Democratic Party

Subterms

    More stories

    • 113 Shares99 Views

      in Elections

      In Nadler-Maloney Matchup, Does Suraj Patel Stand a Chance?

      by

      Suraj Patel has few illusions about what he’s up against as he takes on two titans of New York politics, Representatives Carolyn Maloney and Jerrold Nadler, in this summer’s blockbuster Democratic primary. But he does take hope from a theory about coffee shops.“There’s a Starbucks there and a Starbucks there, and then there’s some brand-new hipster coffee shop here,” the candidate said one recent weekday morning, whirling around 180 degrees in Velcro Stan Smith sneakers. “If all the people going to Starbucks split themselves half and half, then the third spot gets about 40 percent of the foot traffic.”“That,” he wagered a little optimistically, “is what we’re doing.”No doubt the Aug. 23 contest has been dominated by the bitter head-to-head confrontation between Ms. Maloney and Mr. Nadler, two septuagenarian fixtures of Manhattan’s political power structure who have been drawn into a single seat after serving three decades side by side in Washington.But in a summer when Democrats of all ages are reeling from stark losses on guns, abortion rights and the environment, Mr. Patel, 38, believes that discontent over the party’s aging leadership might just run deep enough for him to pull off a monumental upset.A frenetic Indian American lawyer who was just 9 when his opponents took office, Mr. Patel has adopted a less-than-meek approach. Campaigning recently in the heart of Mr. Nadler’s West Side stronghold, he sought to tie himself to Barack Obama and, when chatting up a retired apartment worker and union member, paraphrased the Ramayana, the ancient Hindu epic: “Fear is the mother of all sin.”“We’ve lost every major battle to Mitch McConnell and Republicans in the last decade, and the people who have been in office have no new answers,” Mr. Patel told him. “What we’re offering is a completely new set of arguments on inflation, on public safety, on economic growth and climate change.”The pitch landed. “I’m similar: proactive, go-getter, and you make sense,” replied the union man, Mario Sanders, keeping cool in an unbuttoned Hawaiian shirt. He walked off down 72nd Street with glossy Patel leaflets in one hand and his dog, Juicy, cradled in the other.Flipping enough votes to actually win, though, will be vastly more difficult, as Mr. Patel learned in two previous attempts to defeat Ms. Maloney, 76.He came closest in 2020, when he lost by less than four percentage points, winning diverse areas in Brooklyn and Queens that have since been removed from the district.Because the courts shuffled the district lines this spring, he only has weeks to try to reintroduce himself to New Yorkers who, in some cases, have enthusiastically supported his opponents since the 1970s, and to push younger voters to show up.Key Results in New York’s 2022 Primary ElectionsOn June 28, New York held several primaries for statewide office, including for governor and lieutenant governor. Some State Assembly districts also had primaries.Kathy Hochul: With her win in the Democratic, the governor of New York took a crucial step toward winning a full term, fending off a pair of spirited challengers.Antonio Delgado: Ms. Hochul’s second in command and running mate also scored a convincing victory over his nearest Democratic challenger, Ana María Archila.Lee Zeldin: The congressman from Long Island won the Republican primary for governor, advancing to what it’s expected to be a grueling general election.N.Y. State Assembly: Long-tenured incumbents were largely successful in fending off a slate of left-leaning insurgents in the Democratic primary.With the party establishment shunning him, his most notable endorser is Andrew Yang, the former presidential and mayoral candidate who subsequently left the Democratic Party.Nor is Mr. Patel drawing the sort of sharp ideological contrasts that have propelled challengers to victory in recent cycles. He shares his opponents’ support for left-leaning policies like Medicare for All and the Green New Deal, though many on the left view him skeptically. “I respect the hell out of it,” he said of Mr. Nadler’s voting record.“That’s a hard needle to thread,” said Christina Greer, a political scientist at Fordham University. “Essentially, he’s saying, I will do the same thing they are doing, just minus 40 years’ experience.”Ms. Greer added that Mr. Patel had a heavy lift “to convince people he’s not just another young Obama upstart who thinks they are entitled to cut ahead of the queue.”Ms. Maloney and Mr. Nadler, flanking Gov. Kathy Hochul, were pushed into the same district after a court-ordered redistricting process.Anna Watts for The New York TimesMr. Nadler and Ms. Maloney appear torn between trying to ignore and to eviscerate Mr. Patel. They have dismissed his approach as ageist and warned that the city would suffer if it replaces two senior members with someone they charge has spent more time running for Congress than accomplishing anything of substance. “Most people do not go with that sort of ageism, most people look at people’s records,” Mr. Nadler, 75, said in May, not long after allies of both incumbents quietly tried to steer Mr. Patel to run in a neighboring district.Ms. Maloney recently told The West Side Rag that there was too much at stake for “on-the-job training” and accused Mr. Patel of “bigotry and lack of experience in dealing with critical issues I have dealt with my entire career.”In an interview over coffee (iced with Splenda, no milk) at an upscale cafe (Daily Provisions, neither Starbucks nor hipster), Mr. Patel insisted he was not worried about the institutional support lining up against him, nor his opponents’ critiques.He accused Ms. Maloney of using her perch in Congress to give oxygen to anti-vaccine activists (she says she supports vaccination) and knocked Mr. Nadler for taking corporate campaign funds.“Man, if you think people vote anymore on endorsements and other political leaders telling you who to vote for, then you’re missing the point,” he said.He showed up to greet voters in Chelsea on a Citi Bike, whipped out his iPhone to show off the average of seven miles a day he traverses on foot, and discussed his plans to start bar crawl canvassing, complete with coasters with his face on it. (He drew blowback for using the dating app Tinder to contact potential supporters in 2018.)His policy proposals skew technocratic, built around what Mr. Patel calls “the Abundant Society,” a plan for federal investments in education, child care, manufacturing and research.Mr. Patel came within four percentage points of upsetting Ms. Maloney in the 2020 primary.Sara Naomi Lewkowicz for The New York TimesThe son of Indian immigrants, he lived above the family bodega in Bloomfield, N.J., where 13 people crammed in a one-bedroom apartment. The family moved to Indiana when he was 6 and bought its first motel.Mr. Patel tends to say less about how the business grew into a multimillion-dollar development and hotel management operation that made the family rich, spawned labor complaints and helped him finance a pricey East Village apartment and, until recently, a house in the Hamptons.In a city where politicians often rise through local office or activism, Mr. Patel dabbled in different lines of work: He helped the family business, including during the coronavirus pandemic; staffed Mr. Obama’s campaigns and White House travel; and taught business classes at N.Y.U.Mr. Patel would be the first Indian American from New York in Congress, and his campaign has drawn support from South Asians across the country. Indian American Impact, a national group, said it would run a WhatsApp messaging program to try to drive up turnout among the district’s small slice of South Asians. (Another Indian American, Ashmi Sheth, is also running.)“Democrats can’t just repackage the status quo and sell it back to voters as different when, in reality, people are looking for a clean break,” said Neil Makhija, the group’s leader.Across the district, though, responses to Mr. Patel’s overtures were more mixed.“Soon, when Nadler retires, then I’ll vote for you,” Roz Paaswell, 83, told him as he approached with a flier on the Upper West Side. “You’ve going to have a place in the city and in politics, but not in this seat.”Later, Ms. Paaswell heaped praise on Mr. Nadler and said she had never missed a vote. “He has seniority. He has clout. I love him,” she said.Vanessa Chen, 35, was equally blunt as she walked laps during her lunch break a few days later around Stuyvesant Town, one of the largest voting blocs in the district, just a stone’s throw from Mr. Patel’s apartment.“We just need new blood,” said Ms. Chen, a software engineer. “The Boomers are going. They don’t know how the new world works.”But does she plan to vote in August?“Probably,” she laughed, adding that she had not been aware of the primary date until a reporter informed her.Susan C. Beachy More

