Democratic Party

Subterms

    More stories

    • 88 Shares169 Views

      in Elections

      AOC Endorses Maya Wiley for NYC Mayor

      by

      Ms. Ocasio-Cortez’s endorsement on Saturday may cement Ms. Wiley as the left-wing standard-bearer in the New York City mayor’s race.Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, one of the most prominent left-wing leaders in the country, endorsed Maya D. Wiley in the race for New York City mayor on Saturday, urging voters to “come together as a movement.”Ms. Ocasio-Cortez’s endorsement represents the most significant development yet in left-wing efforts to shape the June 22 Democratic primary that is almost certain to determine the city’s next mayor.“If we don’t come together as a movement, we will get a New York City built by and for billionaires, and we need a city for and by working people,” Ms. Ocasio-Cortez said outside City Hall in Manhattan, as Ms. Wiley waited in the background. “So we will vote for Maya No. 1.”Ms. Ocasio-Cortez’s endorsement of Ms. Wiley, a civil rights lawyer and former counsel to Mayor Bill de Blasio, comes at a moment of extraordinary volatility in the mayor’s race — one week before early voting begins.Eric Adams, the Brooklyn borough president, has increasingly been seen as the Democratic front-runner in the race, in close competition with Andrew Yang, the former presidential candidate. Kathryn Garcia, the former sanitation commissioner, has also demonstrated growing traction. All three candidates are considered relative moderates on issues including policing and their postures toward the business community.Ms. Wiley has generally been considered part of the top tier of candidates, too, but she has not been seen as a front-runner throughout the race. In recent weeks, however, she has landed a growing number of endorsements, especially from the left. On Saturday afternoon, Representative Jamaal Bowman, another left-wing New York Democrat who is close to Ms. Ocasio-Cortez, wrote on Twitter that he, too, was supporting Ms. Wiley. But for months, it was Ms. Ocasio-Cortez’s decision that had been one of the most consequential open questions in the mayor’s race.Surrogates for various candidates pitched her team. Representative Nydia M. Velázquez, a Wiley backer, encouraged Ms. Ocasio-Cortez to meet with the candidate directly. And Ms. Wiley said that she and Ms. Ocasio-Cortez had had conversations over Zoom and by phone.But, like the rest of New York City, Ms. Wiley received almost no advance notice that Ms. Ocasio-Cortez intended to endorse her on Saturday, she said. The congresswoman made the announcement following a scheduled rally with City Council candidates.“I found out right before I came down here,” Ms. Wiley said in a brief interview after the event. “I was extremely excited when she called me and said: ‘You’re my No. 1. Let’s talk about how we do this.’”For months, it was unclear whether Ms. Ocasio-Cortez, 31, would use her platform to influence the mayor’s race. Sparse public polling and interviews with party strategists suggested that a significant number of voters remained undecided, and Ms. Ocasio-Cortez’s endorsement most likely cements Ms. Wiley as the liberal standard-bearer in the contest and could signal a new measure of viability around her campaign.The endorsement may also provide a boost to the left wing of the Democratic Party, which, despite significant recent victories at the congressional and state legislative levels in New York, seemed to be at a disadvantage in the mayor’s race as leaders and activists struggled to coalesce around a single candidate.On several issues, but especially on matters of policing, Ms. Wiley has positioned herself to the left of Mr. Adams, Mr. Yang and Ms. Garcia, and her candidacy will offer an important test of how potent that pitch is among Democratic voters who want to rein in police misconduct but are also concerned about rising violent crime.“I know I’m in a different lane, because I’m in the progressive lane,” Ms. Wiley said. “I think that progressive lane is its own lane now in this race.”Ms. Ocasio-Cortez did not mention Mr. Yang or Mr. Adams by name, but she blasted the “dark money” shaping the race — both have attracted controversy over donors to their super PACs — and she implicitly warned against candidates who support what she cast as overpolicing. (Ms. Wiley also has independent expenditure support.)“We’ve already tried Giuliani’s New York,” Ms. Ocasio-Cortez said, adding that the city had also tried “Bloomberg’s New York.”“And what that got us was a New York that was harder to afford and a New York that criminalized young people and put them into lifelong carceral cycles,” she said. “It ends now.”