More stories

  • in

    Protesters at University of Chicago Take Over Institute of Politics Building

    They confronted the institute’s director, the former senator Heidi Heitkamp. At the University of Pennsylvania, demonstrators also tried to occupy a building.Pro-Palestinian protesters stormed the Institute of Politics building at the University of Chicago on Friday afternoon, overturning furniture, damaging property and confronting the institute’s director, former Senator Heidi Heitkamp. She refused their demand that she leave her office, university officials said, adding that she was the only staff member in the building.The demonstration continued into the evening outside the institute, which is about two blocks from where the police removed a protest encampment last week.In a statement, the protest group on Friday said that it had occupied the building to protest the University of Chicago’s ties to Israel. Bystander video showed protesters climbing through second-floor windows to leave the building, as the crowd below cheered.After demonstrators were cleared from the building by the police, other protesters remained outside and in yards nearby, chanting, yelling and pounding drums.Jeremy Manier, a university spokesman, said in a statement that protesters had tried to block the entrance of the building, damaged property and ignored orders from law enforcement officials to leave.“The University of Chicago is fundamentally committed to upholding the rights of protesters to express a wide range of views,” he said. “At the same time, university policies make it clear that protests cannot jeopardize public safety, disrupt the university’s operations or involve the destruction of property.”Officials said that earlier in the day, the institute held a board meeting in the building that included David Axelrod, the organization’s founder who was a senior adviser to President Barack Obama.The Institute of Politics is two doors away from the University of Chicago Hillel and across the street from Rohr Chabad, where some students were having a Sabbath dinner when the demonstration began. As the protest continued, counterprotesters held Israeli flags within sight of the pro-Palestinian demonstrators. Rock music blasted from a nearby house, in what appeared to be an effort to drown out the protest chants.A sign identifying the Institute of Politics building was covered with a cardboard placard that read “permanent cease-fire now,” and a set of demands were hung from the building. Among the demands was “abolish the university.”A group of protesters at the University of Pennsylvania also tried on Friday evening to occupy a campus building. The university police and the Philadelphia police made several arrests and cleared the building, Fisher-Bennett Hall. The hall is across the street from College Green, the site of the encampment that was cleared last week by the police.Mattathias Schwartz More

  • in

    Trump Deploys Familiar Tactic: I’m Rubber. You’re Glue.