    • 125 Shares149 Views

      in Elections

      Joe Biden es muy viejo para ser presidente de nuevo

      by

      No puedo evitar sentir pena por Joe Biden. Durante la mayor parte de su vida ha querido ser presidente, y se postuló por primera vez hace 34 años. Si su hijo Beau no hubiera muerto en 2015, Biden podría haber entrado a las primarias demócratas: como vicepresidente, habría sido un favorito y quizás habría vencido a Donald Trump.Cuando finalmente llegó al cargo que anhelaba, su mejor momento ya había pasado. Trump había dejado Estados Unidos en ruinas, sus instituciones colapsadas, gran parte de la población presa de ideas delirantes iracundas y millones de personas traumatizadas por la pandemia. Biden fue elegido para devolver una normalidad que ahora parece haberse ido para siempre.Muchas de las crisis que están afectando los índices de aprobación de Biden no son su culpa. Si una tasa de inflación del 8,6 por ciento fuera consecuencia de sus políticas, entonces es difícil entender por qué la tasa en el Reino Unido es aún más alta, del 9,1 por ciento, o por qué es del 7,9 por ciento en Alemania. El compromiso terco con el obstruccionismo de los senadores Joe Manchin y Kyrsten Sinema hace que la mayoría de las leyes sean imposibles de aprobar. Incluso si Biden tuviera una mayor propensión al activismo, no hay mucho que él pueda hacer sobre la revocación cruel de la Corte Suprema a Roe contra Wade o el ritmo cada vez mayor de las masacres que marcan el paso de la vida estadounidense.Sin embargo, espero que no vuelva a contender, porque es demasiado viejo.Ahora bien, yo no quería que Biden fuera el candidato demócrata en 2020, en parte por razones ideológicas, pero aún más porque lucía demasiado agotado y desenfocado. Pero, en retrospectiva, por la forma en la que los republicanos superaron las expectativas, es posible que Biden haya sido el único de los principales candidatos que podría haber vencido a Trump; los votantes no mostraron interés por un cambio progresista radical.Así que reconozco que podría estar equivocada ahora, cuando hago un argumento similar. Pero el cargo presidencial envejece incluso a los jóvenes, y Biden está lejos de ser joven, y un país con tantos problemas como el nuestro necesita un líder lo suficientemente vigoroso para inspirar confianza.El 64 por ciento de los demócratas quiere un candidato presidencial diferente en 2024, descubrió una encuesta reciente de The New York Times/Siena College. Esos demócratas citan la edad de Biden más que cualquier otro factor, aunque el desempeño laboral les sigue de cerca. No es una preocupación que sorprenda. Biden siempre ha sido propenso a las meteduras de pata y los malapropismos, pero al escucharlo hablar ahora hay una incertidumbre dolorosa, es como ver a alguien que se tambalea en la cuerda floja. (Algunos de sus errores pueden explicarse por el tartamudeo que superó cuando era niño, pero no todos). Su equipo a menudo parece mantenerlo fuera del ojo público. El Times informó que ha participado “en menos de la mitad de las conferencias de prensa o entrevistas que sus predecesores recientes”.Sin duda hay algo bueno en un presidente que no atormenta al país con una sed vampírica de atención. Y, según la mayoría de los reportes, Biden sigue siendo agudo y está comprometido con las labores fuera de los reflectores de su oficina. Pero al desvanecerse tanto en el fondo, ha perdido la posibilidad de fijar la agenda pública.No puede darle un giro a una mala economía, pero sí puede resaltar sus puntos más luminosos, como una tasa de desempleo del 3,6 por ciento. Los estadounidenses simpatizan de manera abrumadora con Ucrania, y con un mensaje lo suficientemente conmovedor, algunos podrían estar dispuestos a considerar el malestar que producen los altos precios de la gasolina como el costo de enfrentarse a Vladimir Putin. Pero para motivarlos no es suficiente que su gobierno repita la frase “el aumento de precios de Putin”. Como todos, la Casa Blanca sabía por anticipado de la intención de la Corte Suprema de anular Roe contra Wade, pero, por alguna razón, cuando sucedió finalmente, no estaba lista con una orden ejecutiva y un bombardeo de relaciones públicas.Aquí hay un problema que va más allá de la escasez de discursos presidenciales y apariciones en los medios, o incluso del propio Biden. Nos gobierna una gerontocracia. Biden tiene 79 años. La presidenta de la Cámara de Representantes, Nancy Pelosi, tiene 82. El líder de la mayoría de la Cámara de Representantes, Steny Hoyer, tiene 83. El líder de la mayoría del Senado, Chuck Schumer, tiene 71. A menudo no está claro si entienden lo roto que está Estados Unidos.Hicieron sus carreras en instituciones que, más o menos, funcionaban, y parecen creer que volverán a funcionar. Dan la impresión de considerar que este momento —en el que los engranajes del gobierno se han estancado y un partido trama contra la democracia abiertamente— es como un interregno en lugar de como un punto de inflexión. Los críticos demócratas de Biden provienen de diferentes espacios del espectro político: algunos están enfurecidos por su centrismo, otros preocupados por su falta de energía. Lo que une a la mayoría de ellos es una necesidad desesperada por líderes que muestren sentido de urgencia e ingenio.La edad de Biden presenta una oportunidad: puede hacerse a un lado sin tener que considerarlo un fracaso. No hay vergüenza en no postularse a la presidencia a los 80 años. Salió del semiretiro para salvar a Estados Unidos de un segundo mandato de Trump, y solo por eso todos tenemos una gran deuda con él. Pero ahora necesitamos a alguien que pueda enfrentarse a las fuerzas aún en movimiento del trumpismo.Hay muchas posibilidades: si los índices de aprobación de la vicepresidenta Kamala Harris siguen bajas, los demócratas tienen varios gobernadores y senadores carismáticos a los que pueden recurrir. Durante la campaña de 2020, Biden dijo que quería ser un “puente” para una nueva generación de demócratas. Pronto llegará el momento de cruzarlo.Michelle Goldberg es columnista de Opinión desde 2017. Es autora de varios libros sobre política, religión y derechos de las mujeres, y formó parte de un equipo que ganó un Pulitzer al servicio público en 2018 por informar sobre acoso sexual en el trabajo. @michelleinbklyn More

