuesday to one of the law school’s deans.The flap drew the notice of Slate magazine. The writer of that article, Mark Joseph Stern, was the featured speaker in a conversation about the Federalist Society that Mr. Wallace said he had organized about a month after he sent the satirical email.Mr. Wallace’s cause was also taken up by Laurence H. Tribe, a constitutional law professor emeritus at Harvard University.“Mocking an ideologically-based group can’t be made a basis for denying academic privileges in any open society worthy of respect,” Mr. Tribe wrote on Twitter. “If accurate, this report shows Stanford Law School to be unworthy of treatment as an academic institution.”George T. Conway III, one of the founders of the anti-Trump group the Lincoln Project, also rallied behind Mr. Wallace.“As someone who been involved with the Federalist Society for over 35 years, I agree that this is totally ridiculous,” Mr. Conway said on Twitter, responding to Mr. Tribe.Mr. Wallace, who is from Ann Arbor, Mich., and received his undergraduate degree from the University of Washington in Seattle, said that he is supposed to take the bar exam this summer in his home state and then start a job with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission in Washington, D.C.He said that he would not have been able to take the bar exam without his law school diploma, which he will receive on June 12. More

[Want to get New York Today by email? Here’s the sign-up.]It’s Thursday. Weather: A rainy day, turning stormy in the evening. High in the mid-70s. Alternate-side parking: In effect until June 19 (Juneteenth). WABC-TV and the New York City Campaign Finance BoardWith less than three weeks until the primary election, the race for mayor of New York City has become increasingly heated.That dynamic was on show last night, as the eight major Democratic candidates attacked one another in more personal terms during their first in-person debate.The contenders jousted over several areas of concern for New Yorkers, with matters of crime, justice and policing dominating the night once again. Still, the face-to-face format was often more chaotic than substantive: Deep policy discussions were sometimes replaced by animated attacks.[Read more about the standout moments and catch up on who the candidates are.]Here are three things to know:Eric Adams was attacked like a front-runner.At one point, each of the eight candidates was given a chance to ask a question of an opponent.Mr. Adams, the Brooklyn borough president, was targeted four times.Later, Andrew Yang, the former presidential candidate and another leading contender, landed the sharpest critique, pointing to the times in Mr. Adams’s career when he has been subject to investigation.Mr. Adams defended his integrity and shot back at Mr. Yang’s lack of political experience in New York.Kathryn Garcia stayed out of the fracas.Ms. Garcia, the former sanitation commissioner, appears to have gained traction in the limited polling available. And leading up to the debate, she was the subject of attacks.But as leading candidates faced pointed criticisms, Ms. Garcia largely flew under the radar. Her campaign framed the approach as a strategy of remaining “above the fray.”When the candidates were prompted to ask another a question, no one directed one to Ms. Garcia. Only toward the end of the debate did Scott M. Stringer, the city comptroller, criticize Ms. Garcia for her role in Mayor Bill de Blasio’s administration.Maya Wiley came out swinging.Ms. Wiley, a former commentator on MSNBC, criticized her fellow candidates and ignored calls from the moderators to stay within the time limit.Among her biggest moments were sparring matches with Mr. Adams, whom she attacked for his stance on public safety. She questioned why he once said that he would carry a gun if elected as mayor (he is a former police officer and allowed to do so).Mr. Adams said there was a distinction between off-duty officers carrying guns and the proliferation of illegal weapons.From The TimesWill Cuomo Run for a 4th Term? A $10,000-a-Plate Fund-Raiser Says Yes.A 7-Year-Old Was Accused of Rape. Is Arresting Him the Answer?The M.T.A. Is Breached by Hackers as Cyberattacks SurgeThe Mystery of the $113 Million DeliSummer is here and New York City is reopening. Stay up to date on the best things to do, see