Crime and Criminals

Subterms

    More stories

    • 100 Shares129 Views

      in Elections

      College Athletes and Ideals for Women’s Body Image

      by

      More from our inbox:Elizabeth Warren’s Election Analysis: We DisagreeEric Adams and the MidtermsSue Republican LiarsA Matter of SpaceAudra Koopman, who ran track and field at Penn State, said she felt pressured to avoid sweets and to trim down. But even as she did, she didn’t feel like she performed better.Rachel Woolf for The New York TimesTo the Editor:Re “Women in College Sports Feel Pressure to Be Lean at Any Cost” (Sports, Nov. 14):Thank you for raising awareness about the risks of scrutinizing body composition in college athletes. I am a clinical psychologist specializing in eating disorders, and the highlighted profiles echo stories I have heard many times over.No evidence suggests that participating in a sport causes eating disorders, but rates of these illnesses among athletes are higher than the national average. Athletes who participate in endurance, weight-class or aesthetic-based sports are at heightened risk.A focus on metrics like body fat percentage and body weight may breed an unhelpful hypervigilance on restrictive eating, body size and burning calories. College-age men and women are often still maturing physically, and by taking drastic measures to change their bodies risk their physical and psychological well-being.They also risk missing out on the greatest pleasures of sports: being a good teammate and finding joy in competition even while competing at a high personal level.Deborah R. GlasoferNew YorkThe writer is an associate professor of clinical medical psychology, Columbia Center for Eating Disorders, New York State Psychiatric Institute.To the Editor:Women in college sports are simply the tip of the spear when it comes to our affluent culture’s widely promoted ideal of thinness for women. I lived in Nigeria for many years, and there plumpness in a woman is seen as a desirable signifier of affluence. So this ideal for women’s bodies is anything but universal or timeless.Athletes and dancers perform in public, and the moves that make up their routines are easier when there is less body fat to contend with.This fact extends into other areas of daily life. But though men perform these activities too, and can also have eating disorders, the fact that women are the focal point of this discussion, as they were when I was a professor of women’s studies at Rutgers, says something about the larger issue of gender ideals in our culture.Katherine EllisNew YorkElizabeth Warren’s Election Analysis: We Disagree Kenny Holston for The New York TimesTo the Editor:In “Democrats, Let’s Seize This Moment” (Opinion guest essay, Nov. 14), Senator Elizabeth Warren claims, “The so-called experts who called Democrats’ messaging incoherent were just plain wrong — and candidates who ignored their advice won.”I beg to differ. Surveys show that a large majority of Americans favor most Democratic policies — legal access to abortion, a fair and progressive tax structure, strong environmental regulations and worker protection, a reasonable minimum wage, not cutting Social Security or Medicare, and the Affordable Care Act. Yet many Democratic candidates barely squeaked by, and the Democrats lost control of the House of Representatives.It’s easy to know what Republicans stand for — even if it’s based on lies. It’s all over the media. I’m not sure that most Americans can say what Democrats stand for, although a large minority of Americans seem to think that we steal elections, and want to curtail the police, open the borders and hand out large sums of money to people who refuse to work. Why? Because the Republican message (often lies) is getting through.Democratic politicians may have great ideas, but they’re terrible at communicating them. Otherwise they’d have a much bigger