    Whenever Donald Trump is accused of something, he responds by accusing his opponent of that exact thing. The idea is less to argue that Mr. Trump is clean than to suggest that everyone else is dirty.Days before the Iowa caucuses, former President Donald J. Trump is appearing twice in court this week — on Tuesday in Washington and Thursday in New York.He was not required to attend either hearing. But advisers say he believes the court appearances dramatize what is fast becoming a central theme of his campaign: that President Biden — who is describing the likely Republican nominee as a peril to the country — is the true threat to American democracy.Mr. Trump’s claim is the most outlandish and baseless version of a tactic he has used throughout his life in business and politics. Whenever he is accused of something — no matter what that something is — he responds by accusing his opponent of that exact thing. The idea is less to argue that Mr. Trump is clean than to suggest that everyone else is dirty.It is an impulse more than a strategy. But in Mr. Trump’s campaigns, that impulse has sometimes aligned with his political interests. By this way of thinking, the more cynical voters become, the more likely they are to throw their hands in the air, declare, “They’re all the same” and start comparing the two candidates on issues the campaign sees as favorable to Mr. Trump, like the economy and immigration.His flattening moral relativism has undergirded his approach to nearly every facet of American public life, including democracy.In 2017, when the Fox News host Bill O’Reilly described President Vladimir Putin of Russia as a “killer,” Mr. Trump responded that there were “a lot of killers,” adding, “Well, you think our country is so innocent?”And in the 2016 campaign, Mr. Trump applied the “I’m rubber, you’re glue” approach to a wide range of vulnerabilities.When Mr. Trump was described by voters as racist in polls after, among other things, he described undocumented immigrants from Mexico as “rapists,” he claimed that his rival, Hillary Clinton, was the true “bigot.”When Mrs. Clinton suggested he was temperamentally unfit to be entrusted with the nation’s nuclear codes, Mr. Trump declared her “trigger happy” and “very unstable.”When Mrs. Clinton called Mr. Trump a “puppet” of Mr. Putin during one of their general election debates, Mr. Trump interrupted: “No puppet. You’re the puppet.”Mr. Trump during a debate with Hillary Clinton in 2016.Damon Winter/The New York TimesA spokesman for Mr. Trump did not respond to requests for comment.For years, Mr. Trump championed and breathed life into the previously fringe “birther” movement that falsely claimed Barack Obama had been born in Kenya and was therefore an illegitimate president. When he finally renounced the conspiracy theory out of political expediency shortly before Election Day in 2016, he falsely claimed that it was Mrs. Clinton who had started attacking the first Black president with that assertion.Senator Ted Cruz of Texas — “Lyin’ Ted,” Mr. Trump had dubbed him — was a victim of this Trumpian tactic in the 2016 Republican presidential primaries at a time when Mr. Trump was being called out for almost constant falsehoods. Mr. Cruz once summarized the injustice in a fit of indignation, saying of Mr. Trump: “He lies — practically every word that comes out of his mouth. And in a pattern that I think is straight out of a psychology textbook, his response is to accuse everybody else of lying.”Now, Mr. Trump is repurposing his favored tool to neutralize what many see as his worst offense in public life and greatest political vulnerability in the 2024 campaign: his efforts, after he lost the 2020 election, to disrupt the peaceful transfer of power and remain in office.And his campaign apparatus has kicked into gear along with him, as he baselessly claims Mr. Biden is stage-managing the investigations and legal action against him. Mr. Trump’s advisers have coined a slogan: “Biden Against Democracy.” The acronym: BAD.Steve Bannon, Mr. Trump’s former chief strategist, said he thought his onetime client was on to something. Mr. Trump is now fighting Mr. Biden over an issue that many Republican consultants and elected officials had hoped he would avoid. They had good reason, given that candidates promoting election denial and conspiracy theories about the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol cost their party winnable races in the 2022 midterm elections.Mr. Bannon sees it differently.“If you can fight Biden almost to a draw on this, which I think you can, it’s over,” Mr. Bannon said in an interview, referring to the imperiling of American democracy. “He’s got nothing else he can pitch. This is his main thing.”Mr. Bannon added, “If Biden wants to fight there, about democracy and all this kind of ephemeral stuff, Trump will go there in a second.”It was Mr. Bannon who pushed for Mr. Trump to “go on offense” after a tape leaked of him boasting to the TV host Billy Bush about grabbing women’s genitals. Mr. Bannon helped arrange for three women who had accused former President Bill Clinton of sexual harassment or assault to join Mr. Trump at a news conference shortly before a debate with Mrs. Clinton. It created a disorienting effect at a moment of acute vulnerability for Mr. Trump.“You’ve got to remember something,” Mr. Bannon said of the Trump campaign’s “Biden Against Democracy” gambit. “This is the whole reason he’s actually running: to say he believes that, burned into his soul, is the 2020 election was stolen, and that Jan. 6 was a setup by the F.B.I.”It’s unclear whether Mr. Trump actually believes that Jan. 6 was orchestrated by the “deep state.” His explanations of that day have shifted opportunistically, and he was a relative latecomer to the baseless far-right conspiracy theory that the Capitol riot was an inside job by the F.B.I.Mr. Trump has also sought to muddy the waters on voter concerns about corruption, by trying, along with his allies, to neutralize his liabilities on that front by attacking Mr. Biden’s son, Hunter, for foreign moneymaking while his father was vice president.But some of Mr. Trump’s advisers think there is less to gain from the Hunter Biden angle than from the “Biden Against Democracy” theme. They recognize that Hunter Biden is not the president and doubt the issue will move voters significantly without the emergence of a connection to the president strong enough to convince Senate Republicans who remain skeptical that there is a basis for impeachment.Mr. Trump has also privately expressed concern about overplaying personal attacks on the president’s son to such an extent that they backfire and make Mr. Biden look like a caring father, according to a person who has heard Mr. Trump make these remarks.In a 2020 general election debate, Mr. Trump made such an error, when he mocked Hunter Biden’s past drug use, prompting a humanizing response from Mr. Biden: “My son, like a lot of people, like a lot of people you know at home, had a drug problem. He’s overtaken it. He’s fixed it. He’s worked on it. And I’m proud of him.”President Biden has repeatedly said Mr. Trump is a threat to American democracy. Mr. Trump has been lately saying the same of Mr. Biden. Pete Marovich for The New York TimesMr. Trump and his advisers are hoping to do more than paper over his liabilities related to his election lies and the violent attack on the Capitol, which Democrats are confident remain deeply troubling to a majority of voters. They hope they can persuade voters that Mr. Biden is actually the problem.Voter attitudes related to Mr. Biden have shifted as Mr. Trump has tried to suggest that efforts to hold Mr. Trump accountable for his actions are a threat to democracy. In an October 2022 New York Times/Siena College poll, among voters who said democracy was under threat, 45 percent saw Mr. Trump as a major threat to democracy, compared with 38 percent who said the same about Mr. Biden. The gap was even wider among independent voters, who were 14 percentage points more likely to see Mr. Trump as such a threat.But Mr. Trump’s rhetoric seems to have already altered public opinion, even before the campaign deployed his new slogan. In another more recent survey, 57 percent of Americans said Mr. Trump’s re-election would pose a threat to democracy, and 53 percent said the same of Mr. Biden, according to an August 2023 poll by the Public Religion Research Institute. Among independent voters, nearly identical shares thought either candidate would be a threat to democracy.The repetition that Mr. Trump has used consistently in his public speeches is a core part of his approach.“If people think he’s inconsistent on message, he ain’t inconsistent on this message,” Mr. Bannon said of Mr. Trump’s effort to brand Mr. Biden as the real threat to democracy. “Go back and just look at how he pounds it. Wash, rinse, repeat. Wash, rinse, repeat. It’s very powerful.”David Axelrod, a former top adviser to Mr. Obama, said polling indicated Mr. Trump had “made headway with his base in this project.” But a general election, he said, is a “harder” race to convince people that his lies about Jan. 6, 2021, are true.It is “one of the reasons he’s so desperate to push the Jan. 6 trial past the election,” Mr. Axelrod said of the federal indictment charging Mr. Trump with conspiracy to defraud the United States.“A parade of witnesses, including his own top aides, White House lawyers and advisers, testifying, followed by a guilty verdict, would damage him outside the base,” Mr. Axelrod said.Ruth Igielnik More

  • in

    Should Biden Bow Out, as David Axelrod Urged?

