Elections

The debate was spirited, at times fast-paced and occasionally awkward, with the eight candidates for the Democratic nomination for mayor of New York engaging with one another in a virtual format that left little room for the usual onstage theatrics. Here are five takeaways. Crime and policing became the dividing line.Dakota Santiago for The New York TimesThe topics of crime and police reform came up early, and quickly became the clearest line dividing the candidates. Moderates like Andrew Yang drew sharp contrasts with more progressive candidates like Maya Wiley.“Let me be clear, defund the police is the wrong approach for New York City,” Mr. Yang said.But Ms. Wiley and Dianne Morales argued in favor of shifting resources away from the police.“Safety is not synonymous with police,” Ms. Morales said.Yang acted, and was attacked, like a front-runner.Mr. Yang, who was considered among the leaders if not the top candidate in polls, was treated by the other candidates as a front-runner, repeatedly fielding attacks from other candidates.Scott M. Stringer, the city’s comptroller, targeted Mr. Yang’s lack of governmental experience, saying the city cannot afford a “mayor on training wheels.” Eric Adams said that Mr. Yang’s taking credit for Democrats winning the runoffs for the U.S. Senate race in Georgia was “disrespectful and appalling.”And it was clear Mr. Yang did not feel like he needed to go on the offensive, as he largely abstained from any attacks, sticking to his agenda and talking points.Maya Wiley came out swinging.Spectrum News NY1 & the NYC Campaign Finance BoardBefore she entered the mayor’s race, Ms. Wiley spent nearly three years as a commentator on MSNBC and NBC News. During the debate, she put the skills that she honed there on full display.She interjected with her policy positions in key moments, speaking sharply in soundbites. When attacked, she maintained her composure, firing back with a quick set of talking points. She rarely rambled.And she brought research to the table, drawing on past remarks that other candidates made in speeches or interviews. When she and Mr. Adams were sparring over his views on crime and policing, he suggested her criticism of him was not based in facts.“Eric,” she said, “this is a newspaper article. This is facts.” The virtual format made for some awkward moments.Spectrum News NY1 & the NYC Campaign Finance BoardFor months, the candidates have appeared in virtual forums, similar to the one used during Thursday’s debate. It was an array of talking heads locked into a Brady Bunch grid..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-1dg6kl4{margin-top:5px;margin-bottom:15px;}#masthead-bar-one{display:none;}#masthead-bar-one{display:none;}.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-1rh1sk1{margin:0 auto;overflow:hidden;}.css-1rh1sk1 strong{font-weight:700;}.css-1rh1sk1 em{font-style:italic;}.css-1rh1sk1 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:#ccd9e3;text-decoration-color:#ccd9e3;}.css-1rh1sk1 a:visited{color:#333;-webkit-text-decoration-color:#ccc;text-decoration-color:#ccc;}.css-1rh1sk1 a:hover{-webkit-text-decoration:none;text-decoration:none;}The virtual format had its limits, though. When one candidate was on-screen, viewers couldn’t see how the others reacted. The first time all candidates were asked a question, everyone spoke at once. At one point, a moderator, Josefa Velasquez, half-seriously threatened to put candidates on mute if they ran on too long.Still, as the night went on, the interruptions and attacks mounted. In one segment, candidates were given a chance to cross-examine one another with questions. The exchanges, which mostly targeted the race’s front-runners, Mr. Yang and Mr. Adams, grew contentious, resembling the heated in-person debates of past campaigns.They talked a lot, but here’s what they didn’t discuss.Gregg Vigliotti for The New York TimesIt is impossible to cover all of New York City and its issues in two hours, even over Zoom. But a number of issues that have been central during the campaign were barely mentioned tonight.Mr. Yang’s comments, for example, about the conflict between Israeli and Palestinian people, which roiled the mayor’s race this week, never came up. The city’s transit system, a vital component of its pandemic recovery and a frequent sore spot for Mayor Bill de Blasio, was barely mentioned. Though the subway came up in reference to both crime and homelessness, its financial and structural problems did not.Climate change, a growing concern for a city of eight million people shoved onto a collection of islands and peninsulas, was only mentioned as an aside.And though candidates said they were eager for the city to reopen and for the economy to recover, little attention was paid to the uncertain future of Manhattan’s vast office space, which sits largely empty but is key to the city’s financial health. More

