Elections

Subterms

    More stories

    • 113 Shares119 Views

      in Elections

      Is Mexico’s Recall Election “Democracy of the Highest Order”?

      by

      The vote has the potential to upend the country’s political system. But many fear it will amount to nothing more than a tool for propaganda.MEXICO CITY — Strolling through Mexico’s capital these days, it would be easy to assume the country’s president is at imminent risk of losing his job.City streets are littered with signs, fliers and billboards urging Mexicans to vote on whether to remove President Andrés Manuel López Obrador from office in a recall election this Sunday.Only it isn’t the opposition telling people to rush to the polls. It’s the president’s loyalists.“Support President López Obrador,” reads one flier. “If you don’t participate, the corrupt ones will take away the scholarships, assistance, and pensions that we receive today.”For the better part of a century, Mexican presidents have served out six-year terms without fail, whether or not they were fairly elected — or came to be despised by much of the population. The recall election, proposed by Mr. López Obrador and the first of its kind in Mexico, has the potential to upend the country’s political system, by giving citizens a powerful new avenue to hold their leaders accountable.On Sunday, voters will be asked to decide whether Mr. López Obrador “should have his mandate revoked due to loss of confidence,” or “continue in the presidency of the Republic until his term ends.” To become binding, 40 percent of the electorate must participate.The one wrinkle is that the vote’s most enthusiastic promoter — and the person most keen on putting the president’s well-established popularity to the test — has been the president himself. Opposition leaders have told their followers to boycott the exercise, and analysts believe turnout could be too low for the results to even count.A supporter of the president in Mexico City, giving out information on where and when to vote in the referendum.Alejandro Cegarra for The New York TimesSo, while Mr. López Obrador has called the recall “an exercise in democracy of the highest order,” many fear it could amount to something far less significant: a marketing tool aimed mainly at bolstering the president’s claim to power.“This is supposed to be a mechanism for civic control of power, but it has become instead an instrument of political propaganda,” said Carlos Bravo Regidor, a political analyst and critic of the administration. The governing party, Mr. Bravo Regidor said, “wants this to be a show of force, of muscle, and capacity to bring people into the streets and make explicit their support for López Obrador.”On a balmy Monday in Mexico City, volunteers in the president’s camp fanned out across a residential neighborhood armed with fliers and wide grins, cheerfully advertising nearby polling stations and telling anyone who would listen to go vote in the recall.Allan Pozos, one of the group’s leaders, said he hoped the exercise would “set a precedent” so future leaders could be kicked out if needed. This time, though, he just wants the president to know he’s loved.“It’s to show Andrés Manuel that he has the strong backing of the people,” said Mr. Pozos. “Andrés often feels alone, because he has to go against an entire system and doesn’t have support.”Allan Pozo, a leader of volunteers campaigning for the president in Mexico City.Alejandro Cegarra for The New York TimesSuch a show of support could not come at a better time for the president, who has passed the midpoint of his term while struggling to deliver on key campaign promises that swept him into office in a landslide victory in 2018. He vowed a “transformation” of the country that would drive down poverty, jump start the economy and tackle endemic violence at its roots.But after a pandemic and a global recession, poverty rates remain stubbornly high, economic growth is anemic and homicides are still hovering near record levels.But Mr. López Obrador has remained very popular, with more than half of Mexicans approving of his performance, polls show. His government has sought to improve the lot of the poor, raising the minimum wage four times and boosting welfare spending.Mr. López Obrador has also won points with symbolic gestures, like turning the presidential mansion into a museum open to the public, and flying commercial, even when visiting the United States.A sign supporting Mr. López Obrador on the side of a bus.Alejandro Cegarra for The New York TimesHis high favor with voters is also a tribute, supporters and critics agree, to his relentless broadcasting of an official narrative in which he portrays himself as a lone warrior for the people, going up against a corrupt establishment.“The results have been below the expectations of the government itself,” Jorge Zepeda Patterson, a prominent Mexican columnist who has supported the president, said, referring to Mr. López Obrador’s achievements during his tenure.“Polarization is very profitable politically, especially if you don’t have results,” said Mr. Zepeda Patterson, adding, “at least you can build the narrative that you are fighting.”The main risk of the recall for the president is the possibility that large swaths of the country just ignore the exercise altogether, especially as it takes place on Palm Sunday. By law, for the vote to become binding, at least 37 million Mexicans need to participate in it — significantly more than the number of people who voted for the president in the 2018 elections that swept him into office in a landslide.A demonstration in support of Mr. López Obrador, in Mexico City on Wednesday. Alejandro Cegarra for The New York TimesBut Mr. López Obrador has already identified a scapegoat in case of low turnout: the country’s electoral watchdog.For months, he has been attacking the National Electoral Institute over what he sees as a failure to dedicate enough resources to advertising and administering the recall vote.“They should have promoted the referendum from the start, not acted dishonestly, keeping silent, not promoting the vote so that people wouldn’t know about it, putting polling booths as far away as possible,” the president said at a recent news conference, referring to the electoral institute. “They’re openly against us, against me.”The institute asked the federal government for more money to oversee the contest, to little avail. With only about half the budget it said it needed, the watchdog installed about a third of the polling stations it would in a normal election.Supporters of Mr. López Obrador at a rally on Wednesday.Alejandro Cegarra for The New York TimesLorenzo Córdova, the leader of the electoral institute, known by its Spanish acronym I.N.E., says he’s being set up to fail.“It’s not just the president,” Mr. Córdova said, “there is an orchestrated, systematic and well designed campaign to discredit the I.N.E.” The point, he said, is to “damage the referee, and eventually pave the way for its political capture.”The nation’s Supreme Court has said political parties cannot advertise the recall, and yet, Mr. López Obrador’s face has cropped up on signs around the country.Mr. Córdova says the electoral institute has not determined who is paying for all of the ads, but said there are at least twice as many of them in states where the president’s party will compete in elections for governor in June.“It makes you suspect there’s political intentionality,” behind the marketing campaign, Mr. Córdova said.The nation’s Supreme Court has said political parties cannot advertise the recall, and yet, Mr. López Obrador’s face has cropped up on signs around the country.Alejandro Cegarra for The New York TimesThere are, of course, strategic benefits that could come from asking the country to weigh in on whether or not they like the president at this particular moment. Mr. López Obrador founded his political party and has an obvious interest in doing everything possible to ensure its victory in general elections to replace him in 2024.The voting patterns in the recall will tell the president where his side’s weaknesses are — and which of the potential candidates for president can get people to the polls.“It’s a kind of experiment, a rehearsal,” said Blanca Heredia, a professor at CIDE, a Mexico City research institution. “Looking ahead to 2024, he can measure the capacity of his operators to mobilize the vote.”Whatever happens on Sunday, for many in Mexico, it’s hard to see how the country’s first-ever presidential recall will seriously damage this president.“Andrés Manuel has this thing where even when he loses, he wins,” said Ms. Heredia. “He always has a way of turning a defeat into a triumph.”The recall election, the first of its kind in Mexico, has the potential to upend the country’s political system by giving citizens a powerful new avenue to hold their leaders accountable.Alejandro Cegarra for The New York TimesOscar Lopez More