majority in government.Shaun BreidbartPelham, N.Y.To the Editor:Democrats squeaking by in the midterms is not an overwhelming endorsement of President Biden’s spending and other policies. In many cases it’s voting for the least worst candidate.Has Elizabeth Warren not seen the polls about dissatisfaction with both former President Donald Trump and President Biden? If “none of the above” were a choice, it would likely have won on many ballots.As a centrist, I want elected officials to stop talking and writing about how great they are and how bad their opposition is. Rather, focus on what you will accomplish, bipartisan cooperation and problem solving.Many of my moderate Democratic friends would vote for Liz Cheney if she were a presidential candidate. Sure, she is more conservative, but she has demonstrated integrity, bipartisanship and intelligence. That would be a refreshing change.Gail MacLeodLexington, Va.Eric Adams and the MidtermsMayor Eric Adams views the Democrats’ poor performance in New York as validation of his messaging about crime and his brand of moderate politics.Sarah Blesener for The New York TimesTo the Editor:Re “Democrats See Adams at Root of State Losses” (front page, Nov. 18):Mayor Eric Adams did not lose four New York congressional seats. Asserting that he is to blame says, in essence, that the majority of voters who elected Republicans in swing districts chose poorly and that if voters had not been told crime was a problem, the Democratic candidates in those districts would have won.Mr. Adams has identified crime as a priority for his administration. By virtue of winning election, he is entitled to set his agenda. Whether the current increase in crime is a surge or a blip can be debated, certainly, but the idea that he should soft-pedal concerns about public safety to help other Democratic candidates is inappropriate.On the other hand, the fact that Republicans exploited perceptions about crime for electoral gain may be deplorable, but it is well within the rules of the game.The Democrats’ loss of New York congressional seats resulted from hubris around redistricting and willful ignorance about public perception of issues like bail reform. Eric Adams had nothing to do with either.Rob AbbotCroton-on-Hudson, N.Y.Sue Republican LiarsTo the Editor:Re “Misinformation on Pelosi Attack Spread by G.O.P.” (front page, Nov. 6):The notion seems firmly rooted among Democratic political leaders that since politics is rough and tumble, they should rise above it when the G.O.P.’s fabrication machine spews ominous conspiracy theories and baseless slurs to obscure reality.But since Republican politicians aren’t restrained by shame, common decency or respect for the truth, tolerating their falsehoods only encourages the right wing to wallow in fact-free filth. Instead, the victims of right-wing slanders owe it to themselves — and to us — to seek money damages for defamation from reckless Republican liars.First Amendment law protects scorching invective. But there’s a limit. Under the constitutional principles that govern defamation law, a political speaker is not free to knowingly utter falsehoods or to speak with reckless indifference to truth or falsity.That principle plainly applies to unfounded Republican claims about Paul Pelosi. It likewise applies to Newt Gingrich’s assertion that John Fetterman has “ties to the crips gang,” and to Donald Trump’s lies about a voting machine maker.Multimillion-dollar damage awards might deter Republicans from fouling the political landscape with lies designed to conceal their lack of answers to America’s problems.Mitchell ZimmermanPalo Alto, Calif.The writer is an attorney.A Matter of Space Hiroko Masuike/The New York TimesTo the Editor:Re “Dimming Hope Office Buildings Will Ever Refill” (front page, Nov. 18):Not enough housing? Too much office space? Go figure.Deborah BayerRichmond, Calif. More

