Elections

Subterms

    More stories

    • 113 Shares139 Views

      in Elections

      The Long Global Trail of Resentment Behind Trump’s Resurrection

      by

      As the Cold War wound down almost four decades ago, a top adviser to the reformist Soviet leader, Mikhail S. Gorbachev, warned the West that “we are going to do the most terrible thing to you. We are going to deprive you of an enemy.”In the celebrations of the triumph of Western liberal democracy, of free trade and open societies, few considered how disorienting the end of a binary world of good and evil would be.But when the spread of democracy in newly freed societies looked more like the spread of divisive global capitalism, when social fracture grew and shared truth died, when hope collapsed in the communities technology left behind, a yearning for the certainties of the providential authoritarian leader set in.“In the absence of a shared reality, or shared facts, or a shared threat, reason had no weight beside emotion,” said Nicole Bacharan, a French political scientist. “And so a dislocated world of danger has produced a hunger for the strongman.”A different Russia, briefly imagined as a partner of the West, eventually became an enemy once more. But by the time it invaded Ukraine in 2022, disillusionment with Western liberalism had gone so far that President Vladimir V. Putin’s tirades against the supposed decadence of the West enjoyed wide support among far-right nationalist movements across Europe, in the United States and elsewhere. Western allies stood firm in defense of Ukrainian democracy, but even that commitment is wobbling.The curious resurrection and resounding victory of Donald J. Trump amounted to the apotheosis of a long-gathering revolt against the established order. No warning of the fragility of democracy or freedom, no allusion to 20th-century cataclysm or Mr. Trump’s attraction to dictators, could hold back the tide.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 Shares159 Views

      in Elections

      After California Mountain Fire, Residents Return to Find Homes Reduced to Rubble

      by

      The Mountain fire has torn through more than 20,000 acres and destroyed more than 130 structures in Ventura County. “It’s just devastating,” one resident said.In the city of Camarillo, Calif., on Old Coach Drive, the smell of smoke lay heavy in the air. The fire that erupted this week had hopscotched around the neighborhood, leaving some homes relatively unscathed but reducing several to charred piles of wood and rubble.Kathleen Scott and her sister Tonia Wall surveyed what was left of their two-bedroom home: layers of ash and the metal outlines of what was once the washing machine and dryer.Bent over the earth where a bedroom would have been, the two used a small garden spade to dig through the remains. They hoped they might find some mementos belonging to Ms. Scott’s daughter, Jacquelyn, who died from a rare neurological condition at age 4.“We’re not expecting to find anything huge,” Ms. Scott, 57, said. “We’re just sifting through stuff, just to see, just in case, not to have any regrets.”“We’re not expecting to find anything huge,” Kathleen Scott, 57, said. “We’re just sifting through stuff, just to see, just in case, not to have any regrets.”Loren Elliott for The New York TimesMs. Scott holding some salvaged keepsakes that she found on her destroyed property.Loren Elliott for The New York TimesWe 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

    • 138 Shares199 Views

      in Elections

      Dorothy Allison, Author of ‘Bastard Out of Carolina,’ Dies at 75

      by

      She wrote lovingly and often hilariously about her harrowing childhood in a working-class Southern family, as well as about the violence and incest she suffered.Dorothy Allison, who wrote with lyrical, pungent wit about her working-class Southern upbringing — and about the incest and violence that shaped her — and whose acclaimed 1992 novel, “Bastard Out of Carolina,” based on her harrowing childhood, made her a literary star, died on Tuesday at her home in Guerneville, Calif., in Sonoma County. She was 75.Her death, from cancer, was announced by the Frances Goldin Literary Agency, her longtime representative.Ms. Allison was flat broke in 1989 when she decided to try to sell “Bastard Out of Carolina,” the novel she had been writing for nearly a decade, to a mainstream publisher. “Trash,” a critically praised collection of short stories, had already been published by Firebrand Books, a feminist publishing house; so had her collection of poetry, “The Women Who Hate Me,” which she first published herself as a chapbook in 1983. In both books, she tackled lust, the scrum of feminist politics and her chaotic, beloved family. Feminism had saved her life, she often said, and she was certain that because of her political convictions, the mainstream press would not welcome her.“Bastard Out of Carolina” was published in 1992 to almost unanimous acclaim and made numerous best-seller lists.No creditMs. Allison liked to describe herself, as she told The New York Times Magazine in 1995, as a “cross-eyed, working-class lesbian addicted to violence, language and hope.”But at the time, she and her partner, Alix Layman, a trombone player who had been kicked out of the Army for being gay, were living on grits. Ms. Allison, who was legally blind in one eye, had numerous other health concerns and medical debt, and she could no longer support her writing with part-time clerical jobs.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 Shares99 Views

