More stories

  • in

    Biden Had a Clear Message: Trump Was a Threat. Then the Shooting Happened.

    Former President Donald J. Trump has gone from being an instigator of political violence to a victim of it. The assassination attempt raised questions about how far language should go in a heated campaign.For months, the message from the White House and Wilmington was as stark as it was simple: This year’s election amounts to an existential choice between a defender of democracy and a destroyer of democracy. Nothing less than the future of America is at stake.And then the bullets started flying.The assassination attempt over the weekend has complicated President Biden’s argument now that former President Donald J. Trump has gone from being a longtime instigator of political violence to a victim of it. Republicans, including Mr. Trump’s newly anointed running mate, Senator J.D. Vance of Ohio, instantly blamed Mr. Biden, citing his sharp rhetoric.No one in Mr. Biden’s camp thinks that is a good-faith argument, especially from allies of a former president who sent the mob that marauded the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, and did nothing to stop its assault, and has now vowed to pardon rioters convicted of violent crimes. But the images of Mr. Trump with blood streaked across his face after being grazed by a would-be assassin’s bullet raise the question of how far language should go in a heated campaign.Mr. Biden, who has long preached unity and civility, conceded on Monday that it was “a mistake” to tell supporters a week ago that he wanted to “put Trump in a bull’s-eye,” an expression that was certainly metaphorical but opened the president to criticism after his opponent found himself in literal cross hairs. At the same time, Mr. Biden and his team have made clear that they will not back off efforts to demonstrate that Mr. Trump is a budding dictator who is dangerous to the country.“How do you talk about the threat to democracy, which is real, when a president says things like he says?” Mr. Biden asked Lester Holt of NBC News on Monday during his first interview since the assassination attempt. “Do you just not say anything because it may incite somebody? Look, I’m not engaged in that rhetoric. Now, my opponent is engaged in that rhetoric.”Mr. Biden responded to the shooting in Butler, Pa., on Saturday by calling Mr. Trump to express relief that he was not more seriously wounded and urging Americans to “lower the temperature” this campaign season. His campaign suspended television ads and its regular barrage of attack emails.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    For Biden, a Race Against Time

    When my mom got into her 80s, we had to deal with periodic medical issues. Fainting. Falls. Broken bones.Luckily, she was in good stead with the local rescue squad because she faithfully attended their crab feast fund-raisers.Each time, my siblings and I would move heaven and earth to get her home from whatever hospital she had landed in.In 2003, I tried to talk one emergency room doctor into releasing her after 11 hours.“I’ll let her out if she can tell me who the president is,” the doctor said.We both looked at my mom, expectantly.“George,” she said.I was thrilled; W., it was.“George Washington,” she finished.After each episode, I’d proudly tell her internist, Dr. Simon, how we had nursed her back to health.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    A Female President? Big Deal.

    In her concession speech to President-elect Donald Trump in November 2016, Hillary Clinton declared, “We have still not shattered that highest and hardest glass ceiling, but some day someone will — and hopefully sooner than we might think right now.”There was lots of talk about gender in politics then. Many of us thought that Clinton lost in part because of both hard-core misogyny and a softer unconscious bias that led just enough voters to think of presidents only as guys in suits.I’ve been thinking lately of that glass ceiling because of a conversation we’re not having — one about the gender of the Democratic nominee if Joe Biden takes advice from so many of us to drop out of the presidential race.If Biden withdraws, his most likely successor is a Black woman, Vice President Kamala Harris, who polls a bit better than Biden against Trump. Some of us have urged instead that Democrats nominate Gov. Gretchen Whitmer of Michigan, believing that she would be the nominee most likely to defeat Trump. And a few of us have mentioned the talented Commerce Secretary Gina Raimondo, a former governor and a star of the Biden cabinet.Our argument isn’t a feminist one about the significance of elevating women. It’s not even an argument that these politicians would perform better than Biden as president. Astonishingly given our history, it’s that they would also be more electable.Perhaps even more intriguing, gender has largely gone unmentioned. I’ve had people push back at my recommendation of Whitmer on the basis that she’s untested nationally, that choosing her over Harris would antagonize Black voters, that her name recognition is weak. All fair objections. But I haven’t heard anyone scoff: But Whitmer is a woman. We tried that in 2016, and it got us Trump.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    Republicans Will Regret a Second Trump Term