    • 100 Shares119 Views

      in Elections

      Democrats Promote Tough-on-Crime Credentials as Party Plays Defense

      by

      With sheriffs vouching for them and a flood of ads proclaiming their support for the police, Democrats are shoring up their public safety bona fides. Still, some worry it’s too late.In the final stretch of the midterm campaigns, Democrats are straining to defend themselves against a barrage of crime-focused attacks from Republicans, forcefully highlighting their public safety credentials amid signs that G.O.P. messaging on the issue may be more potent than usual in some critical races this year.Democrats have enlisted sheriffs to vouch for them, have outspent Republicans on ads that use the word “police” in the month of October, and have been using the kind of tough-on-crime language that many on the left seemed to reject not long ago — even as some Democrats worry that efforts to inoculate the party on a complex and emotional issue are falling short.Representative Sean Patrick Maloney of New York, who is being criticized over a 2018 video in which he called ending cash bail a “top priority,” aired an ad in which an officer declared him a “tough-on-crime” lawmaker who confronted those “who wanted to defund the police.”Senator Catherine Cortez Masto of Nevada has long highlighted her pro-law enforcement credentials, including with an ad featuring a police chief praising her record of being “tough on crime.”And Lt. Gov. John Fetterman of Pennsylvania, whose history on criminal justice issues is being denounced by Republicans, sounded pro-law enforcement notes at a senior center on Friday as he discussed his tenure as the mayor of Braddock, Pa., saying he “was proud to work with our police departments, and funding the police.”Nationwide, Democrats spent more money last month on ads that used the word “police” than Republicans did, according to AdImpact, a media-tracking firm. But heavy Republican spending on crime ads earlier this year has helped define the final weeks of the campaign in states like Pennsylvania and Wisconsin.Cheri Beasley, the Democratic nominee for Senate in North Carolina, has highlighted supporters with law enforcement backgrounds in her campaign.Logan R. Cyrus for The New York TimesNational crime trends are mixed and complex, and Republicans have often reached for arguments about crime or border security, with varying results. Some party strategists doubt the issue will be decisive this year, with many Americans far more focused on economic matters.But a Gallup survey released late last month found that “Americans are more likely now than at any time over the past five decades to say there is more crime in their local area than there was a year ago.”The issue, fanned and sometimes distorted by conservative news outlets, has been especially pronounced in liberal-leaning states, including New York, Pennsylvania, Oregon and Wisconsin, where big cities have struggled with concerns about violence and quality of life over the last few years. But the topic is at play in many tight Senate, House and governors’ races.The State of the 2022 Midterm ElectionsElection Day is Tuesday, Nov. 8.Biden’s Speech: In a prime-time address, President Biden denounced Republicans who deny the legitimacy of elections, warning that the country’s democratic traditions are on the line.State Supreme Court Races: The traditionally overlooked contests have emerged this year as crucial battlefields in the struggle over the course of American democracy.Democrats’ Mounting Anxiety: Top Democratic officials are openly second-guessing their party’s pitch and tactics, saying Democrats have failed to unite around one central message.Social Security and Medicare: Republicans, eyeing a midterms victory, are floating changes to the safety net programs. Democrats have seized on the proposals to galvanize voters.Celinda Lake, a veteran Democratic pollster, said the most effective responses had come from candidates who formulated a message on crime early.“Too many Democrats waited until the attacks on crime happened,” she said. “We’re never going to win on crime. We just have to answer it strongly enough to be able to pivot back to other issues to show we’re in touch.”Some Democrats fear that their party has fallen short. In an article on Thursday for The American Prospect, a liberal magazine, Stanley B. Greenberg, a longtime Democratic pollster, warned that the party was still struggling with a branding problem, even though many Democrats distanced themselves long ago from the “defund the police” movement that gained traction after the police killing of George Floyd in 2020.Billboards in Philadelphia attacked Lt. Gov. John Fetterman, the Democratic nominee for Senate in Pennsylvania, over his record on crime.Michelle Gustafson for The New York TimesMr. Fetterman said that during his tenure as the mayor of Braddock, Pa., he had been “proud to work with our police departments, and funding the police.”Ruth Fremson/The New York Times“‘Defund’ is a very small segment” of the party, Mr. Greenberg said in an interview. “But the whole party owns it.”Steven Law, the chief executive of the Senate Leadership Fund, the leading super PAC for Senate Republicans, said concerns about public safety contributed to the idea that the country is going in the wrong direction — a problem for the party in power.