    More from our inbox:Mike Johnson’s LamentSkip the Drive-Through, for the Sake of the Environment and Mental HealthThe Threat to New Orleans Drinking Water Jonathan Ernst/ReutersTo the Editor:Re “The Axe Is Sharp,” by Maureen Dowd (column, Nov. 19):While reading Ms. Dowd’s column on whether President Biden should run for a second term, I was struck by a historical parallel. Like Mr. Biden, President Lyndon B. Johnson had served a deeply charismatic president and used his extensive senatorial experience to seal that president’s vision with legislation.But facing health concerns and declining popularity because of the Vietnam War, as well as surprisingly strong opposition by Robert F. Kennedy, Johnson decided that his moment had passed.As David Axelrod has noted, it is time to consider allowing other Democratic leaders to step forward. Mr. Biden has served the nation honorably for longer than most Americans have been alive, guiding the country through dark times and leaving a clear legislative mark.For his swan song, he can try to hold on to power until he is 86. Or he can choose to guide the nation peacefully through the turbulence of the coming electoral storm — not from the campaign trail, but as a steady presence in the Oval Office. I can think of no higher service.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.We are confirming your access to this article, this will take just a moment. However, if you are using Reader mode please log in, subscribe, or exit Reader mode since we are unable to verify access in that state.Confirming article access.If you are a subscriber, please  More

  • in

    The Axe Is Sharp

    David Axelrod is not a prick.Truly.I’ve known him since 2007 and if I had to pick a noun to describe him, it would be mensch.So when President Biden privately employs that epithet for Axelrod, according to Politico’s Jonathan Martin, it’s bad for a few reasons.The ordinarily gracious president is punching down at the strategist who helped elevate him onto the ticket with Barack Obama in 2008 and who thinks he was “a great vice president” and has done a lot of wonderful things as president.When some in the Obama camp chattered in 2011 about switching Biden out for Hillary Clinton, Axelrod said, he protested: “That would be an incredible act of disloyalty to a guy who has done a great job for us.”Surely, Mr. Biden does not want to lower himself to the vulgarity of the growling, brawling, thieving Republicans in the Hieronymus Bosch hellscape of our Congress.(As Seth Meyers noted, George Santos — who spent campaign money on Hermès, Ferragamo, Botox, Sephora and OnlyFans — had “the shopping list of a 98-year-old oil tycoon’s 20-year-old wife.”)Axelrod drew Biden’s ire because he urged the president to consider stopping at one term, throwing open the race to younger Democrats while there’s still time, and leaving as a hero. He said that, despite Biden’s insult, he got a slew of messages agreeing with him.“I don’t care about them thinking I’m a prick — that’s fine,” the strategist told me. “I hope they don’t think the polls are wrong because they’re not.”According to a New York Times/Siena College poll, Donald Trump is ahead in five battleground states and, as some other surveys have found, is even making inroads among Black voters and young voters. There’s a generational fracture in the Democratic Party over the Israeli-Hamas horror and Biden’s age. Third-party spoilers are circling.The president turns 81 on Monday; the Oval hollows out its occupants quickly, and Biden is dealing with two world-shattering wars, chaos at the border, a riven party and a roiling country.“I think he has a 50-50 shot here, but no better than that, maybe a little worse,” Axelrod said. “He thinks he can cheat nature here and it’s really risky. They’ve got a real problem if they’re counting on Trump to win it for them. I remember Hillary doing that, too.”The president’s flash of anger indicates that he may be in denial, surrounded by enablers who are sugarcoating a grim political forecast.Like other pols, Biden has a healthy ego and like all presidents, he’s truculent about not getting the credit he thinks he deserves for his accomplishments. And it must be infuriating that most of the age qualms are about him, when Trump is only a few years younger.No doubt the president is having a hard time wrapping his mind around the idea that the 77-year-old Mar-a-Lago Dracula has risen from his gilded coffin even though he’s albatrossed with legal woes and seems more deranged than ever, referring to Democrats with the fascist-favored term “vermin” and plotting a second-term revengefest. Trump’s campaign slogan should be, “There will be blood.”For Biden, this is about his identity. It’s what he has fought all his life for, even battling his way through “friendly fire,” as Hunter Biden told me, in the Obama White House, when some Obama aides undermined him. It must have been awful when Obama took his vice president to lunch and nudged him aside for Hillary to run in 2016. Biden craves the affirmation of being re-elected. He doesn’t want to look like a guy who’s been driven from office.But he should not indulge the Irish chip on his shoulder. He needs to gather the sharpest minds in his party and hear what they have to say, not engage in petty feuds.If Trump manages to escape conviction in Jack Smith’s Washington case, which may be the only criminal trial that ends before the election, that’s going to turbocharge his campaign. Of course, if he’s convicted, that could turbocharge his campaign even more.It’s a perfect playing field for the maleficent Trump: He learned in the 2016 race that physical and rhetorical violence could rev up his base. He told me at the time it helped get him to No. 1 and he said he found violence at his rallies exciting.He has no idea why making fun of Paul Pelosi’s injuries at the hands of one of his acolytes is subhuman, any more than he understood how repellent it was in 2015 when he mocked a disabled Times reporter. He gets barbaric laughs somehow, and that’s all he cares about. In an interview with Jonathan Karl, Trump gloated about how his audience on Jan. 6 was “the biggest crowd I’ve ever spoken in front of by far.”Never mind that it was one of the most dangerous, shameful days in our history. To Trump, it was glorious.The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. We’d like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips. And here’s our email: letters@nytimes.com.Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook, Twitter (@NYTopinion) and Instagram. More