The idea of “defunding” the police, which a year ago became a rallying cry after the murder of George Floyd, proved to be a contentious proposition during the debate, dividing the candidates along ideological lines, particularly as New York City reels from an uptick in crime.“The police are going to be a core way for us to address the public safety concerns that so many New Yorkers have and let me be clear defund the police is the wrong approach for new city,” Andrew Yang, considered a more moderate candidate, said.But Maya Wiley, who is viewed as a more progressive candidate, argued in favor of shifting resources away from the police.“I’m going to take a billion dollars from the New York City Police Department and shift that money to create trauma-informed care in our schools, because when we do that violence goes down and graduation rates go up” she said.Dianne Morales, also considered one of the more progressive candidates, said that “safety is not synonymous with police.”“We actually need to recognize that police respond to crime they don’t prevent crime,” she said. More

The surge in fighting left Israel in an unprecedented position — fighting Palestinian militants on its southern flank as it sought to head off its worst civil unrest in decades.Israeli ground forces carried out attacks on the Gaza Strip early Friday in an escalation of a conflict with Palestinian militants that had been waged by airstrikes from Israel and rockets from Gaza.It was not immediately clear if the attack was the prelude to a ground invasion against Hamas, the Islamist militant group that controls Gaza.An Israeli military spokesman, Lt. Col. Jonathan Conricus, initially said that “there are ground troops attacking in Gaza,” but later clarified that Israeli troops had not entered Gaza, suggesting the possibility of artillery fire from the outside. He provided no further details.The surge in fighting highlighted the unprecedented position Israel finds itself in — battling Palestinian militants on its southern flank as it seeks to head off its worst civil unrest in decades.It followed another day of clashes between Arab and Jewish mobs on the streets of Israeli cities, with the authorities calling up the army reserves and sending reinforcements of armed border police to the central city of Lod to try to head off what Israeli leaders have warned could become a civil war.Taken together, the two theaters of turmoil pointed to a step change in the grinding, decades-old conflict between Israel and the Palestinians. While violent escalations often follow a predictable trajectory, this latest bout, the worst in seven years, is rapidly evolving into a new kind of war — faster, more destructive and capable of spinning in unpredictable new directions.In Gaza, an impoverished coastal strip that was the crucible of a devastating seven-week war in 2014, Palestinian militants fired surprisingly large barrages of enhanced-range rockets — some 1,800 in three days — that reached far into Israel.Israel intensified its campaign of relentless airstrikes against Hamas targets there on Thursday, pulverizing buildings, offices and homes in strikes that have killed 103 people including 27 children, according to the Gaza health authorities.The funeral of members of Hamas after they were killed in an Israeli bombardment in Gaza City on Thursday.Samar Abu Elouf for The New York TimesSix civilians and a soldier have been killed by Hamas rockets inside Israel.Egyptian mediators arrived in Israel Thursday in a sooner-than-usual push to halt the spiraling conflict.Most alarming for Israel, though, was the violent ferment on its own sidewalks and streets, where days of rioting by Jewish vigilantes and Arab mobs showed no sign of abating.The unrest in several mixed-ethnicity cities, where angry young men stoned cars, set fire to mosques and synagogues, and attacked each other, signaled a collapse of law and order inside Israel on a scale not seen since the start of the second Palestinian uprising, or intifada, 21 years ago.The violence follows a month of boiling tensions in Jerusalem, where the threatened eviction of Palestinian families from their homes coincided with a spate of Arab attacks against Israeli Jews, and a march through the city by right-wing extremists chanting “Death to Arabs.”The jarring violence this week caused Israeli leaders, led by President Reuven Rivlin, to evoke the specter of civil war — a once unthinkable idea. “We need to solve our problems without causing a civil war that can be a danger to our existence,” Mr. Rivlin said. “The silent majority is not saying a thing, because it is utterly stunned.”Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu visited Lod, a working-class city with a mixed Arab-Israeli population that has emerged as the center of the upheaval. Hulks of burned-out cars littered the streets where, a few nights earlier, Arab youths burned synagogues and cars, threw stones and let off sporadic rounds of gunfire, before gangs of Jewish vigilantes counterattacked and set their own fires. .Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu speaking in the city of Lod on Thursday.Pool photo by Yuval ChenOn Thursday, a Jewish man was stabbed as he walked to a synagogue there, but survived.“There is no greater threat now than these riots,” said Mr. Netanyahu, who vowed to deploy the Israel Defense Forces to keep the peace in Lod. A day earlier, he described the violence as “anarchy” and said: “Nothing justifies the lynching of Jews by Arabs, and nothing justifies the lynching of Arabs by Jews.”To secure Lod, the government brought in thousands of armed border police from the occupied West Bank, and imposed an 8 p.m. curfew, but to little effect.Arab residents, who account for about 30 percent of the town’s 80,000 people, continued a campaign of stone-throwing, vandalism and arson, while Jewish extremists arrived from outside Lod, burning Arab cars and property. Arab protesters erected flaming roadblocks.As night fell there were signs that the violence might escalate when a large convoy of armed Jews in white vans moved into town.Palestinian leaders, however, said the talk of civil war by Jewish leaders was a distraction from what they called the true cause of the unrest in Lod — police brutality against Palestinian protesters and provocative actions by right-wing Israeli settler groups.“The police shot an Arab demonstrator in Lod,” said Ahmad Tibi, the leader of the Ta’al party and a member of Israel’s Parliament. “We don’t want bloodshed. We want to protest.”Israeli security forces on patrol in Lod on Thursday night.Ahmad Gharabli/Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesMr. Tibi said that Mr. Netanyahu, who has frequently aligned with far-right and nationalist parties to stay in power, had only himself to blame for the political tinderbox that has exploded with such ferocity across Israel.On Thursday evening, the State Department urged American citizens to reconsider traveling to Israel and warned against going to the occupied West Bank or Gaza. In an advisory, the department noted rocket attacks that could reach Jerusalem, protests and violence throughout Israel and a “dangerous and volatile” security environment in the Gaza Strip and on its borders.The trouble started on Monday, when a heavy-handed police raid at Jerusalem’s Al Aqsa Mosque — the third-holiest site in Islam, located atop a site also revered by Jews — set off an instant backlash.But beyond the images of police officers flinging stun grenades and firing rubber bullets inside the mosque, Palestinian outrage was also fueled by much wider, decades-old frustrations.Human Rights Watch recently accused Israel of perpetrating a form of apartheid, the racist legal system that once governed South Africa, citing a number of laws and regulations that it said systematically discriminate against Palestinians. Israel vehemently rejected that charge. But its security forces are now confronted with a swelling wave of fury from the country’s Arab Israeli minority, which complains of being treated as second-class citizens.“‘Coexistence’ means that both sides exist,” said Tamer Nafar, a famous rapper from Lod. “But so far there is only one side — the Jewish side.”The rocket attacks from Gaza are also quantitatively and qualitatively different from the last war in 2014. The more than 1,800 rockets Hamas and its allies have fired at Israel since Monday already represent a third of the total fired during the seven-week war in 2014.A house that was hit by a rocket fired overnight from Gaza in Petah Tikva, Israel.Dan Balilty for The New York TimesIsraeli intelligence has estimated that Hamas, Islamic Jihad and other Palestinian militant groups have about 30,000 rockets and mortar projectiles stashed in Gaza, indicating that despite the Israeli-Egyptian blockade of the