Elections

Subterms

    More stories

    • 150 Shares135 Views

      in Elections

      Trump’s First Cabinet Meeting Was a Display of Deference to Elon Musk

      by

      President Trump’s first cabinet meeting was a display of deference to Elon Musk.A couple of hours before President Trump convened his cabinet for the first time, he used his social media platform to declare that the group was “EXTREMELY HAPPY WITH ELON.”As the meeting began, it seemed to be the members’ job to prove it.The secretaries sat largely in silence behind their paper name cards, the sort of thing you need when, powerful though you may be, you are not a household name. And they listened politely as the richest man in the world loomed over them, scolding them about the size of the deficit, sheepishly admitting to temporarily canceling an effort to prevent ebola and insisting they were all crucial to his mission.“I’d like to thank everyone for your support,” Elon Musk said.In fact, Musk has not had the support of every cabinet secretary — at least not when he tried to order their employees to account for their time over email or resign. When a reporter asked about the obvious tension, Trump kicked the question to the secretaries themselves.“Is anybody unhappy with Elon?” Trump asked. “If you are, we’ll throw him out of here. Is anybody unhappy?”Nobody was unhappy. Nervous laughter rippled around the table as Howard Lutnick, the secretary of commerce, grinned and led a slow clap, which Tulsi Gabbard, the director of national intelligence, eventually joined before scratching her nose.Next to her, Kelly Loeffler, the small business administrator, applauded and attended to an itch on her ear. Secretary of State Marco Rubio offered up a single clap and gazed over at Musk, a fixed smile on his face. Robert F. Kennedy Jr., the health secretary, shifted in his seat.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 100 Shares87 Views

      in Elections

      In Trump’s Washington, a Moscow-Like Chill Takes Hold

      by

      A new administration’s efforts to pressure the news media, punish political opponents and tame the nation’s tycoons evoke the early days of President Vladimir V. Putin’s reign in Russia.She asked too many questions that the president didn’t like. She reported too much about criticism of his administration. And so, before long, Yelena Tregubova was pushed out of the Kremlin press pool that covered President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia.In the scheme of things, it was a small moment, all but forgotten nearly 25 years later. But it was also a telling one. Mr. Putin did not care for challenges. The rest of the press pool got the message and eventually became what the Kremlin wanted it to be: a collection of compliant reporters who knew to toe the line or else they would pay a price.The decision by President Trump’s team to handpick which news organizations can participate in the White House press pool that questions him in the Oval Office or travels with him on Air Force One is a step in a direction that no modern American president of either party has ever taken. The White House said it was a privilege, not a right, to have such access, and that it wanted to open space for “new media” outlets, including those that just so happen to support Mr. Trump.But after the White House’s decision to bar the venerable Associated Press as punishment for its coverage, the message is clear: Any journalist can be expelled from the pool at any time for any reason. There are worse penalties, as Ms. Tregubova would later discover, but in Moscow, at least, her eviction was an early step down a very slippery slope.The United States is not Russia by any means, and any comparisons risk going too far. Russia barely had any history with democracy then, while American institutions have endured for nearly 250 years. But for those of us who reported there a quarter century ago, Mr. Trump’s Washington is bringing back memories of Mr. Putin’s Moscow in the early days.The news media is being pressured. Lawmakers have been tamed. Career officials deemed disloyal are being fired. Prosecutors named by a president who promised “retribution” are targeting perceived adversaries and dropping cases against allies or others who do his bidding. Billionaire tycoons who once considered themselves masters of the universe are prostrating themselves before him.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 150 Shares135 Views

