More stories

  • in

    Who won and who lost in Tuesday’s primary elections.

    Voters in seven states weighed in on key contests in Tuesday’s primaries. Here is a rundown of some of the most notable wins and losses:CaliforniaSan Francisco recalled its progressive district attorney, Chesa Boudin. Mr. Boudin had enacted sweeping overhauls since being elected two years ago and faced criticism that those changes led to increases in crime.Rick Caruso, the billionaire developer, and Representative Karen Bass will square off in a runoff contest to be the mayor of Los Angeles.Gov. Gavin Newsom, who last year easily beat back a Republican-led recall effort, will face State Senator Brian Dahle, a Republican.Attorney General Rob Bonta, a Democrat, will advance to the November runoff after his first place finish in the open primary for that office. A second candidate has not been determined yet.Representative Michelle Steel, a freshman Republican, will face Jay Chen, a Democrat and Navy reservist.Scott Baugh, a former leader of the California Assembly, fended off a crowded Republican field on Tuesday to earn the right to challenge Representative Katie Porter.Representative Mike Garcia, a Republican, will face Christy Smith, a former Democratic state legislator, for the third time.Kevin Kiley, a Republican state legislator backed by former President Donald J. Trump, will compete against the Democrat, Kermit Jones, who is a Navy veteran and physician, in the Third Congressional District.New JerseyRobert J. Menendez Jr., the son of Senator Bob Menendez, won his House Democratic primary in the Eighth Congressional District.Tom Kean Jr., a former lawmaker and the son of a two-term New Jersey governor, won the Republican nomination in the state’s Seventh Congressional District. He now faces Representative Tom Malinowski, the Democratic incumbent.IowaSenator Charles E. Grassley, 88, easily won his primary race and will run against Mike Franken, a retired Navy admiral who won the Democratic primary for Senate.State Senator Zach Nunn won the Republican nomination for Iowa’s Third Congressional District. Mr. Nunn will face Representative Cindy Axne, the Democratic incumbent.New MexicoMark Ronchetti, a former Albuquerque television meteorologist, was the Republican’s pick to challenge Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham, a Democrat.Gabe Vasquez, a Las Cruces city councilor, won the Democratic nomination for New Mexico’s Second Congressional District. Mr. Vasquez will face Representative Yvette Herrell, the Republican incumbent.Raúl Torrez, the Bernalillo County district attorney, defeated Brian Colón, the state auditor, in the Democratic primary for attorney general.South DakotaVoters defeated an effort to increase the level of support needed to pass most voter-initiated referendums to 60 percent from a majority.Gov. Kristi Noem won her Republican primary, and so did Senator John Thune.MississippiRepresentative Steven Palazzo, a Republican facing an ethics investigation, was forced into a runoff election in his party’s primary, according to The Associated Press. It has not yet been announced who he will face later this month. More