.css-1xzcza9{list-style-type:disc;padding-inline-start:1em;}.css-3btd0c{font-family:nyt-franklin,helvetica,arial,sans-serif;font-size:1rem;line-height:1.375rem;color:#333;margin-bottom:0.78125rem;}@media (min-width:740px){.css-3btd0c{font-size:1.0625rem;line-height:1.5rem;margin-bottom:0.9375rem;}}.css-3btd0c strong{font-weight:600;}.css-3btd0c em{font-style:italic;}.css-w739ur{margin:0 auto 5px;font-family:nyt-franklin,helvetica,arial,sans-serif;font-weight:700;font-size:1.125rem;line-height:1.3125rem;color:#121212;}#NYT_BELOW_MAIN_CONTENT_REGION .css-w739ur{font-family:nyt-cheltenham,georgia,’times new roman’,times,serif;font-weight:700;font-size:1.375rem;line-height:1.625rem;}@media (min-width:740px){#NYT_BELOW_MAIN_CONTENT_REGION .css-w739ur{font-size:1.6875rem;line-height:1.875rem;}}@media (min-width:740px){.css-w739ur{font-size:1.25rem;line-height:1.4375rem;}}.css-9s9ecg{margin-bottom:15px;}.css-uf1ume{display:-webkit-box;display:-webkit-flex;display:-ms-flexbox;display:flex;-webkit-box-pack:justify;-webkit-justify-content:space-between;-ms-flex-pack:justify;justify-content:space-between;}.css-wxi1cx{display:-webkit-box;display:-webkit-flex;display:-ms-flexbox;display:flex;-webkit-flex-direction:column;-ms-flex-direction:column;flex-direction:column;-webkit-align-self:flex-end;-ms-flex-item-align:end;align-self:flex-end;}.css-12vbvwq{background-color:white;border:1px solid #e2e2e2;width:calc(100% – 40px);max-width:600px;margin:1.5rem auto 1.9rem;padding:15px;box-sizing:border-box;}@media (min-width:740px){.css-12vbvwq{padding:20px;width:100%;}}.css-12vbvwq:focus{outline:1px solid #e2e2e2;}#NYT_BELOW_MAIN_CONTENT_REGION .css-12vbvwq{border:none;padding:10px 0 0;border-top:2px solid #121212;}.css-12vbvwq[data-truncated] .css-rdoyk0{-webkit-transform:rotate(0deg);-ms-transform:rotate(0deg);transform:rotate(0deg);}.css-12vbvwq[data-truncated] .css-eb027h{max-height:300px;overflow:hidden;-webkit-transition:none;transition:none;}.css-12vbvwq[data-truncated] .css-5gimkt:after{content:’See more’;}.css-12vbvwq[data-truncated] .css-6mllg9{opacity:1;}.css-qjk116{margin:0 auto;overflow:hidden;}.css-qjk116 strong{font-weight:700;}.css-qjk116 em{font-style:italic;}.css-qjk116 a{color:#326891;-webkit-text-decoration:underline;text-decoration:underline;text-underline-offset:1px;-webkit-text-decoration-thickness:1px;text-decoration-thickness:1px;-webkit-text-decoration-color:#326891;text-decoration-color:#326891;}.css-qjk116 a:visited{color:#326891;-webkit-text-decoration-color:#326891;text-decoration-color:#326891;}.css-qjk116 a:hover{-webkit-text-decoration:none;text-decoration:none;}“These are the stakes,” she continued. “Maya Wiley is the one. She will be a progressive in Gracie Mansion.”Ms. Ocasio-Cortez has publicly rebuked Mr. Yang twice during the race: once after he laid out his plan to support a “Green New Deal for public housing,” and again following remarks he made about Israel. She indicated that she might announce “further ranks” before New York City’s ranked-choice voting election, but it would stun many political observers if Mr. Yang or Mr. Adams made her list.Ms. Wiley’s campaign has promoted a number of progressive policy proposals, including cutting $1 billion from the police budget and trimming at least 2,250 officers; helping poor families pay for child care by offering $5,000 grants to caregivers; and giving subsidies to low-income New Yorkers to help pay for rent. She is seeking to build a coalition that includes voters of color from across the ideological spectrum and white progressives.Minutes after the endorsement was announced, Mr. Adams — who, more than any candidate, is running on the issue of public safety, casting it as the “prerequisite” to prosperity — released a statement blasting Ms. Ocasio-Cortez and Ms. Wiley over the issue of police funding.“Rep. Ocasio-Cortez and Maya Wiley want to slash the Police Department budget and shrink the police force at a time when Black and brown babies are being shot in our streets, hate crimes are terrorizing Asian and Jewish communities, and innocent New Yorkers are being stabbed and shot on their way to work,” said Mr. Adams, a former police officer. “They are putting slogans and politics in front of public safety and would endanger the lives of New Yorkers.”In a statement, Ms. Wiley accused Mr. Adams of taking a “reactionary approach to public safety” and said that he was using right-wing talking points.Many left-wing activists and leaders have been divided over how to approach the mayor’s race. Some backed Ms. Wiley; others supported Scott M. Stringer, the city comptroller, or Dianne Morales, a former nonprofit executive. But in recent weeks, Mr. Stringer and Ms. Morales have struggled with controversies, and some of their backers have rescinded their endorsements.Mr. Stringer has faced two accusations of making unwanted sexual advances decades ago. He denied wrongdoing in one instance. On Friday, in response to a New York Times report about a second accusation of harassment and unwanted advances, he said that he did not recall the woman making the allegations but that he apologized if he had met her and made her uncomfortable.He has lost a number of high-profile left-wing endorsers, including Mr. Bowman.Ms. Morales’s struggles center on a campaign implosion, as staff members accused the campaign of not living up to its left-wing ideals, senior members departed and battles over a late-stage union drive unfolded.The Working Families Party had initially supported Mr. Stringer as its first choice and then backed Ms. Wiley and Ms. Morales after the first allegation against Mr. Stringer. On Friday, the party endorsed Ms. Wiley alone as its first choice.“We can’t afford to not engage because of what could have been,” Ms. Ocasio-Cortez said on Saturday. “We engage in the world that we have. And we do everything we can to make that world better. We have a choice to make New York City better.”Mihir Zaveri and Anne Barnard contributed reporting. More