      in Elections

      Washington Post Opinion Editor Exits as Bezos Steers Pages in New Direction

      by

      Jeff Bezos, the owner of The Post, said that the newspaper’s opinion section would focus on “personal liberties and free markets.”The Washington Post’s opinion editor, David Shipley, is exiting as the newspaper’s owner, Jeff Bezos, steers the section in a libertarian direction.In an email to The Post’s employees on Wednesday, Mr. Bezos said that Mr. Shipley was stepping down amid a narrowing of the opinion section’s focus to defend “personal liberties and free markets.”“I am of America and for America, and proud to be so,” Mr. Bezos said. “Our country did not get here by being typical. And a big part of America’s success has been freedom in the economic realm and everywhere else. Freedom is ethical — it minimizes coercion — and practical; it drives creativity, invention and prosperity.”In his note, Mr. Bezos said that he asked Mr. Shipley whether he wanted to stay at The Post, and Mr. Shipley declined.“I suggested to him that if the answer wasn’t ‘hell yes,’ then it had to be ‘no,’ Mr. Bezos wrote.In a note to opinion staff members, Mr. Shipley said that he decided to step down “after reflection on how I can best move forward in the profession I love.”“I will always be thankful for the opportunity I was given to work alongside a team of opinion journalists whose commitment to strong, innovative, reported commentary inspired me every day,” Mr. Shipley wrote.This is a developing story. Check back for updates. More

    • 150 Shares79 Views

      in Elections

      In Crucial Judicial Race in Wisconsin, G.O.P. Now Has a Financial Edge

      by

      Two years ago, Democratic money carried a liberal jurist to victory and swung the state’s high court to the left. Now, Elon Musk and other wealthy donors have given Republicans a chance to swing it back.The last time Wisconsin held an election for the state’s Supreme Court, Republicans cried foul over the wave of money from out-of-state Democrats that overwhelmed their candidate.Two years later, Republicans have learned their lesson. It is Democrats who are grappling with a flood of outside money inundating Wisconsin.A super PAC funded by Elon Musk has in just the past week spent $2.3 million on text messages, digital advertisements and paid canvassers to remind Wisconsin Republicans about the April 1 election, which pits Brad Schimel, a judge in Waukesha County and a former Republican state attorney general, against Susan Crawford, a Dane County judge who represented Planned Parenthood and other liberal causes in her private practice.The spending by Mr. Musk, the tech billionaire who is leading President Trump’s project to eviscerate large segments of the federal government, comes as Judge Schimel and his Republican allies have spent more money on television ads than Judge Crawford and Democrats have — a remarkable turnaround in a state where Democrats have had a significant financial advantage in recent years.“When I was a little girl growing up in Chippewa Falls, I never could have imagined that I’d be fighting the world’s richest man,” Judge Crawford told a crowd over the weekend at a campaign stop in Cambridge, Wis.As of Monday, Republicans had spent or reserved $13.9 million of television advertising time for the Wisconsin court race, compared with $10.7 million for Democrats, according to AdImpact, a media-tracking firm. Because a larger chunk of Republican spending comes from super PACs, which pay a higher rate for TV ads than candidates do, the amount of advertising on Wisconsin’s airwaves has remained roughly equal. But the heavy Republican spending has eliminated what was a significant advantage for Democrats in the last such contest, in 2023.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 175 Shares159 Views