  • in

    Jan. 6 Hearings Give Democrats a Chance to Recast Midterm Message

    With their majority at stake, Democrats plan to use the six high-profile hearings to refocus voters’ attention on Republicans’ role in the attack.WASHINGTON — Seventeen months after a mob of Donald J. Trump’s supporters stormed the Capitol with false claims of a stolen election, House Democrats plan to use a landmark set of investigative hearings beginning this week to try to refocus voters’ attention on Jan. 6, aiming to tie Republicans directly to an unprecedented plot to undermine democracy itself.With their control of Congress hanging in the balance, Democrats plan to use made-for-television moments and a carefully choreographed rollout of revelations over the course of six hearings to remind the public of the magnitude of Mr. Trump’s effort to overturn the election, and to persuade voters that the coming midterm elections are a chance to hold Republicans accountable for it.It is an uphill battle at a time when polls show that voters’ attention is focused elsewhere, including on inflation, rising coronavirus cases and record-high gas prices. But Democrats argue the hearings will give them a platform for making a broader case about why they deserve to stay in power.“When these hearings are over, voters will know how irresponsibly complicit Republicans were in attempting to toss out their vote and just how far Republicans will go to gain power for themselves,” said Representative Sean Patrick Maloney, the Democratic campaign chair.The select committee investigating the attack, made up of seven Democrats and two Republicans, says it has approached its work in a sober, apolitical manner and will present its findings as such. But it is clear that the hearings, coming five months before midterm elections in which Democrats are bracing for big losses, carry high political stakes.The hope among Democrats is that the committee’s findings, collected from 1,000 witnesses and over 140,000 documents, will do most of the messaging work for them. Representative Jamie Raskin, Democrat of Maryland and a member of the committee, has promised the hearings will “blow the roof off the House.”They have retained an experienced television executive to ensure that happens and organized scores of watch parties across the country in hopes of generating interest. But they are facing an onslaught from Republicans who are bent on denying, downplaying and obfuscating the truth of what happened in their own messaging operation aimed at discrediting the inquiry.And Democrats are up against the reality that the raw emotions in the aftermath of the attack have faded, even among voters who care about the facts, as attention has turned to an ongoing war in Ukraine, gun violence at home and a deep pessimism about the state of the economy.Their task is to persuade voters that the Jan. 6 attack revealed bigger and more important issues at stake, including the Republican Party’s alignment with violent extremists and its decision to make adherence to the “big lie” that the 2020 election was stolen a test of membership.Representative Hakeem Jeffries, Democrat of New York, said on Twitter that the hearings would “fully expose the cult’s extreme effort to overthrow the U.S. government.”A significant portion of the first hearing on Thursday evening will focus on the Proud Boys, a far-right group whose members have been charged with seditious conspiracy in connection with the storming of the Capitol, according to two people familiar with the matter who spoke about it on the condition of anonymity.It is scheduled to include testimony from a documentary filmmaker, Nick Quested, who was embedded with the group during the storming of the building, and a Capitol Police officer, Caroline Edwards, who was injured in an assault said to be triggered by the Proud Boys.The goal is to provide the public with a more in-depth portrait of what unfolded on Jan. 6 than the images that played out on television that day, and to reveal the extent of what the panel called a “coordinated, multistep effort to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election and prevent the transfer of power.”Norman L. Eisen, who was hired by the Judiciary Committee to serve as special counsel during the first Trump impeachment, said Democrats had learned from some of their successes and misfires during those hearings, but still faced challenges.“They need to have three things: the attention-grabbing power of new evidence, the spontaneous drama created by live witnesses and the oldest trick in the book: telling a good story,” Mr. Eisen said. “The risk is, there’s an enormous amount of anticipation and buildup.”Still, some Democratic operatives believe the political payoff could be substantial, both in energizing the party’s core supporters and in appealing to independent voters who may turn against Republicans based on what they see and hear.Anat Shenker-Osorio, the founder of ASO Communications, a progressive political consulting firm, has been conducting focus groups with voters. She said both Democratic “base surge voters” and “swing voters” were motivated by increased attention on the Capitol riot.“Jan. 6 is very much salient and highly negative to these likely midterm voters,” Ms. Shenker-Osorio told activists on a recent call promoting the hearings.Democrats have met with networks about carrying the hearing live in prime time. Activists have scheduled more than 90 watch events in various states, including a “flagship” event at the Robert A. Taft Memorial and Carillon in Washington, where a large screen will be set up and attendees will get free ice cream.“It’s everything from a family-gathering-in-the-living-room-type event to hosting it in a union hall to hosting it on a big field with a Jumbotron,” said Lisa Gilbert, executive vice president of the progressive group Public Citizen.In an attempt to keep the hearing from becoming too dry and disconnected from the visceral reality of the attack, the committee is tentatively planning to play video of the Capitol attack and considering airing clips of key testimony from high-profile witnesses, such as the former White House advisers Ivanka Trump and Jared Kushner.As it tries to deliver the equivalent of the Watergate hearings for the streaming era, the committee has brought on the former president of ABC News, James Goldston, a move reported earlier by Axios, to help fit the hearings into six tight episodes, running between 90 minutes and 2.5 hours.The committee has brought on the former president of ABC News, James Goldston, to help create six tight episodes from the hearings.Bennett Raglin/Getty ImagesRepublican lawmakers have already begun pushing a counternarrative to dismiss the hearings as nothing more than political theater at a moment when Americans are more concerned with kitchen-table issues like the rising price of gas and a baby formula shortage.“Instead of focusing on $5 gas, 6,000 illegal immigrants a day, record fentanyl deaths, or the violent criminals terrorizing America democrats use taxpayer money on a TV producer for the prime time political infomercial from the Jan 6th circus,” Senator Marco Rubio, Republican of Florida, said on Twitter on Monday.Representative Elise Stefanik of New York, the No. 3 Republican who was Mr. Trump’s chief defender during the first impeachment hearing, will oversee the effort to discredit the committee’s findings, coordinating with Representative Kevin McCarthy of California, the minority leader, and Representative Jim Jordan of Ohio, the top Republican on the Judiciary Committee. They plan to book Republican lawmakers on television to push a debunked claim that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is to blame for the attack.Representative Elise Stefanik, who emerged as Mr. Trump’s chief defender during the first impeachment hearing, has begun referring to the committee’s work as a “political sham witch hunt.”Stefani Reynolds for The New York TimesMs. Stefanik has begun referring to the committee’s work as a “political sham witch hunt,” echoing the same language Mr. Trump used to try to undermine Robert S. Mueller III’s investigation into Russia’s interference in the 2016 election. A person familiar with Republican plans said they also had a “rapid response” operation to try to counter the committee’s revelations.The hearings are expected to flesh out various aspects of the investigation, including Mr. Trump’s promotion of a lie of a stolen election, despite being told his claims were false; his attempts to misuse the Justice Department to cling to power; the pressure campaign on Vice President Mike Pence to persuade him to throw out electoral votes for Joseph R. Biden Jr.; how the mob assembled and descended onto D.C. on Jan. 6; and how Mr. Trump did nothing to stop the violence for more than three hours while the assault was underway.The Jan. 6 committee is tentatively planning to play video of the Capitol attack and considering airing clips of key testimony from high-profile witnesses.Jason Andrew for The New York TimesThe committee has not yet nailed down the full slate of witnesses and is still discussing the possibility of public testimony with several high-profile Trump-era officials.The panel is waiting for Jeffrey A. Rosen, the former acting attorney general, and Richard P. Donoghue, the former acting deputy attorney general, to respond to formal requests to testify, according to two people briefed on the matter.Both Mr. Rosen and Mr. Donoghue have already told multiple congressional committees that Mr. Trump and his allies pressured the department to say falsely that it had found voter fraud and to use its power to undo the results.The committee is still in informal talks with Pat A. Cipollone, the former White House counsel, as well as Byung J. Pak, the former U.S. attorney in Atlanta who abruptly resigned on Jan. 4, 2021, after learning that Mr. Trump planned to fire him for not finding voter fraud, according to those people familiar with the discussions.Katie Benner More