and eat this season. Take a look at our latest newsletter, and sign up here.Want more news? Check out our full coverage.The Mini Crossword: Here is today’s puzzle.What we’re readingNew York City will begin opening mobile vaccination sites at schools tomorrow, starting with several in the Bronx. [PIX 11]Many prospective tenants face illegal housing bias after seeking to pay through forms of public assistance. But staffing to field the complaints is low. [City Limits]What New York might learn from another big city in its planned expansion of the street vendor system. [Curbed].css-1xzcza9{list-style-type:disc;padding-inline-start:1em;}.css-3btd0c{font-family:nyt-franklin,helvetica,arial,sans-serif;font-size:1rem;line-height:1.375rem;color:#333;margin-bottom:0.78125rem;}@media (min-width:740px){.css-3btd0c{font-size:1.0625rem;line-height:1.5rem;margin-bottom:0.9375rem;}}.css-3btd0c strong{font-weight:600;}.css-3btd0c em{font-style:italic;}.css-w739ur{margin:0 auto 5px;font-family:nyt-franklin,helvetica,arial,sans-serif;font-weight:700;font-size:1.125rem;line-height:1.3125rem;color:#121212;}#NYT_BELOW_MAIN_CONTENT_REGION .css-w739ur{font-family:nyt-cheltenham,georgia,’times new roman’,times,serif;font-weight:700;font-size:1.375rem;line-height:1.625rem;}@media (min-width:740px){#NYT_BELOW_MAIN_CONTENT_REGION .css-w739ur{font-size:1.6875rem;line-height:1.875rem;}}@media (min-width:740px){.css-w739ur{font-size:1.25rem;line-height:1.4375rem;}}.css-9s9ecg{margin-bottom:15px;}.css-uf1ume{display:-webkit-box;display:-webkit-flex;display:-ms-flexbox;display:flex;-webkit-box-pack:justify;-webkit-justify-content:space-between;-ms-flex-pack:justify;justify-content:space-between;}.css-wxi1cx{display:-webkit-box;display:-webkit-flex;display:-ms-flexbox;display:flex;-webkit-flex-direction:column;-ms-flex-direction:column;flex-direction:column;-webkit-align-self:flex-end;-ms-flex-item-align:end;align-self:flex-end;}.css-12vbvwq{background-color:white;border:1px solid #e2e2e2;width:calc(100% – 40px);max-width:600px;margin:1.5rem auto 1.9rem;padding:15px;box-sizing:border-box;}@media (min-width:740px){.css-12vbvwq{padding:20px;width:100%;}}.css-12vbvwq:focus{outline:1px solid #e2e2e2;}#NYT_BELOW_MAIN_CONTENT_REGION .css-12vbvwq{border:none;padding:10px 0 0;border-top:2px solid #121212;}.css-12vbvwq[data-truncated] .css-rdoyk0{-webkit-transform:rotate(0deg);-ms-transform:rotate(0deg);transform:rotate(0deg);}.css-12vbvwq[data-truncated] .css-eb027h{max-height:300px;overflow:hidden;-webkit-transition:none;transition:none;}.css-12vbvwq[data-truncated] .css-5gimkt:after{content:’See more’;}.css-12vbvwq[data-truncated] .css-6mllg9{opacity:1;}.css-qjk116{margin:0 auto;overflow:hidden;}.css-qjk116 strong{font-weight:700;}.css-qjk116 em{font-style:italic;}.css-qjk116 a{color:#326891;-webkit-text-decoration:underline;text-decoration:underline;text-underline-offset:1px;-webkit-text-decoration-thickness:1px;text-decoration-thickness:1px;-webkit-text-decoration-color:#326891;text-decoration-color:#326891;}.css-qjk116 a:visited{color:#326891;-webkit-text-decoration-color:#326891;text-decoration-color:#326891;}.css-qjk116 a:hover{-webkit-text-decoration:none;text-decoration:none;}And finally: A new addition to New York’s concert scene The Times’s Ben Sisario writes:For the last year, with the concert business mothballed by the pandemic, small clubs and theaters have warned that their survival was at risk, and dozens of venues across the country have shut down.But with concerts now coming back, something that might have seemed unthinkable just a few months ago is happening: Not only have old venues reopened their doors, but entirely new ones are sprouting up.On Sept. 30, Brooklyn Made, a new club in Bushwick, Brooklyn, will open with two nights featuring Jeff Tweedy of Wilco.Everything about the space is planned as deluxe and high-concept, from the Moroccan lamps adorning the 500-capacity performance space to the adjoining cafe and rooftop deck. Visiting artists will find an impossibly luxurious spread, including a private pool and use of a loft apartment with striking views of the Manhattan skyline.It is one of a handful of changes to the post-pandemic New York concert scene, including the return of Irving Plaza, the landmark rock club off Union Square that will reopen in August after a two-year, multimillion-dollar renovation. The venue underwent a major face-lift inside, with new bars, new bathrooms and improved sight lines.For Brooklyn Made, at 428 Troutman Street, the club’s very existence is a bullish bet on the return of live music and the nightlife economy in New York, said Anthony Makes, a longtime player in the New York concert world who is one of the principals behind the new club.