    • 150 Shares199 Views

      in Elections

      Poll Shows Tight Race for Control of Congress as Class Divide Widens

      by

      With President Biden’s approval rating mired in the 30s and with nearly 80 percent of voters saying the country is heading in the wrong direction, all the ingredients seem to be in place for a Republican sweep in the November midterm elections.But Democrats and Republicans begin the campaign in a surprisingly close race for control of Congress, according to the first New York Times/Siena College survey of the cycle. More

    • 88 Shares149 Views

      in Elections

      Gerrymandered Redistricting Maps Have Become the Norm

      by

      The downtown of Denton, Texas, a city of about 150,000 people and two large universities just north of Dallas, exudes the energy of a fast-growing place with a sizable student population: There’s a vibrant independent music scene, museums and public art exhibits, beer gardens, a surfeit of upscale dining options, a weekly queer variety show. The city is also racially and ethnically diverse: More than 45 percent of residents identify as Latino, Black, Asian or multiracial. There aren’t too many places in Texas where you can encounter Muslim students praying on a busy downtown sidewalk, but Denton is one of them.Lindsey Wilkes, left, and Kimberlyn Spain with friends from the Muslim Student Association near the University of North Texas.Drive about seven hours northwest of Denton’s city center and you hit Texline, a flat, treeless square of a town tucked in the corner of the state on the New Mexico border. Cow pastures and wind turbines seem to stretch to the horizon. Texline’s downtown has a couple diners, a gas station, a hardware store and not much else; its largely white population is roughly 460 people and shrinking.It would be hard to pick two places more different from one another than Denton and Texline — and yet thanks to the latest round of gerrymandering by Texas’ Republican-dominated Legislature, both are now part of the same congressional district: the 13th, represented by one man, Ronny Jackson. Mr. Jackson, the former White House physician, ran for his seat in 2020 as a hard-right Republican. It turned out to be a good fit for Texas-13, where he won with almost 80 percent of the vote.Denton’s bustling downtown square is a gathering point for the city’s diverse population.The city’s soccer facilities provide meeting grounds for families from all walks of life.Enjoying live music is a multigenerational undertaking, as the Rojas family did one afternoon at a performance of Latin funk at Harvest House.This was before the 2020 census was completed and Congress reapportioned, which gave the Texas delegation two more seats for its growing population, for a total of 38. State Republicans, who control the governor’s office and both houses of the Legislature, were free to redraw their district lines pretty much however they pleased. They used that power primarily to tighten their grip on existing Republican seats rather than create new ones, as they had in the 2010 cycle. In the process, they managed to squelch the political voice of many nonwhite Texans, who accounted for 95 percent of the state’s growth over the last decade yet got not a single new district that would give them the opportunity to elect a representative of their choice.Marsha Keffer, a volunteer and precinct chair, looking over district maps at the the Denton County Democratic Party headquarters.A development of multistory homes under construction in Denton.Denton offers a good example of how this played out. Under the old maps, downtown Denton, where the universities lie, was part of the 26th District — a Republican-majority district, but considerably more competitive than the 13th. If Texas politics continue to move left as they have in recent years, the 26th District could have become a tossup. The liberal residents of Denton could have had the chance to elect to Congress a representative of their choosing.Now that the downtown has been absorbed into the 13th District and yoked to the conservative Texas panhandle, however, they might as well be invisible. Even with the addition of all those younger and more liberal voters, the 13th remains a right-wing fortress, with a 45-point Republican lean, according to an analysis by the website FiveThirtyEight. (The redrawn 26th District, meanwhile, will likely become a few points more Republican in the absence of Denton’s downtown.)Families enjoyed a custom ride after attending a Spanish-language church service in Krum, a town in Denton County in the newly redrawn 13th Congressional District.Recycled Books, a used book, record, CD and video game store, fills several floors of an old opera house in the middle of Denton Square.This is the harm of partisan gerrymanders: Partisan politicians draw lines in order to distribute their voters more efficiently, ensuring they can win the most seats with the fewest votes. They shore up their strongholds and help eliminate any meaningful electoral competition. It’s the opposite of how representative democracy is supposed to work.A music and film festival drew Chelsey Danielle, left, and Stefanie Lazcano to the dance floor.Kinsey Davenport getting inked at Smilin’ Rick’s tattoo shop in Denton.The kitchen staff at Boca 31, an upscale Latin street-food restaurant, during a Saturday afternoon rush.Ross Sylvester, right, and Chuck Swartwood joined a crew of volunteers at a food distribution site run by First Refuge in Denton.How is it supposed to work? Politicians are elected freely by voters, and they serve at the pleasure of those voters, who can throw them out if they believe they aren’t doing a good job. Partisan gerrymanders upend that process. Politicians redraw lines to win their seats regardless of whether most voters want them to; in closely fought states like Wisconsin and North Carolina, Republicans drew themselves into control of the legislatures even when Democrats won a majority of votes statewide.When these gerrymanders become the norm, as they have in the absence of meaningful checks, they silence the voices of millions of Americans, leading people to believe they have little or no power to choose their representatives. This helps increase the influence of the political extremes. It makes bipartisan compromise all but impossible and creates a vicious circle in which the most moderate candidates are the least likely to run or be elected.A music class for infants and toddlers at the Explorium, a children’s museum and play and education center in Denton.Texas Republicans have been especially ruthless at playing this game, but they’re far from alone. Their counterparts in Wisconsin, North Carolina, Florida, Ohio, Pennsylvania and Kansas have taken similar approaches to stack the deck against Democrats. Democrats have likewise gone on offense in states where they control mapmaking, such as in Illinois and Oregon, where lawmakers drew maps for 2022 that effectively erased swathes of Republicans.After a virtual home wedding for family members in Moldova and Mexico, Matt Lisovoy and Diana Lisovaya celebrated with ice cream on the square.Diya Craft and her punk-fusion band, Mutha Falcon, playing at a nonprofit social club featuring local bands and craft beers.Iglesia Sobre la Roca serves a varied population from Mexico and Central America with Spanish-language services.The Austin-based rock band Holy Death Trio at Andy’s Bar on the square.The Supreme Court had an opportunity in 2019 to outlaw the worst of this behavior, but it refused to, claiming it had neither the authority nor any clear standards to stop gerrymanders that “reasonably seem unjust.” This was nonsense; lower federal courts and state courts have had no problem coming up with workable standards for years. Court