      in Elections

      Will NYC Revive Congestion Pricing After Trump’s Victory?

      by

      Gov. Kathy Hochul, facing pressure from supporters of the contentious tolling plan, is said to be exploring options for adopting it in some form.Gov. Kathy Hochul of New York is exploring options for reviving a congestion pricing plan for New York City before President-elect Donald J. Trump has a chance to kill it, according to four people familiar with the matter.Ms. Hochul’s move to salvage the contentious plan comes as she faces pressure from various corners, including a group that represents transit riders and is planning to start an advertising blitz on Monday in support of the tolling program.The plan that Ms. Hochul, a Democrat, is now exploring differs slightly from the one she halted in June. She is trying to satisfy opponents who had complained about the $15 congestion-pricing toll that most motorists would have had to pay as well as supporters who want to reduce car traffic and fund mass transit improvements.The governor has talked to federal officials about the possibility of a $9 toll and about whether such a change might require the lengthy, involved process of additional environmental review, according to a Metropolitan Transportation Authority board member familiar with the matter. The discussions were first reported by Politico.Mr. Trump, a Republican, has said he opposes congestion pricing, and his victory on Tuesday has apparently pushed Ms. Hochul to try to find a compromise.“The timing is everything,” said Danny Pearlstein, a spokesman for Riders Alliance, the riders’ group that is planning the ad blitz. If congestion pricing has not started by January, he added “it’s very unlikely it would start.”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

    • 138 Shares99 Views

      in Elections

      San Francisco Mayor-Elect Plans to Declare Fentanyl Emergency on Day 1

      by

      Daniel Lurie is a man in a hurry.He said in his first speech as San Francisco’s mayor-elect on Friday that he would declare a state of emergency on fentanyl on his first day in office in January.In brief, clipped remarks, he said he intended to shut down the open-air fentanyl markets that had proliferated in the city’s Tenderloin and South of Market neighborhoods and had infuriated many residents.“We are going to get tough on those that are dealing drugs, and we are going to be compassionate, but tough, about the conditions of our streets, as well,” Mr. Lurie, 47, said at a gathering in Chinatown that lasted just a few minutes.Fentanyl, a cheap opioid, is responsible for most of the 3,300 drug deaths that have occurred in San Francisco since 2020, killing far more people in the city than Covid-19, homicides and car crashes combined.Mr. Lurie, a 47-year-old heir to the Levi Strauss fortune who has never held elected office, appealed to an electorate that was tired of rampant drug use and property crime in the city and was looking for a mayor who could revitalize the struggling downtown area. He was effective in getting his message out to voters, spending $8.6 million of his own money on his campaign and receiving another $1 million from his mother, the billionaire Mimi Haas.Mr. Lurie, a Democrat, addressed reporters the morning after Mayor London Breed, also a Democrat, called him to concede. He did not provide additional details about what his emergency declaration would do.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