“Crime has an outsized ability to define Democrats as being liberal instead of moderates, more than any other issue,” he added.Democratic officials have tried to address the issue head-on. The party’s Senate campaign arm encouraged candidates to challenge Republicans over opposing measures that would combat gun violence, a committee aide said, and to use law enforcement officials in their advertising.“It’s not just trying to be more Republican than the Republicans,” said Aimee Allison, the founder of She the People, a political advocacy group focused on women of color. “People are interested in how to make communities safer.”And a memo this spring from the Democratic House campaign arm laid out a guide, advising candidates to reject the notion of defunding the police, to highlight law enforcement funding they had secured and to rely on members of law enforcement to endorse their records. It also urged Democrats to “stand up for racial justice.”“In 2020, the Republican lies were so outrageous, some candidates thought they could ignore them,” Mr. Maloney, the chairman of the House Democratic campaign arm, said. “In 2022, we know better.”It is evident that many Democrats are following aspects of that playbook, while also slamming Republicans over the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol — another issue the memo noted.Representative Tim Ryan, Democrat of Ohio, who is facing a difficult Senate race, has claimed credit for helping to obtain federal funding for state law enforcement. He has also criticized his Republican opponent, J.D. Vance, over sympathetic statements he made toward rioters at the Capitol, where about 140 police officers were injured.Over the summer, Mr. Ryan ran an ad in which a sheriff called the claim that Democrats want to defund the police “ridiculous” and said he “trusts Tim Ryan to keep our community safe.”Representative Abigail Spanberger, a moderate Democrat in Virginia, made national headlines two years ago for her critique of her party on a leaked post-election call, which included concerns about the “defund the police” movement.This year, Ms. Spanberger said in an interview, Democrats could point to votes serving as “proof points” that they are serious about crime.“We’re appropriating significant money to local police departments,” she said.Representative Tim Ryan, Democrat of Ohio, who is facing a difficult Senate race, has claimed credit for helping to obtain federal funding for state law enforcement. Brian Kaiser for The New York TimesJ.D. Vance, Mr. Ryan’s Republican opponent, has made sympathetic statements toward rioters who were at the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021.Maddie McGarvey for The New York TimesIn one of Ms. Spanberger’s television ads, a Republican police chief endorsed her while criticizing her opponent, Yesli Vega, for “defending” rioters who attacked the Capitol. Ms. Vega, an auxiliary deputy with the Prince William County Sheriff’s Office, called the rioters “a group of Americans exercising their First Amendment rights.”In Pennsylvania, the Fetterman campaign said it had put out 16 ads mentioning crime or public safety, including at least one featuring the sheriff of suburban Montgomery County, who vouched for Mr. Fetterman.This week, a Monmouth University poll showed that voters trusted both Mr. Fetterman and Mehmet Oz, his Republican rival, equally when it came to handling crime. The poll also noted that Mr. Fetterman’s edge on the issue had evaporated. Mr. Fetterman has defended himself primarily by pointing to his tenure as the mayor of Braddock, outside Pittsburgh, where for five years a scourge of murders came to a stop.The issue has also played a prominent role in other Senate races, including in Wisconsin and, to some degree, North Carolina.Lt. Gov. Mandela Barnes in Wisconsin and Cheri Beasley in North Carolina, the first Black woman to serve as chief justice of the State Supreme Court, have also showcased supporters with law enforcement backgrounds in their campaigns.In Wisconsin, mail advertising from Republicans has darkened Mr. Barnes’s skin, one stark example of the ways attacks on crime can propel issues of race to the forefront.Representative Mark Pocan, Democrat of Wisconsin, said: “Clearly, the message was not just one of crime. It was one of racism.” And, like other Democrats, he alluded to the Capitol riot.“They claim to back the blue, and in reality, they’re backing the coup,” he said. “You can’t pretend to support law enforcement, but then selectively decide which law enforcement that you’re going to protect.”Jon Hurdle contributed reporting from Harrisburg, Pa. More