intervention is essential, because voters essentially have no other way of unrigging the system. But the Supreme Court’s conservative majority stuck its head in the sand, giving free rein to the worst impulses of a hyperpolarized society.As Justice Elena Kagan wrote in dissent: “Of all times to abandon the court’s duty to declare the law, this was not the one. The practices challenged in these cases imperil our system of government. Part of the court’s role in that system is to defend its foundations. None is more important than free and fair elections.”The view in Texline, Texas, on the far western edge of the 13th Congressional District.The Supreme Court isn’t the only institution to shirk its responsibility to make maps fairer. Congress has the constitutional authority to set standards for federal elections, but Republicans have repeatedly blocked efforts by Democrats to require independent redistricting commissions. It doesn’t help matters that most Americans still don’t understand what redistricting is or how it works.The Amarillo office of Representative Ronny Jackson is on the far west side of the district.Visitors to Amarillo can find an astonishing selection of cowboy boots and other western wear at Cavender’s.They can also take in a film at the American Quarter Horse Foundation Hall of Fame and Museum.Left to their own devices, states are doing what they can. More than a dozen have created some type of redistricting commission, but the details matter greatly. Some commissions, like California’s and Michigan’s, are genuinely independent — composed of voters rather than lawmakers, and as a result these states have fairer maps.Isaiah Reed mastering his trampoline basketball skills in his backyard in Texline.Commissions in some other states are more vulnerable to partisan influence because they have no binding authority. In New York, the commission plays only an advisory role, so it was no surprise when Democrats in power quickly took over the process and redrew district lines to ensure that 22 of the state’s 26 seats would be won by their party. The state’s top court struck the Democratic maps down for violating a 2014 amendment to the State Constitution barring partisan gerrymanders — a good decision in a vacuum, perhaps, but the result is more chaos and infighting, because the final maps are forcing several top Democratic lawmakers to face off against one another. Meanwhile in Ohio, where the State Constitution has a similar provision barring partisan gerrymanders, the State Supreme Court repeatedly invalidated Republican-drawn gerrymanders for being unfairly biased, but Republicans have managed to ignore those rulings, and so will end up with the maps they want, at least for this cycle.A truck driver making a pit stop in Conway, Texas, which is in the 13th District.Palo Duro Canyon State Park, home to the second-largest canyon in the United States, is part of the arid landscape of northwestern Texas.Bushland, a suburb of Amarillo.Drew Merritt’s “The Chase” in downtown Amarillo.The patchwork of litigation and different outcomes around the country only strengthens the case for a national standard, which is nowhere in sight. It’s a maddening situation with no apparent solution — until you widen the lens and look at the larger structure of American government. When you do, it becomes clear that extreme partisan gerrymandering is more a symptom than a cause of democratic breakdown. The bigger problem is that the way we designed our system of political representation incentivizes the worst and most extreme elements of our politics.On the federal level, at least, there are clear solutions that Congress could adopt tomorrow if it had the will to do so.The 190-foot-tall cross in Groom, Texas, is among the largest in the country.First, expand the House of Representatives. As The Times’s editorial board explained in 2018, the House’s membership, 435, is far too small for America in the 21st century. It reached its current size in 1911, when the country had fewer than one-third as many people as it does today, and the national budget was a tiny fraction of its current size. In 1911, each representative had an average of 211,000 constituents — already far more than the founders had envisioned. Today that number is more than 750,000. It is virtually impossible for one person, Ronny Jackson or anyone else, to accurately represent the range of political interests in a district of that size.In the Texas Panhandle, which lies almost entirely in the 13th District, wind turbines dot the landscape, and cattle outnumber voters.The region is littered with desolate downtowns like Shamrock, where a stray cat was among the few signs of life.On the far northwestern edge of the district, in Texline, Carlos Mendoza tossed a few pitches to his neighbor Sebastian Reed. They live about 450 miles from the opposite corner of the district.Why are we still stuck with a House of Representatives from the turn of the last century? The founders certainly didn’t want it that way; the original First Amendment to the Constitution, which Congress proposed in 1789, would have permanently tied the size of the House to the nation’s population; the amendment fell one state short of ratification.Still, as the country grew Congress kept adding seats after every decennial census, almost without fail. After 1911, that process was obstructed by rural and Southern lawmakers intent on stopping the shift in political power to the Northern cities, where populations were exploding. In 1929, Congress passed a law that locked the House size at 435 seats and created an algorithm for reapportioning them in the future.A bigger House is necessary to more accurately reflect American politics and to bring the United States back in line with other advanced democracies. But on its own it wouldn’t solve our failure of representation. The larger culprit is our winner-take-all elections: From the presidency down, American electoral politics gives 100 percent of the spoils to one side and zero to the other — a bad formula for compromise at any time, and especially dangerous when the country is as polarized as it is today. But at least some of that polarization can be attributed to the manner in which we choose our representatives.Texline is at one end of the 13th District.Tattoos of a musician in Denton.In Congress, districts are represented by a single person, which is harmful in two ways: First, it’s hard to see how one person can adequately represent three-quarters of a million people. Second, even though representatives are supposed to look out for all their constituents, the reality of our politics means most people who didn’t vote for the winner will feel unrepresented entirely.The solution: proportional multimember districts. When districts are larger and contain three or even five members, they can more accurately capture the true shape of the electorate and let everyone’s voice be heard. And if the candidates are chosen through ranked-choice voting, then Republicans, Democrats and even third parties can win representation in Congress in rough proportion to their vote share. It’s no longer a zero-sum game that leaves out millions of Americans.A farm in Texline at the New Mexico border. The founders were comfortable with multimember districts, just as they were with a House of Representatives that kept expanding. In fact, such districts were common in the early years of the Republic, but Congress outlawed them at the federal level, most recently in 1967, partly out of a concern that Southern lawmakers were using them to entrench white political power — a problem that ranked-choice voting would solve.These reforms may sound technical, but they are central to saving representative democracy in America.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