    • 63 Shares99 Views

      in Elections

      Three Paths to Containing Trump

      by

      Last fall and winter, the president of the United States attempted, with ineffectual strategy but violent consequences, to pressure Republicans to overturn an election that he quite clearly lost. Now he reportedly believes that swing-state “audits” will somehow reinstall him in the White House by the end of summer. Many of the courtiers who encouraged his earlier delusions are still busily at work; one of them, Michael Flynn, recently suggested (before backpedaling) that the United States needed a Myanmar-style military coup. More

    • 100 Shares149 Views

      in Elections

      Kamala Harris and a High-Risk, High-Reward Presidential Résumé

      by

      For the vice president, another run at the Oval Office is a near certainty. How her current responsibilities help or hurt that bid is an open question.Hi. Welcome to On Politics, your wrap-up of the week in national politics. I’m Lisa Lerer, your host.Is Kamala Harris drawing the shortest straws in the White House?This week, President Biden announced that Ms. Harris would lead the administration’s effort to protect voting rights, a task he immediately said would “take a hell of a lot of work.”And on Sunday, Ms. Harris leaves for her first trip abroad, visiting Mexico and Guatemala as part of her mandate to address the root causes of migration from Central America that are contributing to a surge of people trying to cross the United States’ Southern border.The central political question facing Ms. Harris has never been whether she will run for president again. It’s when and how.Yet for a history-making politician with big ambitions, Ms. Harris has adopted an early agenda that has left some Democrats fretting about the future of a politician who is already positioned as a presidential-nominee-in-waiting.Both immigration and voting rights are politically fraught problems with no easy solutions. Democrats’ expansive election legislation has faltered in the Senate, with moderate party lawmakers like Senator Joe Manchin III of West Virginia expressing concerns about the bill.And despite the best efforts of her team, Ms. Harris has become the administration’s face — sometimes quite literally — for the influx of migrants, including tens of thousands of unaccompanied children, at the Southern border.Allies point out that Ms. Harris’s portfolio extends beyond those two high-profile issues. She’s also responsible for expanding broadband internet access, combating vaccine hesitancy, advocating the infrastructure plan, helping women re-enter the work force, highlighting the Black maternal mortality rate and aiding small businesses, among other issues.The allies cite the challenges Mr. Biden took on during his first term as vice president — including leading the White House effort to draw down troops in Iraq and overseeing the implementation of the stimulus bill — and argue that voters reward politicians for tackling hard issues, even if they remain unresolved.And many argue that there are no easy problems in a country still grappling with a devastating pandemic, continued economic uncertainty and a divisive racial reckoning.“These are long-term systemic issues,” said Donna Brazile, a former Democratic Party chairwoman who speaks with Ms. Harris and her team. “She’s defined by what I call real big problems, and problems that require a different kind of leadership to solve.”Of course, “real big problems” also carry a far greater risk of political missteps and policy failures, particularly for a politician who is more polarizing than the president she serves, polls show.Even before she became the first Black female vice president, Ms. Harris emerged as an early target of Republicans, who found it easier to rile up their base with racist and sexist attacks against her than with condemnations of Mr. Biden. In the conservative media, she’s relentlessly defined as an untrustworthy radical, with an unpronounceable name and an anti-American agenda.The false caricature may be having an impact on her image: Tracking polls find Ms. Harris’s approval rating hovering a few percentage points lower than Mr. Biden’s, with more voters expressing negative views of her performance.Aides to Ms. Harris have quietly placed some of the blame for the politically damaging situation on Mr. Biden, according to some Democrats outside the White House. The president announced her new diplomatic assignment by telling reporters before a March meeting on immigration at the White House that the vice president would “lead our efforts with Mexico and the Northern Triangle, and the countries that can help, need help in stemming the movement of so many folks, stemming the migration to our southern border.”Ms. Harris’s staff spent weeks explaining that her job was not to reform the country’s immigration system but a narrowly focused foreign policy mission. That distinction is difficult to draw, given the interconnected nature of global migration.And it seems to have been lost on Republicans, who see the situation at the border as one of their most potent lines of attack against a relatively popular administration. They’ve spent weeks falsely calling her Mr. Biden’s “border czar,” releasing #BidenBorderCrisis videos and calling on the vice president to visit the southern border, which she will fly over this weekend on her way to meetings in Central America.But there are some indications that behind the scenes, Ms. Harris pushed for leadership roles on these charged policy issues.After the election, some allies of Ms. Harris’s urged her to take on immigration, according to people who have spoken with her team, even though the issue has long been so intractable that the last president to pass significant legislation addressing it was Ronald Reagan. And the vice president personally asked Mr. Biden if she could spearhead the administration’s fight against Republicans’ new voting restrictions, as an extension of her past work as a senator and the attorney general of California on a problem she believes threatens the underpinnings of American democracy.Yet in the Senate, Ms. Harris was not known for her close relationships with moderates like Mr. Manchin. It’s unclear if she will be able to broker the kind of compromises within her party that will be necessary to pass a voting rights bill. And given the lack of Republican support, little is likely to happen on the bill unless Democrats agree to abolish the filibuster, which several moderates oppose.Beyond legislation, her influence is limited. In the states, Republicans have made the passing of laws that restrict voting an early litmus test for their party. While the Justice Department can bring litigation against voter-suppression measures, Ms. Harris can’t been seen as pressuring the agency to do so. Filling judicial vacancies with pro-voting judges could help stop some of the state laws, but that is a role that falls to Congress and Mr. Biden.Still, there may be political upside for Ms. Harris in taking on voting rights. Voting rights advocates have expressed frustration at what they see as the administration’s tepid approach to countering voter suppression and the prospect that it could hamper Democrats’ ability to win elections in 2022 and beyond.Ms. Harris can travel the country rallying her party’s base, particularly voters of color who are the backbone of Democratic politics. Allies say her role will extend far beyond the legislative wrangling in the Senate to include meetings with activists, state officials and corporations — building relationships with the kinds of Democrats who can help bolster a presidential bid.“From her perspective, what I would say she’s thinking about is, ‘Look, if we don’t fix this, our democracy is gone,’” said Leah Daughtry, a veteran of Democratic campaigns. “She will be using the power of the bully pulpit of the White House to get people engaged and involved.”But some suggest that Ms. Harris’s portfolio may have more to do with office politics than those of the presidential variety. While Mr. Biden feels comfortable with Ms. Harris, Democrats familiar with the workings of the White House say, some on his team remain skeptical of her loyalty after the divisive primary race. Her agenda, they argue, may simply be the White House version of cleaning up after the office party: What better way to prove her fidelity than by taking on some of the most thankless tasks?“There’s always the long view when you are vice president and you think about the future,” Ms. Brazile said. “But it’s too early. Joe Biden has said he’s running in 2024, and she is a real team player.”Drop us a line!We want to hear from our readers. Have a question? We’ll try to answer it. Have a comment? We’re all ears. Email us at onpolitics@nytimes.com or message me on Twitter at @llerer.By the numbers: 29… That’s the number of days former President Donald J. Trump’s blog existed before being shuttered this week.… SeriouslyThe campaign swag that is worth a thousand words.Thanks for reading. On Politics is your guide to the political news cycle, delivering clarity from the chaos.On Politics is also available as a newsletter. Sign up here to get it delivered to your inbox.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

