Elections

His childlike porcelain characters thrilled and inspired generations of collectors. They also made him a millionaire.Sam Butcher, the soft-spoken artist whose doe-eyed, pastel-hued porcelain Precious Moments figurines ignited a global collecting frenzy and made him a wealthy man, and whose Christian faith spurred him to build his own version of the Sistine Chapel in Carthage, Mo., died on May 20 at his home there. He was 85.His death was confirmed by his son Jon.Mr. Butcher was the Michelangelo of Missouri, and his adorable snub-nosed Precious Moments characters were “the Beanie Babies of porcelain,” as The Wall Street Journal once put it. Their zealous collectors, who numbered in the hundreds of thousands, built rooms for their Precious Moments figurines, convened in regional clubs and made pilgrimages to Carthage, where they slept in the Precious Moments motel or the R.V. park, marveled at the Precious Moments Fountain of the Angels, dined in the Precious Moments food courts and wandered the 30-acre grounds. (Carthage also hosted Precious Moments weddings.)For a time, the Precious Moments Care-a-Van — an 18-wheeler kitted out like a museum, filled with figurines and dioramas that told Mr. Butcher’s life story — toured the country. There were hundreds and hundreds of Precious Moments licensees, which made hats, keychains, watches, greeting cards, books and a children’s Bible. At the company’s peak, in 1996 and 1997, Precious Moments’ global retail sales reached over $500 million each year, a stunning amount for a man who was once so poor that he struggled to buy groceries for his seven children.Mr. Butcher, whose fans sought him out at the Precious Moments compound to autograph their figurines and posters (he always carried two pens to do so), was an unlikely-looking millionaire: a rumpled figure typically clad in bluejeans and a T-shirt, with paint in his bushy hair and a shy smile.“Most people just think I’m the gardener,” he said.Mr. Butcher and a colleague began making greeting cards and posters featuring waifish children in the 1970s. A giftware company thought the characters had commercial potential as figurines. By 1995, Precious Moments were said to be the No. 1 collectible in the world.Lissa Forliti-Aska, via Associated PressMr. Butcher had been working with an international nondenominational ministry for children, teaching and illustrating Bible stories, when he and a colleague, Bill Biel, began making inspirational greeting cards and posters featuring his winsome characters in the early 1970s. “I came up with ‘Precious’ and he came up with ‘Moments,’” Mr. Butcher told The Kansas City Star in 1995.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

In his post-verdict remarks, the former president sounded less like a political martyr than like a motorist trying to talk his way out of a speeding ticket.The way to evaluate a political speech — I mean as a literary critic, not as a pundit or a partisan — is to examine how the rhetoric rises to the occasion. Does the moment demand gravity or transcendence? Humility or defiance? Do the speaker’s words answer the call of history?In the case of Donald J. Trump’s 33-minute address in the lobby of Trump Tower on Friday, the occasion was both bizarre and momentous. A former president on the brink of becoming, for the third time in a row, the nominee of his party, stood convicted of 34 felonies. That nothing remotely similar has ever happened before is sufficient to guarantee the speech a place in the annals of American political discourse.As text and performance, though, the thing was kind of a slog. Mr. Trump has never been an orderly orator or a methodical builder of arguments; he riffs and extemporizes, free-associates and repeats himself, straying from whatever script may be at hand. He did some of that on Friday, but his manner was subdued. The matter was also curiously flat: a rehash of the trial, with a few gestures toward the larger political stakes.The persona Mr. Trump presented on Friday was that of an aggrieved New York businessman — a Trump that seemed like a throwback to an earlier, pre-MAGA era. He didn’t sound like a candidate in campaign mode. The showboating populism that he brings to his rallies — the mix of piety and profanity that gets the crowds going — was hardly in evidence.It’s true that he began and ended with familiar tropes and themes, painting a grim picture of a declining, crime-ridden American overrun by foreigners (some speaking languages “that we haven’t even heard of”). He framed his legal troubles as an assault on the Constitution and used religious imagery to depict what had happened in the courtroom. Some witnesses were “literally crucified” by the judge, Juan Merchan, “who looks like an angel, but he’s really a devil.”As a longtime journalist (and lifelong pedant), I’m compelled to point out that nobody was literally crucified. And as a student of Renaissance love poetry, I’m tempted to linger over Mr. Trump’s oddly tender description of the “highly conflicted” judge: “He looks so nice and soft.” A citizen looking for campaign issues might find some boilerplate in a peroration that conjured images of Venezuela and Congo emptying their prisons and asylums onto America’s streets, of Little League ball fields swamped by migrant encampments, of “record levels of terrorists” flooding the country.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