“I believe in the future,” Makes said on a recent tour of the space, where construction machines were still whirring, but the sunny artist apartment, one level up, was an oasis of quiet.“And I think everyone’s going to come back,” he added.It’s Thursday — are you ready to dance?Metropolitan Diary: Barking Dear Diary:I was walking my 14-pound rescue dog, Ellie, across the intersection at 70th Street and West End Avenue. A work crew was installing gas lines nearby.The noise was quite loud from the drilling in the pavement, and I hesitated before crossing. But it seemed safe enough, and I held onto Ellie as I made my way across the street.As we approached the workers, one of them, a tall, burly man, was bending over to install a sign warning drivers to slow down. Ellie dashed toward him and started to bark.The man jumped up, surprised and then embarrassed at being frightened by a little dog.I started to apologize, but a man I took to be a supervisor walked over and interrupted.“Don’t apologize,” he said. “I wanted to bark at him all week.”— Judith Mandel LampronNew York Today is published weekdays around 6 a.m. Sign up here to get it by email. You can also find it at nytoday.com.What would you like to see more (or less) of? Email us: [email protected] More

new video loaded: More

With the Democratic primary just weeks away and polls showing several candidates in or near the lead, the anticipation going into Wednesday night’s debate was fairly high. Confronting each other face-to-face — though from C.D.C.-approved distances — eight candidates engaged in two hours of frenetic verbal sparring that may have been higher on theatrics than substance.Here are five takeaways. And for more, read our full recap of the debate.Adams was attacked like a front-runner.In the second hour of the debate, the moderator gave each of the eight candidates the opportunity to ask one question of a competitor. Four of the contenders targeted Eric Adams, the Brooklyn borough president and a front-runner in the race.“Mr. Adams has said he’s carried a gun to church, he has asked off-duty officers to carry guns to church,” said Maya Wiley, a former counsel to Mayor Bill de Blasio. “He’s said he will carry a gun as mayor and maybe even ditch his detail. Eric, isn’t this the wrong message to send our kids we’re telling not to pick up the guns?”Later on, the former presidential candidate Andrew Yang — who also took heat for his centrist platform — delivered the night’s sharpest critique of Mr. Adams, pointing to the various times in his career when he has been subject to investigation. “You don’t pay attention to the rules of the road,” Mr. Yang said. “You’re unprincipled.” Mr. Adams generally responded to the attacks with ease, a smile, and in the case of Ms. Wiley, a note of condescension.“I really want you to understand this issue,” Mr. Adams told Ms. Wiley, before launching into an explanation of how off-duty officers sometimes intervene in crimes to good effect.Responding to Mr. Yang, Mr. Adams defended his integrity and criticized Mr. Yang’s lack of political experience in the city. Once again, crime dominated the discussion.The issue of public safety in New York City, much like in the first debate last month, dominated the second mayoral debate from the outset.The first question challenged candidates to explain whether it was possible to tackle crime — shooting incidents in the city are up 77 percent this year, compared with last year — while simultaneously diverting resources away from the Police Department, which many of the more left-leaning candidates have proposed.Mr. Adams, a former police officer who does not support cutting policing, spoke grimly about gang wars and more personally about losing a childhood friend to gang violence. Kathryn Garcia, the former sanitation commissioner under Mr. de Blasio, emphasized the importance of taking guns off the street.Scott Stringer, the city comptroller, used the opportunity