Debates (Political)

Subterms

    More stories

    • 138 Shares129 Views

      in Elections

      Democrats’ Split Over Israel Takes Center Stage in Tense Primary Debate

      by

      A rancorous clash between Representative Jamaal Bowman and his Democratic opponent, George Latimer, exposed sharp divisions in their party.Democrats’ smoldering divisions over the war in Gaza flared in New York on Monday, as Representative Jamaal Bowman, one of the House’s most endangered incumbents, debated a party rival over Israel’s war tactics, American military aid and a powerful pro-Israel group.In many ways, their exchanges echoed those playing out from Congress to college campuses. But for Mr. Bowman, there was something more at stake: His sharp criticism of Israel has put him at risk of losing his seat in a primary in the New York City suburbs next month.That possibility appeared to be front of mind as he began the race’s first televised debate in White Plains, N.Y. Mr. Bowman joined his more moderate opponent, George Latimer, in reiterating support for two states — one Palestinian and one Jewish — and condemning antisemitism. He steered clear of incendiary terms like “genocide” that have cost him key Jewish support. Both candidates let some deeper differences slide.The comity lasted all of 25 minutes.Friction spiked — and never really abated — after the conversation turned to the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, the influential pro-Israel lobby that helped push Mr. Latimer into the race and has pledged millions of dollars to defeat Mr. Bowman and other members of the House’s left-wing “Squad.”Sensing a rare opportunity to go on the attack, the congressman accused Mr. Latimer, the Westchester County executive, of being “bought and paid for” by the group and its deep-pocketed funders, who Mr. Bowman said also support “right-wing Republicans who want to destroy our democracy.”Mr. Latimer did not take the gibe kindly. The group, as he quickly pointed out, has deep ties to Democratic leadership, but its brook-no-criticism approach to Israel’s deadly counteroffensive in Gaza has alienated large numbers of Democratic lawmakers and voters.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

    • 63 Shares129 Views

      in Elections

      The Prevalence of Standing Ovations

      by

      More from our inbox:China, America and the Climate ChallengeKids’ Reactions to the ‘Cringe-Worthy’ News TodayDebate Conditions Pablo DelcanTo the Editor:Re “Bravo! Hurray! Wahoo! (Meh.),” by John McWhorter (Opinion, April 16):The currency of the standing ovation is indeed seriously debased. The impulse to stand up during the ovation following a performance may in some cases represent a kind of unconscious one-upmanship. “I’m more sensitized than most people to the sublimity of what we all have just witnessed, and it is imperative that I separate myself from the underappreciative herd.”Needless to say, if other audience members follow suit by rising from their seats, then you can raise the ante by hoisting your clapping hands up from the standard mid-torso level to over your head — signifying that the artistry one is acknowledging is not just merely great, but really most sincerely great.I confess that although I invariably applaud performances, I usually “sit out” the competitive appreciation derby, and haul myself to my feet only if I feel particularly inspired. I avoid the over-the-head clapping mode at all times. Maybe this marks me as a philistine; I’ve been called worse.David EnglishActon, Mass.To the Editor:I admit that I’m often among the first to give a standing ovation. I always wondered why the holdouts would deny something so simple to these hardworking actors.You have to walk out of the theater a few minutes later anyway, so why not stretch your legs and participate with your fellow theatergoers in the shared joy of theater? Perhaps it’s generational, cultural or regional, or maybe it’s a combination.Jumping to my feet in appreciation of the actors’ hard work is my way of giving back, and it feels really good! I’m sure the actors like to feel the good will as well.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

    • 75 Shares169 Views

      in Elections

      Maximizing Profits at the Patients’ Expense

      by

      More from our inbox:The Brave Trump JurorsBlack Voters ‘Want to Be Courted’ by DemocratsBetter Than Debates NATo the Editor:Re “Patients Hit With Big Bills While Insurers Reap Fees” (front page, April 7):Chris Hamby’s investigation uncovers the hard truth for patients who receive care from providers outside their insurance network. While most of us try to save out-of-pocket costs by using in-network health professionals and hospitals, it’s not always possible. And there’s no way to determine what we’ll owe until after we get that care — when it’s too late to reconsider based on the costs we’ve incurred.So, it’s more important than ever for the government to swiftly implement an essential element of the No Surprises Act: Providers should have to give patients an advance explanation of benefits so patients can estimate their financial burden before they get treatment, in or out of network.Health price transparency is improving, but it’s outrageous that even two years after the No Surprises Act passed, everyone except the patient knows the price of a procedure or doctor’s visit in advance, leaving patients unpleasantly surprised.Patricia KelmarAlexandria, Va.The writer is senior director of Health Care Campaigns for U.S. PIRG.To the Editor:This is just the latest example of the schemes deployed by insurers to maximize profits by cutting reimbursements to physicians and shifting medically necessary health care costs onto patients.Whether it’s through third-party entities like MultiPlan or using tactics such as narrowing provider networks and restrictive prior authorization policies, insurers have the perverse incentive to boost revenue over offering adequate payment for quality patient care under the guise of “controlling costs.”More and more patients are being forced to decide whether they should forgo treatment because their insurer won’t pay the bill.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 138 Shares119 Views