  • in

    Voters Aren’t Believing in Bidenomics

    A new Times/Sienna poll shows the president behind in five of six key states. Voters cite his economic track record, indicators notwithstanding.President Biden’s poll numbers are sagging in key states, a new Times/Siena poll shows. Voters are especially dissatisfied with his track record on the economy.Doug Mills/The New York TimesEconomic perceptions are hurting Biden more than everThere was little good news for President Biden in the latest Times/Siena poll of 2024 battlegrounds, which found him trailing Donald Trump in five of six key states one year before voters head to the polls. (That’s despite Trump being nearly as unpopular and fighting multiple legal battles; he is taking the stand on Monday in one of them. And, on PredictIt, which is watched by political experts, Biden holds a six-point lead on Trump.)A glaring weakness for Biden remains the economy, despite signs that it’s doing well and efforts by the White House to promote its accomplishments. Experts say it’s still possible for the president to make a comeback — but when it comes to economic issues, that’s a tough task.Just 2 percent of voters said the economy was excellent, the poll found. Worryingly for Biden, that discontent is being reflected in demographics crucial to his re-election: 48 percent of Black voters in the Times/Siena poll rated the economy as poor, as did 59 percent of voters under 30. Zero respondents in that age group in Arizona, Nevada and Wisconsin rated the economy as excellent.Biden’s struggles are Trump’s gain. Likely voters trust the former president on the economy more than the current one by wide margins: 57 percent of those under 30 prefer Trump, as do 55 percent of Hispanics, 52 percent of women and a majority of people in every income bracket.Voters’ discontent comes despite numerous indicators that the economy is healthy, including a huge gain in third-quarter G.D.P. growth. And while Friday’s jobs data came in below expectations, the latest stats show that employers have been on a nearly three-year hiring spree.But inflation remains a sticking point. While the Fed isn’t likely to raise borrowing costs at its next rate-setting meeting in December, its policymakers haven’t closed the door to future hikes. (Some commentators have written that the studiously apolitical central bank could end up helping Trump get re-elected.)It’s unclear how Biden can turn around his fortunes. Multiple wars and global economic malaise are unlikely to stop weighing on the U.S. economy anytime soon. And voters appear to have soured on Biden himself, with an unnamed generic Democrat beating Trump by eight points.The poll prompted David Axelrod, the former Obama adviser, to openly muse about whether Biden should run for re-election. While conceding that it’s late for Democrats to change candidates, he wrote of Biden, “What he needs to decide is whether that is wise; whether it’s in HIS best interest or the country’s?”A reminder: The DealBook Summit is on Nov. 29. Guests will include Elon Musk, who this weekend announced the launch of Grok, the first chatbot from his start-up xAI, which will draw on data from the X social network. You can apply to attend here.HERE’S WHAT’S HAPPENING Here’s what to watch this week. Corporate earnings return to the fore after last week’s big gains for stocks and bonds. Wednesday will see results from the chip designer Arm and the media giants Disney and Warner Bros. Discovery; SoftBank, the Japanese tech investor, reports Thursday. Meanwhile, on Friday the University of Michigan will publish its latest consumer sentiment report, a key inflation signpost.Striking Hollywood actors weigh a new contract proposal by big studios. The SAG-AFTRA union said it had received a “last, best and final” offer that includes a substantial pay increase and more residual payments from streaming shows, The Times reports. South Korean stocks jump as short-selling is banned again. Stocks on the Kospi, Seoul’s biggest index, gained nearly 6 percent on Monday after the country reimposed a ban on betting against share prices to earn a profit. Critics said the eight-month prohibition, seemingly tied to elections next year, could deter overseas investors from buying Korean stocks.Berkshire Hathaway’s war chest reaches a record. Warren Buffett’s industrial conglomerate revealed in its latest earnings report that its cash balance now stands at $157 billion, giving the company ample financial ammunition for a big deal or more stock buybacks. But Berkshire also reported its first loss in a year as the paper value of stock holdings, including those in Apple, declined.Donors keep up pressure on universities over antisemitism The fight between Wall Street titans and universities over their handling of antisemitism on campus following last month’s Hamas attacks on Israel shows little sign of abating. The hedge fund manager Bill Ackman this weekend ramped up his criticism of Harvard, his alma mater, and donors continued to step back from the University of Pennsylvania.Ackman published an excoriating open letter to Harvard’s president, Claudine Gay. “Four weeks after the barbaric terrorist attacks of October 7th, I have lost confidence that you and the university will do what is required,” he wrote. Ackman said he had met with Harvard students and faculty last week, and wrote that “Jewish students are being bullied, physically intimidated, spat on” and assaulted.He called on the university to suspend those behind the abuse, even though the incidents have been referred to the police and the F.B.I.Gay has spoken out against the attacks and the abuse on campus. Last week, she appointed a group of advisers to determine how to counter antisemitism at Harvard. But Ackman sees these actions as insufficient. The university didn’t engage directly with Ackman’s latest criticism, referring instead to previous statements.Harvard’s diversity, equality and inclusion policy is also under scrutiny. Ackman pointed out that Harvard’s doesn’t explicitly include Jews, tapping into a growing argument on campuses and beyond. Adam