    Now is the summer of Republican content.The G.O.P. is confident and unified. Donald Trump has held a consistent and widening lead over President Biden in all the battleground states. Never Trumpers have been exiled, purged or converted. The Supreme Court has eased many of Trump’s legal travails while his felony convictions in New York seem to have inflicted only minimal political damage — if they didn’t actually help him.Best of all for Republicans, a diminished Joe Biden seems determined to stay in the race, leading a dispirited and divided party that thinks of its presumptive nominee as one might think of a colonoscopy: an unpleasant reminder of age. Even if Biden can be cajoled into quitting, his likeliest replacement is Vice President Kamala Harris, whose 37 percent approval rating is just around that of her boss. Do Democrats really think they can run on her non-handling of the border crisis, her reputation for managerial incompetence or her verbal gaffes?In short, Republicans have good reason to think they’ll be back in the White House next January. Only then will the regrets set in.Three in particular: First, Trump won’t slay the left; instead, he will re-energize and radicalize it. Second, Trump will be a down-ballot loser, leading to divided and paralyzed government. Third, Trump’s second-term personnel won’t be like the ones in his first. Instead, he will appoint his Trumpiest people and pursue his Trumpiest instincts. The results won’t be ones old-school Republicans want or expect.Begin with the left.Talk to most conservatives and even a few liberals, and they’ll tell you that Peak Woke — that is, the worst excesses of far-left activism and cancel culture — happened around 2020. In fact, Peak Woke, from the campus witch hunts to “abolish the police” and the “mostly peaceful” protests in cities like Portland, Ore., and Minneapolis that followed George Floyd’s murder, really coincided with the entirety of Trump’s presidency, then abated after Biden’s election.That’s no accident. What used to be called political correctness has been with us for a long time. But it grew to a fever pitch under Trump, most of all because he was precisely the kind of bigoted vulgarian and aspiring strongman that liberals always feared might come to power, and which they felt duty bound to “resist.” With his every tweet, Trump’s presidency felt like a diesel engine blowing black soot in the face of the country. That’s also surely how Trump wanted it, since it delighted his base, goaded his critics and left everyone else in a kind of blind stupor.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    Donors Tell Pro-Biden Super PAC Roughly $90 Million in Pledges Is Frozen

    Some major Democratic donors have told the largest pro-Biden super PAC, Future Forward, that roughly $90 million in pledged donations is now on hold if President Biden remains atop the ticket, according to two people who have been briefed on the conversations.The frozen contributions include multiple eight-figure commitments, according to the two people, who spoke on the condition of anonymity given the sensitivity of the situation. The decision to withhold such enormous sums of money is one of the most concrete examples of the fallout from Mr. Biden’s poor debate performance at the end of June.Future Forward declined to comment on any conversations with donors or the amounts of any pledged money being withheld. A Future Forward adviser would say only that the group expected contributors who had paused donations to return once the current uncertainty about the ticket was resolved.Separately, one donor to the group described being approached multiple times by Future Forward since the debate for a contribution, but said he and his friends had been “holding off.”The two people briefed on the frozen pledges declined to say which individual donors were pulling back promised checks, which were estimated to total around or above $90 million. It was not clear how much of the pledged money was earmarked for Future Forward’s super PAC versus its nonprofit arm, which has also been running advertising in key battleground states.The cash freeze comes as some advisers around Mr. Biden are discussing how to persuade the president to exit the race, and as his campaign has begun to test Vice President Kamala Harris in head-to-head surveys of voters against former President Donald J. Trump. The number of congressional Democrats calling for Mr. Biden to step aside is growing by the day.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    Democrats Fear Safe Blue States Turning Purple as Biden Stays the Course