      in Elections

      News Outlets Urge Trump and Biden to Commit to Presidential Debates

      by

      In an unusual statement, the news organizations said “there is simply no substitute” for a face-to-face debate, a campaign staple since 1976.A group of major news organizations — including The Associated Press and the five big broadcast and cable networks — issued an unusual joint statement on Sunday urging President Biden and former President Donald J. Trump to commit to participating in televised debates before Election Day.“General election debates have a rich tradition in our American democracy,” the group wrote. “There is simply no substitute for the candidates debating with each other, and before the American people, their visions for the future of our nation.”Media organizations rarely weigh in so explicitly on the campaign plans of presidential candidates. The statement underscores just how much uncertainty surrounds whether this year’s debates will occur.Mr. Biden has declined to commit to the three debates scheduled for September and October. His allies have expressed concerns about the Commission on Presidential Debates, the nonpartisan group that has organized the events since 1988, and its ability to enforce its rules when Mr. Trump participates.Mr. Trump has promised to debate and regularly taunts Mr. Biden for not following suit. But in 2020, Mr. Trump forced the cancellation of the second scheduled debate by pulling out at the last minute. Last year, Mr. Trump refused to debate his Republican primary opponents, and he has accused the debate commission of pro-Biden bias.If no debate is held in 2024, it would break a streak that dates back to the Jimmy Carter-Gerald R. Ford election of 1976. Presidential debates remain America’s largest mass gathering outside of sports: In 2020, an average of 68 million people tuned in for the two Biden-Trump debates, significantly more than watched the party nominating conventions.The news outlets’ plans to issue a joint statement were reported by The New York Times last week.In addition to ABC, CBS, CNN, NBC and Fox News, the following news organizations also endorsed the statement: The Associated Press, C-SPAN, NewsNation, NPR, PBS NewsHour, USA Today and Noticias Univision, the news division of the Spanish-language network.(A spokesman for Newsmax volunteered to The Times last week that the right-leaning news channel was in agreement with the statement, although it is not an official signatory.)The statement noted that dates and eligibility requirements for this year’s matchups were previously announced by the debate commission.“Though it is too early for invitations to be extended to any candidates, it’s not too early for candidates who expect to meet the eligibility criteria to publicly state their support for, and their intention to participate in, the commission’s debates planned for this fall,” the statement reads. More

    • 125 Shares99 Views

      in Elections

      Who Will Replace George Santos? Takeaways From the Pilip-Suozzi Debate

      by

      Five days before a special House election in New York, Tom Suozzi and Mazi Pilip traded blows in the race’s lone debate.The candidates vying to replace George Santos in a special House election squared off on Thursday in an exceedingly bitter debate, tangling over the roots of New York City’s migrant crisis, abortion rights and, at one point, the definition of “assault weapon.”The face-off on Long Island was the only chance for voters to see the candidates debate, and each sought to smear the other at close range. Mazi Pilip, the Republican nominee, claimed that her opponent, Tom Suozzi, “opened the border.” He called her wholly unprepared for Congress.The Feb. 13 election is considered a tossup. A victory by Mr. Suozzi would narrow Republicans’ paper-thin House majority at a time when they are already struggling to govern. If he loses, it could signal trouble for Democrats ahead of November’s elections.Here are five takeaways from the debate, hosted by News 12.The migrant crisis is dominating the race.New York is almost 2,000 miles from the U.S.-Mexico border, but it is clear the race has become a referendum on the influx of migrants trying to get across it. The only question is who will take the blame in the eyes of frustrated voters.Ms. Pilip, a Nassau County legislator who immigrated from Israel, offered spare details about her own prescriptions to secure the border (she supports a wall and more border agents). But she repeatedly accused Mr. Suozzi, a moderate former three-term congressman, of siding with President Biden and far-left members of the House “squad” to encourage illegal immigration.“Tom Suozzi opened the border. Tom Suozzi funded the sanctuary city. Tom Suozzi kicked I.C.E. from Nassau County,” she said. Addressing Mr. Suozzi, she added, “This is absolutely you; you have to own it.”We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 138 Shares199 Views