Neufeld, a senior vice president at the Anti-Defamation League, told The Times last year that D.E.I. policies that don’t recognize Jews as a minority group reinforce the view that “Jews are not vulnerable.”Meanwhile, more donors are expressing their anger at Penn’s handling of antisemitism. They include Neuberger Berman’s Steve Eisman, a longtime benefactor, who told CNBC that he had asked that his family’s name be removed from a scholarship he had established at his alma mater. “I do not want my family’s name associated with the University of Pennsylvania, ever,” he said. The university newspaper reported that dozens more benefactors no longer want to be associated with the school.In related news: The authorities have opened a hate crime investigation after an Arab Muslim student was injured in a reported hit-and-run attack at Stanford; Israeli businesses are feeling the strain of the war.An epic new antitrust fight for GoogleGoogle is waging antitrust fights on many fronts, including a battle against the Justice Department over its dominance of online search.On Monday, the tech giant will square off in a San Francisco courtroom to defend its app store strategy against a familiar face in Silicon Valley antitrust circles: Epic Games, the publisher of Fortnite.Epic argues that Google is unfairly forcing Android users into its Play Store, where it collects a cut from in-app subscriptions and purchases. Most developers generally pay a roughly 15 percent surcharge on such purchases, though big ones like Epic pay the maximum 30 percent.Google “is using its size to do evil upon competitors, innovators, customers and users in a slew of markets it has grown to monopolize,” Epic says in its complaint. (Google counters that “Epic wants all the benefits of Android and Google Play without having to pay for them.”)Witnesses are set to include Sundar Pichai, Google’s C.E.O., and Tim Sweeney, Epic’s chief.It’s a similar case to Epic’s unsuccessful fight with Apple — but with key differences. Google, unlike Apple, allows phone makers to include alternative app stores on their devices and users to download apps directly. And it is testing a program to let developers use other payment systems in their apps for a smaller fee.And unlike the Apple case, which was decided by a judge, the Google lawsuit will be heard by a jury, adding a greater level of unpredictability.Epic is hoping things go better this time. The 2021 trial over its Apple claims ended with the game maker losing on most of its accusations, a decision that a federal appeals court backed this year. Meanwhile, Google has also reached settlements over the app store issue with both a group of state attorneys general and the dating app developer Match Group.“Big Finance is the problem” As climate activists increase pressure on oil majors to halt new fossil-fuel exploration and rein in production, they’re increasingly looking to enlist support from another industry: Big Finance.But it is a thorny problem, writes Vivienne Walt for DealBook, given that large asset managers have roundly rejected resolutions from climate-activist shareholders this year. “Big Oil is not the problem. Big Finance is the problem,” Mark van Baal, founder of Follow This, a shareholder activist group, told DealBook. “They tell oil companies, ‘Please continue with oil and gas as long as possible. We have your back.’”Wall Street has rebuffed climate measures at a record clip. On Monday, Follow This released its annual tally of proxy climate votes. It showed the biggest U.S. asset management firms — including BlackRock, Vanguard, and Fidelity — siding with Big Oil on resolutions by activists that pushed the supermajors to commit to Paris accord emission reduction goals. The only (partial) support came from European investors including UBS and Allianz.It’s a sharp departure from a few years ago. Larry Fink, the C.E.O. of BlackRock, said in 2020 that climate change would be “the defining factor” in his firm’s investment decisions. A year later, BlackRock helped lead a board revolt at Exxon over what critics called a lackluster climate plan. This year, the world’s biggest asset manager rejected climate resolutions targeting the oil majors, including at Exxon. “Our role is not to replace the judgment of management and the board,” it said.The oil boom has been good business. With oil prices surging and a deal frenzy expected in the oil patch, Wall Street looks to reap billions in fees. It’s also backing new projects. Reclaim Finance, a French climate organization, notes that Citigroup and Bank of America funded tens of billions worth of oil exploration after they joined the U.N.-created Net Zero Banking Alliance in 2021. “We want them to stop giving new capital,” said Agathe Masson, the group’s stewardship campaigner in Paris.Lobbying continues behind the scenes. The Rev. Kirsten Spalding, vice president of the investor network for Ceres, a Boston-based climate organization, said financial firms are still being tough on Big Oil. “I’m hearing a lot about capital expenditure: How much are they moving into climate solutions? How are they accounting for emissions?” she said. THE SPEED READ DealsTelecom Italia agreed to sell its landline telephone network to KKR for $23.6 billion, a deal that may draw a legal challenge by the Italian company’s biggest shareholder, Vivendi. (Bloomberg)Saudi Arabia reportedly could buy a $5 billion stake in the Indian Premier League cricket competition at a $30 billion valuation. (Bloomberg)LVMH said it will buy the Los Angeles-based eyewear maker Barton Perreira, reportedly for about $80 million. (WSJ)PolicyWill the Treasury Department’s decision to increase the size of longer-term debt by less than expected prove a turning point for markets? (WSJ)“More Semiconductors, Less Housing: China’s New Economic Plan” (NYT)Best of the rest“The New Headache for Bosses: Employees Aren’t Quitting” (WSJ)How corporate America is adjusting to a world of higher rates after years of piling up on cheap debt. (FT)We’d like your feedback! Please email thoughts and suggestions to dealbook@nytimes.com. More