coastal territory, the militants have managed to amass a vast arsenal.The rockets have also demonstrated a longer range than those fired in previous conflicts, reaching as far as Tel Aviv and Jerusalem.They have also proven more effective. In the 2014 war, they killed a total of six civilians inside Israel, the same number killed in the last three days.Those casualties appeared to be a product of Hamas’s new tactic of firing more than 100 missiles simultaneously, thwarting the American-financed Iron Dome missile-defense system, which Israeli officials say is 90 percent effective at intercepting rockets before they land inside Israel.Israeli’s Iron Dome air defense system launching to intercept rockets fired from Gaza on Thursday.Ariel Schalit/Associated PressGaza residents have no such protection against Israeli airstrikes, which crushed three multistory buildings in the strip after residents were warned to evacuate. Israeli officials said that the buildings housed Hamas operations and that they were striving to limit civilian casualties, but many Gaza residents viewed the Israeli attacks as a form of collective punishment.Thursday was supposed to be a day of celebration for Palestinians as they marked the end of the holy month of Ramadan, a day when Muslims typically gather to pray, wear new clothes and share a family meal. In Jerusalem, tens of thousands of worshipers gathered at dawn outside the Aqsa Mosque, some waving Palestinian flags and a banner showing an image of Ismail Haniyeh, the leader of Hamas.Muslims gathered for prayers outside the Aqsa Mosque in Jerusalem on Thursday.Mahmoud Illean/Associated PressIn Gaza, though, it was a somber day of funerals, fear and missile strikes. Some families buried their dead, others laid out prayer mats beside buildings recently destroyed in Israeli airstrikes, and still others came under attack from Israeli drones hovering overhead.“Save me,” pleaded Maysoun al-Hatu, 58, after she was wounded in a missile strike outside her daughter’s house in Gaza, according to a witness. An ambulance arrived moments later, but it was too late. Ms. al-Hatu was dead.American and Egyptian diplomats were heading to Israel to begin de-escalation talks. Egyptian mediators played a key role in ending the 2014 war in Gaza, but this time there is little optimism they can achieve a quick result.Israeli military officials have said their mission is to stop the rockets from Gaza, and the military moved tanks and troops into place along the border with Gaza on Thursday in preparation for a possible ground invasion.A residential building that was destroyed in an Israeli airstrike on Thursday in Gaza City.Hosam Salem for The New York TimesThe decision to extend the campaign is ultimately political. Analysts said that a ground operation would likely incur high casualties, and it was unclear if the troop deployment was anything more than a threat.But the political calculation grew more complicated on Thursday after the collapse of negotiations between opposition parties seeking to form a new government.Naftali Bennett, an ultranationalist former settler leader who opposes Palestinian statehood, pulled out of the talks, citing the state of emergency in several Israeli cities.His withdrawal increases the likelihood of Israel holding a general election later this summer — in what would be its fifth in just over two years. And the collapse of the talks appears to benefit Mr. Netanyahu, making it impossible for opposition parties to form an alliance large enough to oust him from office.Mr. Netanyahu, who is on trial on corruption charges, is serving as caretaker prime minister until a new government can be formed.On the Palestinian side, the indefinite postponement last month of elections by the Palestinian president, Mahmoud Abbas, created a vacuum that Hamas is more than willing to fill.Isabel Kershner contributed reporting from Lod, Israel; Iyad Abuheweila from Gaza City; Patrick Kingsley, Irit Pazner Garshowitz and Myra Noveck from Jerusalem; Gabby Sobelman from Rehovot, Israel; Mona el-Naggar and Vivian Yee from Cairo; Megan Specia from London; Steven Erlanger from Brussels; and Lara Jakes from Washington. More

Erica Newland serves as counsel for Protect Democracy, a nonprofit organization founded in 2017 to fight democratic breakdown in America. Before Joe Biden’s victory was officially confirmed in January, she researched some of the ways that Donald Trump’s allies in Congress might sabotage the process. She came to a harrowing conclusion. More