    • 125 Shares199 Views

      in Elections

      State Election Officials Are Under Attack. We Will Defend Them.

      by

      Tucked into many of the election laws Republicans are pushing or enacting in states around the country are pernicious provisions threatening punishment of elections officials and workers for just doing their jobs.Laws like those already passed in Republican-controlled states like Georgia and Iowa, no matter their stated intent, will be used as a weapon of intimidation aimed at the people, many of them volunteers, charged with running fair elections at the local and state levels. By subjecting them to invasive, politically motivated control by a state legislative majority, these provisions shift the last word in elections from the pros to the pols. This is a serious attack on the crucial norm that our elections should be run on a professional, nonpartisan basis — and it is deeply wrong.It is so wrong that having once worked together across the partisan divide as co-chairs of the 2013-14 Presidential Commission on Election Administration, we have decided to come together again to mobilize the defense of election officials who may come under siege from these new laws.Bear in mind that this is happening after the 2020 election, run in the midst of a once-in-a-century pandemic, went off much better than expected. Voter turnout was the highest since 1900. A senior official in the Trump administration pronounced it the “most secure election in American history,” with “no evidence that any voting system deleted or lost votes, changed votes or was in any way compromised.” Multiple recounts, contests and court cases brought by former President Donald Trump and his allies failed to persuade any courts or state officials to overturn the results of any election.The new laws establish civil penalties for technical infractions and subject officials to threats of suspension and even criminal prosecution. Iowa state election officials are now subject to fines of $10,000 and suspension for any actions that “hinder or disregard the object of the law.” They are also subject to criminal penalties when seeking to address disruptive conduct by partisan poll watchers. In Georgia, an election official threatened with suspension may appeal, but the law restricts state-financed support for the individual’s legal defense. The Georgia secretary of state, the chief election official, has been removed from the chairmanship of the State Elections Board, demoted to nonvoting ex officio status.Other states are considering laws containing similar threats to the impartial administration of elections. It can be no surprise that officials around the country are also experiencing threats and harassment ranging from physical confrontation to social media postings of personal information from their Facebook pages. And this dangerous behavior is spreading throughout the electoral process. Last month, election officials in Anchorage, Alaska, issued a report describing the “unprecedented harassment of election officials” during the conduct of a mayoral runoff election.The partisan efforts to control election outcomes will result in the corruption of our system of government, which is rooted in fair, free elections. We say this as longtime election lawyers from opposing political parties. In jointly leading the presidential commission, we worked with numerous local and state elections officials. We saw firsthand the dedication and professionalism they brought to their jobs. They work hard with inadequate resources and are rarely praised for what goes well and are quickly blamed for what goes wrong.In 2020, after the pandemic struck, these officials performed the near-impossible task of locating replacements for thousands of poll workers, reconfiguring polling places to offer safe voting spaces for voters and poll workers and ramping up effective mail voting where allowed under state law.Now their nonpartisan performance of their duties is under attack — even to the point of being criminalized. So we are committed to providing these officials a defense against these attacks and threats by recruiting lawyers around the country, Democrats and Republicans, to establish a network that would provide free legal support to election officials who face threats, fines or suspensions for doing their jobs. This national network will monitor new threats as they develop and publicly report on what it learns.The defense of the electoral process is not a partisan cause, even where there may be reasonable disagreements between the parties about specific voting rules and procedures. The presidential commission we led concluded that “election administration is public administration” and that whenever possible, “the responsible department or agency in every state should have on staff individuals who are chosen and serve solely on the basis of their experience and expertise.” To serve voters, those officials would require independence from partisan political pressures, threats and retaliatory attacks.These state laws, and the blind rage against our election officials that they encourage or reinforce, will corrode our electoral systems and democracy. They will add to the recent lamentable trend of experienced officials’ retiring from their active and vitally needed service — clearing the way for others less qualified and more easily managed by partisans. Early surveys show that in our nation’s larger jurisdictions, up to a quarter of experienced election officials are planning to leave their jobs. A primary reason they cite: “the political environment.”No requirement of our electoral process — of our democracy — is more critical than the commitment to nonpartisanship in the administration of our system for casting and counting of ballots now being degraded by these state laws. This challenge must be strongly and forcefully met in every possible way by Democrats and Republicans alike.Bob Bauer, a former senior adviser to the Biden campaign, is a professor at New York University School of Law and a co-author of “After Trump: Reconstructing the Presidency.” Ben Ginsberg practiced election law for 38 years representing Republican candidates and parties.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