  • in

    Democrats Express Deep Anxiety as Polls Show Biden Trailing Trump

    President Biden’s team emphasized that polls have failed to predict the results of elections when taken a year ahead of time.White House officials on Sunday shrugged off weekend polling that showed President Biden trailing former President Donald J. Trump, even as Democrats said they were increasingly worried about Mr. Biden’s chances in 2024.The new polling from The New York Times and Siena College found Mr. Biden losing in one-on-one matchups with former President Donald J. Trump in five critical swing states: Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Nevada and Pennsylvania. Mr. Biden is ahead by two percentage points in Wisconsin.Although the polling is worrisome for the president, Mr. Biden still has a year to campaign, which his team emphasized on Sunday. They noted that polls have historically failed to predict the results of elections when taken a year ahead of time.“Gallup predicted an eight-point loss for President Obama only for him to win handily a year later,” said Kevin Munoz, a spokesman for Mr. Biden’s campaign. “We’ll win in 2024 by putting our heads down and doing the work, not by fretting about a poll.”Still, the results of the poll, and other recent surveys showing similar results, are prompting public declarations of doubts by Democrats.David Axelrod, a Democratic strategist who has expressed concerns about Mr. Biden before, wrote on X, formerly known as Twitter, that the new polling “will send tremors of doubt” through the party.“Only @JoeBiden can make this decision,” Axelrod wrote, referring to whether the president would drop out of the race. “If he continues to run, he will be the nominee of the Democratic Party. What he needs to decide is whether that is wise; whether it’s in HIS best interest or the country’s?”In a follow-up interview, Mr. Axelrod said he believed Mr. Biden, 80, had achieved a lot during the past three years but was rapidly losing support largely because of concern about how his age affects his performance.“Give me his record and chop 10 to 15 years off, I’d be really confident,” Mr. Axelrod said. “People judge him on his public performance. That’s what people see. That’s where the erosion has been. It lends itself to Republican messaging.”Senator Richard Blumenthal, a Connecticut Democrat, said on CNN’s “State of the Union” program on Sunday that he was concerned “before these polls.”“And I’m concerned now,” he said.“These presidential races over the last couple of terms have been very tight,” he said. “No one is going to have a runaway election here. It’s going to take a lot of hard work, concentration, resources.”Donna Brazile, a former chair of the Democratic National Committee and a supporter of Mr. Biden, said, “don’t count out Joe Biden” on ABC’s “This Week” program. But she added that Democrats should be mindful of the polling from The Times.“I would say a wake-up call once again for Democrats to be reminded that they have to go back out there, pull the coalition that allowed Joe Biden to break new ground in 2020, especially in Arizona and Georgia, but more importantly to bring back that coalition,” she said. “Without that coalition, it’s going to be a very, very difficult race.”Mr. Munoz declined to comment on the specifics of the Times/Siena poll.Julie Chávez Rodríguez, Mr. Biden’s campaign manager, said in a memo released on Friday — before the Times poll was public — that it would be “crucial” for Mr. Biden to show strength among key parts of his coalition in order to win.The weekend poll results, including a 10-point deficit behind Mr. Trump in Nevada, strike at the heart of the argument the president’s campaign advisers have been making for a year: that voters will back Mr. Biden once they are presented with a clear choice between him and his predecessor.In her memo, Ms. Rodríguez said “voters will choose between the extremism, divisiveness and incompetence that extreme MAGA Republicans are demonstrating — and President Biden’s historic record of accomplishment.“The American people are on our side when it comes to that choice,” she wrote.Julie Chávez Rodríguez, Mr. Biden’s campaign manager, left, said in a memo released on Friday that it would be “crucial” for Mr. Biden to show strength among key parts of his coalition in order to win.Myung J. Chun/Los Angeles Times, via Getty ImagesThe Times polls presented voters with that choice, and many of them, including Democrats, said they would pick Mr. Trump if the election were held today.Already, there were signs that the campaign is scrambling to address the vulnerabilities on display in the poll among young, Black and Hispanic voters.Last month, the campaign quietly started two pilot programs aimed at bolstering support among Democrats in two key states, Arizona and Wisconsin. In each state, the campaign has hired 12 full-time staff members to test their assumptions about how Mr. Biden is viewed by particular groups and what he needs to do to earn their votes.In Arizona, the new staff members in two offices in Maricopa County will focus on Latino and female voters in that state. In Wisconsin, staff members will work out of an office in Milwaukee to evaluate the president’s message for Black and young voters in the state.Campaign officials say the idea is to use the next several months to test new ways of communicating to those voters. Those include the use of “microinfluencers” who are popular on social media platforms, and “relational” campaigning, in which the campaign reaches out to voters through their network of friends rather than impersonal ads.One of the central arguments of the Biden campaign is a belief that polls taken now, by definition, do not take into account the robust campaign that will unfold during the course of the next year.Mr. Biden has already generated a significant campaign war chest. The president and Vice President Kamala Harris have $91 million in cash on hand and are expected to raise hundreds of millions more for use during the general election campaign that will begin in earnest next summer.The president’s campaign aides say they are confident the polls will shift in Mr. Biden’s direction once that money is put to use attacking Mr. Trump (or another Republican, if Mr. Trump loses the nomination) and reaching out to voters.That is similar to the argument that Mr. Axelrod made in September 2011, when Mr. Obama was trailing badly in the polls.“The president remains ahead or in a dead heat with the Republican candidates in the battleground states that will decide the election in 2012,” Mr. Axelrod said at the time. “And ultimately it is in those battleground states where voters will choose, 14 months from now, between two candidates, their records, and their visions for the country.”But Mr. Axelrod said he believed Mr. Biden is further behind now than his candidate was in 2011.He said he believed Mr. Biden would continue to run for re-election, and would likely end up facing Mr. Trump again next year. He urged Mr. Biden and those around him to begin attacking Mr. Trump politically to make it clearer what a Trump victory in 2024 would mean for the country.That kind of “competitive frame” is more important now, Mr. Axelrod said, than trying to tell people about the accomplishments that Mr. Biden has made.“I think he’ll run,” Mr. Axelrod said. “I think he will be the nominee. If so, they need to throw the entire campaign into a very, very tough competitive frame very quickly.” More