While a newly united opposition seemed to gain some traction, it faced an uphill task in unseating a deeply entrenched prime minister.Voting in India’s general election, a six-week-long referendum on Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s decade in power, came to a close on Saturday as much of the country’s populous north was gripped by a deadly heat wave.Results will be tallied and announced on Tuesday.Mr. Modi, his power deeply entrenched, is seen as likely to win a third consecutive term as prime minister, which would make him only the second leader in India’s nearly 75 years as a republic to achieve that feat.But a newly united opposition has put up a fight, rallying against Mr. Modi’s divisive politics and management of India’s deeply unequal economic growth. The country will now wait to see whether the opposition was able to accomplish its goal of significantly cutting into the sizable majority in Parliament held by Mr. Modi’s Hindu-nationalist Bharatiya Janata Party, or B.J.P.The election, held in phases over a month and a half, is the largest democratic exercise in the world, with more than 950 million eligible voters. The last stretch of the campaigning drew large rallies even as northern India baked under an intense heat wave, with temperatures frequently exceeding 110 degrees Fahrenheit, or more than 43 degrees Celsius.At least 19 poll workers have died from heat strokes or other health complications resulting from the heat in recent days.Elections in a parliamentary system like India’s are usually fought seat by seat, with a candidate’s fate determined by local economic and social factors. But the B.J.P. made its campaign for the 543-seat Parliament into a presidential-style referendum, putting the focus almost entirely on Mr. Modi and his leadership. The party hoped that Mr. Modi’s deep popularity would help it overcome a growing anti-incumbent sentiment 10 years into the B.J.P.’s rule.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

“The consumer was a fat pig — now there’s nothing left, and they need to feed the pig again,” one banker told DealBook.The president of McDonald’s USA, Joe Erlinger, pushed back on “inaccurate” reports this week that said the chain had more than doubled its prices on some items over the last decade. But his retort wasn’t exactly reassuring: The average price of a Big Mac is up 21 percent from 2019.Erlinger’s rebuttal underlines the heat that some companies are facing as the news media, politicians and consumers focus on steadily rising prices. Whether persistent price increases reflect price gouging, or simply companies’ own rising costs, is a matter of fierce debate. Either way, one thing is clear: Consumers are becoming fed up.McDonald’s first-quarter earnings fell short of analyst expectations on sales, as “consumers continue to be even more discriminating” with their dollars, the chain’s chief executive, Chris Kempczinski said. Starbucks, Target and Yum Brands, the parent company of Pizza Hut and KFC, also reported earnings misses, each acknowledging increasingly cautious customers among other factors like the war in the Middle East.Consumer spending remained surprisingly resilient in the face of stubbornly fast inflation, but now savings from the coronavirus pandemic have dried up, economic growth has slowed and many companies are working to counteract the belief that their prices have gotten out of control.As one banker told DealBook: “The consumer was a fat pig — now there’s nothing left, and they need to feed the pig again.”The message: Consumers have hit their limit. During periods of rapid inflation, companies tend to push to see how far they can raise prices. “We’re taking smaller, more frequent price increases because it gives us the flexibility to be able to see how consumers are reacting and then adjust if or when necessary,” Kevin Ozan, the chief financial officer of McDonald’s, told analysts in 2022.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

Ditch the dye; live with style.Dana Golan for The New York TimesDear readers,I’m telling you first so you can hold me to it: I’m ditching the hair dye this summer. Twenty-five years, countless colorists and thousands of hours of dark brown gunk (not to mention dollars) later, the time has come to embrace my silver roots. I know the growing-in won’t be easy. I know I should have let it happen during the pandemic. (As if lockdown wasn’t stressful enough.) I know that there are certain, shall we say, biases against salt-and-pepper hair, but I’m leaning into a different narrative — one that celebrates wisdom, sparkle and experience. Pizzazz, too, even though the word has always sounded to me like the perfect name for a Chevy sedan. As always, I turn to books to shore up my stance. Here are two that did the trick with levity and gravitas.—Liz“Going Gray: What I Learned About Beauty, Sex, Work, Motherhood, Authenticity, and Everything Else That Really Matters,” by Anne KreamerNonfiction, 2007If you search on Instagram for “#grombre” and “#silversisters,” you’ll find an entire community of women encouraging, supporting and advising one another through the evolution from dyed hair to what lies beneath. There are tutorials, testimonials and videos. There are evangelists, apologists and philosophizers. There are posters who swear by headbands,highlights, lowlights or stripping — processes that replace your current color with your natural one by matching the shade of your roots or removing dye. (Google “Jack Martin hair” and you’ll get the gist.)I’m a sucker for a sisterhood — I’ve spent hours scrutinizing strangers’ tresses and liking their mirror selfies — but, for me, the last word on hair color or lack thereof still belongs to Anne Kreamer. She documented her brunette-to-gray journey for More magazine (may it rest in peace), then expanded those dispatches into a memoir, “Going Gray” (2007). I read it during my first attempt to go natural … and, just to give you some idea of how long I’ve been waffling about my hair, the baby I was pregnant with at the time is now 17.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