  • in

    What to Watch in Today’s Primary Elections in California, New Jersey and More

    Primary voters in seven states, including California and New Jersey, go to the polls on Tuesday to select their party’s candidates for statewide offices, like the governors of New Mexico and South Dakota; for mayor of Los Angeles, the nation’s second largest city, and for dozens of House seats.Crime is very much on the minds of Californians: San Franciscans are deciding whether to remove their district attorney, and Angelenos are weighing whether to elect as their next mayor a longtime Democratic insider or a billionaire former Republican who promises to crack down on crime and homelessness and clean up the city.Senator Charles E. Grassley, Republican of Iowa, is not expected to have much opposition as he seeks an eighth term this November at age 89. Other races offer more drama.Here’s what to watch for in Tuesday’s contests in New Jersey, Mississippi, Iowa, South Dakota, New Mexico, Montana and California:A true battleground map comes into viewIn most of the country, congressional redistricting shored up incumbency for both parties. Tuesday will showcase much of the battleground that remains. Of the 53 House seats that the nonpartisan Cook Political Report sees in play, nine are in California, New Mexico and Iowa.And for once, Democrats will be watching districts where they can play offense: four Republican House seats in California, now held by Representatives David Valadao, Mike Garcia, Michelle Steel and Young Kim, and one in New Mexico, held by Yvette Herrell.If those races do not add a little suspense to the vote Tuesday, California’s unusual primary system could give political obsessives a very late night. Under the system, established under former Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, the top two vote-getters on primary night face off in November, regardless of party.Invariably, a few races end up with a Republican facing off with a Republican or a Democrat meeting a Democrat, leaving one party iced out. Some seats could be guaranteed to change hands based on Tuesday’s results.Democratic miscalculations and lost opportunitiesIn New Mexico, Democrats in full control of the state capital in Santa Fe took a chance, making a safe seat in the state’s picturesque north less safe by dipping the district’s boundaries south, in hopes of taking southern New Mexico’s Republican seat.But in a bad Democratic year, they may have overplayed their hand: Rather than hoping for a sweep of the state’s three House seats, Democrats now are worrying that Republicans could hold that seat and grab another.Redistricting in California was in the hands of a nonpartisan commission, which put Democrats into position to take some Republican seats and elect the first Hispanic representatives in the Central Valley.But Democrats could also lose some House seats, including the one held by Katie Porter, one of the party’s rising stars. Besides Ms. Porter, Representative Mike Levin on the Southern California coast is sweating his re-election, and a new seat in central California, the 13th District, should be Democratic in an ordinary year, but this is not that.Democrats had also hoped to make a play for the Iowa Senate seat held by Mr. Grassley. But Mr. Grassley opted to run for re-election, though he would be 95 by the end of his next term. And the Democrats’ favored candidate, Abby Finkenauer, 33, who served one term in the House, has struggled even to get on the ballot.Ethics lapses can be costly. Except when they aren’t.Representative Tom Malinowski, a New Jersey Democrat, had the makings of a foreign policy heavyweight in his party. He was the Washington director of Human Rights Watch before becoming a top human rights official in the Obama administration’s State Department.Mr. Malinowski turned his attention to electoral politics in 2018, beating a moderate Republican, Leonard Lance, in that year’s Democratic wave. In 2020, he edged out Thomas Kean Jr., the son and namesake of a popular former New Jersey governor, by 5,311 votes.Stock trades by Representative Tom Malinowski were the subject of an investigation by the House Ethics Committee.Pool photo by Graeme JenningsOn Tuesday, Mr. Kean is the odds-on favorite to win his party’s nomination to challenge Mr. Malinowski again, but this time, the Democrat is one of the most endangered incumbents in the House, thanks to three factors. Redistricting made his narrowly Democratic seat narrowly Republican.Despite Mr. Kean’s loss in 2020, the governor’s son is a strong opponent in a state where surnames matter (Robert J. Menendez, Senator Bob Menendez’s son, is the heavy favorite in the Democratic primary for another House seat). And Mr. Malinowski admitted he had failed to properly disclose thousands of dollars in stock trades, the subject of an investigation by the House Ethics Committee.On the other hand, another House candidate with a checkered ethics record, Ryan Zinke, is expected to win his G.O.P. primary and return to the House from Montana’s First District. Mr. Zinke left Washington in 2018 as Mr. Trump’s first Interior secretary under a cloud of conflict-of-interest investigations and questionable taxpayer expenditures.Trump’s swing and miss in South DakotaFormer President Donald J. Trump vowed to punish Senator John Thune, Republican of South Dakota, for not sufficiently promoting the lie that Mr. Trump had won re-election in 2020. “South Dakota doesn’t like weakness. He will be primaried in 2022, political career over!” the former president declared on Twitter in December 2020, before he was barred from the platform.Senator John Thune at the Capitol in May.Shuran Huang for The New York TimesBut South Dakota’s governor, Kristi Noem, opted to run for re-election instead of for the Senate, and no serious challenger heeded Mr. Trump’s call to take on Mr. Thune. Consequently, Republican voters in South Dakota are likely to easily nominate Mr. Thune — dismissed by Mr. Trump as a “Republican in name only” and “Mitch’s boy” — for re-election, lifting him up as the heir apparent to Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, the Senate Republican leader.They will also put Ms. Noem in position to run for president or, if Mr. Trump runs, to make a play for vice president.Understand the 2022 Midterm ElectionsCard 1 of 6Why are these midterms so important? More