Having fueled mistrust in elections, Republicans are pointing to voters’ fears to justify new voting laws.You’ve heard this koan a million times: If a tree falls in a forest and no one’s there to hear it, does it make a sound?Now let’s try a variation: If a tree doesn’t fall, and nobody was there to watch it stay upright, could you be persuaded to believe that it made a crashing sound anyway?What am I driving at here? Read the latest article by our reporter Maggie Astor, and you’ll get it: In state legislatures across the country, Republicans have put forward hundreds of bills this year aimed at limiting access to the ballot — and they’ve justified it with the argument that, even if widespread election fraud isn’t a real problem (it isn’t), the fact that some voters believe it is ought to be reason enough to do something about it.For decades, suspicion of voter fraud has far outpaced actual instances of impropriety. That is partly because, as Republican politicians have increasingly focused on restricting access to the ballot, they have justified it with a crescendo of claims (mostly fallacious) about improprieties.But not until President Donald Trump lost his bid for re-election last year had false claims of voter fraud become a central political issue. Nowadays, addressing supposed fraud is at the heart of the G.O.P. platform. Representative Liz Cheney is proof of that: This week, she lost her Republican leadership post in the House because she was willing to call out Trump on “the big lie.”This stuff gets very meta very fast — so to wrap my head around it all, I contacted my colleague Maggie to ask her what she’d found in the process of reporting her story. Here’s what she said.Hi, Maggie. Your story is specifically about restrictive voting laws, but it’s also about something broader: the way that, as you describe it, “disinformation can take on a life of its own, forming a feedback loop that shapes policy for years to come.” To what degree was this a longstanding problem — and how much is it something that Donald Trump and his supporters have taken to a new level?The basic problem predates President Trump. You can see a similar pattern in, say, the campaigns against routine childhood vaccinations. The disinformation about supposed side effects spreads, and eventually you start to see politicians talking about how they’ve spoken to lots of parents who have serious concerns about vaccinations and arguing that those parents’ concerns should be accommodated in policy.There’s no question that we’re seeing this happen more because of Trump and his supporters. But it’s not that the feedback-loop pattern is becoming more common, per se — it’s that Trump has promoted so much disinformation, and the disinformation campaigns among his supporters have become so enormous and effective, that we end up seeing the pattern more just because of the volume of disinformation.One quotation that didn’t make it into my article was from Matt Masterson, a fellow at the Stanford Internet Observatory who was previously a senior election security official in the Department of Homeland Security. He told me: “There’s no question, none, that this was the broadest campaign that I have seen to undermine confidence in elections, and so now the push is broader and more pervasive across the states because the lies are broader and more pervasive across the states.”States across the country are using worries about fraud to justify legislation. How widespread have voter-restriction laws become at the state level this year? Are we looking at something on a historic scale?It’s absolutely on a historic scale. According to the Brennan Center for Justice, which tracks voting-related bills, legislators in 47 states have introduced a total of 361 bills with restrictive provisions this year. For comparison, in 2017, the Brennan Center counted 99 bills in 31 states.That doesn’t mean the push to restrict voting is new, of course. Far from it — 99 bills in 2017 is still a lot, and more broadly, these sorts of laws have proliferated since the Supreme Court weakened the Voting Rights Act in 2013. But the scale is unlike anything we’ve seen before, and many of the individual bills are really sweeping.In your story, you quote a state senator from North Carolina, Ralph Hise, who wrote to you: “Elected officials have a responsibility to respond to declining voter confidence, and failure to do so is dangerous to the health of our republic.” But what about responding to declining voter confidence by simply shoring up voters’ faith in the election system, given that widespread fraud basically isn’t real? Are there any Republicans