    • 150 Shares199 Views

      in Elections

      Most Candidates Running on Crime Don’t Have Much Power to Solve It

      by

      Your congressman doesn’t control the police budget. Your senator probably doesn’t know where the worst hot spots are.Politicians around the country have promised in the closing days of the midterm election to crack down on crime. Would-be governors will crack down on crime. Senators will crack down on crime. Members of Congress will do it, too. Obviously, their opponents won’t.The law-and-order messaging is often disconnected from the nuance of crime trends (in 2022, homicide is up in some places, but down in others like New York City; yes, Oklahoma has higher violent crime rates than California). But it’s also devoid of the reality that these offices generally have little power to bend crime trends on the ground tomorrow.Crime surges and falls for reasons that experts don’t fully understand, and it’s hard for even the most proven ideas to quickly reverse its direction. But the people with ready levers to pull are not sitting in the Senate. And your current sense of order in your community is definitely not controlled by your congressman.“You’re not going to fix the problems from there,” said Jeff Asher, a crime analyst and consultant with AH Datalytics in New Orleans (and a former Upshot contributor). “If you want to fix the problems, go run for mayor.”Your governor isn’t going to solve a spike in murder, he added. And it’s generally not the governor who’s been failing to solve it, either. As for Senate candidates who say they will make sure we keep criminals behind bars who don’t belong on our streets?“U.S. senators don’t determine state prison release policies,” said John MacDonald, a professor of criminology and sociology at the University of Pennsylvania. “Who you elect to Senate is going to have zero impact on state prisons.”When voters choose candidates for higher office thinking of crime, they often misunderstand where and how criminal justice decisions get made, said Amy Lerman, a political scientist at Berkeley. The federal government controls a small fraction of the whole picture. In the U.S., there are 51 prison systems, and about 18,000 police departments.The State of the 2022 Midterm ElectionsElection Day is Tuesday, Nov. 8.Biden’s Speech: In a prime-time address, President Biden denounced Republicans who deny the legitimacy of elections, warning that the country’s democratic traditions are on the line.State Supreme Court Races: The traditionally overlooked contests have emerged this year as crucial battlefields in the struggle over the course of American democracy.Democrats’ Mounting Anxiety: Top Democratic officials are openly second-guessing their party’s pitch and tactics, saying Democrats have failed to unite around one central message.Social Security and Medicare: Republicans, eyeing a midterms victory, are floating changes to the safety net programs. Democrats have seized on the proposals to galvanize voters.If you see a police officer while walking or driving around your community, that officer is most likely a local one. And those local officers generally report to locally elected bosses like sheriffs, or people appointed by locally elected officials like mayors, said Thomas Ogorzalek, a visiting scholar at the Center for Urban Research at CUNY.Those are the people, in turn, who decide what share of the city budget the police get, how many officers they’ll hire, where those officers will focus, if they’ll wear body cameras, and whether they’ll work alongside violence interruption workers, social workers and mental health clinicians.This may seem counterintuitive to voters: Broad crime trends are often national in scale (that was the case when crime plummeted across the country starting in the 1990s, and when gun violence surged just about everywhere during the pandemic). But it doesn’t follow that the answers are primarily federal ones.