      in Elections

      CNN and ABC Cancel Republican Debates Ahead of New Hampshire Primary

      by

      Neither of the two Republican debates planned for the days before the New Hampshire primary will be happening.CNN canceled the debate it was set to host because only one candidate agreed to participate, the network said on Wednesday, a day after ABC News did the same.The CNN debate had been scheduled for Sunday, and the ABC News/WMUR debate for Thursday. CNN said it would host a town-hall event with Ms. Haley on Thursday instead, after hosting one with Gov. Ron DeSantis of Florida on Tuesday.Only Mr. DeSantis, who finished second in the Iowa caucuses, had said he would debate. Former President Donald J. Trump, who won Iowa overwhelmingly, has skipped every debate throughout the campaign. And Nikki Haley, the third-place finisher in Iowa, said on Tuesday that she would not do any more unless Mr. Trump participated.“We’ve had five great debates in this campaign. Unfortunately, Donald Trump has ducked all of them,” Ms. Haley said on X. “He has nowhere left to hide. The next debate I do will either be with Donald Trump or with Joe Biden. I look forward to it.”Ms. Haley is trying to present the race as a two-person contest between her and Mr. Trump despite her third-place showing in Iowa. Her campaign has noted that Mr. DeSantis focused on Iowa largely to the exclusion of other states. He is polling far behind Ms. Haley in New Hampshire, which holds its primary on Jan. 23, and in South Carolina, where Republicans vote on Feb. 24.Mr. Trump, who is far ahead in polls of both states, has been uninterested in debating either of them. He has cast the race as over and himself as the inevitable nominee. More

    • 138 Shares199 Views

      in Elections

      ABC News Cancels G.O.P. Debate After Haley Demands Trump Appear, Too

      by

      ABC News canceled a Republican presidential debate scheduled for Thursday in New Hampshire, after Ron DeSantis was the only candidate who had agreed to participate.Hours earlier, Nikki Haley said she would not participate in future debates unless either Donald J. Trump or President Biden also participated, after a lower-than-expected result placing third in the Iowa caucuses.Ms. Haley’s statement also cast uncertainty over another upcoming Republican debate in New Hampshire, hosted by CNN and scheduled for Sunday.ABC News said in a statement that it and WMUR-TV had given Mr. Trump and Ms. Haley until 5 p.m. to “commit” to participate. They canceled the debate minutes after the deadline.Mr. Trump has refused to participate in any debates so far.Ms. Haley, a former ambassador to the United Nations under Mr. Trump and a former South Carolina governor, finished third in the Iowa caucuses on Monday just behind Mr. DeSantis, the Florida governor. After failing to overtake Mr. DeSantis in Iowa, Ms. Haley faces heightened pressure in New Hampshire, where polls have shown her within striking distance of Mr. Trump, who dominated in Iowa. The state holds its primary on Jan. 23.Ms. Haley has increasingly come under attack in recent debates as she has risen in the polls, including from Mr. DeSantis and Vivek Ramaswamy, another rival who dropped out of the race after the caucuses and endorsed Mr. Trump.She has accused Mr. Trump of ducking his opponents.“He has nowhere left to hide,” Ms. Haley said in a statement on Tuesday. “The next debate I do will either be with Donald Trump or with Joe Biden. I look forward to it.”The Trump campaign on Tuesday called Ms. Haley “desperate” and said the only voters casting ballots for her were Democrats “trying to interfere in a Republican primary.”Mr. DeSantis, who has ratcheted up his criticism of Ms. Haley at recent debates, including a one-on-one matchup on CNN last week in Iowa, assailed her on Tuesday on social media. He said she was afraid of scrutiny of her time as a Boeing board member after leaving the governor’s office.“The reality is that she is not running for the nomination, she’s running to be Trump’s VP,” Mr. DeSantis wrote. “I won’t snub New Hampshire voters like both Nikki Haley and Donald Trump, and plan to honor my commitments.”Later in the day, Mr. DeSantis went after Ms. Haley for not taking more questions from reporters and voters, calling her campaign “hermetically sealed.” “She will not do what I’m doing right here,” he said as he addressed reporters. More

    • 88 Shares149 Views

      in Elections

      Did Ron DeSantis Shake His Wife’s Hand?

      by

      In a campaign full of strained social interactions and clumsy pantomimes of warmth, Ron DeSantis’s encounter with his wife at the presidential primary debate in Des Moines on Wednesday night was one of the more curious.During the second commercial break, Mr. DeSantis, the governor of Florida, strode to the edge of the stage and reached down to shake hands with Gov. Kim Reynolds, Republican of Iowa, and her husband. Then, with a businesslike rigor, he grasped the outstretched palm of Casey DeSantis, Florida’s first lady.Did he just shake his wife’s hand? Onlookers in the room were bewildered.Interactions with spouses on the campaign trail can be fraught, even for the most adept politicians and for the warmest of marriages. To be fair, Mr. DeSantis was standing on an elevated stage, on a tight timetable, making an embrace impractical. Too much affection runs its own political risks.And who knows? Maybe The Handshake was some sort of inside joke, or an effort to create a signature routine, like Barack and Michelle Obama’s coy fist bump (which was weaponized by Mr. Obama’s political foes as a “terrorist fist jab”).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?  More