    • 113 Shares159 Views

      in Elections

      Joe Biden Is Too Old to Be President Again

      by

      I can’t help feeling very sorry for Joe Biden. He’s wanted to be president for most of his life, first running 34 years ago. Had his son Beau not died in 2015, Biden might have entered the Democratic primary then; as vice president he would have been a favorite and likely would have beaten Donald Trump.By the time he finally achieved the office he longed for, he was far past his prime. Trump had left the country in ruins, its institutions collapsing, much of the population gripped by furious delusions, and millions traumatized by the pandemic. Biden was elected to bring back a normality that now appears to be gone for good.Many of the crises driving down Biden’s approval numbers are not his fault. If an 8.6 percent inflation rate were due to his policies, then it’s hard to see why the rate is even higher in Britain, at 9.1 percent, or why it’s 7.9 percent in Germany. The mulish attachment to the filibuster by Senators Joe Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema makes most legislation impossible. Even if Biden had more activist inclinations, there’s not much he could do about the Supreme Court’s cruel reversal of Roe v. Wade or the increasing tempo of massacres that punctuate American life.Nevertheless, I hope he doesn’t run again, because he’s too old.Now, I didn’t want Biden to be the Democratic nominee in 2020, partly for ideological reasons but even more because he seemed too worn-out and unfocused. In retrospect, however, given the way Republicans outperformed expectations, Biden may have been the only one of the major candidates who could have beaten Trump; voters showed no appetite for sweeping progressive change.So I recognize that I could be wrong when I make a similar argument today. But the presidency ages even young men, and Biden is far from young; a country in as much trouble as ours needs a leader vigorous enough to inspire confidence.As a recent New York Times/Siena College poll found, 64 percent of Democrats want a different presidential nominee in 2024. Those Democrats cite Biden’s age more than any other factor, though job performance is close behind. Their concern isn’t surprising. Biden has always been given to gaffes and malapropisms, but there is a painful suspense in watching him speak now, like seeing someone wobble on a tightrope. (Some of his misspeaking can be explained by the stutter he overcame as a child, but not all.) His staff often seems to be keeping him out of view; as The Times reported, he’s participated “in fewer than half as many news conferences or interviews as recent predecessors.”Certainly, there’s something nice about a president who doesn’t torment the country with his vampiric thirst for attention. And by most accounts, Biden is still sharp and engaged in performing the behind-the-scenes duties of his office. But by receding so far into the background, he forfeits the ability to set the public agenda.You can’t spin away a bad economy, but you can draw attention to its bright spots, like a 3.6 percent unemployment rate. Americans overwhelmingly sympathize with Ukraine, and with a rousing enough message, some might be willing to accept the pain of high gas prices as the cost of standing up to Vladimir Putin. To rally them, however, it’s not enough for the administration to repeat the phrase “Putin’s price hike.” Like the rest of us, the White House had ample notice of the Supreme Court’s intention to overturn Roe v. Wade, but it somehow wasn’t ready with an immediate executive order and public relations blitz.There’s a problem here that goes beyond a shortage of presidential speeches and media appearances, or even Biden himself. We are ruled by a gerontocracy. Biden is 79. Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi is 82. The House majority leader, Steny Hoyer, is 83. The Senate majority leader, Chuck Schumer, is 71. Often, it’s not clear if they grasp how broken this country is.They built their careers in institutions that worked, more or less, and they seem to expect them to start working again. They give every impression of seeing this moment, when the gears of government have seized and one party openly schemes against democracy, as an interregnum rather than a tipping point. Biden’s Democratic critics come from different places on the political spectrum — some are infuriated by his centrism, others worried by his listlessness. What links most of them is desperation for leaders who show urgency and ingenuity.If there’s one consolation in Biden’s age, it’s that he can step aside without conceding failure. There’s no shame in not running for president in your 80s. He emerged from semiretirement to save the country from a second Trump term, and for that we all owe him a great debt. But now we need someone who can stand up to the still-roiling forces of Trumpism.There are plenty of possibilities: If Vice President Kamala Harris’s approval ratings remain underwater, Democrats have a number of charismatic governors and senators they can turn to. Biden said, during the 2020 campaign, that he wanted to be a “bridge” to a new generation of Democrats. Soon it will be time to cross it.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

    • 138 Shares169 Views

      in Elections

      Biden’s Approval Hits 33 Percent; Democrats Want 2024 Options, Poll Shows

      by

      President Biden is facing an alarming level of doubt from inside his own party, with 64 percent of Democratic voters saying they would prefer a new standard-bearer in the 2024 presidential campaign, according to a New York Times/Siena College poll, as voters nationwide have soured on his leadership, giving him a meager 33 percent job-approval rating.Widespread concerns about the economy and inflation have helped turn the national mood decidedly dark, both on Mr. Biden and the trajectory of the nation. More than three-quarters of registered voters see the United States moving in the wrong direction, a pervasive sense of pessimism that spans every corner of the country, every age range and racial group, cities, suburbs and rural areas, as well as both political parties.Only 13 percent of American voters said the nation was on the right track — the lowest point in Times polling since the depths of the financial crisis more than a decade ago.Voters on the Direction of the CountryDo you think the United States is on the right track, or is it headed in the wrong direction?

      Note: Polls prior to 2020 are Times/CBS surveys of U.S. adults, with the wording “Do you feel things in this country are generally going in the right direction or do you feel things have pretty seriously gotten off on the wrong track?”

      Based on a New York Times/Siena College poll of 849 registered voters in the United States from July 5-7, 2022.By Marco HernandezFor Mr. Biden, that bleak national outlook has pushed his job approval rating to a perilously low point. Republican opposition is predictably overwhelming, but more than two-thirds of independents also now disapprove of the president’s performance, and nearly half disapprove strongly. Among fellow Democrats his approval rating stands at 70 percent, a relatively low figure for a president, especially heading into the 2022 midterms when Mr. Biden needs to rally Democrats to the polls to maintain control of Congress.In a sign of deep vulnerability and of unease among what is supposed to be his political base, only 26 percent of Democratic voters said the party should renominate him in 2024.Mr. Biden has said repeatedly that he intends to run for re-election in 2024. At 79, he is already the oldest president in American history, and concerns about his age ranked at the top of the list for Democratic voters who want the party to find an alternative.The backlash against Mr. Biden and desire to move in a new direction were particularly acute among younger voters. In the survey, 94 percent of Democrats under the age of 30 said they would prefer a different presidential nominee.Nicole Farrier, a 38-year-old preschool teacher in Michigan, is frustrated by the rising cost of living.Elaine Cromie for The New York Times“I’m just going to come out and say it: I want younger blood,” said Nicole Farrier, a 38-year-old preschool teacher in East Tawas, a small town in northern Michigan. “I am so tired of all old people running our country. I don’t want someone knocking on death’s door.”The Biden PresidencyWith midterm elections looming, here’s where President Biden stands.Struggling to Inspire: At a time of political tumult and economic distress, President Biden has appeared less engaged than Democrats had hoped.Low Approval Rating: For Mr. Biden, a pervasive sense of pessimism among voters has pushed his approval rating to a perilously low point.Questions About 2024: Mr. Biden has said he plans to run for a second term, but at 79, his age has become an uncomfortable issue.Rallying Allies: Faced with Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, Mr. Biden has set out to bolster the West and outline a more muscular NATO.Staff Changes: An increasing number of West Wing departures has added to the sense of frustration inside the Biden White House.Ms. Farrier, a Democrat who voted for Mr. Biden in 2020, said she had hoped he might have been able to do more to heal the nation’s divisions, but now, as a single mother, she is preoccupied with what she described as crippling increases in her cost of living. “I went from living a comfortable lifestyle to I can’t afford anything anymore,” she said.Democrats’ Reasons for a Different CandidateWhat’s the most important reason you would prefer someone other than Joe Biden to be the Democratic Party’s 2024 presidential nominee?