“We have a national problem that isn’t solved at the national level,” said Phillip Atiba Goff, a Yale professor and co-founder of the Center for Policing Equity. “But our national narrative makes it harder to solve it at the local level — which is the only level where it’s going to get solved.”The federal government does play an important role. It funnels money to states and local governments, and often uses that money to incentivize local police to shift policies. Major components of the 1994 crime bill, for example, dedicated federal money to hire local police officers, fund victims’ services and construct state prisons.The federal government has also sent military-grade equipment to local police, although research suggests that has done little to reduce crime. In its other roles, the federal government offers technical assistance to local agencies and supports research on which policing strategies work.And it has a bully pulpit. President Biden signed an executive order in May directing federal law enforcement to restrict tactics like chokeholds and no-knock warrants. While the order has a limited reach, it could still nudge cultural changes among local departments. And individual senators and members of Congress can use their own megaphones to push policing priorities to local officials.As a whole, Congress could play a bigger role — but often chooses not to.“One of the reasons that we talk about the federal government having so little authority is not just because it can’t do a lot of things, but also because it won’t do certain things,” said Thomas Abt, a senior fellow at the Council on Criminal Justice, a nonpartisan think tank, and chair of the Violent Crime Working Group. “The single biggest thing that the federal government could do to limit violent crime in particular would be to pass reasonable regulations that limit access to deadly firearms.”Relaxed gun laws at the federal and state level have allowed more guns on the street and made the problem of local violent crime worse, said Darrel Stephens, a retired chief of the Charlotte-Mecklenburg Police Department, and former longtime head of the Major Cities Chiefs Association.With that solution off the table, the Council on Criminal Justice released earlier this year a report on tangible actions that could reduce violence now, all of them aimed at local officials. A central tactic involves identifying the small subset of residents and places that drive the bulk of violence, a pattern that occurs across cities. Officials can then target those areas with police resources, outreach workers, city programs and community partnerships.“The strongest evidence deals with focusing on concentrations,” Mr. Stephens said, including crime that victimizes a small concentration of people. “What you’re trying to do is to tailor your response to your understanding of what’s contributing to the problem.”That might mean changing traffic patterns on specific streets, or offering behavioral therapy programs to particular residents. That level of specificity isn’t something you would expect a senator or governor to know much about: this intersection, this family, this apartment with unsecured doors.Local officials, on the other hand, oversee many of the levers voters may not think of as part of crime policy — whether that’s street lighting, public schools, summer jobs programs, recreation departments or housing programs. And they wield the most influence over other kinds of disorder, like uncleared trash, graffiti and vacant properties, that may shape the sense of unease voters connect to their fears of crime.Those other tools are “extremely important,” said Art Acevedo, a former chief of police in Houston, Austin and Miami. He offered as an example pre-K education, citing the greater likelihood that students who eventually drop out of school will go to prison.Mr. Acevedo lamented national politicians who parachute into communities after mass shootings, offer prayers and no legislation, while local police and elected officials face those families and manage everyday violence.“When it comes to actually being closest to it, and actually focusing on good policy — rather than good politics — it’s those local officials,” he said.There is a parallel case that good crime policy at the state and federal level is inseparable from education investments, safety-net supports and housing programs that could help break up concentrated poverty and despair. Research, for example, suggests that people newly released from prison who are given federal health coverage through Medicaid are less likely to return to prison.But these interconnected benefits play out over years, not immediately in the midst of a crime surge. And this is not the conversation about crime that’s happening in 30-second campaign ads and on debate stages with an election around the corner. More