to attack Ms. Wiley, who is also vying for support from the party’s left flank. Mr. Stringer said Ms. Wiley served as a “rubber stamp” as chair of the Civilian Complaint Review Board, which processes civilian complaints about the police.The debate was messy and missing substance.Most of the candidates pushed to hold the debate in person. But the format change did not appear to bring the more substantive policy discussion that the candidates and many voters had hoped for.Instead, the debate was a chaotic, tumultuous two hours in which the candidates repeated talking points they’d delivered before and attacks they’ve already honed.Mr. Adams seemed frustrated by the clashes. At one point, he complained to a moderator, “I really hope that we have the discipline to allow all of us to have the time frame that has been allocated.”Sounding similarly irritated, the moderator replied: “You have your chance now, Mr. Adams.”Garcia largely flew under the radar.With all the barbs flying between the candidates, one contender seemed to conspicuously stay out of the mix: Ms. Garcia..css-1xzcza9{list-style-type:disc;padding-inline-start:1em;}.css-3btd0c{font-family:nyt-franklin,helvetica,arial,sans-serif;font-size:1rem;line-height:1.375rem;color:#333;margin-bottom:0.78125rem;}@media (min-width:740px){.css-3btd0c{font-size:1.0625rem;line-height:1.5rem;margin-bottom:0.9375rem;}}.css-3btd0c strong{font-weight:600;}.css-3btd0c em{font-style:italic;}.css-w739ur{margin:0 auto 5px;font-family:nyt-franklin,helvetica,arial,sans-serif;font-weight:700;font-size:1.125rem;line-height:1.3125rem;color:#121212;}#NYT_BELOW_MAIN_CONTENT_REGION .css-w739ur{font-family:nyt-cheltenham,georgia,’times new roman’,times,serif;font-weight:700;font-size:1.375rem;line-height:1.625rem;}@media (min-width:740px){#NYT_BELOW_MAIN_CONTENT_REGION .css-w739ur{font-size:1.6875rem;line-height:1.875rem;}}@media (min-width:740px){.css-w739ur{font-size:1.25rem;line-height:1.4375rem;}}.css-9s9ecg{margin-bottom:15px;}.css-uf1ume{display:-webkit-box;display:-webkit-flex;display:-ms-flexbox;display:flex;-webkit-box-pack:justify;-webkit-justify-content:space-between;-ms-flex-pack:justify;justify-content:space-between;}.css-wxi1cx{display:-webkit-box;display:-webkit-flex;display:-ms-flexbox;display:flex;-webkit-flex-direction:column;-ms-flex-direction:column;flex-direction:column;-webkit-align-self:flex-end;-ms-flex-item-align:end;align-self:flex-end;}.css-12vbvwq{background-color:white;border:1px solid #e2e2e2;width:calc(100% – 40px);max-width:600px;margin:1.5rem auto 1.9rem;padding:15px;box-sizing:border-box;}@media (min-width:740px){.css-12vbvwq{padding:20px;width:100%;}}.css-12vbvwq:focus{outline:1px solid #e2e2e2;}#NYT_BELOW_MAIN_CONTENT_REGION .css-12vbvwq{border:none;padding:10px 0 0;border-top:2px solid #121212;}.css-12vbvwq[data-truncated] .css-rdoyk0{-webkit-transform:rotate(0deg);-ms-transform:rotate(0deg);transform:rotate(0deg);}.css-12vbvwq[data-truncated] .css-eb027h{max-height:300px;overflow:hidden;-webkit-transition:none;transition:none;}.css-12vbvwq[data-truncated] .css-5gimkt:after{content:’See more’;}.css-12vbvwq[data-truncated] .css-6mllg9{opacity:1;}.css-qjk116{margin:0 auto;overflow:hidden;}.css-qjk116 strong{font-weight:700;}.css-qjk116 em{font-style:italic;}.css-qjk116 a{color:#326891;-webkit-text-decoration:underline;text-decoration:underline;text-underline-offset:1px;-webkit-text-decoration-thickness:1px;text-decoration-thickness:1px;-webkit-text-decoration-color:#326891;text-decoration-color:#326891;}.css-qjk116 a:visited{color:#326891;-webkit-text-decoration-color:#326891;text-decoration-color:#326891;}.css-qjk116 a:hover{-webkit-text-decoration:none;text-decoration:none;}Mr. Yang and Mr. Adams were the subject of several attacks, consistent with being seen as top candidates in the race. But Ms. Garcia, who seemed to be gaining momentum in the race following an endorsement from The New York Times editorial board and was the subject of attacks leading up to the debate, largely escaped the attention of the other candidates on Wednesday evening.When the candidates were prompted to ask another candidate a question, nobody directed one to Ms. Garcia.Only toward the end of the debate did Mr. Stringer criticize Ms. Garcia for being part of the de Blasio administration.Wiley came out swinging.Ms. Wiley, an attorney and