    • 88 Shares179 Views

      in Elections

      Kyrsten Sinema and Joe Manchin’s Nihilistic Bipartisanship

      by

      We are in the eye of the storm of American democratic collapse. There is, outwardly, a feeling of calm. The Biden administration is competent and placid. The coronavirus emergency is receding nationally, if not internationally. Donald Trump, once the most powerful man on earth and the emperor of the news cycle, is now a failed blogger under criminal investigation. More

    • 138 Shares179 Views

      in Elections

      Andrew Yang and Eric Adams Rivalry Takes Center Stage After Debate

      by

      Both candidates, who are considered front-runners, have sharpened their tone, launching attacks on each other during and after Wednesday’s debate.During the 2020 presidential race and for much of the New York City mayor’s race, Andrew Yang has been known as a cheerful optimist.But voters saw a different side of Mr. Yang at the second major Democratic debate on Wednesday night as he fiercely criticized Eric Adams, the Brooklyn borough president and one of his main rivals.After Mr. Adams knocked him for leaving the city during the pandemic and not voting in city elections, Mr. Yang fought back, depicting Mr. Adams as a corrupt and unprincipled politician who would maintain the status quo. It was a strategic attack that could damage his opponent’s reputation, but the approach was far from Mr. Yang’s exuberant brand.“It was definitely noticeable,” Susan Kang, a professor of political science at John Jay College of Criminal Justice, said of his change in tone. “His biggest appeal has always been being the affable guy — he seemed so friendly and relaxed despite being attacked.”The tense exchange between Mr. Yang and Mr. Adams continued to make waves on Thursday as the eight leading candidates all tried to claim victory after their first major in-person debate.Mr. Adams continued to draw attention to Mr. Yang’s lack of experience at a virtual town hall for ethnic and community media.“You can examine my record because I have a record,” Mr. Adams said. “We can’t examine the records of those who decided to pop in the city all of a sudden. We can’t examine the records of those who have not been on the ground with us.”Evan Thies, a spokesman for Mr. Adams, doubled down on Mr. Adams’s demand Wednesday night for an apology from Mr. Yang over his accusations of corruption.“Yang is lying to voters about Eric because New Yorkers know the truth about Yang: he’s a fraud,” Mr. Thies said. “Yang should apologize to New Yorkers for spreading falsehoods, abandoning the city during Covid, and not taking this crucial election seriously.”Chris Coffey, one of Mr. Yang’s campaign managers, responded by reiterating Mr. Yang’s concerns that Mr. Adams was corrupt, and said voters were turning “towards the candidate who represents real change.”But Mr. Adams also appeared excited over his momentum going into the Democratic primary on June 22.“We are only 19 days away,” he said. “It almost gives me goose bumps when I think about it.”Kathryn Garcia, the city’s former sanitation commissioner, celebrated her debate performance with a specialty bagel in Brooklyn. Maya Wiley, a former counsel to Mayor Bill de Blasio, greeted voters at the Park Slope Food Co-op in Brooklyn and highlighted a new endorsement from the New York State Nurses Association. Scott M. Stringer, the city comptroller whose campaign was damaged by an allegation of sexual misconduct, held a “Women for Stringer” event.Mr. Adams wasn’t the only one to attack Mr. Yang during the debate. Mr. Stringer said that Mr. Yang was worse than an “empty vessel” — a term used by one of Mr. Yang’s advisers — and that he was a Republican.On Thursday, Mr. Yang was back to his upbeat self on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe,” arguing that he had momentum in the final weeks of the campaign.“We feel very, very confident going into this homestretch,” he said.Mr. Yang faced another confrontation on Thursday when he tried to hold a news conference outside the Prospect Park YMCA in Brooklyn and was shouted down by protesters. He chose the gym — Mr. de Blasio’s favored workout spot before the pandemic — to make the argument that he is the “best candidate to turn the page on the de Blasio administration.”A group of progressive activists were there to meet him, holding signs that read “Yang = More Cops” and “Hedge Fund Mayor,” and shouting “Don’t rank Yang!” After trying to talk with them, Mr. Yang gave up and left.Mr. Yang’s campaign said in a statement that he did not want to “defund the N.Y.P.D. at a time of soaring gun violence” and blamed the disruption on Mr. Stringer’s camp, calling it “a desperate attempt to distract from his failing campaign.”The organizers of the protest, a progressive super PAC called Our City, denied that they were backing Mr. Stringer. The group has called for voters not to rank Mr. Yang or Mr. Adams and is being led by Gabe Tobias, a former senior adviser to Justice Democrats, which played a key role in helping Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez get elected to Congress in 2018.