Elections

Subterms

    More stories

    • 138 Shares199 Views

      in Elections

      O Brasil pode ter finalmente se livrado da loucura de Bolsonaro

      by

      SÃO PAULO, Brasil — Quatro anos de loucura chegaram praticamente ao fim. Em um segundo turno tenso, Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva prevaleceu sobre o presidente Jair Bolsonaro, com 50,9 por cento dos votos. Exceto por uma reviravolta dramática — o temível golpe que há meses paira sobre o país, por exemplo — Lula se tornará, em 1 de janeiro, o presidente do Brasil.Não foi fácil. O último mês foi um resumo da era Bolsonaro. Houve uma quantia desenfreada de desinformação. (A campanha de Lula teve até de confirmar, em resposta a boatos insanos que circularam nas mídias sociais, que o candidato “não tem pacto nem jamais conversou com o diabo.”) Houve ampla discussão sobre canibalismo, maçonaria e o sistema político supostamente preferível da Idade Média. E, é claro, houve a ameaça de violência política, aparentemente encorajada pelo topo.Finalmente, para o bem da nossa saúde mental coletiva, podemos dizer que Bolsonaro foi derrotado. Não é que o Brasil esteja fortemente alinhado com Lula e a política de centro-esquerda do Partido dos Trabalhadores, que governou o país por 13 anos, terminando em 2016. É mais que os últimos quatro anos de gestão Bolsonaro nos mostraram o quão baixo uma nação pode ir, e estamos desesperados para emergir desse pântano de desalento político.Há muita coisa dessa gestão que não vai deixar saudades — a negligência assassina, a corrupção arraigada, o fanatismo. Um dos maiores alívios será não precisar mais participar de discussões loucas. O Brasil, enfim, pode voltar a ter uma aparência de sanidade.É difícil acreditar no quanto o debate público mudou. Nove anos atrás, os brasileiros foram às ruas para pedir a gratuidade no transporte público. Quão longe estamos desse tipo de mentalidade cívica hoje? Agora passamos boa parte do tempo garantindo (de uma forma cada vez mais exasperada) que a virologia de fato existe e a mudança climática não é uma farsa globalista.Temos medo de ir às ruas protestar e dar ao governo um motivo para tentar um golpe. Achamos que qualquer cidadão passando em um automóvel pode estar armado. Sabemos que usar vermelho será visto como uma declaração política. (Recentemente um cardeal católico brasileiro foi levado a prestar contas sobre suas vestimentas tradicionais, o que mostra que nem mesmo o clero está acima de qualquer suspeição.) Não ousamos discutir as notícias com os vizinhos, por medo do que eles poderão dizer. Os elevadores nunca estiveram tão silenciosos.A verdade é que a sociedade brasileira sempre foi dominada por forças conservadoras. Nenhum dos avanços das últimas duas décadas veio com facilidade — o programa de assistência social Bolsa Família, as cotas nas universidades e no setor público, ou o casamento entre pessoas do mesmo sexo. Todos foram recebidos com escárnio, se não com total indignação, pela maior parte dos conservadores. Mas foram batalhas travadas entre a centro-esquerda e a centro-direita, que então eram suficientemente razoáveis para se empenhar em um debate democrático. Isso mudou quando Bolsonaro entrou na cena política nacional. Primeiro aos poucos, e então de modo súbito, uma barragem de extremismo de direita reprimido se rompeu.Dia após dia, a integridade do debate público se liquefez em alegações conspiratórias, impulsionadas pelas mídias sociais e encorajadas por Bolsonaro. Fomos obrigados a gastar nosso tempo combatendo publicamente a teoria de que vacinas contêm nanobots ou que, como o presidente declarou, a floresta amazônica “não pega fogo.” Toda essa energia, que podia ser gasta exigindo a melhoria do sistema público de saúde ou uma resposta mais enérgica à mudança climática, foi, em vez disso, dissipada no combate a tolices obscuras.Mas Bolsonaro não nos deu outra chance, inclusive até o momento das eleições. Não há dúvida de que ele tinha como meta a autocracia e iria aproveitar qualquer oportunidade de se manter no poder; a necessidade de derrotá-lo se tornou uma prioridade absoluta, tomando precedência sobre qualquer outra preocupação. Isso explica a amplitude da coalizão em torno da candidatura de Lula, que incluiu até antigos oponentes da centro-direita. A batalha eleitoral foi reduzida a um binarismo: contra ou a favor de Bolsonaro.Na realidade, não é assim tão simples. De um lado, não há solução tangível para o quanto as redes sociais parecem empurrar os cidadãos a posições extremas, aprofundando a polarização. De outro, os políticos endossados por Bolsonaro agora são parte estabelecida do cenário político. O povo elegeu mais de uma dúzia de governadores que apoiam Bolsonaro, das 27 unidades da federação, e seu partido obteve maioria no Senado após ganhar oito dos 27 assentos à disposição. (Muitos dos novos senadores, que ficarão no poder pelos próximos oito anos, são ex-ministros da gestão Bolsonaro.) A extrema direita também aumentou sua influência no Congresso: o partido do presidente ganhou 99 assentos na Câmara, formada por 513 deputados. Jair Bolsonaro pode até deixar o cargo, mas o bolsonarismo está longe de acabar.Isso representa sérios desafios à próxima gestão. Não só porque uma extrema direita encorajada será um obstáculo constante para o lado de Lula, mas também porque irá forçá-lo a recorrer aos partidos do Centrão, abrindo caminho para a troca de favores — muitas vezes corrupta — que desfigurou a democracia brasileira desde sua concepção. Ainda assim, a oportunidade para uma nova trajetória política nacional não pode ser menosprezada. Após ocupar a Presidência do país, a extrema direita pode ser empurrada de volta às margens da política. No mínimo teremos um governo mais preocupado com o aumento da desigualdade e da fome, em vez do número de seguidores em suas motociatas de apoio. Só isso já é um alívio.De modo crucial, os brasileiros poderão voltar a discutir assuntos mais urgentes do país, como o déficit de moradia, a educação pública, a polícia militar e o racismo. Talvez também possamos falar de coisas que nos interessam e nos surpreendem, que nos dão satisfação. (Tartarugas e astronomia, alguém?) Depois de tudo o que passamos, merecemos algum respiro dessa loucura.Vanessa Barbara é a editora do sítio literário A Hortaliça, autora de dois romances e dois livros de não-ficção em português, e escritora de opinião do The New York Times. More