former commentator on MSNBC, came out strong during the second debate, going after two of the front-runners and ignoring calls from the moderators to stay within the time limit.In addition to taking on Mr. Adams over guns, Ms. Wiley, wearing a bright red blazer that helped her stand out on the stage, also criticized another front-runner in the race, Andrew Yang, saying that his nonprofit was ineffective in accomplishing its goal of creating jobs. Mr. Yang promised 100,000 jobs, Ms. Wiley said, but “created 150.”In the first hour, there were moments when Ms. Wiley controlled the frenetic pace of the debate even as she frustrated the moderators by refusing to stop when asked.During a question on stopping crime, one moderator, WABC’s Bill Ritter, repeatedly tried to get Ms. Wiley to stop talking. “Ms. Wiley,” said Mr. Ritter. “Appreciate that.” More

The eight Democratic contenders jousted over the economy, education and the fundamental question of who among them was qualified to run New York City.The Democratic candidates for mayor of New York City forcefully attacked their opponents’ records and ethics in starkly personal terms on Wednesday night, tangling over how they would address growing concerns over rising violent crime and the city’s economic recovery.In their first in-person debate of the campaign, the eight leading contenders battled over crime, justice and the power of the police, questions of education and charter schools and, in the debate’s most heated moments, the issue of who is qualified to lead the nation’s largest city.The debate was the first opportunity for the candidates to confront each other face to face, and the setting and the timing — just 20 days before the June 22 Democratic primary — elevated the importance and the tension of the gathering.One of the most heated exchanges unfolded between Eric Adams, the Brooklyn borough president, and Andrew Yang, the former presidential candidate — two contenders who have generally been considered the front-runners, though the race is tightening.“Eric, we all know that you’ve been investigated for corruption everywhere you’ve gone,” Mr. Yang charged, accusing Mr. Adams of involvement in a “trifecta of corruption investigations.”“Is that really what we want in the next mayor? he asked. “Did you think you were going to enter City Hall, and it’s going to be different? We all know it’s going to be exactly the same.”Mr. Adams, who defended his integrity, noted Mr. Yang’s lack of past political experience in the city and remarked, “You do not vote in municipal elections at all. I just don’t know — how the hell do we have you become our mayor, with this record like this?”The candidates laid out their ambitions on vital city issues, including how to account for educational losses during the pandemic and the need to boost small businesses.The debate also touched on broader thematic questions: whether New York needed a political outsider with boldly ambitious ideas, or a leader with traditional experience in city government who might be more knowledgeable about how to tackle the staggering challenges that await the next mayor.

.s-carousel{margin:0;padding:0;max-width:600px;margin:auto}.s-carousel__slides{position:relative;padding-top:min(600px,100%);background:#000}.s-carousel img,.s-carousel video{margin:0;padding:0;width:100%;height:100%;object-fit:contain}.s-carousel figure{margin:0;padding:0;position:relative}.s-carousel__credit{z-index:10;position:absolute;bottom:15px;left:15px;text-align:left;font-family:nyt-franklin,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;font-weight:500;font-size:.75rem;color:#fff;opacity:.6}.s-carousel figcaption{z-index:10;top:15px;left:15px;width:75%;letter-spacing:.01em;position:absolute;text-align:left;font-family:nyt-franklin,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;font-weight:700;text-shadow:0 0 10px rgba(0,0,0,.25),1px 1px 1px rgba(0,0,0,.35),-1px -1px 1px rgba(0,0,0,.35);font-size:1.0625rem;line-height:1.3125rem;color:#fff}.s-carousel li,.s-carousel ol{list-style:none;margin:0;padding:0}.s-carousel__viewport{width:100%;position:absolute;top:0;left:0;bottom:0;display:flex;overflow-x:scroll;overflow-y:hidden;scroll-behavior:smooth;scroll-snap-type:x mandatory}@media (prefers-reduced-motion){.s-carousel__viewport{scroll-behavior:auto}}.s-carousel__viewport{-ms-overflow-style:none;scrollbar-width:none;scrollbar-color:transparent