    Lingering worries about President Biden’s age could make Minnesota, New Hampshire, New Mexico and Virginia competitive, party operatives believe.As President Biden insists he will stay in the presidential race, Democrats are growing increasingly alarmed that his presence on the ticket is transforming the political map, turning light-blue states into contested battlegrounds.Down-ballot Democrats, local elected officials and party strategists say Minnesota, New Hampshire, New Mexico and Virginia — all of which Mr. Biden won comfortably in 2020 — could be in play in November after his miserable debate performance last month.Some polls in these states suggest a tightening race between Mr. Biden and former President Donald J. Trump, with one showing a virtual tie in Virginia, which has not voted for a Republican for president since 2004, and another showing Mr. Trump squeaking ahead in New Hampshire, which has been in the Democratic column since 2000.On Tuesday, the Cook Political Report, a prominent elections forecaster, downgraded New Hampshire and Minnesota from “likely” wins for Mr. Biden to only leaning in his direction. And in a meeting at the White House last week, Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham of New Mexico told Mr. Biden that she feared he would lose her state, according to two people briefed on her comments.The shakiness in the fringe battleground states is an alarming sign for Mr. Biden’s hopes in must-win contests that were already expected to be close, such as Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin. An expanding battleground map could force his campaign to divert resources away from the traditional swing states, where he has been falling further and further behind.But Mr. Biden has given no indication he is going anywhere, telling reporters at a high-profile news conference on Thursday that “I’m determined I’m running” and pushing back on his poor polling numbers.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    Biden Digs In as Democratic Fears Deepen

    The president put on a competent showing at his pressure cooker of a news conference, but it remained in doubt if he could stem the bleeding of Democratic support.Days after President Biden said only the “Lord Almighty” could drive him from the race, he laid out a far more earthly scenario at his closely watched news conference on Thursday night: His advisers would have to prove to him that he was headed for certain defeat.But leaning into the microphone and whispering to dramatize his defiance, Mr. Biden made clear that he did not foresee this happening.“No one’s saying that,” he said. “No poll says that.”He seemed to open the door to an alternative, then swiftly shut it. Sure, “other people can beat Trump,” he said, but it would be too hard to “start from scratch.”The president’s first news conference since the debate amounted to a competent presentation, if not a compelling performance. But it remained in doubt whether it was enough to stop the bleeding of Democratic support that has threatened to hemorrhage. Minutes after he left the stage, the drip-drip-drip of Democratic members of Congress calling for him to step aside continued unabated.“I believe I’m the best qualified to govern,” said Mr. Biden, who has for decades pointed to naysayers to fuel his own comeback narratives. “And I think I’m the best qualified to win.”The high-stakes, mostly unscripted hour — Mr. Biden’s longest since the debate that sent his candidacy into a tailspin — came as some of those around him have talked about how to persuade him to drop out, and as his campaign has commissioned a survey to test the strength of Vice President Kamala Harris in a matchup he has insisted will never come to pass.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    Biden Says Harris Is Qualified to Be President, but Vows to Remain in Race

    President Biden said on Thursday that Vice President Kamala Harris was qualified to be president, but pitched himself as the best person to defeat former President Donald J. Trump in November.During a news conference, Mr. Biden defended Ms. Harris’s readiness to take charge amid reports that he feared she could not beat Mr. Trump even as he made clear that he would not step aside. But in his answer to a question about Ms. Harris’s chances of beating Mr. Trump, he confused the two leaders’ names, committing just the sort of verbal misfire that has unnerved Democrats and prompted them to wonder if she should instead be the nominee.“Look, I wouldn’t have picked Vice President Trump to be vice president, did I think she’s not qualified to be president,” Mr. Biden said. “So let’s start there, No. 1. The fact is that the consideration is that I think I’m the most qualified person to run for president. I beat him once, and I will beat him again.”Polls in recent weeks have generally showed that Ms. Harris is just as likely, or possibly more likely, to defeat Mr. Trump, and the former president’s campaign has ramped up attacks on her recently.Following Mr. Biden’s disastrous debate performance two weeks ago, panicked donors, political groups and even allies began to rally around Ms. Harris as a potential placement for him. Ms. Harris has stood behind Mr. Biden’s decision to stay in the race.The Biden campaign has been quietly testing Ms. Harris’s chances against Mr. Trump this week, with some speculation that the results would determine whether Mr. Biden would consider dropping out of the race.Asked whether he would reconsider his decision to stay in the race if his team showed him data that Ms. Harris would fare better in a matchup, Mr. Biden repeatedly said he would not drop out of the race.“No,” he said, “unless they came back and said that there’s no way you could win. No one’s saying that.”When asked about her qualifications, Mr. Biden pointed to Ms. Harris’s work elevating reproductive rights and praised her “ability to handle almost any issue on the board.”“This was a hell of a prosecutor,” Mr. Biden said of Ms. Harris, who was the district attorney of San Francisco and attorney general of California. “She was a first-rate person, and in the Senate she was really good. I wouldn’t have picked her unless I thought she was qualified to be president. From the very beginning. I made no bones about that. She is qualified to be president. That’s why I picked her.” More