  • in

    What to Watch For in NY Governor Debate Between Hochul and Top Rivals

    Gov. Kathy Hochul will be a target for Rep. Tom Suozzi and Jumaane Williams in the first of two debates featuring the three leading Democrats.ALBANY, N.Y. — The first official debate in the Democratic primary for governor of New York took place last week with little attention or fanfare, and perhaps for good reason: The favorite in the race, Gov. Kathy Hochul, was not in attendance.That will change on Tuesday, with the first of two debates scheduled among Ms. Hochul and her two main party rivals, Representative Thomas R. Suozzi of Long Island and Jumaane D. Williams, New York City’s public advocate.The one-hour debate, which will be hosted and broadcast by WCBS-TV, will provide the candidates a chance to introduce themselves to voters and to road-test their arguments against Ms. Hochul, who, with the June 28 primary only three weeks away, carries a commanding lead in the polls.But the same polls show areas of concern among voters — including fears about crime and disapproval of the hefty government subsidy going to a new Buffalo Bills stadium — that could hint at potential weak spots in the governor’s armor.The two-man debate last week was more of a shared opportunity for Mr. Williams and Mr. Suozzi to lace into Ms. Hochul, offering a glimpse at the attack lines they are likely to use in the debate on Tuesday and on the campaign trail.How will Ms. Hochul fend off the attacks she has now seen previewed? Will the nonaggression pact between Mr. Suozzi and Mr. Williams on display last week hold? Is there still time for a breakthrough moment that could change the shape of the race?Here’s a look at the candidates, and some of the main issues they will grapple over.A focus on crimeEven before the mass shootings in Buffalo, Tulsa and Uvalde, Texas,, addressing gun violence was a priority for New York politicians, and it has now taken on even greater urgency.Mr. Suozzi has placed fighting crime at the center of his platform, releasing a 15-point plan and repeatedly demanding rollbacks to changes made in recent years to New York’s bail laws that were meant to reduce the number of people incarcerated over a lack of bail money. One feature of Mr. Suozzi’s plan involves giving judges discretion in assessing a defendant’s “dangerousness” when setting bail.Ms. Hochul made similar proposals during the most recent legislative session, securing a few changes but finding opposition to others in the left-leaning Legislature. She is likely to trumpet these modifications, as well as the package of gun-safety bills she recently signed into law, as evidence that her administration has made progress in containing gun violence.On the other side of the issue is Mr. Williams, who has argued against rolling back the bail reforms and has said state agencies and community groups can “co-create” public safety, if provided with the appropriate funding.Suozzi will cast himself as the experienced executiveFor much of the campaign, Mr. Suozzi has rarely missed an opportunity to question Ms. Hochul’s capability, and to imply that New Yorkers are unsafe under her leadership.This tactic has the potential to both help and hurt Mr. Suozzi, political observers say. On one hand, he is well positioned to point out Ms. Hochul’s inconsistencies, such as criticizing Washington for doing little on gun safety when she was hardly a gun-reform advocate during her time in Congress, even earning an N.R.A. endorsement at one point.But by striking too hard, Mr. Suozzi could risk coming across as bullying or dismissive, analysts said — particularly dangerous given the makeup of New York’s Democratic primary electorate.“Look, 58 to 60 percent of the primary voters in this election are going to be female,” said Bruce Gyory, a Democratic political consultant, adding that “an awful lot of them are highly educated, professional women who really bristle at the mansplaining.”Mr. Suozzi has emphasized his background as Nassau County executive and mayor of Glen Cove, suggesting that he is best equipped to lead the state as an experienced executive.In addition to his focus on making changes to the bail laws, Mr. Suozzi has said he would push to lower property taxes and to make state government to do what it can to make New York more attractive to business.Those stances place him in ideological territory that is very similar to Ms. Hochul’s. Perhaps that is why Mr. Suozzi has struggled to make headway in polls or in fund-raising thus far, raising $3.5 million in the latest reporting period, compared with Ms. Hochul’s more than $10 million.Williams has the progressive lane to himselfAs the only far-left candidate in an increasingly progressive state, Mr. Williams has a clear path before him. He also has experience running against Ms. Hochul: In 2018, he lost to her in a competitive race for lieutenant governor.Yet his campaign for governor has failed thus far to build momentum, raising just $250,000 in the last filing period.At last week’s debate, Mr. Williams refrained from taking swipes at Mr. Suozzi, saving his barbs for the governor. He repeatedly suggested that Ms. Hochul’s six years as lieutenant governor to Andrew M. Cuomo, who resigned last year amid allegations of sexual misconduct, had made her complicit in some of his more unpopular policies.Mr. Williams has also said Ms. Hochul should have more to show from her time in office, citing the lack of access to food and transit options in the mostly Black Buffalo neighborhood where last month’s mass shooting took place as proof that she had done little for constituents in her hometown.In the debate on Tuesday, political analysts suggested, Mr. Williams will need to attack without overreaching. But more than that, he will be hoping for a breakthrough moment that could put his candidacy and ideas — like public power, free public college and an approach to public safety that is based on community building, rather than policing — into the conversation.But that is easier said than done, said Steve Israel, a former congressman from Long Island who once ran the House Democrats’ campaign arm and has endorsed Ms. Hochul.“Unless you have a grenade with a pin pulled halfway out, it’s hard to break through,” he said.Hochul will practice risk managementThe calculus for Ms. Hochul is the opposite. Armed with the power of incumbency, a slate of endorsements from powerful unions and an $18.6 million campaign war chest, she will be doing all she can to maintain the race’s current dynamics.Ms. Hochul is likely to seek to highlight the wins she earned in the most recent legislative session, including gun-safety and abortion rights legislation and a gas tax holiday, while trying to steer the debate away from controversy.It will not be easy. Her first lieutenant governor, Brian Benjamin, resigned after being indicted on federal bribery charges; the Bills stadium deal was heavily criticized; and the fund-raising records she has set in her first year in office have raised questions about her relationship with big donors.The debate will provide her opponents a chance to press for answers to difficult questions on live television. Still, if she is able to fend off attacks from the left and right, strategists said, she will be well positioned to claim a middle ground.“Her best-case scenario is status quo,” said Evan Stavisky, the president of the Parkside Group, a political consulting firm.“She needs to forcefully defend herself because she’s likely to be the focus of contrast from her opponents,” he said. “She needs to talk about her successes, and to get out of there without changing the fundamental dynamics of the race.”Bolstering New York’s economyAnother crucial question for candidates is how to breathe life into the state’s economy, especially as New York continues to recover from the worst effects of the coronavirus pandemic and some residents leave for other states.Each candidate has different explanations for why people have flowed out. Mr. Suozzi blames crime and taxes. Mr. Williams points to an overall rise in prices and to employers that force workers back to offices. He suggests the state should embrace a “new normal.”Ms. Hochul has tried to thread the needle, pledging to make New York the most “business-friendly and worker-friendly state in the nation.” How successful she has been will no doubt be a subject of much debate. More