transparent;-webkit-user-select:none;user-select:none}.s-carousel__viewport::-webkit-scrollbar{width:0;display:none}.s-carousel__viewport::-webkit-scrollbar-track{background:0 0}.s-carousel__viewport::-webkit-scrollbar-thumb{background:0 0;border:none}.s-carousel figure:focus,.s-carousel image:focus,.s-carousel video:focus{outline:0;box-shadow:none}.s-carousel__slide{width:100%;height:100%;position:relative;flex:0 0 100%;scroll-snap-align:start}.s-carousel__slide figure{width:100%;height:100%;display:flex;align-items:center}.s-carousel__tap-to-unmute-overlay{height:100%;width:100%;position:absolute;z-index:100;animation:fade-in .5s ease-out forwards;background-color:transparent;border:none}.s-carousel__tap-to-unmute-icon{pointer-events:none;background-color:#00000099;padding:10px;border-radius:50%;position:absolute;top:15px;right:15px}.s-carousel__tap-to-unmute-icon svg{display:block;fill:#fff;width:20px;height:20px}.s-carousel__tap-to-unmute-icon svg path{stroke:#fff}.s-carousel__kebob{display:flex;justify-content:center;margin-top:15px}.s-carousel__bob{display:inline-block;width:6px;height:6px;background:#121212;opacity:.3;background-clip:content-box;border:3px solid transparent;border-radius:50%;font-size:0;transition:transform .4s}.s-carousel__bob[data-active=true]{opacity:.8}.s-carousel__navigation{margin-top:15px;display:flex;justify-content:space-between;align-items:center}.s-carousel__arrows{width:50px;display:flex;justify-content:space-between;align-items:center}@media (hover:none){.s-carousel__arrows{visibility:hidden}}.s-carousel__arrow{all:unset;cursor:pointer}.s-carousel__arrow svg{pointer-events:none;fill:#333;transition:fill .15s}.s-carousel__arrow:hover svg{fill:#ccc}.s-carousel__closed-captions-container{position:absolute;z-index:11;bottom:35px;margin:0 auto;left:0;right:0;text-align:center}.s-carousel__closed-captions{font-size:1rem;color:#fff;background-color:rgba(0,0,0,.9);padding:5px;font-family:nyt-franklin,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;visibility:hidden}@media (max-width:600px){.s-carousel figcaption{width:75%;letter-spacing:.01em}.s-carousel__closed-captions{font-size:.8125rem}}Eric AdamsJames Estrin/The New York TimesAndrew YangJames Estrin/The New York TimesMaya WileyJames Estrin/The New York TimesRaymond J. McGuireJames Estrin/The New York TimesShaun DonovanJames Estrin/The New York Timesslide 1slide 2slide 3slide 4slide 5 Mr. Yang, who spent months running as an above-the-fray front-runner who billed himself as a cheerleader for New York City, has demonstrated a growing willingness to lace into his opponents — especially Mr. Adams — in recent days. He is seeking to cast the race as a choice between a change candidate and sclerotic status quo contenders, as he competes against others who have the kind of significant city government experience he lacks.The candidates took the stage at a moment of extraordinary uncertainty in the race, even as the contest nears its conclusion.In recent weeks, Kathryn Garcia, the former sanitation commissioner, has demonstrated real traction in both sparse public polling and more concretely, in fund-raising numbers — potentially joining Mr. Yang and Mr. Adams as front-runners.Those three candidates all have distinct bases, but they are in direct competition over some moderate white voters, and Mr. Yang and Mr. Adams have both criticized Ms. Garcia in recent weeks in a sign of her emerging strength — and a sharp departure from their previous friendly postures toward her.But onstage, the fire was directed more often at Mr. Yang and Mr. Adams than at Ms. Garcia, who pitched herself as a steady and serious government expert. She stayed out of the fray during the debate, but also at times was out of the spotlight.