If you want to understand why the party that liberated South Africa from white rule lost its parliamentary majority in the election this week, you need to look no further than Beauty Mzingeli’s living room. The first time she cast a ballot, she could hardly sleep the night before.“We were queuing by 4 in the morning,” she told me at her home in Khayelitsha, a township in the flatlands outside Cape Town. “We couldn’t believe that we were free, that finally our voices were going to be heard.”That was 30 years ago, in the election in which she was one of millions of South Africans who voted the African National Congress and its leader, Nelson Mandela, into power, ushering in a new, multiracial democracy.Nelson Mandela on the campaign trail, 1994.David Turnley/Corbis, via Getty ImagesBut at noon on Wednesday, Election Day, as I settled onto a sofa in her tidy bungalow, she confessed that she had not yet made up her mind about voting — she might, for the first time, she told me, cast a ballot for another party. Or maybe she might do the unthinkable and not vote at all.“Politicians promise us everything,” she sighed. “But they don’t deliver. Why should I give them my vote?” More

[Ahora también estamos en WhatsApp. Empieza a seguirnos]Mi madre nació en 1943, en un país donde no se le permitía votar. El gobierno mexicano no le otorgó a las mujeres el derecho a votar en las elecciones nacionales —o el derecho a ocupar cargos públicos a nivel nacional— hasta el 17 de octubre de 1953. Hoy, casi 71 años después, por primera vez dos mujeres encabezan la contienda electoral para ser la próxima presidenta de México: Claudia Sheinbaum, la puntera en las encuestas, y Xóchitl Gálvez. No es una hazaña menor para un país con una larga y compleja relación con el machismo, y donde cada día mueren asesinadas un promedio de 10 mujeres o niñas.Y, sin embargo, este logro a menudo se ha sentido como algo secundario en estas históricas elecciones. Sheinbaum, una científica que se presenta en la candidatura del partido gobernante, Morena, y Gálvez, una empresaria que representa a una coalición de partidos convertidos en oposición, han aludido a los logros del feminismo y su influencia en la vida pública mexicana. Pero han sido cautas respecto a detenerse demasiado en los temas de los derechos de las mujeres en sus campañas, abordando muy superficialmente el aborto y los derechos reproductivos, por lo que podría parecer cierta deferencia a los votantes conservadores. Ninguna ha presentado un plan de gobierno sólido para atender a las mujeres que las han llevado adonde están hoy.Porque, mientras México se sumía en su pesadilla de violencia generalizada, desde la guerra contra el narcotráfico respaldada por Estados Unidos, pasando por el gobierno de Felipe Calderón y hasta el sexenio del presidente saliente, Andrés Manuel López Obrador, han sido las mujeres —su incansable trabajo, su rabia infinita y su dolor cada vez más profundo— quienes le han dado a este país una brújula moral. Las movilizaciones de las mujeres han cobrado más fuerza y estruendo ante la indiferencia y la represión del gobierno; han constituido la única oposición seria contra el statu quo y han convertido las cuestiones de los derechos de las mujeres y la justicia de género en temas centrales de cualquier debate sobre nuestro futuro en común.Para ser justos, a los hombres que han aspirado a la presidencia tampoco se les ha exigido históricamente que presenten sus planes para las mujeres. Rara vez se les pregunta al respecto. Sin embargo, las mujeres constituyen algo más de la mitad del electorado mexicano, por lo que es imperativo que Sheinbaum y Gálvez hablen de sus puntos de vista y sus posturas sobre asuntos que afectarán los cuerpos, la seguridad y la vida cotidiana de las mujeres; no porque sean mujeres, sino porque son candidatas a la presidencia que luchan por representarnos a todos y todas en el más alto cargo político del país.Casi con toda seguridad, el 2 de junio una mujer recibirá el mandato de gobernarnos a todos. Será la presidenta de unos votantes profundamente preocupados por la inseguridad y la corrupción. La política de seguridad del gobierno actual —conocida como “Abrazos, no balazos”— no ha conseguido reducir la violencia desatada por la fallida y mal llamada guerra contra las drogas, hecho que se pone dolorosamente de manifiesto con el creciente número de desapariciones y los altos índices de violencia de género. Una impactante cifra de colectivos de víctimas, compuestos en su mayoría por madres, esposas, hermanas e hijas de personas desaparecidas, recorren el país con escaso o nulo presupuesto o apoyo institucionales, en ocasiones desenterrando ellas mismas los restos de sus seres queridos.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

On This Week’s Episode:People tethered to one particular other person, whether they want to be or not.Peter RyanNew York Times Audio is home to “This American Life.” New episodes debut in our app a day early. Download the app — available to Times news subscribers on iOS — and sign up for our weekly newsletter. More