    • 138 Shares199 Views

      in Elections

      Can Lee Zeldin Reinvent His Way to the NY Governor’s Mansion?

      by

      SHIRLEY, N.Y. — As a young U.S. Army lawyer of unmistakable ambition, Lee Zeldin could almost see his future unfurling before him. It was his first stint in Iraq, and he was already imagining the kind of distinguished career in uniform that would have laid the groundwork for one in politics.Then a Red Cross message arrived on the base where Mr. Zeldin was embedded as a captain with the 82nd Airborne Division. His girlfriend had gone into dangerously premature labor with twin girls. Doctors were not optimistic about the babies’ survival. His commanding officer sent him home to mourn.“This I vividly remember the emotion of,” Mr. Zeldin, now a conservative congressman, recalled in a recent interview. “My priorities became all about my daughters.”The girls survived after months in the hospital. But rather than returning to Iraq, Mr. Zeldin took a desk job back at Fort Bragg in North Carolina, got married and then was discharged. At just 27, he found that the life he had imagined had veered off course.It was not the first time, nor the last. As a high school senior here on the South Shore of Long Island, Mr. Zeldin sought a prestigious appointment to West Point, only to fall short. After leaving the Army in 2007, he almost immediately entered a race for Congress, hoping to jump-start his political career. He lost in a blowout.But in every case, Mr. Zeldin has shown aptitude for finding a quick path to reinvention that has helped fuel his political ascent. Now, at age 42, it has put him closer than any Republican since George E. Pataki two decades ago to one of the nation’s most influential political posts, the governorship of New York.A few hundred Zeldin supporters attended a rally on Monday in Westchester County, traditionally an area controlled by Democrats. Brittainy Newman for The New York TimesThough Gov. Kathy Hochul, the Democratic incumbent, remains the front-runner, Mr. Zeldin’s late surge in the polls has shocked even political strategists and sent Democrats scrambling to prop up their candidate. With Ms. Hochul’s huge war chest and a vast Democratic registration advantage, few expected Mr. Zeldin to come close to winning, and perhaps with good reason: He does not easily fit the profile of a New York power player.In a state shaped by wealthy business interests and often governed by larger-than-life personalities and family dynasties, Mr. Zeldin is an outlier. He grew up in law enforcement households of modest means. He can be introverted and awkward with voters. And in a state dominated by the political left, he is probably the most conservative serious contender for the governorship in modern memory — even voting to overturn the 2020 election on Jan. 6, 2021.Yet a careful review of his public and private life, including two dozen interviews with family, friends, colleagues and critics, shows that Mr. Zeldin’s emergence as a political force stems from decades of meticulous planning, comfort with taking risks, well-timed alliances with more powerful Republicans and, above all, a knack honed from a young age for what allies call adaptation but his critics view as a more cynical political shape-shifting.Those qualities have been on full display in this fall’s campaign, as Mr. Zeldin moved swiftly to tap into two powerful currents of discontent that Democrats appear to have misjudged and that threaten to scramble the state’s usual political order: painful inflation eroding New Yorkers’ sense of financial well-being and fears about rising crime.“He’s grabbed the right issues and hasn’t let go,” said Rob Astorino, who lost to Mr. Zeldin in this year’s Republican primary.Mr. Zeldin, center, has heavily courted the Hasidic vote during his campaign stops in New York City, including a recent visit to Williamsburg, Brooklyn.Andrew Seng for The New York TimesBut his instincts have also been evident as he tries to execute another on-the-fly transformation, playing down hard-line positions that served him well while he climbed the Republican ranks in Albany and Washington but are now politically inconvenient, while offering scant details on some of his latest policy proposals.Who Is Lee Zeldin Up Against?Card 1 of 5Gov. Kathy Hochul’s rise to power. More