    • 125 Shares149 Views

      in Elections

      4 Takeaways From the Last Kemp-Abrams Debate Before Election Day

      by

      Gov. Brian Kemp and Stacey Abrams, who would like to replace him, met Sunday night for one of the last major televised debates of the 2022 midterm election cycle, and the Georgia showdown delivered an hour heavy on substance and light on political fireworks and viral moments.Mr. Kemp, a Republican who narrowly defeated Ms. Abrams, a Democrat, in 2018, holds a durable lead of 5 to 10 percentage points in public and private polling, a status that was evident throughout their discussion.Mr. Kemp took few chances, stuck to his talking points about how Ms. Abrams has spent the years since their last contest and tried to sell Georgia voters on how good they have things now.Ms. Abrams, as she has done throughout her campaign, pressed a message that prosperity in Mr. Kemp’s Georgia has not been shared equally. Under an Abrams administration, she said, Black people and women would have more input into their relationship with the government — or in the case of abortion rights, pushing the government away from any relationship at all.Here are four takeaways from Sunday’s debate:Abrams tried to catch up.With just about all of Ms. Abrams’s arguments against Mr. Kemp well worn by now — she has been making parts of them fairly consistently since their 2018 race — she sought a new approach to chip away at Mr. Kemp’s advantage in the race and remind her supporters that the election isn’t over.So she turned to Herschel Walker, seeking to tie Mr. Kemp to Georgia’s Republican Senate nominee. Mr. Walker’s campaign has been plagued by a host of revelations about his past: that despite opposing abortion rights, he pushed women with whom he’d had relationships to undergo abortions and that he had physically attacked women and family members — accusations Georgians are seeing nonstop in television advertising.A watch event in Atlanta for the governor’s debate on Sunday evening.Gabriela Bhaskar for The New York TimesDuring a segment discussing new restrictions on abortion that Mr. Kemp signed into law, Ms. Abrams accused him of refusing to defend women.“And yet he defended Herschel Walker, saying that he didn’t want to be involved” in Mr. Walker’s personal life, she said. She added, “But he doesn’t mind being involved in the personal lives and the personal medical choices of the women in Georgia. What’s the difference? Well, I would say the equipment.”Kemp: Check my record.Ms. Abrams criticized Mr. Kemp for a majority of the policy decisions during his term as governor, like ignoring public health guidance to keep businesses open at the height of the Covid-19 pandemic and supporting a law that allows the purchase of firearms without a permit. But Mr. Kemp dismissed her arguments with an I’m-rubber-and-you’re-glue argument.“This debate’s going to be a lot like the last one,” he said early on, before delivering a line he’d repeat throughout the hour. “Ms. Abrams is going to attack my record because she doesn’t want to talk about her own record.”The refrain is a common one from Mr. Kemp and one he used against his Republican primary opponent, David Perdue. It also underlines a key feature of Mr. Kemp’s re-election campaign, which has focused largely on his first term. And while Ms. Abrams has a policy record dating back to her years as State House minority leader, hers did not include policymaking from the governor’s mansion.She recognized that fact in her rebuttal before reading off a laundry list of his policies she disagreed with: “I have not been in office for the last four years.”Mr. Kemp stuck to his talking points on Sunday in the debate in Atlanta.Ben Gray/Associated PressLong answers led to fewer fireworks.Hosted by the Atlanta TV station WSB, the debate was meant to be heavy on policy and light on drama — and policy heavy it was. The format gave each candidate 90 seconds — as opposed to 60 or even 45 in some other debates — to answer each question, with rebuttals that often lasted just as long.It was also a performance in which both candidates kept within the rules. There were no interruptions or interjections and at no point in the hourlong debate did the moderators have to remind either candidate of the agreed-upon time limits.That gave the candidates ample time to articulate their views and gave Georgia’s voters one of the clearest opportunities to judge for themselves the candidates’ policy and stylistic differences.The moderators also left the job of policing fact from fiction to the candidates themselves — a responsibility both Mr. Kemp and Ms. Abrams did not hesitate to accept. The questions posed were open-ended, allowing a robust discussion but not one in which the moderators challenged the candidates on their own past positions and statements.Two candidates who disagree on everything.There is virtually no overlap in Ms. Abrams’s and Mr. Kemp’s views on the issues most animating the race. Those stark differences came into full view during their back-and-forth on firearms, abortion, the state’s election laws and use of the state’s budget.Mr. Kemp argued that universal access to guns would allow more people in Georgia to protect themselves. Ms. Abrams said that logic would put more people in danger and increase the likelihood of mass shootings.Ms. Abrams has loudly criticized the state’s newly instituted law outlawing abortion after six weeks of pregnancy — Mr. Kemp signed and defended the law. And on the state’s more than $6 billion state budget surplus, Mr. Kemp said he supported allocating the funds for tax relief while Ms. Abrams has proposed using it to fund an array of state programs.The differences highlighted the candidates’ contrasting partisan instincts and put a clear choice between the two on display for an electorate that is very closely divided. More