“Our city deserves so much better than Andrew Yang and Eric Adams,” Mr. Tobias said in a statement. “No Democratic primary voter should rank either Yang or Adams. These are corporate candidates supported by super PACs that are funded by right-wing billionaires.”.css-1xzcza9{list-style-type:disc;padding-inline-start:1em;}.css-3btd0c{font-family:nyt-franklin,helvetica,arial,sans-serif;font-size:1rem;line-height:1.375rem;color:#333;margin-bottom:0.78125rem;}@media (min-width:740px){.css-3btd0c{font-size:1.0625rem;line-height:1.5rem;margin-bottom:0.9375rem;}}.css-3btd0c strong{font-weight:600;}.css-3btd0c em{font-style:italic;}.css-w739ur{margin:0 auto 5px;font-family:nyt-franklin,helvetica,arial,sans-serif;font-weight:700;font-size:1.125rem;line-height:1.3125rem;color:#121212;}#NYT_BELOW_MAIN_CONTENT_REGION .css-w739ur{font-family:nyt-cheltenham,georgia,’times new roman’,times,serif;font-weight:700;font-size:1.375rem;line-height:1.625rem;}@media (min-width:740px){#NYT_BELOW_MAIN_CONTENT_REGION .css-w739ur{font-size:1.6875rem;line-height:1.875rem;}}@media (min-width:740px){.css-w739ur{font-size:1.25rem;line-height:1.4375rem;}}.css-9s9ecg{margin-bottom:15px;}.css-uf1ume{display:-webkit-box;display:-webkit-flex;display:-ms-flexbox;display:flex;-webkit-box-pack:justify;-webkit-justify-content:space-between;-ms-flex-pack:justify;justify-content:space-between;}.css-wxi1cx{display:-webkit-box;display:-webkit-flex;display:-ms-flexbox;display:flex;-webkit-flex-direction:column;-ms-flex-direction:column;flex-direction:column;-webkit-align-self:flex-end;-ms-flex-item-align:end;align-self:flex-end;}.css-12vbvwq{background-color:white;border:1px solid #e2e2e2;width:calc(100% – 40px);max-width:600px;margin:1.5rem auto 1.9rem;padding:15px;box-sizing:border-box;}@media (min-width:740px){.css-12vbvwq{padding:20px;width:100%;}}.css-12vbvwq:focus{outline:1px solid #e2e2e2;}#NYT_BELOW_MAIN_CONTENT_REGION .css-12vbvwq{border:none;padding:10px 0 0;border-top:2px solid #121212;}.css-12vbvwq[data-truncated] .css-rdoyk0{-webkit-transform:rotate(0deg);-ms-transform:rotate(0deg);transform:rotate(0deg);}.css-12vbvwq[data-truncated] .css-eb027h{max-height:300px;overflow:hidden;-webkit-transition:none;transition:none;}.css-12vbvwq[data-truncated] .css-5gimkt:after{content:’See more’;}.css-12vbvwq[data-truncated] .css-6mllg9{opacity:1;}.css-qjk116{margin:0 auto;overflow:hidden;}.css-qjk116 strong{font-weight:700;}.css-qjk116 em{font-style:italic;}.css-qjk116 a{color:#326891;-webkit-text-decoration:underline;text-decoration:underline;text-underline-offset:1px;-webkit-text-decoration-thickness:1px;text-decoration-thickness:1px;-webkit-text-decoration-color:#326891;text-decoration-color:#326891;}.css-qjk116 a:visited{color:#326891;-webkit-text-decoration-color:#326891;text-decoration-color:#326891;}.css-qjk116 a:hover{-webkit-text-decoration:none;text-decoration:none;}Mr. de Blasio, a Democrat in his second term, was not impressed by the debate or by Mr. Yang’s stunt outside his favorite gym.“That’s just a politician being a politician,” Mr. de Blasio told reporters. “I’d much rather people talk about what they’re going to do for New Yorkers and show they actually have some knowledge of this city and how it works.”Many of the candidates gave Mr. de Blasio poor to failing grades during the debate, and Mr. Yang was the only one who said he would accept the mayor’s endorsement.Mr. de Blasio said he had watched the debate and wanted more substance.“Sadly, I don’t think it was much of a debate,” he said. “I don’t think it shed a lot of light and New Yorkers need a lot more information about these candidates. They need a lot clearer vision from these candidates.”Ms. Wiley agreed. She went on the attack during the debate against both Mr. Yang and Mr. Adams. During the frenetic first hour of the debate, Ms. Wiley ignored calls from the moderators to stop talking and continued until she felt she had made her point.“One of the complaints about the debate was substance,” said Ms. Wiley, who explained her strategy after greeting voters outside of Yankee Stadium in the Bronx on Thursday. “Well, how do you get substantive in 30 to 45 seconds? You are basically doing sound bites.”During the debate, Ms. Wiley criticized Mr. Adams for what she believes are regressive views on policing and called out a nonprofit Mr. Yang founded for promising to create 100,000 jobs but only providing 150 in the cities that it targeted.“A two-minute answer is very different from a 45-second or 30-second answer,” she explained. “When I’m able to have a two-minute conversation — that’s all I need.”Both Mr. Adams and Mr. Yang showed a different side of themselves at the debate, said Mitchell L. Moss, a professor of urban policy and planning at New York University. Mr. Adams, who is known for making unscripted remarks, was prepared to respond calmly to Mr. Yang’s attacks.“He brushed it off very gracefully,” Mr. Moss said.Mr. Yang decided to go negative, but he also made good points about the city’s growing deficits in the coming years, said Mr. Moss, who advised Michael R. Bloomberg during his 2001 mayoral campaign and donated to Ms. Garcia this year.“Yang’s best message was that we are facing tough financial problems, and we should be discussing them,” Mr. Moss said. More