      in Elections

      UK’s Starmer to Meet Trump With a Boost on Defense and Pleas for Ukraine

      by

      Prime Minister Keir Starmer of Britain, fresh from announcing a boost to military spending, is flying to Washington for a high-stakes visit.Now it’s Keir Starmer’s turn.After President Emmanuel Macron of France navigated his meeting with President Trump on Monday, skirting the rockiest shoals but making little headway, Mr. Starmer, the British prime minister, will meet Mr. Trump on Thursday to plead for the United States not to abandon Ukraine.Mr. Starmer will face the same balancing act as Mr. Macron did, without the benefit of years of interactions dating to 2017, when Mr. Trump greeted the newly elected French president with a white-knuckle handshake that was the first of several memorable grip-and-grin moments.Unlike Mr. Macron, Mr. Starmer will arrive in the Oval Office armed with a pledge to increase his country’s military spending to 2.5 percent of gross domestic product by 2027, and to 3 percent within a decade. That addresses one of Mr. Trump’s core grievances: his contention that Europeans are free riders, sheltering under an American security umbrella.To finance the rearming, Mr. Starmer will pare back Britain’s overseas development aid, a move that echoes, on a more modest scale, Mr. Trump’s dismantling of the United States Agency for International Development. Mr. Starmer’s motive is budgetary not ideological — he says the cuts are regrettable — but Mr. Trump might approve.British officials said Mr. Starmer would combine his confidence-building gestures on defense with a strong show of support for President Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine and a warning not to rush into a peace deal with President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia that fails to establish security guarantees for Ukraine.“The key thing is, we don’t want to repeat the previous mistakes in dealing with Putin, in going for a truce or cease-fire that doesn’t convert into a durable peace,” said Peter Mandelson, who became Britain’s ambassador to Washington three weeks ago and has helped arrange the visit.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 113 Shares143 Views

      in Elections

      Faith Leaders Need to Loudly Defend Routine Childhood Vaccinations

      by

      As of this writing, the measles outbreak in Texas and New Mexico has spread to 99 people; 95 percent of those diagnosed with measles this year are unvaccinated or have an unknown vaccine status, and the vast majority of those affected are under 19. The outbreak is concentrated in Gaines County, Texas, a rural area in West Texas with a disproportionately high level of religious or philosophical exemptions to vaccines — a whopping 47.95 percent of students from one of only three public school districts in the county claimed exemptions in the 2023-24 school year. The percentage of exemptions in all of Gaines County is nearly 14 percent, and that doesn’t include home-schooled children.Earlier this month, the Texas Department of State Health Services spokesperson Lara Anton said that the outbreak in Gaines County was mostly among the “close-knit, undervaccinated” Mennonite community, whose members don’t get regular health care and don’t attend public school. “The church isn’t the reason that they’re not vaccinated,” Anton said in a news release. “It’s all personal choice and you can do whatever you want.”“Do whatever you want” might be good advice for choosing a fun new wallpaper, but it’s terrible advice for encouraging vaccine uptake.You might assume that many religious groups are doctrinally opposed to vaccination. Why else would the majority of states allow for religious or philosophical exemptions to school vaccine mandates? But that is not accurate. The Mennonite leadership, as Anton points out, is not against vaccines — and neither are most other major religious groups. The U.S. Conference of Mennonite Brethren Churches made a statement in 2021 regarding the Covid vaccine that “our confession of faith and our current and historical practice do not provide the necessary rationale for granting a religious exemption based on the theological convictions of the denomination” (italics theirs).This isn’t the first time that undervaccinated religious groups have been at the epicenter of measles outbreaks. In 1991, a Philadelphia measles outbreak that killed nine people spread in two church communities that did not believe in any medical intervention. In 2018-19, an outbreak in Brooklyn took root among undervaccinated Orthodox Jews.As Caitlin Rivers points out in a recent guest essay for Times Opinion, routine childhood vaccines are still very, very popular in the United States. But Robert F. Kennedy Jr., the secretary of health and human services, is already going back on promises he made about vaccines during his confirmation hearing. Earlier he said he wouldn’t mess with the childhood vaccination schedule, and now he’s saying “Nothing is going to be off limits.”We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 113 Shares119 Views