      Asked of 191 respondents who said they planned to vote in the 2024 Democratic primary and who preferred a candidate other than Joe Biden in a New York Times/Siena College poll from July 5-7, 2022.By The New York TimesJobs and the economy were the most important problem facing the country according to 20 percent of voters, with inflation and the cost of living (15 percent) close behind as prices are rising at the fastest rate in a generation. One in 10 voters named the state of American democracy and political division as the most pressing issue, about the same share who named gun policies, after several high-profile mass shootings.More than 75 percent of voters in the poll said the economy was “extremely important” to them. And yet only 1 percent rated economic conditions as excellent. Among those who are typically working age — voters 18 to 64 years old — only 6 percent said the economy was good or excellent, while 93 percent rated it poor or only fair.The White House has tried to trumpet strong job growth, including on Friday when Mr. Biden declared that he had overseen “the fastest and strongest jobs recovery in American history.” But the Times/Siena poll showed a vast disconnect between those boasts, and the strength of some economic indicators, and the financial reality that most Americans feel they are confronting.“We used to spend $200 a week just going out to have fun, or going and buying extra groceries if we needed it, and now we can’t even do that,” said Kelly King, a former factory worker in Greensburg, Ind., who is currently sidelined because of a back injury. “We’re barely able to buy what we need.”Ms. King, 38, said she didn’t know if Mr. Biden was necessarily to blame for the spiking prices of gas and groceries but felt he should be doing more to help. “I feel like he hasn’t really spoken much about it,” Ms. King said. “He hasn’t done what I think he’s capable of doing as president to help the American people. As a Democrat, I figured he would really be on our side and put us back on the right track. And I just feel like he’s not.”Now, she said, she is hoping Republicans take over Congress in November to course-correct.One glimmer of good news for Mr. Biden is that the survey showed him with a narrow edge in a hypothetical rematch in 2024 with former President Donald J. Trump: 44 percent to 41 percent.The result is a reminder of one of Mr. Biden’s favorite aphorisms: “Don’t compare me to the Almighty, compare me to the alternative.” The poll showed that Democratic misgivings about Mr. Biden seemed to mostly melt away when presented with a choice between him and Mr. Trump: 92 percent of Democrats said they would stick with Mr. Biden.Randain Wright, a truck driver, says he talks frequently with friends about Mr. Biden’s shortcomings.Bryan Anselm for The New York TimesRandain Wright, a 41-year-old truck driver in Ocean Township, N.J., is typical of these voters. He said he talked frequently with friends about Mr. Biden’s shortcomings. “He’s just not aggressive enough in getting his agenda done,” Mr. Wright lamented. In contrast, he said, “Trump wasn’t afraid to get his people in line.”But while he would prefer a different nominee in 2024, Mr. Wright said he still wouldn’t consider voting Republican in 2024 if faced with a Biden-Trump rematch.On the whole, voters appeared to like Mr. Biden more than they like his performance as president, with 39 percent saying they have a favorable impression of him — six percentage points higher than his job approval.In saying they wanted a different nominee in 2024, Democrats cited a variety of reasons, with the most in an open-ended question citing his age (33 percent), followed closely by unhappiness with how he is doing the job. About one in eight Democrats just said that they wanted someone new, and one in 10 said he was not progressive enough. Smaller fractions expressed doubts about his ability to win and his mental acuity.The Times/Siena survey of 849 registered voters nationwide was conducted from July 5 to 7, in the aftermath of the Supreme Court’s June 24 decision to overturn Roe v. Wade, eliminating the constitutional right to an abortion, which had been protected for half a century. The ruling sent Democrats into the streets and unleashed an outpouring of political contributions.Typically, voters aligned with the party in power — Democrats now hold the House, the Senate and the White House — are more upbeat about the nation’s direction. But only 27 percent of Democrats saw the country as on the right track. And with the fall of Roe, there was a notable gender gap among Democrats: Only 20 percent of Democratic women said the country was moving in the right direction, compared with 39 percent of Democratic men.Overall, abortion rated as the most important issue for 5 percent of voters: 1 percent of men, 9 percent of women.Gun policies, following mass shootings in Buffalo, Uvalde, Tex., and elsewhere, and the Supreme Court’s June 23 ruling striking down a New York law that placed strict limits on carrying guns outside the home, were ranked as the top issue by 10 percent of voters — far higher than has been typical of nationwide polls in recent years. The issue was of even greater importance to Black and Hispanic voters, ranking roughly the same as inflation and the cost of living, the survey found.The coronavirus pandemic, which so thoroughly disrupted life at the end of the Trump administration and over the first year of Mr. Biden’s presidency, has largely receded from voters’ minds, the survey found. In an open-ended question, fewer than one percent of voters named the virus as the nation’s most important problem.When Mr. Biden won in 2020, he made a point of trying to make inroads among working-class white voters who had abandoned the Democratic Party in droves in the Trump era. But whatever crossover appeal Mr. Biden once had appears diminished. His job approval rating among white voters without college degrees was a stark 20 percent.John Waldron, a registered Republican in Schenectady, N.Y., regrets voting for Mr. Biden.Richard Beaven for The New York TimesJohn Waldron, a 69-year-old registered Republican and retired machinist in Schenectady, N.Y., voted for Mr. Biden in 2020. Today, he said, he regrets it and plans to vote Republican in 2024. “I thought he was going to do something for this country, but now he’s doing nothing,” Mr. Waldron said.Like others, he expressed worries about Mr. Biden’s age and verbal flubs. On Friday, a clip of Mr. Biden at an event announcing an executive order on abortion went viral when he stumbled into saying “terminate the presidency” instead of “pregnancy,” for instance.“You ever see him on TV?” Mr. Waldron said, comparing the president to zombies. “That’s what he looks like.”Mr. Biden’s base, in 2020 and now, remains Black voters. They delivered the president a 62 percent job-approval rating — higher marks than any other race or ethnicity, age group or education level. But even among that constituency, there are serious signs of weakening. On the question of renominating Mr. Biden in 2024, slightly more Black Democratic voters said they wanted a different candidate than said they preferred Mr. Biden.“Anybody could be doing a better job than what they’re doing right now,” said Clifton Heard, a 44-year-old maintenance specialist in Foley, Ala.An independent, he said he voted for Mr. Biden in 2020 but is disillusioned over the state of the economy and the spiraling price of gas, and is now reconsidering Mr. Trump.“I understand that they’ve got a tough job,” he said of Mr. Biden’s administration. “He wasn’t prepared to do the job.”The Times/Siena nationwide survey was conducted by telephone using live operators. The margin of sampling error is plus or minus 4.1 percentage points. Cross-tabs and methodology are available here.Alyce McFadden contributed reporting. More