    • 163 Shares199 Views

      in Elections

      VP Kamala Harris Asked to Lead on Voting Rights, and It's a Challenge

      by

      Her new role comes as the Senate enters a crucial month in the Democratic drive to enact the most extensive elections overhaul in a generation.WASHINGTON — Vice President Kamala Harris did not come to her role with a list of demands. She wanted to be a generalist, in large part to learn the political rhythms of a president she was still getting to know. In the first few months of her tenure, some of her portfolio assignments were just that: assignments.But on the matter of protecting voting rights, an issue critically important to President Biden’s legacy, Ms. Harris took a rare step. In a meeting with the president over a month ago, she told him that she wanted to take the lead on the issue.Mr. Biden agreed, two people familiar with the discussions said, and his advisers decided to time the announcement of Ms. Harris’s new role to a speech he delivered on Tuesday in Tulsa, Okla. In his remarks, the president declared the efforts of Republican-led statehouses around the country to make it harder to vote as an “assault on our democracy, ” and said Ms. Harris could help lead the charge against them.He also gave a blunt assessment of the task: “It’s going to take a hell of a lot of work.”Back in Washington, the president’s announcement has not clearly illuminated a path forward for Ms. Harris, whose involvement in the issue stands to become her most politically delicate engagement yet. Her new role comes as the Senate enters a crucial month in the Democratic drive to enact the farthest-reaching elections overhaul in a generation, including a landmark expansion of voting rights that is faltering in the Senate.Her office has not yet announced its plans, aside from calls Ms. Harris held with civil rights activists, including Derrick Johnson, the president of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, and a few scheduled meetings with prominent voting rights groups. Her advisers say she will take a wide-ranging approach to the issue by giving speeches, convening stakeholders and using the vice-presidential bully pulpit to raise awareness of the importance of the vote.“The work of voting rights has implications for not just one year down the road or four years down the road but 50 years from now,” Symone D. Sanders, the vice president’s senior adviser and press secretary, said in an interview on Wednesday. “The president understands that and the vice president understands that, and that’s why we will implement a comprehensive strategy.”The voting rights bill faces a more urgent timeline. The vast majority of the party has agreed to make the bill the party’s top legislative priority, and Senator Chuck Schumer, Democrat of New York and the majority leader, vowed to put it up for a vote later this month so any changes could be put into effect before the 2022 elections.With just weeks to go, it remains far from clear if it can actually pass. Because Republicans have locked arms in opposition, the only path forward would require all 50 Democrats — plus Ms. Harris, who serves as the tiebreaking vote in an evenly divided Senate — to support not only the substance of the bill, but changing the filibuster rule requiring 60 votes to approve major legislation, allowing it to pass with a simple majority instead.A handful of Democratic senators have expressed unease about changing the filibuster, while Senators Joe Manchin III of West Virginia and Kyrsten Sinema of Arizona, have been more adamant in their opposition.Mr. Biden has already pledged to sign the bill, which the House passed with only Democratic votes this spring. Known as the For the People Act, the bill would overhaul the nation’s elections system by creating new national requirements for early and mail-in voting, rein in campaign donations and limit partisan gerrymandering. But with the bill all but stalled in the Senate, Mr. Biden has repeatedly expressed concern over its future in his discussions with Democrats.The announcement that Ms. Harris would be working to move the bill forward took many on Capitol Hill by surprise. Ms. Harris and Mr. Schumer spoke on Tuesday — and had plans to hold a follow-up conversation late Wednesday, a White House official said — but it did not appear Mr. Manchin or Ms. Sinema were given a heads up.In a statement, Mr. Schumer said he welcomed Ms. Harris’s help navigating into law an elections overhaul that was “essential to protecting the future of our democracy.”Proponents of the voting legislation took her involvement as a sign that their attempts to build pressure not just on lawmakers, but the White House, were being felt.Senator Chuck Schumer, the majority leader, said he welcomed Ms. Harris’s help navigating into law an elections overhaul that was “essential to protecting the future of our democracy.”Erin Scott for The New York Times“It’s an interesting move given the long odds of anything getting passed and signed into law,” said James P. Manley, who served as a senior aide to former Senator Harry Reid of Nevada, the Democratic leader before Mr. Schumer. “There’s not a lot of cards to play right now, so it shows me they are going to try to raise the public temperature of this thing.”Others pointed out that even though Mr. Biden has decades of experience moving legislation through the Senate, Ms. Harris, the first woman and woman of color to hold her role, comes to the issue with an equally valuable perspective as the country grapples with the ways American policies have marginalized and mistreated Black people.