    • 100 Shares189 Views

      in Elections

      Your Monday Briefing: Seoul Mourns Halloween Crush Victims

      by

      Plus Russia halts Ukrainian grain shipments and Brazilians vote for their next president.A man paid his respects at the memorial site of the crowd crush in Seoul on Sunday.Chang W. Lee/The New York TimesAt least 150 dead in SeoulAt least 150 people were killed in Seoul after they were crushed in a Halloween crowd on Saturday. Most were in their teens and 20s, and women significantly outnumbered men among the victims. South Koreans are trying to understand how the crowd crush happened now that most of the victims have been identified. Witnesses said they saw almost no crowd control and scant police presence in the hours leading up to the tragedy, even though people were filling the streets. The crush happened in Itaewon, a popular nightlife district, on the first Halloween after most pandemic-related social distancing measures were lifted.As the night grew more frenetic and the mass of revelers swelled, many of them crammed into an alleyway barely 11 feet wide, in a bottleneck of human traffic that made it difficult to breathe and move. From within the crowd came calls to “push, push” and a big shove. Then, they began to fall, a tangle of too many bodies, compressed into too small of a space.Toll: At a community center where family members had been awaiting news, wrenching wails followed dreaded confirmations. Shin Su-Bin, 25, is among the dead. Her family had been calling her phone that night to no answer.Details: Among those killed in Itaewon, Seoul’s most diverse neighborhood, were citizens of the U.S., China, Iran, Norway and Uzbekistan. Yoon Suk Yeol, South Korea’s president, has declared a weeklong period of national mourning.Context: The tragedy is one of the deadliest peacetime accidents in South Korea’s history. In recent years, it has been eclipsed only by the Sewol ferry sinking in 2014, where more than 300 people died — including 250 high school students.Friends and relatives helped Anna Moroz, 80, salvage what she could from her home in Ukraine.Ivor Prickett for The New York TimesRussia pulls back from grain dealOn Saturday, Russia withdrew from a deal that had allowed grain to be exported from Ukrainian ports, upending an agreement that was intended to alleviate a global food crisis. Yesterday, the U.N. and Turkey pushed to revive the deal, which they helped broker.Russia’s move came hours after a drone attack on its Black Sea Fleet in Crimea, which Russia blamed on Ukraine. Russia said it could no longer ensure the security of cargo ships taking grain from Ukrainian ports and would suspend the agreement’s implementation “for an indefinite period.”The State of the WarGrain Deal: After accusing Ukraine of attacking its ships in Crimea, Russia withdrew from an agreement allowing the export of grain from Ukrainian ports. The move jeopardized a rare case of wartime coordination aimed at lowering global food prices and combating hunger.Turning the Tables: With powerful Western weapons and deadly homemade drones, Ukraine now has an artillery advantage over Russia in the southern Kherson region, erasing what had been a critical asset for Moscow.Fears of Escalation: President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia repeated the unfounded claim that Ukraine was preparing to explode a so-called dirty bomb, as concerns rose in the West that the Kremlin was seeking a pretext to escalate the war.A Coalition Under Strain: President Biden is facing new challenges keeping together the bipartisan, multinational coalition supporting Ukraine. The alliance has shown signs of fraying with the approach of the U.S. midterm elections and a cold European winter.The grain deal, which was signed in July, also aimed to lower food prices. Russia’s move jeopardized a rare case of wartime coordination, which ended a five-month Russian blockade. The deal allowed more than 9.2 million tons of grain and foodstuffs to be exported again. Many were bound for poor countries.Reaction: The U.S. accused Russia of using food as a weapon. “It’s really outrageous to increase starvation,” President Biden said on Saturday. Fighting: With Western weaponry, Ukraine now has a front line advantage in the south. Despite the slog of mud season, its army keeps advancing.Toll: Ukraine’s children face years of trauma.Brazil’s vote is one of Latin America’s most important in decades. Dado Galdieri for The New York TimesBrazilians choose their new presidentVoters headed to the polls yesterday to cast their ballots in a presidential runoff. Polls closed just before this newsletter was sent, and results are still coming. Here are live results and an overview of the race.Voters faced a stark choice after an ugly campaign. Jair Bolsonaro, a right-wing populist, seeks a second term as president. He faces Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, the once-incarcerated former leader who vows to revive leftist policies.The vote carries major consequences for the Amazon, and thus the entire