    • 50 Shares169 Views

      in Elections

      We Are Political Hostages

      by

      One of our greatest errors as a country has been our nonstop campaign to convince generations of voters that elections are about freedom of choice.This may be true if you are of a class not historically oppressed by the state. Many white people, particularly white men, fall into this category. They have the ability — the power — to be swing voters, knowing that their basic civil rights are not on the line. And many of them have invented new dangers — like threats to the Second Amendment — while pretending to defend their rights against those threats.In November of 2019, Nate Cohn in The Times analyzed a number of surveys of swing-state voters and looked specifically at the “persuadable pool,” the 15 percent of voters in the battleground states who were undecided and still thinking of voting for Donald Trump or a Democrat.He found, “As a group they are 57 percent male and 72 percent white.”For most other people, “freedom of choice” in elections is an illusion. We are captives of the two-party system. We are political hostages.Voters subject to oppression have only two choices: the benevolent captors (Democrats) or the cruel captors (Republicans).Democrats will work for your freedom, but not to the extent that it endangers their power. They have to work against Republicans, who, now more than at any other time in recent memory, seem hellbent on establishing a new age of severe restrictions under the banner of states’ rights.The choice between the two is not a choice at all. Voting for Democrats is the only option, not because they have been fully responsive to your pleading, but because they are the only bulwark against disaster.This is not a lesser-of-two-evils view but a light-switch view: the choice is light — no matter how dim — or darkness.There was some waffling about Hillary Clinton in 2016, and that gave us Donald Trump, who gave us a radical, theocratic Supreme Court, which has given us dozens of deeply regressive decisions: overturning Roe v. Wade, restricting the ability to enforce Miranda rights, tying the country’s hands in its fight against climate change.Now, we live in a kind of captivity, and captivity, of any sort, is unconscionable to some. So, they fly against it. Over the past year, progressives have demanded action from Democrats, demanded that promises be kept, demanded that more of a fight be waged. But, in the end, this is futile. What’s worse, it often provides ammunition to cruel captors who are waiting for a chance to replace benevolent ones.There are periods on the electoral calendar in which Democratic voters can more forcefully challenge Democratic politicians to stay true to their ideals while doing the least amount of damage to their electoral chances: the primary season when Democrats are choosing among possible Democratic candidates, and in the early days of a presidential term.But once those windows close, the time for complaining ends. One must enter the defense phase.This is all incredibly unsatisfying, and yet it is the reality that voters must accept. We have to dispense with the mythology of elections and come around to the reality of them.That often means swallowing a bitter pill, coming to terms with the fact that our priorities are not always aligned with those of the politicians we chose to represent us.Politicians in a hyper-politicized, two-party system understand that winning and holding their seats is the first order of business. With a position in power or a vote in Congress, they can get things done, even if their accomplishments are limited in scope. But if they lose seats, nothing gets done. In fact, it is very likely that something deeply harmful could happen.In that equation, simply trying to make progress — even if the effort is weak — has to be sufficient. It is the “has to be” in that sentence that grates against those of us on the quest for full freedom, political and otherwise.This is maddening, I know. It drives me mad. When I see broken promises, when I see existential issues shunted to the back burner, when I see political tiptoeing when there should be stomping, I am enraged by it. It is supremely disappointing. I know that politics are once again winning over the will of the people.But I try to remind myself of what every voter must: This is the system in which we are trapped. We can try to reform that system or at minimum force our leaders to consider radically altering it. Both are noble endeavors, but they are also incredibly hard and, at the very least, not close at hand. In the meantime, we have to work within the current system.Maybe one day there will be a third party or even multiple parties, but that won’t be the case by the next presidential election.This brings me to President Biden: Whatever you think of him and his performance — whether you champion his accomplishment or focus on the areas where he has fallen short — if he chooses to run for re-election, as the White House insists he will, he will be the only option. In that scenario, he becomes a last line of defense. His shortcomings become secondary. Helping to ensure his re-election becomes an act of self preservation.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 and Twitter (@NYTopinion), and Instagram. More