    • 138 Shares189 Views

      in Elections

      How Trump’s Win Is Explained by Right and Left Media Outlets

      by

      Media outlets across the political spectrum offered very different explanations about why Donald J. Trump won the presidential election this week.On the right, some media outlets said Mr. Trump had won because of the left’s embrace of what they called extreme political views, while others focused on how Americans were deeply dissatisfied with the economy under President Biden, which Vice President Kamala Harris defended.Outlets on the left were more divided in their explanations. Some said American voters had chosen to “burn it all to the ground” by choosing Mr. Trump. Others blamed the Democratic Party as a whole, arguing that Democrats had failed to connect with voters on key issues, and that Ms. Harris had lost by defending what those commentators saw as a broken system.Here’s how a few outlets have covered the last few days in political news:FROM THE RIGHTBreitbart-Breitbart, a conservative outlet, highlighted that Americans were upset with how Democrats had handled the economy, and argued that Mr. Trump’s victory was a “mandate for Trumponomics.”In one article, the reporter John Carney ticked through what he saw as the reasons behind Mr. Trump’s victory. He pointed to the costs of basic necessities like groceries, housing and health care, all of which had soared over the last four years, as well as fears surrounding high levels of immigration. Americans, in Mr. Carney’s view, wanted “less inflation, more economic nationalism and an economy they could feel great about again.”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

    • 88 Shares129 Views

      in Elections

      Read the Trump Assassination Plot Criminal Complaint

      by

      and committed out of the jurisdiction of any particular State or district of the United States,
      FARHAD SHAKERI, CARLISLE RIVERA, a/k/a “Pop,” and JONATHAN LOADHOLT, the
      defendants, and others known and unknown, at least one of whom is expected to be first brought
      to and arrested in the Southern District of New York, knowingly and willfully did combine,
      conspire, confederate, and agree together and with each other to commit murder-for-hire, in
      violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 1958.
      6. It was a part and an object of the conspiracy that FARHAD SHAKERI,
      CARLISLE RIVERA, a/k/a “Pop,” and JONATHAN LOADHOLT, and others known and
      unknown, would and did knowingly travel in and cause others to travel in interstate and foreign
      commerce, and would and did use and cause another to use a facility of interstate and foreign
      commerce, with intent that a murder be committed in violation of the laws of the State of New
      York or the United States as consideration for the receipt of and as consideration for a promise or
      agreement to pay anything of pecuniary value, to wit, SHAKERI, RIVERA, and LOADHOLT
      participated in an agreement whereby RIVERA and LOADHOLT would kill Victim-1 in exchange
      for payment, and used cellphones and electronic messaging applications to communicate in
      furtherance of the scheme.
      (Title 18, United States Code, Sections 1958 and 3238.)
      COUNT FIVE
      (MONEY LAUNDERING CONSPIRACY)
      7. From at least in or about December 2023, up to and including the date of
      this Complaint, in Iran, the Southern District of New York, and elsewhere, and in an offense begun
      and committed out of the jurisdiction of any particular State or district of the United States,
      FARHAD SHAKERI, CARLISLE RIVERA, a/k/a “Pop,” and JONATHAN LOADHOLT, the
      defendants, and others known and unknown, at least one of whom is expected to be first brought
      to and arrested in the Southern District of New York, knowingly and willfully did combine,
      conspire, confederate, and agree together and with each other to commit money laundering, in
      violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 1956.
      8. It was further a part and an object of the conspiracy that FARHAD
      SHAKERI, CARLISLE RIVERA, a/k/a “Pop,” and JONATHAN LOADHOLT, the defendants,
      and others known and unknown, in an offense involving and affecting interstate and foreign
      commerce, knowing that the property involved in certain financial transactions represented the
      proceeds of some form of unlawful activity, would and did conduct and attempt to conduct such
      financial transactions which in fact involved the proceeds of specified unlawful activity, to wit,
      the proceeds of the murder-for-hire offenses charged in Counts Three and Four of this Complaint,
      knowing that the transactions were designed in whole and in part to conceal and disguise the
      nature, location, source, ownership, and control of the proceeds of said specified unlawful activity,
      in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 1956(a)(1)(B)(i).
      9. It was further a part and an object of the conspiracy that FARHAD
      SHAKERI, CARLISLE RIVERA, a/k/a “Pop,” and JONATHAN LOADHOLT, the defendants,
      and others known and unknown, would and did transport, transmit, and transfer, and attempt to
      transport, transmit, and transfer, monetary instruments and funds to a place in the United States
      3 More