planet. Bolsonaro gutted the agencies tasked with protecting the rainforest, leading to increased deforestation. Da Silva has vowed to eradicate illegal logging and mining.It is also a test for democracy. Bolsonaro has spent years attacking Brazil’s democratic institutions, including a sustained effort to undermine its election systems. In so doing, he has destroyed public trust in the elections.What’s next: If Bolsonaro loses, will he accept his defeat?Details: Brazil’s elections chief ordered the head of the country’s highway police to answer allegations that he had ordered traffic stops, particularly of buses transporting voters to the polls, in an effort to suppress turnout.THE LATEST NEWSAsia PacificDozens of Australians, many of whom are children, remain in the camps.Ivor Prickett for The New York TimesSeventeen Australians have returned home from Islamic State detention camps in northeast Syria, where they had lived since 2019. Dozens remain at the camps.At least 70 people were killed after a suspension bridge collapsed in the western Indian state of Gujarat yesterday.Flooding and landslides left at least 45 people dead in the Philippines.Kazuki Takahashi, who created Yu-Gi-Oh!, died in July. New details have been released: The 60-year-old drowned while trying to save others.Around the WorldElon Musk took charge of Twitter and quickly ordered layoffs. My colleagues analyzed the deal on “Hard Fork,” our podcast.Israel will hold its Parliamentary elections tomorrow. Benjamin Netanyahu is the leading candidate.At least 100 people died in the deadliest terrorist attack in Somalia in five years.The U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s husband was attacked in their home. He is expected to heal, but the encounter highlights fears of growing political violence in the U.S. Other Big StoriesRishi Sunak, Britain’s new prime minister, married into a secretive $800 million fortune, which might not fit within his party’s views.The U.S. released Guantánamo’s oldest prisoner, a 75-year-old businessman who was held for nearly two decades without being charged with a crime.Census data revealed that more than one in five Canadians is an immigrant. Polls show the nation approves.Tom Brady and Gisele Bündchen divorced after 13 years of marriage.A Morning ReadThis year, parts of Riyadh, the Saudi capital, looked like creatures from a haunted house had escaped and taken over the city.Tamir Kalifa for The New York TimesUntil recently, Saudi Arabia banned Halloween, which was viewed as suspicious and pagan. But this past weekend, the kingdom hosted a government-sponsored “horror weekend” — not strictly speaking a Halloween festival, but certainly conveniently timed.Clowns and goblins filled the streets, and costume shops sold out almost as fast as employees could restock the shelves. “Saudi is changing,” said a young man going as a wizard.UP FOR DEBATEShould daylight saving time end?Mexico City (and most of the rest of Mexico) would stop springing forward and falling back.Marco Ugarte/Associated PressLast week, Mexico’s Senate voted to end daylight saving time for most of the country, prioritizing morning light. In March, the U.S. Senate took the opposite approach when it unanimously passed legislation to make daylight saving time permanent. (The House has not found consensus.)Each side of the debate carries strong opinions. The business community generally supports keeping daylight saving time: Many retailers and outdoor industries say that extra afternoon light can boost sales because people have more time to spend money after work or school.But many scientists believe that doing away with it, as Mexico is poised to do, is better for human health. They argue that aligns more closely with the sun’s progression — and, therefore, with the body’s natural clock.Mexico’s Senate seems to agree. “This new law seeks to guarantee the human right to health and increase safety in the mornings, procure the well-being and productivity of the population, and contribute to saving electric energy,” the body said on Twitter.PLAY, WATCH, EATWhat to CookChristopher Simpson for The New York Times. Food Stylist: Simon Andrews.Start your week off right with this simple salted-caramel rice pudding for dessert.What to Watch“The Novelist’s Film,” by the South Korean director Hong Sang-soo, is a study in small moments and chance encounters.Tech TipA latecomers’ guide to TikTok.TravelThe next time you’re in Mexico City, tour the former houses of Frida Kahlo, Diego Rivera and Leon Trotsky.Now Time to PlayPlay the Mini Crossword, and a clue: Hair colorer (three letters).Here are the Wordle and the Spelling Bee.You can find all our puzzles here.That’s it for today’s briefing. Happy Halloween, and see you next time. — AmeliaP.S. Jenna Russell, a longtime reporter at The Boston Globe, will be our next New England bureau chief.Start your week with this narrated long read about animal voyages. And here is Friday’s edition of “The Daily,” on Brazil’s elections.You can reach Amelia and the team at briefing@nytimes.com. More