    • 75 Shares119 Views

      in Elections

      Biden and the Increasingly Anxious Democrats

      by

      Michael D. Shear, a longtime White House reporter for The New York Times, talks about recent staff turnover in the administration and frustration around the president.Despite signs that Democrats may be in better shape in the midterms than many expected six months ago, a widespread malaise is setting in within the White House. There is a growing sense that President Biden is not prosecuting a political case against Republicans aggressively enough.I spoke today with Michael D. Shear, a longtime political reporter and Pulitzer Prize winner who has covered the White House for the past 13 years.Shear has seen plenty of drama over that time: He covered all four years of Donald Trump’s presidency, including two impeachment inquiries, and he and Julie Hirschfeld Davis wrote “Border Wars: Inside Trump’s Assault on Immigration.”Our conversation, lightly edited for length and clarity:You wrote this week: “At a moment of broad political tumult and economic distress, Mr. Biden has appeared far less engaged than many of his supporters had hoped. While many Democrats are pleading for a fighter who gives voice to their anger, Mr. Biden has chosen a more passive path — blaming Congress, urging people to vote and avoiding heated rhetorical battles.” What are your sources telling you?The concern among Democrats about the White House, and in particular about President Biden’s political skills, is palpable. The main issue seems to be a performative one. Democrats want Biden to seem tougher, more engaged and more in the moment.It was striking to me that in a week when there were so many big, sweeping issues — Roe v. Wade, inflation, recession fears, mass shootings — you wouldn’t have known it from the president’s schedule. He awarded the Medal of Honor to four Vietnam-era soldiers (a worthy thing, for sure), gave a speech on pensions and then awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom to 17 people.There has been a string of departures and arrivals at the White House lately. Cedric Richmond, the director of the Office of Public Engagement, and Jen Psaki, the press secretary, have left. Kate Bedingfield, the communications director, is departing. Anita Dunn, who was a top aide to both Barack Obama and Biden, is returning from her consulting firm.What’s going on here? Is this connected to a feeling of low morale inside the White House? Or just the usual personnel turmoil that happens inside every administration?I think the turnover in the communications shop is a bit of both.There is burnout in every administration around this time; many of the people who start an administration worked like crazy on the campaign, and they are tired.And Ron Klain, the White House chief of staff, has made it clear to people that if they wanted to leave, they should do it sooner rather than later in an election year. Thus Psaki and Richmond have left recently.The Biden PresidencyWith midterm elections looming, here’s where President Biden stands.Struggling to Inspire: At a time of political tumult and economic distress, President Biden has appeared less engaged than Democrats had hoped.Low Approval Rating: Despite early warnings from his pollster, Mr. Biden’s approval among Americans has reached the lowest level of his presidency.Rallying Allies: Faced with Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, Mr. Biden has set out to bolster the West and outline a more muscular NATO.Staff Changes: An increasing number of West Wing departures has added to the sense of frustration inside the Biden White House.Looking Ahead to 2024: Amid doubts from Democrats, aides say Mr. Biden is irked by persistent questions over his plans to seek re-election.Bedingfield has been working nonstop for Biden since 2015, and I’m told she has been debating when to leave for a while. The fact that Anita Dunn — a veteran communications czar for Democratic presidents — was recently brought back on was the writing on the wall.But having said all that, I do think morale is low right now. The president’s polling numbers are low, the problems are myriad and one of the first places that critics look to place blame is with the communications staff. The problem for this White House is that if predictions come true and Republicans take over in Congress, things will just get bleaker.What do people in and around Biden’s political operation make of all the reporting, including from our colleagues, that shows Trump is weighing the announcement of a 2024 bid earlier than expected?There is no question that the White House is paying close attention to this question.There is a belief among some people close to the president that a formal Trump candidacy will provide an effective foil for Biden and will energize him much the way he was energized during the 2020 campaign. The threat of Trump was, after all, Biden’s stated reason for running in the first place.There’s also a belief — maybe more of a hope — that an early decision by Trump to announce that he is running could hurt Republican candidates this fall. It would force the political discourse away from issues that benefit Republicans, like inflation, and toward subjects that are more favorable to Democrats, like Trump’s rantings about Jan. 6 and a “stolen” 2020 election.There also will be legal issues and questions about whether the president needs to start a re-election effort sooner as a result — so he can start to raise money. But those questions are still being hashed out.Cedric Richmond, a former top White House aide, pushed back against Democratic criticism of President Biden. Stefani Reynolds for The New York TimesWhen I speak with Democrats running campaigns or working at party committees, I hear a lot of frustration with the White House and a lot of criticism, specifically about Biden’s political acumen. Are White House officials aware of the extent of the complaints?David Plouffe, one of the architects of Obama’s presidential campaigns, famously dismissed complaints from Democrats as “bed-wetting” by overly anxious partisans.The current White House doesn’t use that phrase, but the sentiment is basically the same.I talked this week to Cedric Richmond, one of Biden’s earliest and most fervent supporters, who was a top White House aide until he departed recently for the Democratic National Committee.He did not hold back.“We have to have some discipline as Democrats in what we’re talking about, and not be going off on tangents that are destructive to where we want to be,” Richmond said, referring to the sniping at Biden from members of his own party.“So go out there and show the difference between the two parties,” he said. “But the circular firing squad, I think, is a self-fulfilling prophecy.”What are people inside the White House most optimistic about regarding 2022 and 2024? What do they think, or hope, the main drivers of the midterm elections will be?For a long time, there was a hope inside the West Wing that inflation would subside by the time the election came around.That is no longer a realistic hope, given the situation internationally, including the Russia-Ukraine war. The president’s advisers are mostly cleareyed about how the deck is stacked against them in 2022.But they are optimistic about a few things: They think — hope — that Covid is receding as a major political issue, given the relative success of the vaccination program. They think the underlying economy — job growth, wage increases, manufacturing — is strong. And they argue that Biden has accomplished more than he currently gets credit for.The worry about all of those things is the possibility of reversal. Covid could surge again. Job growth could slow. And the accomplishments could fade further into the rearview mirror if the rest of the year is simply a political stalemate.We want to hear from you.Tell us about your experience with this newsletter by answering this short survey.What to read tonightBoris Johnson, Britain’s prime minister, announced his plans to resign as unrest grows over his handling of inflation and the economic aftermath of the coronavirus pandemic. Johnson was a close Trump ally.The I.R.S. said its commissioner asked the Treasury Department’s inspector general for tax administration to look into audits of James B. Comey and Andrew G. McCabe, Michael S. Schmidt and Glenn Thrush report.The Atlantic has a fresh excerpt from the new book by Mark Leibovich, a former New York Times writer. Headlined “The Most Pathetic Men in America,” the excerpt skewers Senator Lindsey Graham, Representative Kevin McCarthy and, as Leibovich puts it, “so many other cowards in Congress.”SHENANIGANSGov. Gavin Newsom of California has been criticized for taking a personal trip to Montana.Jim Wilson/The New York TimesYou win some, you NewsomGavin Newsom, the governor of California, is being put through the political wringer once again — this time, over a family vacation in Montana.As On Politics has noted, Newsom has carved out a national role for himself as a leading critic of Republican-led states. Montana, despite having a Democratic-friendly, “prairie populist” streak, is deeply red: Trump won the state by more than 16 percentage points in the 2020 presidential election.It’s also a place that holds special meaning for Newsom, who married his second wife there. The couple even named their older daughter Montana. His in-laws own a ranch along the Bitterroot River and still live there.The problem, politically speaking, is that Montana is on liberal California’s travel ban list. State-funded travel to Montana and 21 other states is barred in California, through a law enacted in 2016 under Newsom’s predecessor, Jerry Brown. The restrictions, which are enforced by the California Department of Justice, were put in place to punish states whose laws were deemed discriminatory toward the L.G.B.T.Q. community.Newsom paid for the trip himself, and the travel ban does not apply to personal vacations, as his aides have pointed out. Still Republicans have seized on the episode to accuse the governor of hypocrisy. Sometimes, when you poke the G.O.P. bear, as Newsom did when he joined Donald Trump’s social media network and ran ads on Fox News stations in Florida, the bear pokes back.It “must be hard for his family to meet all the woke rules that he and the ‘Regressives have created for themselves,” James Gallagher, the Republican leader of the State Assembly, posted on Twitter.The criticisms echoed one of the more politically potent attacks on Newsom. When the governor dined, indoors and without a mask, at a pricey Napa Valley restaurant in 2020 at the height of the coronavirus lockdowns, his critics said Newsom believed the rules didn’t apply to him.And while California did not pay for Newsom’s Montana trip, the state did pay for his security detail.Anthony York, a spokesman for Newsom, said the trip was very much a personal, and not political, one. “His kids are visiting their grandparents for his daughter’s birthday, as they do every year,” he said.York denied that Newsom’s office was being coy about his whereabouts, and said that the office was trying to balance transparency with safety. “On the security side, the law explicitly states there is an exemption for public safety, and the governor has to travel with security,” he said.Is there anything you think we’re missing? Anything you want to see more of? We’d love to hear from you. Email us at onpolitics@nytimes.com. More