    • 150 Shares139 Views

      in Elections

      With Allies Nearby, Hochul and Zeldin Try to Spur Voters to Polls

      by

      With eight days until Election Day, the candidates in New York’s governors race are hoping popular politicians can help them drum up support from their bases.With the race for governor of New York closer than expected, the two candidates on Monday put their strategies and proxies front and center: Representative Lee Zeldin, a Republican, held a campaign rally with Gov. Glenn Youngkin of Virginia, and Gov. Kathy Hochul appeared with a pair of Black and Latino Democratic lawmakers.For Mr. Zeldin, the rally in Westchester County served to remind voters of Mr. Youngkin’s victory last year, seen by some Republicans as a kind of how-to for conservatives in left-leaning states.For Ms. Hochul, the appearance underscored her need to stir up enthusiasm among Black and Latino populations she is eager to draw to the polls.Speaking at the Madison Square Boys & Girls Club in Harlem alongside Representatives Jamaal Bowman and Adriano Espaillat, Ms. Hochul focused heavily on gun control and public safety, as she sought to address Mr. Zeldin’s campaign emphasis on crime, which has helped him gain traction with voters.Virginia Governor Glenn Youngkin with Lee Zeldin at a Get Out the Vote Rally in Thornwood Monday. Brittainy Newman for The New York TimesAs anti-violence activists and parents who have lost children to gun violence stood nearby, the governor spoke about legislation she championed to help stop the flow of illegal firearms into New York. She accused Mr. Zeldin of failing to back up his rhetoric on public safety with a clear plan.She asserted that Mr. Zeldin supported plans that would help more guns come into the state, including arming school safety officers and possibly teachers with weapons, ideas she denounced as “absurd” and “insanity.”“Don’t come here today and tell us that you’ve got a tough on crime plan that’s just soft and squishy on guns,” Ms. Hochul said.Some 20 miles to the north, Mr. Zeldin accused Ms. Hochul of ignoring a “crime emergency” in the state and urged voters in liberal New York to place their personal views above party identity.“This isn’t about Republicans verse Democrats, this is about all of us together,” Mr. Zeldin said. “Republicans, Democrats and independents uniting as New Yorkers to save our state.”Recent polls have suggested Ms. Hochul, seeking her first full term as governor, is leading in the race. But support for Mr. Zeldin has grown, particularly as public safety has become a top concern for voters.The governor’s campaign has shifted in response. Though Ms. Hochul had earlier focused her pitch to voters on abortion rights, and tying Mr. Zeldin to his party’s extremist flank, she has since broadened her message.As part of this change, Ms. Hochul’s campaign released a new television ad on Monday that focused on public safety. The ad emphasized gun control laws that she signed in June, and her successful effort to tighten New York’s bail laws.Bruce Gyory, a Democratic strategist, said Ms. Hochul’s focus on guns as the cause of crime made sense.“The gun safety issue is a major issue that unites suburban women and inner-city women,” Mr. Gyory said. “I think that’s a strong hook to hang your hat on, so to speak, for her.”Ms. Hochul’s event on Monday is one of several that she is expected to hold in the city in the next eight days as she seeks to boost turnout, particularly from Black and Latino voters whom New York Democrats have long relied on.Monday Mr. Bowman, who represents the northern Bronx and southern Westchester, accused Mr. Zeldin of “fear mongering.” He criticized the Republican for not voting in Congress to support legislation addressing gun violence and gun safety.Mayor Eric Adams alongside Governor Kathy Hochul in Queens Sunday. Johnny Milano for The New York TimesMr. Espaillat, whose district includes parts of Upper Manhattan and Harlem, criticized Mr. Zeldin for not being present in the communities most affected by the surge in violence that has been at the center of his campaign.“Where is Lee when two young men confront each other with handguns on a weekend night?” Mr. Espaillat said.Hours later, Mr. Zeldin was with Mr. Youngkin, addressing a cheering crowd of hundreds outside the American Legion in Thornwood, N.Y. His focus was on his anti-crime platform, and he repeated promises to roll back New York’s bail laws, and fire Manhattan’s district attorney.Mr. Youngkin, a rising figure in the Republican Party, commended Mr. Zeldin for putting Democrats on edge in a state whose electoral fealty they had largely taken for granted.“The momentum is building like they can’t believe. You can see them all of a sudden go from cocky to scared, it happens just like that,” Mr. Youngkin said, comparing Mr. Zeldin’s campaign to the one that saw him become governor last year in Virginia, a state that President Biden won handily in 2020 and where Democrats had built increasing support.Mr. Youngkin also carefully courted suburban voters who turned away from the Republican Party under former President Donald J. Trump, keeping the former president at a distance during his campaign yet being careful not to criticize him. Mr. Youngkin also downplayed his opposition to abortion, focusing instead on inflation, safety, and how race and equity are discussed in schools.Mr. Zeldin has tried to manage the same balance in his campaign, particularly as he tries to pick off moderate voters in the suburbs.Rosemary Eshghi, 68, of Chappaqua, N.Y., said that she used to be a Democrat but was now part of a group called Republican Women of Westchester. She came to the rally because she appreciated Mr. Youngkin’s views on schools, which she believed Mr. Zeldin was aligned with.Her vote, she said, would go to the Republican ticket, in part because Ms. Hochul “does not represent those ideals that I believed in 30 years ago. I left the party, and she’s totally inviting chaos.”But Andrew Lynch, 64, of New Rochelle, who said that he used to be a registered Republican but was no longer affiliated with the party, would not be voting for Mr. Zeldin, in part because the Jan. 6 Capitol riot convinced him that Republicans were trampling on the rule of law.He was at the rally, he said, to see Mr. Zeldin and Mr. Youngkin up close and to “see if it’s as horrible as I think it is when you’re actually live and in person.” More