  • in

    Jessica Cisneros Calls for Recount in Texas Runoff Against Rep. Cuellar

    Jessica Cisneros, the progressive South Texas immigration lawyer, said on Monday that she would formally demand a recount in her razor-thin runoff against Representative Henry Cuellar, the nine-term incumbent and moderate Democrat she has been trying to unseat for years.“I owe it to our community to see this through to the end,” Ms. Cisneros said in a statement.The May 24 election has not been called by The Associated Press. As of Friday, Mr. Cuellar was ahead of Ms. Cisneros by 187 votes.The Cisneros campaign said the Texas Democratic Party canvassed and certified the results of the runoff on Monday, and the review showed Mr. Cuellar ahead of Ms. Cisneros by 281 votes. Mr. Cuellar’s campaign had already declared victory the day after the runoff, saying that the margin of victory at that time “will hold.”In a statement on Monday, Mr. Cuellar said, “Every vote has been counted and our margin not only held but increased.” He added, “As Democrats, it is now time to come together and win the general election in November.”Mr. Cuellar said Ms. Cisneros had “every legal right” to demand a recount, but he said that she “has no path to victory and will not gain 281 votes.”Ms. Cisneros has until 5 p.m. Wednesday to formally submit a recount request to the Texas Democratic Party, which in turn has 48 hours to review the matter, according to a spokeswoman for the party. The spokeswoman, Rose Clouston, said that once the request was received and deemed eligible, the process of recounting the ballots could begin immediately.The race has drawn national attention as Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and other progressive leaders have backed Ms. Cisneros’s attempt to unseat one of the most conservative Democrats left in the House. Mr. Cuellar campaigned alongside Representative James E. Clyburn, the House majority whip, and faced scrutiny over a federal investigation. The F.B.I. raided Mr. Cuellar’s Laredo home earlier this year as part of an investigation that appears to be linked to an inquiry into the political influence of Azerbaijan, the former Soviet republic.Ms. Cisneros’s demand for a recount on Monday was the latest chapter in her efforts to defeat Mr. Cuellar, for whom she had once worked as an intern. In 2020, Ms. Cisneros came within 2,700 votes of victory. This year, she challenged him again, holding him just below the 50 percent threshold in the March primary to avoid a runoff.In Texas primaries, any candidate who finishes below 50 percent faces the No. 2 vote-getter in a runoff. In the Democratic primary in March, Mr. Cuellar won 48.4 percent of the vote, Ms. Cisneros got 46.9 percent and another liberal candidate, Tannya Benavides, had 4.7 percent. More

  • in

    High California Gas Prices Rattle Democrats Ahead of Midterms

    SANTA ANA, Calif. — Orange County, Calif., symbolized Republican struggles in America’s diverse and highly educated suburbs during Donald J. Trump’s presidency, as a backlash to Mr. Trump transformed center-right strongholds into increasingly Democratic territory.But at a Chevron station in Santa Ana near John Wayne Airport on Friday afternoon, the anger was aimed at President Biden and his party, as Californians grappled with gas prices registering that day at $6.59 a gallon.“I’m really unhappy,” Carmen Vega, 47, of Anaheim, said, adding that she voted for Mr. Biden but was now considering backing Republicans in the midterm elections. “The economy sucks right now, everything’s too expensive.”And as Simona Sabo, 38, of Irvine, waxed nostalgic for Mr. Trump while filling up her S.U.V. — “What I liked was that gas prices weren’t this high” — another woman poked her head around the pump and offered a silent thumbs up before driving away.Five months before the midterm elections, Democrats are straining to defend their narrow House majority in a brutal political environment shaped by high inflation, Mr. Biden’s low approval ratings and a strong sense among many Americans that the country is on the wrong track. But they have held out hope that a handful of California congressional contests will emerge as bright spots, thanks to the redistricting process that made some seats more hospitable to Democrats, and the importance of issues including abortion rights and gun control to many coastal voters.A station in Los Angeles last week with even higher prices.Zeng Hui/Xinhua via Getty ImagesYet in California, home to the highest average price for regular gasoline in the nation — $6.326 on Sunday, according to the motor club AAA, compared with the nation’s average of $4.848 — anger over the cost of living is threatening Democrats’ ambitions. (California gas prices are typically the highest in the nation, owing in part to state taxes and regulations on emissions that require a more expensive blend of gasoline, but recent numbers have been eye-popping.)On the cusp of Tuesday’s primary elections that will determine California’s general election matchups, there are signs that the cost of living is overshadowing virtually every other issue in some of the state’s battleground areas, according to elected officials, party strategists and polling.“They’re beyond furious — it’s called desperation,” said Representative Lou Correa, a Democrat from Santa Ana, whose district is considered safely Democratic but neighbors more competitive Orange County seats. “I don’t hear anything about the other national issues we’re focusing on in Washington. The thing I hear about is gasoline. What are you going to do to bring down the gas prices?”An ABC News/Ipsos poll released Sunday found that most Americans called the economy, inflation and rising gas prices the most important issues in determining their midterm votes. Just 28 percent of those surveyed approved of Mr. Biden’s handling of inflation, and 27 percent approved of his handling of gas prices.Understand the 2022 Midterm Elections So FarAfter key races in Georgia, Pennsylvania and other states, here’s what we’ve learned.Trump’s Invincibility in Doubt: With many of Donald J. Trump’s endorsed candidates failing to win, some Republicans see an opening for a post-Trump candidate in 2024.G.O.P. Governors Emboldened: Many Republican governors are in strong political shape. And some are openly opposing Mr. Trump.Voter Fraud Claims Fade: Republicans have been accepting their primary victories with little concern about the voter fraud they once falsely claimed caused Mr. Trump’s 2020 loss.The Politics of Guns: Republicans have been far more likely than Democrats to use messaging about guns to galvanize their base in the midterms. Here’s why.“The problem for the Democrats here will be that all of the contributing economic factors, particularly inflation, that’s hurting them nationally is on steroids in California,” said Rob Stutzman, a veteran California Republican strategist who is assisting some independent statewide candidates this year. “Seats that, when the maps got drawn, that they didn’t think would be competitive very well could be,” he added.The contours of those House races will come into clearer focus after Tuesday’s primaries, which have so far appeared to be low-turnout affairs. In California primaries, the top two vote-getters, regardless of party, then move on to the general election.The races against Representatives David Valadao and Mike Garcia, two Republicans, are expected to be highly competitive in general elections, given the Democratic tilt of both their new districts.Mr. Valadao, of the Central Valley, is one of 10 Republicans who voted to impeach Mr. Trump after the Jan. 6 Capitol riot, and he also faces primary challenges.Mr. Garcia, of Santa Clarita, who won his last election by just 333 votes, voted against certifying the results of the 2020 election. Democrats are locked in a primary to challenge him.There are also primary contests for a newly redrawn open seat in California’s 13th Congressional District near Fresno, which leans Democratic, according to the Cook Political Report, though the race may well be highly competitive.Several Republican primary contests may determine how close a number of Southern California seats become. National Republicans see a chance to defeat Representative Mike Levin, a Democrat, but there is also a competitive primary to challenge him.There has also been something of a Republican rescue mission for Representative Young Kim. Her primary contest this year grew unexpectedly competitive, and her newly redrawn district would become far more tightly contested in November should she lose.Two other high-profile House races are unfolding in Orange County, a place once strongly associated with Ronald Reagan and Richard Nixon, staunchly conservative former presidents, but now a prominent political battleground. Representative Michelle Steel, who like Ms. Kim is a Korean American Republican who flipped a seat in 2020, is running in a new, heavily Asian American district in what is expected to be a close race against Jay Chen, a small-business owner and lieutenant commander in the U.S. Navy Reserve. The newly drawn district somewhat favors Democrats.Representative Katie Porter speaking at an event against gun violence on Saturday in Seal Beach, Calif.Jenna Schoenefeld for The New York TimesAnd Representative Katie Porter, a Democrat with a national platform and a huge war chest, is running in a redrawn seat that is roughly evenly politically divided.She and many other Democrats argue that their party is trying to bring down gas prices — which have spiked for reasons including Russia’s invasion of Ukraine — while charging that Republicans embrace the issue as a political cudgel. And certainly, there is still time for gas prices and other costs to come down before the midterms, amid other positive economic indicators, and for the political environment to improve for Democrats in competitive races.“My minivan is almost out of gas today and I thought, you know what, I’m not in the mood to fill it up today. Right? It’s frustrating,” Ms. Porter said, arguing that Democrats grasp voters’ pain on this issue. “There is a solution to this, and it starts by being willing to stand up to corporate abuse.”Representative Michelle Steel with Irene Schweitzer, 99, of Anaheim, on Saturday at a campaign event in Buena Park, Calif.Jenna Schoenefeld for The New York TimesRepublicans argue that Democrats have pursued a range of inflationary measures, and some are pushing for practices like more drilling.Understand the 2022 Midterm ElectionsCard 1 of 6Why are these midterms so important? More