    • 100 Shares99 Views

      in Elections

      Brazil’s Runoff Faces ‘Spiritual Warfare’ for Evangelical Voters

      by

      As the race between Brazil’s right-wing president, Jair Bolsonaro, and his leftist challenger, Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, tightened, Mr. Bolsonaro and his allies intensified their courting of a voting bloc key to his campaign: evangelical Christians.In the days leading to Sunday’s runoff election, the country was awash in harsh attacks against Mr. da Silva that were meant in part to sway evangelical voters, who make up by some estimates roughly 30 percent of the population and have become key supporters of Mr. Bolsonaro.The president likely needs this bloc, which tends to be more conservative than other religious groups in Brazil, to vote for him in significant numbers if he is to win a second term.Mr. Bolsonaro won more than 60 percent of the evangelical vote in his first campaign for the presidency in 2018 and received a similar percentage during the first round of voting in this election cycle.Evangelicals are the only religious group that has clear political representation in Congress, and they vote as a bloc on certain conservative topics.Bolsonaro supporters in recent weeks accused Mr. da Silva of being a Satanist who would close churches if he won and described him as a supporter of abortion rights, the legalization of drugs and “gender ideology,” a movement to re-examine the concept of gender.Mr. Bolsonaro amplified some of these claims. “When someone is in favor of abortion, as Lula is in favor, the guy turns on the yellow light,” the president said in a recent interview on a podcast, warning voters to be wary of Mr. da Silva.Mr. da Silva, who has said he is opposed to abortion rights and the legalization of drugs, recently had to clarify that he does not have a pact with the devil. (He has not given a position on “gender ideology.”)Mr. Bolsonaro has also drawn the backing of evangelical pastors who have used their pulpits to pressure their congregants to vote for the president.“The speeches within the churches say that this is not an election, but spiritual warfare,” said Vinicius do Valle, a political scientist and the leader of the Observatory of Evangelicals, an organization studying their impact on Brazilian society.Mr. da. Silva’s allies have fired back with their own attacks on Mr. Bolsonaro’s character, including trying to link him to freemasonry and questioning his sexual morals by pointing to a video in which he suggests sexual interest in teenage girls.Mr. Bolsonaro has also been accused of cannibalism because of another video, a 2016 interview with The New York Times in which he talks of eating an Indigenous person.Mr. da Silva, who has said that he has “never used religion in his campaign,” recently met with evangelical leaders and called Mr. Bolsonaro a “compulsive liar.” More

    • 125 Shares119 Views

      in Elections

      Brazil Election Officials Demand Answers for Police Stops of Voters

      by

      RIO DE JANEIRO — Brazil’s elections chief ordered the head of the country’s highway police to answer allegations that he had ordered traffic stops, particularly of buses transporting voters to the polls, in an effort to suppress turnout in Sunday’s presidential election.There were dozens of reports on social media on Sunday that federal highway agents were stopping vehicles and questioning people in several states across Brazil. Such stops appeared to violate orders from election officials on Saturday to halt any traffic stops on Election Day that could hinder people’s efforts to vote.Alexandre de Moraes, a Supreme Court justice who leads Brazil’s election agency, issued an order to the head of Brazil’s federal highway police, calling on the official to provide proof that his officers were not violating election rules to benefit President Jair Bolsonaro, the far-right incumbent.In the order, Mr. Moraes included a link to a tweet from a person claiming that the highway police had set up a roadblock in the northeastern city of Cuité and were not letting people pass. “It’s already driving away the population of the countryside!” the tweet said. Brazil’s northeast is a leftist stronghold.On Sunday afternoon, Mr. Moraes told reporters that election officials’ initial investigation found that the stops delayed the buses, but they all still reached their intended polling stations. “We didn’t have any voters who didn’t vote because of the operations,” he said.Silvinei Vasques, the highway police chief, responded to Mr. Moraes’s order to halt Election Day traffic stops, saying that the highway police would not target public buses. But, he added, the police would continue to conduct stops because, he said, Mr. Moraes’s order did not apply to all federal highway operations.As of Sunday afternoon, the federal highway police had stopped more than 550 buses across the country, according to a federal highway officer with access to internal data who spoke on condition of anonymity. On Sunday, Oct. 2, in the first round of voting, the highway police stopped nearly 300 buses, according to the officer.A post on Mr. Vasques’s official Instagram account on Saturday urged people to vote for Mr. Bolsonaro, according to O Globo, one of Brazil’s biggest newspapers. The kind of message he posted automatically disappears from Instagram after 24 hours and was no longer visible on Sunday. Mr. Vazques had previously posted various photos with Mr. Bolsonaro.Thomas Thaler, 45, a computer programmer, said his wife gave up on voting after her bus got stuck in traffic and then was stopped by highway police on the way to vote in Recife, a large city on Brazil’s northeastern coast. She eventually exited the bus and took a different bus back home. She said she had planned to vote for Mr. da Silva.Jessica Sousa, 22, a student, said she was stuck in traffic near Cuité in Brazil’s northeast and then eventually questioned by the highway police, who requested her I.D. and asked about her plans. She eventually managed to get to a polling station and vote for Mr. da Silva. More