  • in

    Fearing a New Shellacking, Democrats Rush for Economic Message

    Democratic candidates, facing what increasingly looks like a reckoning in two weeks, are struggling to find a closing message on the economy that acknowledges the deep uncertainty troubling the electorate while making the case that they, not the Republicans, hold the solutions.For some time, the party’s candidates and strategists have debated whether to hit inflation head on or to heed warnings that any shift toward an economic message would be ending the campaign on the strongest possible Republican ground. Since midsummer, when the Supreme Court repealed Roe v. Wade, Democrats had hoped that preserving the 50-year-old constitutional right to an abortion and castigating Republican extremism could get them past the worst inflation in 40 years.That is looking increasingly like wishful thinking.On Monday, Democrats unveiled new messages that appeared to switch tacks, incorporating achievements of the past two years with expressions of sympathy on the economy and dire warnings for what Republicans might bring.Former Representative Steve Israel, who headed the House Democrats’ campaign arm in a strong cycle of 2012 and weak one in 2014, said the dispute over how to address voters’ economic distress was essentially being resolved in favor of trying to accomplish a political feat that he said would be the trickiest he has ever seen: Democrats would continue to hammer Republicans on abortion and their ties to former President Donald J. Trump to boost turnout among their core supporters, while simultaneously trying to win over undecided voters whose biggest concerns are inflation and crime.“There was a narrative at one point that this was a Roe v. Wade election,” said Representative Tom Malinowski of New Jersey, whose district, newly drawn to lean Republican, has made him one of the most endangered Democratic incumbents in the House. “I never thought it was going to be that simple.”On Friday, four veteran Democratic strategists published a piece in The American Prospect, the liberal magazine, that pleaded with Democrats to find a new message that acknowledges the pain of rising prices and answers voter concerns. To do that, they argued, candidates need to convey their legislative successes while setting up culprits other than themselves: Republicans who voted against popular measures like capping the price of insulin, and wealthy corporations that are jacking up prices and reaping more profits.Voters “want to know you understand what is going on in their lives,” the strategists wrote. “They want to know you are helping with their No. 1 problem and have a plan. They want to know the difference between Democrats and Republicans when they cast their votes.” The piece was written by Patrick Gaspard, president of the liberal Center for American Politics; Stanley Greenberg and Celinda Lake, veteran Democratic pollsters; and Mike Lux, a senior White House aide under President Bill Clinton.Ms. Lake, in an interview on Saturday, said Democratic strategists were “extremely concerned” that the wave of support the party saw over the summer was evaporating at the worst possible time. But she insisted there was time, with barely two weeks to go, to correct course.“A lot of candidates aren’t really clear about what the economic message is,” she said. “What we need to do is set up a more vivid contrast. People are getting more pessimistic about the economy.”To some Democrats, liberals and moderates alike, the reluctance of frontline candidates to talk up the party’s achievements has been maddening. Faiz Shakir, a longtime political adviser to Senator Bernie Sanders, the progressive mainstay from Vermont, called a campaign built around abortion and former President Donald J. Trump “political malpractice.”Representative Nancy Pelosi during a news conference on the Inflation Reduction Act.Shuran Huang for The New York TimesIn two years, the party has passed a trillion-dollar infrastructure bill, a generous tax credit for parents that brought child poverty to historic lows, legislation that made good on the popular, longstanding promise to allow Medicare to negotiate lower drug prices, and the biggest investment in clean energy in history — all achievements that could be framed as helping people cope with rising prices.An ad launched on Monday by a Democratic super PAC in the Minnesota district of moderate Representative Angie Craig makes that point. And Mr. Sanders pressed it on Sunday, on CNN’s “State of the Union,” saying Republicans have said little about what they would do, and what they have said — like forcing cuts to entitlements like Medicare and Social Security and extending Mr. Trump’s 2017 tax cuts — would be unpopular, make the problem worse, or both.The State of the 2022 Midterm ElectionsBoth parties are making their final pitches ahead of the Nov. 8 election.A G.O.P. Advantage: Republicans appear to be gaining an edge in the final weeks of the contest for control of Congress. Nate Cohn, The Times’s chief political analyst, explains why the mood of the electorate has shifted.Ohio Senate Race: Tim Ryan, the Democrat who is challenging J.D. Vance, has turned the state into perhaps the country’s unlikeliest Senate battleground.Losing Faith in the System: As democracy erodes in Wisconsin, many of the state’s citizens feel powerless. But Republicans and Democrats see different culprits and different risks.Secretary of State Races: Facing G.O.P. candidates who spread lies about the 2020 election, Democrats are outspending them 57-to-1 on TV ads for their secretary of state candidates. It still may not be enough.“They want to cut Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid at a time when millions of seniors are struggling to pay their bills,” Mr. Sanders said. “Do you think that’s what we should be doing? Democrats should take that to them.”But for the party in control of the White House and both chambers of Congress, finding an effective message will be difficult, if not impossible. Republicans are evincing no fears of any Democratic shifts.