  • in

    Democrats Can Win This Fall if They Make One Key Promise

    Democrats hope to make November’s midterm elections a referendum on Roe v. Wade, the linchpin decision upholding abortion rights, which the Supreme Court is almost certain to strike down this summer. That strategy makes sense. Polls show that roughly two in three Americans oppose overturning Roe and almost 60 percent support passing a bill to set Roe’s protections in a federal law. What’s more, polls showed a rising number of voters listing abortion as their top midterm issue after news of Roe’s imminent demise leaked in the form of a draft court opinion published by Politico.Unfortunately, their current plan is almost sure to fail.After the Democrats came up with just 49 votes to bring a Roe-protecting bill before the Senate on May 11, they promised to keep fighting and, in the words of Senator Amy Klobuchar, “take that fight right to the ballot box” in November. But you can’t make an election into a referendum on an issue if you can’t point to anything winning the election would accomplish. To make the 2022 elections a referendum on Roe, Democrats have to put protecting Roe and abortion rights on the table.Here’s one way to do that: get clear public commitments from every Senate Democrat (and candidate for Senate) not only to vote for the Roe bill in January 2023 but also to change the filibuster rules to ensure that a majority vote would actually pass the bill and send it to the White House for the president’s signature.At present, there are likely 48 Senate Democrats who can make that pledge. Senators Joe Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema are dead set against any changes to the filibuster — a fact you likely know because most of President Biden’s agenda has been bottled up behind their refusal for the past year. Some claim that Senators Manchin and Sinema are just taking the public heat for a number of other Senate Democrats who are also unwilling to change the filibuster rules. That’s highly unlikely. But if any do have misgivings, that’s why the public commitments are so important. Getting a list of holdouts down to a publicly named handful is the first step to persuading them to fall in line.If my math is right and there are 48 Senate Democrats ready to make that pledge, they need two additional Democratic senators in the next Congress. And that is the party’s message that makes the 2022 midterms a referendum on Roe: “Give us the House and two more senators, and we will make Roe law in January 2023.”No ambiguity, no haggling, no living in Senator Manchin’s head for a year. You give us this, and we’ll give you that. That tells voters exactly what will be delivered with a Democratic win. It also defines what constitutes a win: control of the House and two more Senate seats.The campaign message is clear: If you want to protect Roe, give us those majorities. If this is your passion, here’s where to channel that passion. These are the Senate seats we need to hold (in New Hampshire, Arizona, Georgia and Nevada) and here are the ones we need to win (in Pennsylvania and Wisconsin and possibly in Ohio, Florida and North Carolina). With those commitments in hand, one question should be on the lips of every Democratic candidate. Will you make a firm commitment to never vote for a federal law banning abortion nationwide?Few, if any, Republicans would be able to make that pledge. And their evasions wouldn’t just make them look ridiculous; that would put squarely on the table the very real threat that Republicans would enact a nationwide abortion ban as soon as January 2025. That could prove enough to win Senate races in Pennsylvania, Wisconsin and Ohio.In a way, though, this strategy isn’t so much about winning the 2022 midterms or even making Roe into a federal law, although it’s the best way to accomplish both. It’s just an example of how you win elections.Effective campaigns are built on connecting the intense beliefs of the electorate — their hopes and fears — directly to the hard mechanics of political power. You’ve got to connect those wires. If you were testing some new electrical contraption, that’s the first thing you’d do: make sure the energy supply is wired to the engine that makes it run. This is no different. Without tying a specific electoral result to a clear commitment to a specific legislative action after the elections, you’re not connecting those wires.What Democrats would be proposing is a classic small-c conservative solution in the best sense of the word. Codifying Roe would preserve the set of rights and protections that the vast majority of Americans have lived their entire adult lives with and that the overwhelming majority of Americans do not want to change. The threat that the court will strike down such a law is real but overstated. And in any case, refusing to act because of what opponents might do is the definition of political paralysis.So how do Democrats get from here to there?They likely can’t rely on the party’s leaders, at least not at first. But they’re not essential. It’s really up to voters and activists and particularly committed members of Congress. Probably half the Democrats in the Senate would be happy to sign on this dotted line by the end of the day. Those who are up for re-election, even in safe races, will come around quickly.Some senators may resist at first. And that wouldn’t be surprising. Politicians seldom see any advantage to committing themselves in advance or reducing their room for maneuver. It’s always safer to keep your options open and be as general as possible until the final moment. That’s why assembling a clear public list of commitments is critical. Once the list gets down to a handful of hesitaters, the pressure from Democrats nationwide, focused on those members, will be overwhelming. If there are real holdouts, they’ll fold in short order.You don’t need to wait on Nancy Pelosi or Chuck Schumer or President Biden. You can get the ball rolling by calling up your Democratic senator today.Josh Marshall (@joshtpm) is the founder and editor in chief of the political news website TPM.The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. We’d like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips. And here’s our email: letters@nytimes.com.Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook, Twitter (@NYTopinion) and Instagram. More