    • 100 Shares99 Views

      in Elections

      Palestinian Voters Debate Staying Home for Israeli Election

      by

      As Israel prepares to go to the polls again, some of the voters who helped propel an Arab party into the governing coalition for the first time are worried about a lack of results.KHASHAM ZANA, Israel — A new school in portable buildings, a paved road that reaches only halfway into the village and a sign in Arabic, English and Hebrew are the only indications of recent improvement in the Bedouin village of Khasham Zana in southern Israel.Like many other Palestinian Bedouin villages in Israel, it has existed for decades without state recognition of land ownership claims, leaving residents at constant risk of home demolitions and without basic services and infrastructure.Last year, when an independent Arab party, Raam, made history as the first to join an Israeli governing coalition, it pledged to address the plight of these villages.But when the government of Prime Minister Naftali Bennett collapsed in June, precipitating Israel’s fifth national election in less than four years on Tuesday, Raam and its leader, Mansour Abbas, had delivered on few of their electoral promises. And in places like Khasam Zana, the impact has been minimal.Raam’s inclusion in the government was welcomed by many Palestinian citizens of Israel who saw it as an important step in securing their rights. But now, many Palestinian-Israeli voters say they are disillusioned. Some are questioning how much they can realistically benefit from political engagement in a parliament that, four years ago, passed a controversial law that enshrined the right of national self-determination as “unique to the Jewish people” rather than all Israeli citizens.Palestinians as well as Israeli centrists and leftists condemned the law as racist and anti-democratic, and it was criticized by the European Union and rights groups including Human Rights Watch. Mansour Abbas, the leader of Raam, which last year became the first independent Arab party to enter an Israeli governing coalition.Dan Balilty for The New York TimesTuesday’s elections for the 120-seat Parliament, or Knesset, could see record low turnout among Israel’s one million Palestinian voters who hold Israeli citizenship. They account for about 17 percent of the country’s possible voters, but a public opinion poll in early October for Israeli public television’s Arabic-language Makan channel found that less than 40 percent of Arab voters planned to take part in the election.“The frustration is at its highest, maybe because we tried to enter the government and nothing changed,” said Mirvat Abu Hadoba-Freh, 33, a former high school civics teacher now earning a doctorate on political awareness among minority communities, including Palestinians.“This election, I hear educated people say they have gotten fed up. They don’t feel like there is anything encouraging them to vote,” she said.Though the majority of Palestinian citizens of Israel are in favor of integration and greater involvement in government, voter turnout has largely been on a downward trend over the past decade, said Khalil Shikaki, director of the Palestinian Center for Policy and Survey Research, a polling organization in Ramallah.“More and more people say what is the point in participating if nothing changes, essentially,” he said. “Obviously, it’s not fair to judge what Mansour Abbas and his party have done in a single year, but that’s what people have to go by and people’s assessment is it wasn’t worth it,” he added, referring to the leader of Raam.Raam’s green campaign banners hang along the entrance of Khasham Zana village, with different slogans playing off its campaign theme of being closer to the pulse of the street.“Closer to be effective,” reads one. “Closer to combating racism,” reads another.Palestinian Bedouin villages in the Negev Desert. Many such villages have gone unrecognized by the state for decades, leaving them without basic services. Amit Elkayam for The New York TimesThe largely conservative Palestinian communities in Israel’s Negev constitute a Raam stronghold and helped put the party into office last year.But Ms. Abu Hadoba-Freh says Raam’s brief time in office has helped put into perspective for Palestinian voters what can realistically be accomplished.“We as Arab voters, we may be able to send our leaders to the Knesset, but we don’t know if it will have much of an impact,” she said. “It may affect local budgets and services, but things like the discrimination against Arabs, this is impossible to change unless the country changes.”Raam promised to secure the official recognition of Khasham Zana and two other villages — homes to Bedouin, Palestinian communities that were once seminomadic — and said it also intended to prepare a plan to deal with dozens of other unrecognized villages in Israel’s Negev Desert.But that has not happened, and few other improvements have taken place in a village where, besides the school and half-finished road, there is no other infrastructure. Though power lines run alongside the edges of Khasham Zana, there is no state-supplied electricity, and residents must rely on solar power. There are no sewers or garbage collection. Running water comes from water tanks and pipes that residents installed themselves.Ms. Abu Hadoba-Freh comes from another unrecognized village, Wadi Samara, where residents face home demolitions and must rely on themselves for almost all services, including setting up solar panels for electricity.She voted in the past four elections. But she is questioning whether she will vote again this time.Even before Raam, more Palestinian voters were beginning to question their involvement in the Parliament, said Mansour Nasasra, a professor of politics at Ben Gurion University of the Negev, especially as there has been no progress on other key issues of importance to the Palestinians, including rising violence within the Arab community and increased attacks and police raids on holy sites.Those reservations have only increased with an Arab party in government, he said.When the government of former Prime Minister Naftali Bennett, center, collapsed in June, few of Raam’s promises had been fulfilled.Dan Balilty for The New York TimesMr. Bennett’s governing coalition needed Mr. Abbas and his party to form a coalition, hailed at the time as a sign of national unity. But some Palestinians say they don’t feel they got enough in return for one of their parties’ joining the government.“The number of Palestinians killed has increased. The number of home demolitions increased in Abbas’s presence. The number of raids and closures of Al Aqsa increased in Abbas’s presence,” Mr. Nasasra said, referring to Al Aqsa Mosque in Jerusalem, the third-holiest site in Islam. “And Abbas couldn’t say one word about it.”Dr. Kayed al-Athamen, a hematologist and community leader from Khasham Zana who supports Raam, acknowledges that the past year’s accomplishments have been minimal. But he still encourages his fellow villagers to vote. He said he explains to them that political engagement is a long game and that they cannot be discouraged because the first Arab party in government was not as successful as they may have hoped.“We’re not going to solve the Palestinian cause in the Knesset,” he said. “But if we have four or five parliamentarians, we can make progress in terms of getting services.”Mr. al-Athamen, 43, is also banking on the idea that even if some Palestinians might not be motivated by progress, they might vote anyway because of the potential negative consequences of staying away from the polls.A campaign rally for former Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu this month. A comeback for him could bring more right-wing figures into government.Amit Elkayam for The New York TimesThis election could lead to a political comeback for Benjamin Netanyahu, the right-wing prime minister who left office last year amid corruption charges, and to his bringing even more radical figures into government, namely Itamar Ben-Gvir, a far-right lawmaker.If Arab voter turnout surpasses 50 percent, they would constitute an important voting bloc that could help decide what the future government looks like, Mr. al-Athamen said he tells people. That might include keeping Mr. Ben-Gvir out of government, he said.“If not, then it will be a government for Netanyahu, and the situation for Arabs will be even worse,” he said. More