“Democrats are out of time and out of solutions when it comes to fixing the rising costs they handed voters — now they’re going to pay the price at the ballot box,” said Michael McAdams, a spokesman for the National Republican Congressional Committee, the campaign arm of House Republicans.In the 2010 midterms, then-President Barack Obama barnstormed the country with a message that Republicans had driven the country’s economy into a ditch, and Democrats had pulled the car out. Then voters delivered what Mr. Obama himself called a “shellacking,” giving Republicans 63 total seats in the House and seven in the Senate, the largest shift since 1948.David Axelrod, Mr. Obama’s chief political adviser, recalled telling the president-elect in 2008 that Democrats would face a reckoning in 2010 after two successive wave elections and the most dire financial crisis since the Depression. After Democrats passed a huge economic stimulus bill, other economic measures like legislation to help consumers trade in their “clunker” cars for more efficient models, and a landmark regulation of Wall Street, they could say they had made progress on the economy.“But people didn’t feel the car was out of the ditch yet,” Mr. Axelrod said, “and they were looking to the guy who was in there now.”The lesson of 2010 was not to avoid the subject but to acknowledge the pain and set up a choice. Two years later, with the economic shock of the financial crisis still lingering, the Obama campaign made fighting for the middle class the central message of a re-election bid against a Republican candidate, Mitt Romney, who was painted as the essence of the out-of-touch plutocrat.“It was never going to work to not talk about the economy,” Mr. Axelrod said. “That’s sort of like, ‘How was the play otherwise, Mrs. Lincoln?’”If voter anguish in 2022 is similar to 2010, the economic issues are different. Unemployment is at record lows in several states. The issue is more a shortage of workers than a shortage of jobs. Wage growth is robust. But inflation — which lends itself to an attendant fear of the future and pervasive sense of falling behind — is a particularly destabilizing force. It helped topple Liz Truss, the British prime minister, after only six chaotic weeks, and helped usher in an Italian government that descends from Mussolini’s fascism.Ms. Truss’s support collapsed after her conservative economic plan of tax cuts skewed to the rich sent financial markets in a tailspin. The British pound also sank to near record lows against the dollar, and economists warned of still worse inflation. Representative Ro Khanna, a liberal Democrat from California, said Democrats needed to harness that experience to point out that Republican leaders have a similar economic plan if they take control of Congress.“The Republicans are running on an explicit promise of extending Trump’s tax cuts,” he said. “We have to frame the election as a choice on the economy.”Mr. Khanna was campaigning for Democrats in South Carolina on Saturday. He said the party’s candidates needed to answer the inflation question by hammering home the argument that Republican fiscal policies translate to tax cuts for the wealthy and sending jobs overseas.“We’ve got to do a better job having a clear economic message,” Mr. Khanna said. “I don’t think we can say, ‘Woe is me. Gas prices are going up.’”But Republicans, out of power, with no responsibility for much of the legislation of the Biden era, have a ready answer, which they have used with success: All those “achievements” created the inflation problem, by stoking consumer demand at a time when supply could not keep up. The U.S. economy was not prepared for a rapid shift from fossil fuels, their argument goes, so Democratic efforts to address climate change sent gas prices soaring. And Democratic promises for still more government assistance will only keep prices rising.Senator Mike Lee, a Utah Republican in an unexpectedly competitive re-election fight, has taken to quoting the Nobel Prize-winning conservative economist Milton Friedman on inflation repeatedly: “Consumers don’t produce it. Producers don’t produce it. The trade unions don’t produce it. Foreign sheikhs don’t produce it. Oil imports don’t produce it. What produces it is too much government spending.”That may be oversimplified in today’s strange economy. Some price increases were triggered by supply chains snarled by the pandemic that created pent-up consumer demand after periods of confinement and shuttered factories and shipping industries that were slow to return to peak production. Tight energy supplies and ensuing gas price increases are far more attributable to the war in Ukraine than any domestic energy legislation. Inflation is a global problem that is worse in Europe and Britain than in the United States.A gas station in Wilkes-Barre, Pa.Aimee Dilger/ReutersBut most economists do believe some Democratic bills — especially the $1.9 trillion American Rescue Plan — exacerbated the problem. The $1,400 checks that most American households received in 2021 have been forgotten. Their contribution to an overheated consumer economy has not.The latest Republican attack ads hit inflation and economic uncertainty hard and lay the blame on Democratic malfeasance, not the complexities of international commerce and conflict.“Democrats spent two years completely ignoring the country’s single-most pressing issue because they have nothing to say. They know their policies made inflation worse and they own this economic tsunami,” said Dan Conston, head of the Congressional Leadership Fund, a powerful super PAC aligned with the House Republican leadership.Mr. Axelrod said the Democrats’ secret weapon could be their opponents. For all the campaign ads harping on economic issues, many Republican candidates are using extreme language to spotlight more contentious issues: national abortion legislation, denying the validity of the 2020 election, and impeaching President Biden. Given some of the loudest voices in the G.O.P. seem uninterested in economic struggles, voters may not see the opposition party as a credible alternative.But, Ms. Lake said, the Democrats need to make that case.“There’s time; there’s money,” she said. “We’re going to be spending tens of millions of dollars on advertising in the next two weeks, and there’s vulnerability on the Republican side, but only if we articulate the contrast.” More