  • in

    In San Francisco, Democrats Are at War With Themselves Over Crime

    Fueled by concerns about burglaries and hate crimes, San Francisco’s liberal district attorney, Chesa Boudin, faces a divisive recall in a famously progressive city.SAN FRANCISCO — As the former chair of the San Francisco Democratic Party, Mary Jung has a long list of liberal bona fides, including her early days in politics volunteering in Ohio for the presidential campaign of George McGovern and her service on the board of the local Planned Parenthood branch. “In Cleveland, I was considered a communist,” she said in her San Francisco office.But the squalor and petty crime that she sees as crescendoing on some city streets — her office has been broken into four times during the coronavirus pandemic — has tested her liberal outlook. Last year, on the same day her granddaughter was born, she watched a video of a mentally ill man punching an older Chinese woman in broad daylight on Market Street.Ms. Jung, director of government affairs for the San Francisco Association of Realtors and head of a Realtors foundation that assists homeless people, wondered what kind of city her granddaughter would grow up in. “I thought, ‘Am I going to be able to take her out in the stroller?’”Now she finds herself leading what has been called a Democratic civil war in one of America’s most liberal cities: an effort to recall San Francisco’s district attorney, Chesa Boudin, that has echoes of the party’s larger split over how to handle matters of crime and punishment. In an overwhelmingly Democratic city, liberals and independents will decide a recall that is being financially backed by conservative donors.“What shade of blue are you — that’s really what it comes down to,” said Lilly Rapson, the campaign manager of the recall and Ms. Jung’s partner in the endeavor. A lifelong Democrat, Ms. Rapson said she was motivated to lead the campaign after her home was broken into last year as she slept.There is no compelling evidence that Mr. Boudin’s policies have made crime significantly worse in San Francisco. Overall crime in San Francisco has changed little since Mr. Boudin took office in early 2020.But his message of leniency for perpetrators has rankled residents of the city, many of whom feel unsafe and violated by property crimes. Like a president facing election during a bad economy, Mr. Boudin finds himself a vessel for residents’ pandemic angst and their frustrations over a wave of burglaries and other property crimes in well-to-do areas. Some residents, especially the city’s sizable Asian American population, also feel that a spike in hate crimes has made it unsafe to walk the streets.If successful, the recall would overturn one of the nation’s boldest efforts in criminal justice reform: an experiment to install a former public defender as the protector of public safety with promises to reduce mass incarceration, hold the police accountable and tackle racial disparities in the justice system.A vote to push Mr. Boudin from office would signal to Democrats that talking tough on crime could be a winning message in the midterm elections, and deal a blow to a national movement that has elected progressive prosecutors in cities such as Philadelphia, Chicago and Los Angeles.Mr. Boudin faced long odds in his race to become San Francisco’s district attorney two years ago.Jim Wilson/The New York TimesThe election comes as San Francisco is being convulsed by debates over the disorder of its streets — car break-ins, tent encampments that dot the sidewalks in some neighborhoods and the open-air markets peddling illicit fentanyl that has killed more people in the city than Covid-19.Read More About the Homelessness Crisis in America‘Invisible Child’: In 2013, a five-part Times series told the story of Dasani, an 11-year-old Black girl who lived in a Brooklyn homeless shelter. Today, she’s still struggling.A Rising Death Toll: More than ever it has become deadly to be homeless in America, especially for men in their 50s and 60s.Housing Discrimination: A voucher program aimed at reducing homelessness in New York City has been hamstrung by the discriminatory practices of landlords and real estate agents.Los Angeles Goes to War With Itself: The pandemic has intensified a bitter fight over homelessness in the city — with no end in sight.Mr. Boudin, 41, was an outsider to San Francisco politics who grew up while his parents, 1960s radicals with the Weather Underground, went to prison for their role in the notorious 1981 robbery of a Brink’s armored car in New York that left two police officers and a bank guard dead.He went on to become a Rhodes Scholar who graduated from Yale College and Yale Law School before starting his legal career as a public defender. In 2019, Mr. Boudin sought to move across the courtroom and was elected as the city’s top prosecutor, assuming office just before the pandemic.He promised to end cash bail, stop prosecuting children as adults and expand diversion programs that offer defendants a chance at rehabilitation instead of prison — all steps he has taken while in office. Almost immediately, his opponents began collecting signatures toward a recall.“It’s not been an easy time to start a career in public life,” he said recently at a community forum in the North Beach neighborhood, which was interrupted by protesters outside chanting, “Recall Chesa!”On the campaign trail, Mr. Boudin is facing stiff headwinds. Several polls showed him down at least 10 points. In fighting to keep his job, he has leaned on two main strategies: associate, at every turn, the recall effort with Republicans, and confront voters with data that shows overall crime has not increased meaningfully while he has been in office, even as some categories have risen during the pandemic.He has referred to one of the biggest donors to the recall campaign, William Oberndorf, a conservative and wealthy businessman, as an “oligarch,” called his opponents “Trumpian,” and sought to place the recall in the national context of a Republican-led effort to attack liberal prosecutors as weak on crime.