    • 113 Shares179 Views

      in Elections

      Segunda vuelta en Brasil: lo que hay que saber

      by

      La votación se realizará tras una larga y dura campaña política que enfrenta a dos figuras políticas importantes en una contienda que ha puesto a prueba la democracia del país.Los brasileños acudirán a las urnas el domingo para elegir a un nuevo presidente en una disputada segunda vuelta entre dos candidatos que ofrecen visiones marcadamente distintas para el futuro de la democracia más grande de América Latina.El presidente de derecha, Jair Bolsonaro, ha movilizado a sus simpatizantes en torno a lo que califica como un ataque de la izquierda a los valores familiares y las libertades individuales. Ha caracterizado como enemigos a los académicos, los medios de comunicación e incluso a instituciones democráticas como el Congreso brasileño y el Supremo Tribunal Federal.El candidato de izquierda Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, quien es expresidente de la nación, ha prometido que gobernará para todos los brasileños y que devolverá el país a un pasado más próspero, aunque su propia historia de escándalos por corrupción ha dividido a los votantes.Durante la primera vuelta realizada el 2 de octubre, Da Silva obtuvo alrededor de seis millones de votos más que Bolsonaro —quien quedó en segundo lugar—, pero no alcanzó el umbral del 50 por ciento necesario para evitar una segunda vuelta. A Bolsonaro le fue mucho mejor de lo que habían pronosticado las encuestas, lo que sugiere que la contienda del domingo podría estar reñida.El domingo, la autoridad electoral comenzará a publicar los resultados después del cierre de las urnas, a las 4:00 p. m. hora del Este. El nuevo presidente prestará juramento el 1 de enero.El Times cubrirá las elecciones en vivo durante todo el día.Una parte de la selva amazónica es incendiada para extender las áreas de pastoreo de ganado en 2019, cerca de la ciudad de Porto Velho, en el estado de Rondônia.Victor Moriyama para The New York Times¿Cuáles son los temas políticos más importantes?La elección sucede en un momento crucial para Brasil, en el que el aumento de los precios de los alimentos y el combustible, junto con una dolorosa desaceleración económica, han hecho que la vida sea más difícil para muchos brasileños. Alrededor de 33 millones de los 217 millones de habitantes del país padecen hambre. La pobreza se ha incrementado, lo que ha revertido décadas de progreso social y económico.Las preocupaciones ambientales y climáticas también ocupan un lugar preponderante. Bajo el gobierno de Bolsonaro —quien ha debilitado las protecciones ambientales y ha defendido la idea de que la selva tropical debería estar abierta a la minería, la ganadería y la agricultura— la deforestación en la Amazonía ha alcanzado niveles históricos en 15 años. La destrucción de la Amazonía y sus efectos en los esfuerzos para evitar una crisis climática ha convertido a Brasil en un paria global.También hay cuestionamientos persistentes sobre la salud de la democracia de Brasil. Bolsonaro ha sembrado dudas sobre la integridad del sistema electoral: ha afirmado, sin pruebas, que las máquinas electrónicas de votación del país pueden ser manipuladas. Bolsonaro ha dicho que, si pierde el domingo, solo será porque hubo fraude.Esto ha alimentado las preocupaciones —tanto en el país como en el extranjero— de que una potencial derrota de Bolsonaro pueda impulsarlo a atizar a sus millones de seguidores y pedirles que salgan a las calles a exigir que permanezca en el poder.Un desfile militar a favor del presidente Jair Bolsonaro en agostoVictor Moriyama para The New York Times¿Qué propone Bolsonaro?Bolsonaro ha prometido pagos en efectivo de alrededor de 113 dólares mensuales a las familias necesitadas, en lo que sería una extensión de una política temporal creada para aliviar las dificultades generadas por la pandemia.Continuar con ese programa, el cual remplazó una iniciativa similar pero menos generosa presentada por Da Silva, tiene como objetivo “reducir la pobreza y contribuir al crecimiento económico sostenible”, según el plan político oficial de Bolsonaro.En vísperas de las elecciones, Bolsonaro ha realizado un gran gasto en asistencia social y subsidios de combustible.También se comprometió a crear empleos a través de la eliminación de trámites burocráticos, recorte de impuestos e inversión en tecnología. En otro guiño a los líderes empresariales, quienes le brindaron un apoyo vital durante su primera contienda a la presidencia, Bolsonaro afirmó que mantendrá una estrategia de libre mercado y que mantendrá bajo control la deuda pública.Repitiendo la retórica que hace cuatro años le ganó el apoyo de los votantes ultraconservadores y evangélicos, Bolsonaro también ha prometido defender a “la familia”: se opondrá al aborto legal y a la educación trans en las escuelas.Bolsonaro también ha prometido expandir las políticas de mano dura contra el crimen y se comprometió a ampliar aún más el acceso a las armas de fuego, una política a la que le atribuye una reducción de los delitos violentos en todo Brasil.A retrato del expresidente Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, un político de izquierda que contiende por la presidencia contra Bolsonaro, en São PauloVictor Moriyama para The New York Times¿Qué propone Da Silva?Da Silva lideró una era dorada de crecimiento durante sus dos periodos en la presidencia, cuando un auge impulsado por las materias primas convirtió a Brasil en una historia de éxito mundial. Da Silva ha prometido devolver el país a esos días de gloria.El candidato de izquierda ha prometido aumentarles los impuestos a los ricos e incrementar el gasto público, “metiendo a la gente en el presupuesto”. Sus planes incluyen una gran cantidad de programas sociales, como un vale mensual de 113 dólares para competir con el propuesto por Bolsonaro. Las familias pobres con niños recibirán adicionalmente otros 28 dólares mensuales por cada niño menor de 6 años.También ha prometido ajustar el salario mínimo de Brasil de acuerdo con la inflación y reactivar un plan de vivienda para los pobres, además de garantizar la seguridad alimentaria para las personas que padecen hambre.Da Silva, quien fue sindicalista, planea impulsar el crecimiento y “crear oportunidades de empleo” a través de la inversión en infraestructura. Sin embargo, también tiene planeado invertir en una “economía ecológica” y ha advertido que Brasil debe hacer la transición a sistemas energéticos y alimentarios más sostenibles.En cuanto a la Amazonía, ha afirmado que tomará medidas enérgicas contra los delitos ambientales cometidos por milicias, acaparadores de tierras, madereros y otros.Electores hacían fila para votar en la primera vuelta este mes en Brasilia, BrasilDado Galdieri para The New York Times¿Qué ha sucedido desde la primera vuelta?En la primera vuelta, Da Silva obtuvo el 48 por ciento de los votos, mientras que Bolsonaro recibió el 43 por ciento, superando significativamente las proyecciones de las encuestas preelectorales y planteando dudas sobre la credibilidad de las encuestadoras.Ese desacierto de los sondeos también le dio credibilidad a las afirmaciones de Bolsonaro de que las encuestas no reflejan con precisión su popularidad.Los sondeos previos a la votación del domingo muestran a Da Silva con una ventaja estrecha sobre Bolsonaro. Ambos candidatos están intensificando sus esfuerzos para apuntalar el apoyo de los votantes.Da Silva se ha centrado en proyectar un tono más moderado y forjar alianzas con candidatos presidenciales de centro que no pasaron la primera vuelta, como una forma de obtener parte de los 10 millones de votantes que los apoyaron.Bolsonaro se ha acercado a los gobernadores de derecha en los tres estados más poblados de Brasil, con la intención de convertir respaldos políticos en votos. También ha reclutado a líderes religiosos en su búsqueda por ampliar su ventaja entre los votantes evangélicos.Sin embargo, gran parte de la campaña —la cual ya está marcada por la desinformación y los feroces ataques en línea— se ha convertido en un festival de insultos y difamaciones en el que se debate poco sobre los desafíos que enfrentará el próximo líder del país.Bolsonaro ha intentado vincular a su rival con el satanismo, lo que impulsó a Da Silva a emitir un comunicado en el que confirmó que “no tiene un pacto” con el diablo. Por su parte, Da Silva ha aprovechado la difusión de videos poco halagadores de Bolsonaro que lo vinculan con la masonería, el canibalismo y la pedofilia.Inspectores del Tribunal Electoral realizan pruebas finales en máquinas de votación electrónica en São Paulo.Victor Moriyama para The New York Times¿Cómo funciona el proceso de votación?Los brasileños emitirán sus votos en máquinas electrónicas de votación, un sistema que ha estado vigente durante más de dos décadas y que ha sido el foco de las denuncias de Bolsonaro sobre el riesgo de fraude electoral.Unos 156 millones de brasileños cumplen con los requisitos para votar en las elecciones. Votar en Brasil es obligatorio, aunque la multa por no hacerlo es menor a un dólar y es mayormente simbólica. En la primera vuelta, la participación rondó el 79 por ciento.La participación por lo general suele ser menor en la segunda vuelta porque la eliminación de candidatos tras la primera vuelta mitiga el entusiasmo de algunos votantes. Algunos votantes más pobres que se inclinarían a favorecer a Da Silva también podrían quedarse en casa porque el costo de trasladarse hacia un centro electoral en un país tan grande puede llegar a ser un desincentivo. More