“We don’t need a politician right now,” Ms. Garcia said. “And perhaps from this stage, maybe you will agree with me.”The first hour of the debate, co-hosted by WABC-TV, aired on broadcast television and may have been the biggest stage yet for the mayoral candidates, though the station pre-empted the second hour with a game show, “Press Your Luck,” forcing viewers to switch to another channel or an online stream. After months of staid online forums, the debate on Wednesday took on the trappings of a prize fight, with fans of the candidates holding rallies outside the Upper West Side television studio, waving signs, blaring music and mixing with the contenders.Inside, several of the candidates appeared eager for confrontation. In the tense exchanges between Mr. Yang and Mr. Adams, Mr. Yang suggested that Mr. Adams’s advice about confronting others over the use of illicit fireworks led to a woman’s death, and Mr. Adams said at another point that people of color are “wrongly accused often in this country” and called on Mr. Yang to apologize for his insinuations on corruption.Scott M. Stringer, the city comptroller who maintained a low profile in the first debate, issued bitter denunciations of several of his rivals. “As your consultants have told you time and time again, they admit you are an empty vessel,” Mr. Stringer said to Mr. Yang, peering over his podium to address the former presidential candidate directly. “I actually don’t think you are an empty vessel. I think you are a Republican who continues to focus on the issues that will not bring back the economy.”Mr. Stringer, who is casting himself as a progressive with deep government experience, also ripped Maya Wiley, the former counsel to Mayor Bill de Blasio, claiming she had been a “rubber stamp” for the Police Benevolent Association when she chaired the Civilian Complaint Review Board.And he suggested that Mr. Adams and others believe “the only solution to preventing crime is going back to the Giuliani days with stop-and-frisk and a Republican agenda that put a lot of kids in our criminal justice system.”Ms. Wiley, who defended her tenure, slammed Mr. Yang’s record leading Venture for America, the nonprofit he ran before running for president, over its record of job creation and how, records show, he failed to recruit many participants of color. And in one of the most revealing exchanges of the night, she and Mr. Adams had an extended back-and-forth over remarks he made about guns.“Mr. Adams has said he’s carried a gun to church, he has asked off-duty officers to carry guns to church, he’s said he will carry a gun as mayor,” Ms. Wiley said. “Eric, isn’t this the wrong message to send our kids we’re telling not to pick up the guns?”Mr. Adams stressed that he saw a distinction between off-duty officers carrying guns and the proliferation of illegal guns, describing an incident that occurred when he was a transit police officer, and he stopped an anti-Asian hate crime on a subway train..css-1xzcza9{list-style-type:disc;padding-inline-start:1em;}.css-3btd0c{font-family:nyt-franklin,helvetica,arial,sans-serif;font-size:1rem;line-height:1.375rem;color:#333;margin-bottom:0.78125rem;}@media (min-width:740px){.css-3btd0c{font-size:1.0625rem;line-height:1.5rem;margin-bottom:0.9375rem;}}.css-3btd0c strong{font-weight:600;}.css-3btd0c em{font-style:italic;}.css-w739ur{margin:0 auto 5px;font-family:nyt-franklin,helvetica,arial,sans-serif;font-weight:700;font-size:1.125rem;line-height:1.3125rem;color:#121212;}#NYT_BELOW_MAIN_CONTENT_REGION .css-w739ur{font-family:nyt-cheltenham,georgia,’times new roman’,times,serif;font-weight:700;font-size:1.375rem;line-height:1.625rem;}@media (min-width:740px){#NYT_BELOW_MAIN_CONTENT_REGION .css-w739ur{font-size:1.6875rem;line-height:1.875rem;}}@media (min-width:740px){.css-w739ur{font-size:1.25rem;line-height:1.4375rem;}}.css-9s9ecg{margin-bottom:15px;}.css-uf1ume{display:-webkit-box;display:-webkit-flex;display:-ms-flexbox;display:flex;-webkit-box-pack:justify;-webkit-justify-content:space-between;-ms-flex-pack:justify;justify-content:space-between;}.css-wxi1cx{display:-webkit-box;display:-webkit-flex;display:-ms-flexbox;display:flex;-webkit-flex-direction:column;-ms-flex-direction:column;flex-direction:column;-webkit-align-self:flex-end;-ms-flex-item-align:end;align-self:flex-end;}.css-12vbvwq{background-color:white;border:1px solid #e2e2e2;width:calc(100% – 40px);max-width:600px;margin:1.5rem auto 1.9rem;padding:15px;box-sizing:border-box;}@media (min-width:740px){.css-12vbvwq{padding:20px;width:100%;}}.css-12vbvwq:focus{outline:1px solid #e2e2e2;}#NYT_BELOW_MAIN_CONTENT_REGION .css-12vbvwq{border:none;padding:10px 0 0;border-top:2px solid #121212;}.css-12vbvwq[data-truncated] .css-rdoyk0{-webkit-transform:rotate(0deg);-ms-transform:rotate(0deg);transform:rotate(0deg);}.css-12vbvwq[data-truncated] .css-eb027h{max-height:300px;overflow:hidden;-webkit-transition:none;transition:none;}.css-12vbvwq[data-truncated] .css-5gimkt:after{content:’See