“It’s really problematic that we are having a very Trumpian conversation in San Francisco,” Mr. Boudin said.California Democrats have had success using that strategy of attaching opponents to former President Donald J. Trump — most notably in Gov. Gavin Newsom’s triumph over a recall drive. But some wonder if the approach has staying power the longer Mr. Trump is out of office.Mr. Boudin added that the recall campaign had exploited individual tragedies like the story of a Thai grandfather who was fatally attacked last year while taking his morning walk. He also pointed to an increase in media coverage of crime, and especially high-profile videos on social media of shoplifting cases — like one showing a man on a bike stealing from a Walgreens.“And then people read the story, they see the video, and they perceive crime as being out of control,” Mr. Boudin said. “When in fact things like shoplifting are down dramatically. It doesn’t mean we don’t have a real problem with auto burglaries, but the notion that it’s out of control today and it wasn’t in 2019 is just demonstrably false.”Auto burglaries have been especially common in San Francisco’s tourist hot spots.Jim Wilson/The New York TimesBut more than anything, it was the case of Troy McAlister, a man with a long criminal history who mowed down two people with a stolen car on New Year’s Eve in 2020, that has fueled the recall effort. Mr. McAlister was free because Mr. Boudin’s office had previously negotiated a plea deal on an armed robbery charge. And Mr. Boudin says it is a case that keeps him up at night.“The nature of this job is we are always looking backwards and hindsight is 20-20,” Mr. Boudin said. “We know as a matter of material fact that some people will be released and commit bad crimes. There’s always going to be cases where if we look back we would make different decisions.”Unlike in other parts of the country, homicides are not driving the anger and passions of recall advocates. The annual number of people killed in the city has stayed within a range of 41 to 56 over the past seven years.Instead, recall advocates describe a pervasive feeling that quality of life in San Francisco has deteriorated. Burglaries, especially in wealthier neighborhoods, have soared during the pandemic. The city recorded 7,575 burglaries in 2020 and 7,217 last year, a sharp increase of more than 45 percent from 2019. Car break-ins, long a festering problem, were less frequent during the pandemic, but thieves shifted their targets from tourist areas to more residential neighborhoods, a change that gave the issue more immediacy and urgency among voters.Another problem is that Mr. Boudin and the Police Department, whose rate of arrests for reported crimes is among the lowest of major cities, have a toxic relationship. In the 2019 campaign, the San Francisco Police Officers Association attacked Mr. Boudin by calling him the “#1 choice of criminals and gang members.” Supporters of Mr. Boudin responded at his victory party with chants of epithets toward the union.Officers have been heard on body camera footage telling residents that the district attorney is unwilling to prosecute crimes. And while Mr. Boudin has been criticized for not more aggressively prosecuting drug dealing, he said the police make, on average, only two drug-dealing arrests a day.“The perception is right,” Mr. Boudin said. “Low-level drug dealers can reasonably expect in San Francisco that nothing will happen to them. Because they’re not getting arrested. Incidentally, the same thing is true with auto burglaries, where 1 percent of reported auto burglaries result in an arrest. So the focus on my office or on me or my policies is really misplaced.”The chief of police, Bill Scott, declined to answer questions on the department’s rate of solving crimes. A spokesman said in a statement that it was “not appropriate for him to get into the type of political discussion that could influence the will of the voters of San Francisco.”“While Chief Scott admits that he and District Attorney Boudin have their disagreements, he maintains that they have a candid and very professional relationship,” the spokesman said.San Francisco has had a long line of liberal prosecutors, including Vice President Kamala Harris. But if Mr. Boudin loses the recall, Mayor London Breed is likely to appoint a more moderate Democrat, political analysts say. The replacement would serve through the end of the year and then might be eligible for re-election.Some of the recall campaign’s most visible supporters have come from within the district attorney’s office, which has seen a high rate of turnover — dozens of lawyers have left since Mr. Boudin took over, after resigning or being fired.Brooke Jenkins, a former prosecutor, left the office to join the recall effort in part, she says, because she clashed with Mr. Boudin about how to prosecute a murder case. “I don’t believe Chesa is living up to his obligation as the district attorney,” Ms. Jenkins said. “He of course ran on a platform of reform, and reform is necessary in the criminal justice system. But you have to be able to balance that with your primary obligation of maintaining public safety.”Among the most frustrated residents in San Francisco are those who live and work in the Tenderloin, the compact neighborhood near City Hall that was once the city’s red-light district filled with bars and boxing gyms. Today, it is a gritty tableau of the city’s most persistent ills — the illicit drug markets, the desperation of those who are chronically homeless and the consequences of untreated mental illness.A homeless encampment in the Tenderloin.Jim Wilson/The New York TimesAs the manager of Threads for Therapy, a nonprofit thrift shop in the Tenderloin run by a Christian charity, Angel Fernandez watched warily on a recent afternoon as customers perused the women’s coats. The shop has a full-time security guard because so many people try to shoplift.Mr. Fernandez does not hesitate when asked how he will vote on the recall. He compares Mr. Boudin to Robin Hood, someone who views criminals as “the downtrodden forced into crime.” But like the concerns of many recall supporters, some of Mr. Fernandez’s complaints do not relate directly to the district attorney’s performance — they are more general feelings of a need for order and responsiveness from the city, including the police. When Mr. Fernandez calls the Tenderloin police station one block away to report fights on the sidewalk, drug sales, threatening behavior or shoplifting, he is frequently disappointed with the slow response. “Sometimes they don’t come at all,” he said of the police.Holly Secon More