who seem willing to do that?You do see a very small number of Republicans doing that. Think Liz Cheney, Mitt Romney or Adam Kinzinger. But the Republicans who are saying that the election was secure, and who have tried to push other Republicans to acknowledge the same, have not been received well by the broader party, to put it mildly. Just yesterday, of course, Cheney was ousted from her leadership position in the House Republican caucus because she denounced the disinformation.So yes, there are Republicans who are willing, but they’re just not influential voices within the party now — even when they’re people like Romney who were once extremely influential voices within the party.Were you forwarded this newsletter? Sign up here to get it delivered to your inbox.Is there anything you think we’re missing? Anything you want to see more of? We’d love to hear from you. Email us at [email protected]. More

Two candidates in the New York race for mayor have been accused of wrongdoing. One has been urged to drop out of the race; the other is gaining strength.A year ago, if you had asked anyone who has spent time around New York City politics who would next become mayor, you were likely to hear that the election of Scott Stringer was more or less assured. Ranked-choice voting would probably favor him. A lifelong public servant, a son of Washington Heights, a wonk, an advocate — fighting for housing justice and climate justice and all the justices — he seemed like a pot roast on a damp night in midwinter: satisfying, if not abundant in memorable flavor.It was hard to foresee that the kind of candidate who could brag about having “fixed the back office” of the city’s pension fund would find himself engulfed in scandal, and yet here we are. As the city’s comptroller, Mr. Stringer had spent the past seven years rooting around in the mess of bureaucracy, issuing audit after audit, finding waste here and inefficiency there. In 2016, for example, his office uncovered that the city was spending $400,000 a day on hotel rooms for the homeless; two years later, that “a shocking 27 percent of commercial waste vehicles have been issued at least one red light camera violation.” A Stringer mayoralty, as one friend recently remarked, would provide a daily streaming of “competence porn.”Charisma, as the Trump era reiterated, allows people to overlook a litany of political sins. Among contenders in the Democratic mayoral field, Mr. Stringer had already been losing ground to Andrew Yang, he of bodega illiteracy, when a woman came forward late last month with accusations of sexual impropriety.Jean Kim, who volunteered on Mr. Stringer’s unsuccessful campaign for public advocate 20 years ago when she was 30, said that during that time, when both were unmarried, Mr. Stringer kissed her and groped her and tried to pressure her into sleeping with him, exploiting his stature in politics, when she wasn’t interested. Mr. Stringer, in turn, has denied the allegations, arguing that their involvement had been “light” and consensual. Ms. Kim and her many vocal allies view the interactions as assault.Jean Kim, a former intern to Scott Stringer, accused the mayoral candidate of sexual abuse and harrasment at a press conference in April.Gabriela Bhaskar for The New York TimesWhatever the truth, the judgment was swift. Mr. Stringer’s eventual defeat began to seem much more of a foregone conclusion, the result of a mind-set among many Democrats, particularly young ones, who regard sexual misdeeds as unparalleled in terms of their severity and demand for obliterating consequence.The most recent mayoral poll, of more than 1,000 Democratic voters, the first to be conducted after Ms. Kim’s allegations, had Mr. Stringer’s support dropping by 5 points, with Mr. Yang in the lead and Brooklyn Borough president Eric Adams essentially in second place.A decade ago, when Mr. Adams served in the state legislature, as chairman of the Senate Racing and Wagering Committee, he appeared on the radar of the state inspector general’s office for his involvement in the selection of a slot-machine operator at the Aqueduct Racetrack in Queens. The company initially chosen — and then ultimately rejected after public outcry — had offered a bid $100 million below its competitors’ for the licensing fee.The 308-page report produced by the inspector’s office concluded that Mr. Adams had given investigators dubious testimony about the process, accepted campaign money from the operator first selected and then showed up at a celebratory dinner in which the company toasted its winning bid. Like