more’;}.css-12vbvwq[data-truncated] .css-6mllg9{opacity:1;}.css-qjk116{margin:0 auto;overflow:hidden;}.css-qjk116 strong{font-weight:700;}.css-qjk116 em{font-style:italic;}.css-qjk116 a{color:#326891;-webkit-text-decoration:underline;text-decoration:underline;text-underline-offset:1px;-webkit-text-decoration-thickness:1px;text-decoration-thickness:1px;-webkit-text-decoration-color:#326891;text-decoration-color:#326891;}.css-qjk116 a:visited{color:#326891;-webkit-text-decoration-color:#326891;text-decoration-color:#326891;}.css-qjk116 a:hover{-webkit-text-decoration:none;text-decoration:none;}“I was off-duty, I was able to stop those armed perpetrators from carrying out the actions while off-duty,” he said. “The state law states that a police officer can carry off-duty because he has to respond 24 hours a day to any crime that is taking place in this city.”“We also had an off-duty officer shoot his friend and murder him carrying his gun,” Ms. Wiley shot back.Ms. Wiley is working to assemble a coalition of both voters of color and white progressives, and she has increasingly billed herself as “the progressive candidate that can win this race,” as she seeks to emerge as the left-wing standard-bearer in the race. On Tuesday, she released a striking ad highlighting the police attacking peaceful protesters, betting that the attitudes around reining in police power that animated Democrats and others following the killing of George Floyd last year remain resonant.Mr. Adams, a Black former police captain who pushed for change from within the system, has in some ways made a very different bet about the mood of the electorate regarding public safety. Amid a spike in shootings, jarring episodes of crime on the subway and a spate of hate crimes around the city, he has argued that public safety is the “prerequisite” to prosperity even as he also presses for policing reforms. He sees a need for more police in the subway system, while Ms. Wiley has said the focus should be on more mental health professionals.“No one is coming to New York, in our multibillion dollar tourism industry, if you have 3-year-old children shot in Times Square,” Mr. Adams said. “No one is coming here, if you have people being pushed on the subway because of mental health illnesses. If we’re going to turn around our economy, we have to make this city a safe city.”“We can’t do safety at the expense of justice,” Ms. Wiley said. In an implicit swipe at Mr. Adams’s positions, she added, “We cannot, and that means we can’t have stop-and-frisk back, or the anti-crime unit.”For much of the race, the battle for the left has been crowded, as Mr. Stringer and Dianne Morales, a former nonprofit executive, sought to engage the most deeply progressive voters in the city along with Ms. Wiley.Mr. Stringer is a well-funded candidate with significant labor support, but an accusation that he made unwanted sexual advances 20 years ago — which he denies — sapped his momentum and appears to have complicated his ability to grow beyond his Upper West Side base. Onstage, though, he was one of the most vigorous combatants.Ms. Morales was a favorite of the activist left, but her campaign has been embroiled in inner turmoil to an extraordinary degree, with a bitter unionization battle spilling into public view.Ms. Wiley’s challenge is to both unite and energize the most liberal voters in the party around her candidacy, and her ability to do so is not yet clear.Shaun Donovan, the former federal housing secretary, and Raymond J. McGuire, a former Citi executive, both took the debate stage as well-funded candidates who have struggled to gain significant traction.In different ways, both Mr. Donovan and Mr. McGuire sought to cast themselves as city government outsiders with serious executive experience who can fix the problems that have daunted others more closely tied to the current administration.“Other candidates on this stage have had a chance, these last eight years, to make progress,” Mr. Donovan said. “I would leave New York in a new and better direction.”Or as Mr. McGuire put it, borrowing from President Barack Obama, “I’m the change that you can vote for. I’m the change that you can believe in.”Emma G. Fitzsimmons More