“I think that Vice President Harris herself personifies the need for voting rights to be extended,” the Rev. Al Sharpton, who attended the speech in Tulsa, said in an interview. “When she’s on the phone or walks into an office, we’re looking at the reason we need voting rights.”Michael Waldman, the president of the Brennan Center for Justice at the New York University School of Law, said that the decision to elevate Ms. Harris as the face of the administration’s work on the issue was a pivotal moment for the Biden White House given the number of voter suppression efforts that were moving forward — 389 bills in 48 states and counting, according to a tracker maintained the Brennan Center.“It has been decades since a Democratic White House has made voting rights and democracy reform a central goal,” Mr. Waldman said, but he added, “the clock is ticking.”Ms. Harris’s impact on the hand-to-hand politics of the Senate is expected to be limited, but she often drew attention to voting rights during her four years as a senator. During her last year in the Senate, Ms. Harris introduced legislation that would expand election security measures, require each state to have early in-person voting periods and allow for an expansion of mail-in absentee ballots.In 2020, Ms. Harris was also a co-sponsor of the John Lewis Voting Rights Act, which would restore a piece of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 that relied on a formula to identify states with a history of discrimination and require that those jurisdictions clear any changes to their voting processes with the federal government. The protections were eliminated by the Supreme Court in 2013.Still, Ms. Harris, who spent a chunk of her time in the Senate running for president, was not known for building especially close relationships with colleagues, and Mr. Manchin and Ms. Sinema are no exceptions.Several Democratic aides who work closely with the senators scoffed on Wednesday at the idea that Ms. Harris, known as a staunch liberal, would be the one to persuade either moderate lawmaker to change the filibuster rule. Nor is Ms. Harris a likely candidate to broker the kind of compromise on the substance of the bill needed to persuade Mr. Manchin, the only Democrat who has not sponsored it, to back it.Ms. Harris’s attempts in February to nudge Mr. Manchin to back the White House’s proposed $1.9 trillion coronavirus rescue package are illustrative.Mr. Manchin was piqued when Ms. Harris appeared, without warning, on a television affiliate in West Virginia to promote the package before he backed it. Though a Democratic aide familiar with the matter, who asked for anonymity to speak candidly, said the episode was now “water under the bridge,” it prompted cleanup by top White House officials.Mr. Manchin and Ms. Sinema’s offices declined to comment about Ms. Harris’s new role.Senate Republicans, meanwhile, are doing their best to kill the bill and blunt any Democratic attempt to change the filibuster rule, which would leave their party powerless to stop the passage of sweeping liberal priorities well beyond voting rights.At an event in his home state on Wednesday, Senator Mitch McConnell, Republican of Kentucky and the minority leader, argued that Democrats were inflating the impact of new state voting laws in an attempt to justify an unwarranted and chaotic slew of top-down changes to the way states run elections.“What is going on is the Democrats are trying to convince the Senate that states are involved in trying to prevent people from voting in order to pass a total federal takeover in how we conduct elections,” he told reporters. He said “not a single member” of his party supported the bill.Aware of the daunting path ahead, allies of the White House said that shepherding the bill through Congress was only one piece of the effort. Ms. Harris could be useful in helping ratchet up pressure on private companies, working with civil rights organizations, and engaging local communities over the importance of registering to vote.“She understands the need to engage in what I’d like to call kind of an ‘all of the above approach,’” said Representative Steven Horsford, Democrat of Nevada. “We can’t take anything for granted when we’re talking about having people’s voice heard at the ballot box.” More