Mr. Stringer, he has never been charged with anything; each has denied any lapses in ethical conduct. But the paths of the two candidates diverge in the way that these old allegations around Mr. Adams, more deeply substantiated, have appeared to have no effect on his current standing in the race.As it happens, corruption — real or insinuated — is often hard for ordinary people to understand, while for so many women, the abuses of men are all too easily pulled from the archives of personal recollection. Amid companion crises in the Cuomo administration, for example, the sexual misconduct allegations against the governor upstaged the efforts on the part of his office to obscure the death toll in state nursing homes.Four years ago, an article in the Annual Review of Political Science looked at voter response to corruption charges in democratic elections around the world and found that “voters keep re-electing politicians who steal from them.” Even when corruption is obvious, people are often willing to overlook it when weighed against other variables. Two years ago, Jasiel Correia, then a young mayor of Fall River, Mass., who was facing federal bribery, fraud and extortion charges, managed to be recalled and re-elected on the same day.Scott Stringer at a “Women for Stringer” comptroller campaign rally at the Harriet Tubman Memorial Statute in Harlem in August 2013.Michael Nagle for The New York TimesMr. Stringer’s situation is particularly striking, given that he won the race for comptroller eight years ago as the candidate of choice among young feminists who were not about to raise their champagne flutes for Eliot Spitzer, forced to leave office in 2008 because of his dalliances with prostitutes. At a fund-raiser for Mr. Stringer in Chelsea, late in the summer of 2013, there were Vogue editors and Lena Dunham out to show their support, improbably enough, for a candidate described by Women’s Wear Daily as an “avuncular man who has the countenance of an Upper West Side accountant.” They had been corralled by Audrey Gelman, his press secretary, who would go on to rise and fall as the founder of the women’s co-working space, the Wing..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-1dg6kl4{margin-top:5px;margin-bottom:15px;}#masthead-bar-one{display:none;}#masthead-bar-one{display:none;}.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-1rh1sk1{margin:0 auto;overflow:hidden;}.css-1rh1sk1 strong{font-weight:700;}.css-1rh1sk1 em{font-style:italic;}.css-1rh1sk1 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:#ccd9e3;text-decoration-color:#ccd9e3;}.css-1rh1sk1 a:visited{color:#333;-webkit-text-decoration-color:#ccc;text-decoration-color:#ccc;}.css-1rh1sk1 a:hover{-webkit-text-decoration:none;text-decoration:none;}Now, though, young women — especially those occupying prominent political positions on the left — are abandoning Mr. Stringer. Among the first to rescind an endorsement was a close friend and ally, State Senator Jessica Ramos, 35 years old and elected in 2018, who maintained in a statement that after Ms. Kim “came forward to share her truth,” it was “our duty to listen.” Soon the Working Families Party vacated Mr. Stringer’s camp as well.But despite the aura of finality around his campaign, there is another truth. Young voters are notoriously loath to turn out in local elections. Data from a few recent races in New York indicates that Democratic women between the ages of 18 to 34 are less likely to show up at the polls than voters over 40 — even when a dynamic, young female candidate presents herself.Three years ago, in the primary that sent Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez to Congress, women in that cohort turned out at a rate of only 7 percent, nearly half the proportion of those over 40 who voted.More concerning than anything else in this election cycle is the extent to which so many New Yorkers remain oblivious to the particulars of the mayoral race at a moment profoundly critical to the city’s future. People who several months ago might have been able to predict the outcome of the Georgia Senate runoffs in Lamar County to one-tenth of a percent have little ability to differentiate among the candidates beyond viral details like Mr. Stringer’s harassment allegations, Mr. Yang’s goofy levity and Shaun Donovan’s limited understanding of the Brooklyn housing market.Regardless of the whether the accusations against Mr. Stringer and Mr. Adams prove spurious or damning, one thing is true, at least for now. Two men accused of wrongdoing are ahead of women who are accused of nothing. More