      in Elections

      Tim Walz Will Not Run for Minnesota’s Senate Seat

      by

      Gov. Tim Walz of Minnesota, who rose from relative obscurity to become the Democratic nominee for vice president last year, will not run for his state’s open Senate seat in 2026 and will instead begin the process to seek a third term as governor, his spokesman said Wednesday.“Governor Walz is not running for the United States Senate,” said Teddy Tschann, Mr. Walz’s spokesman. “He loves his job as governor and he’s exploring the possibility of another term to continue his work to make Minnesota the best state in the country for kids.”By staying out of the contest to replace Senator Tina Smith, a Minnesota Democrat who is not seeking re-election in 2026, Mr. Walz effectively kicks off a primary contest for the Senate seat that could be competitive should Republicans field a well-financed candidate.It also positions Mr. Walz, who won national attention for his “Midwestern dad” persona and football-coach background when he and Vice President Kamala Harris ran against Donald J. Trump, to potentially enter the 2028 Democratic presidential primary. During an interview with a Dutch television station last week, Mr. Walz said he was “not ruling out” running for president.Focusing on re-election also allows Mr. Walz to avoid what would have been an awkward Senate primary contest against his lieutenant governor, Peggy Flanagan, who announced her campaign for the seat last week. Mr. Walz and Ms. Flanagan, who had been political allies for two decades, had a falling out over shared campaign finances when Mr. Walz returned to Minnesota from the presidential campaign trail.Several other Minnesota Democrats have said they are considering running for Ms. Smith’s Senate seat. They include Keith Ellison, the state’s attorney general, Representatives Angie Craig and Ilhan Omar, and Melissa Hortman, the Democratic leader in the Minnesota state house. Mr. Walz is not expected to endorse a candidate in the primary.On the Republican side, Royce White, a former professional basketball player who lost a 2024 Senate race to Senator Amy Klobuchar, has said he will run, along with Adam Schwarze, a former Navy SEAL. Michelle Tafoya, a former television sports broadcaster who has become a regular on the right-wing commentary circuit, has also said she is considering running for the seat.No one has yet entered the race for governor of Minnesota. Mr. Walz coasted to general election victories in 2018 and 2022, though the state has been much closer in two of the last three presidential elections. More

    • 150 Shares119 Views

      in Elections

      My Mother-in-Law Wants to Be in the Delivery Room With Me. Help!

      by

      A reader asks for help setting boundaries with her husband’s mother, who has floated the idea of a lengthy stay with the couple after the arrival of their firstborn.My husband and I are expecting our first child this year, and our parents will become first-time grandparents. As much as I love my mother-in-law, she can be controlling — even from 500 miles away. Recently, she told us that she wants to visit us monthly until the baby arrives and to stay with us for two weeks after the baby is born. Later, I heard that she told my husband and others that she wants to be in the delivery room! I know that this is all coming from a good place, but it feels overwhelming. I would prefer less frequent visits. My husband and I work full time, and our weekends are packed with baby planning. After the baby is born, we want time alone to bond as a new family. How can I politely set boundaries with my mother-in-law?WIFEBe careful not to become your mother-in-law. In my experience, so-called controlling people are sometimes shoved into that position. Consider your husband, for instance: He seems to be mostly absent from your strategizing. Is that because you are trying to control the relationship with his mother or because you can’t count on him to step up and speak to her himself? If he hasn’t spoken to her yet, why hasn’t he?Don’t get me wrong: Your mother-in-law sounds like a challenging figure, and her plans for the coming months seem daunting. Still, it is not your job to shoulder all the emotional labor in your marriage. Too often, that interpersonal work falls to women. So I am going to suggest that your husband communicate your joint decisions about visits with his family.What’s more, his decades of experience with his mother presumably make him better qualified than you to express your family’s needs to her. If he wants help, I’m here for him! (I bet you are, too.) I expect your whole family is feeling exuberant about the birth of your child — which is all the more reason for you and your husband to share the load of discussing your desires and boundaries with them.Miguel PorlanValue Your Friend? Then Value His Skills.Over 12 years, my husband and I have become friends with his personal trainer. We have entertained him and his partner, a retired makeup artist, frequently. Recently, we asked his partner to do a makeup session for my daughter and a couple of our friends. He did and took some photos. (I served an elaborate lunch.) Unfortunately, one of my friends was unable to attend. So I emailed him to arrange another session for her. He asked if he should provide his services for free again or if he could charge his discounted rate. I told him I didn’t expect anything for free. So he sent me a bill for the second session, which I paid. Was I wrong to expect that it would be free?We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More