    • 150 Shares129 Views

      in Elections

      Four Opinion Writers on How the G.O.P. Fringe Took Over American Politics

      by

      Lawmakers in Ohio this week proposed legislation that would restrict discussion of sexual orientation and gender identity in schools, borrowing from Florida’s “Don’t Say Gay” law. It’s the latest in a raft of culture-war legislation in Republican statehouses aimed against abortion, transgender rights, L.G.B.T.Q. rights and critical race theory.Meanwhile, Democrats are struggling to advance a national agenda amid spiraling inflation and energy prices.The Times columnists Jamelle Bouie and Ezra Klein join the Times Opinion podcast hosts Jane Coaston and Lulu Garcia-Navarro to discuss these and other issues.Their conversation, recorded Thursday morning, is available in the audio file and the transcript below.Four Opinion Writers on How the G.O.P. Fringe Took Over American PoliticsThe following conversation has been edited.Lulu Garcia-Navarro: Ezra, I’m going to start with you. The thing that strikes me about these Republican bills is that they’re staking ground on some things that are not necessarily popular with the majority of voters. That would seem to suggest to me that there’s political risk in doing them, but instead these laws have been copied from G.O.P. statehouse to G.O.P. statehouse. Why do you think that’s happening, in your view?Ezra Klein: So I think there are a couple of levels you can think about these bills on. One is to think about what you might imagine as the modal Republican strategy for a year like this. Every Republican could spend the next couple of months just saying, “Huh, gas prices are pretty high, aren’t they?” And that would be it. They would win the midterms. It would be done.And instead, the Republican Party, in part due to the incentives of modern media, in part due to the example offered by Donald Trump and how he shot to prominence and then ultimately to the presidency, has become extraordinarily attention-hungry among its rank-and-file legislators. And so if you can create the next culture-war kernel by passing a really brutal piece of legislation — and these are brutal pieces of legislation that will hurt a lot of very just ordinary kids who need some help — then you can catapult to the center of the national debate.So I don’t think Mitch McConnell wants to be having this conversation. I don’t think Kevin McCarthy wants to be having this conversation. I think they want to talk about how Joe Biden is a failure. But the Republican Party doesn’t have that kind of control over its own structure and its own institutional members now. And so at a time when there’s a lot of tailwinds for them, they are nevertheless pulled along by the more extreme and attention-driven members of their own caucus.Lulu Garcia-Navarro: It’s kind of like applying the attention economy to legislation. Jamelle, what are your thoughts?Jamelle Bouie: I largely agree that this is an attempt to do something like what Trump did: capture attention, generate energy amongst one’s most fervent supporters. Sort of draw the opposition into an argument and hope that you’re able to frame the argument in your direction, and capture the attention of people who may just be marginally paying attention to the whole thing.There’s a good case to make that Republicans can be successful at this precisely because they have this very sophisticated media apparatus: not just Fox News, but a broad constellation of outlets and different modes of delivery that allow them to, if not shape a message from its inception, then shape how its supporters receive any given message or any given piece of information.Having said that, I do think that Republicans are making something of a strategic mistake based on a misunderstanding of how Donald Trump was able to get into a position to win the presidency in the first place. And that is, Trump — as much as he calibrates anything — calibrated the kinds of offense that he caused. And so he both leveraged and utilized nativism, and racism, and these sorts of things, but he also presented himself as pretty liberally minded on L.G.B.T. rights, even though that his likely appointments and nominations were not going to be that. He himself presented himself as, I’m a New York libertine, so of course I have no problem with the L.G.B.T. community.He presented himself obviously as more of a moderate on economic policy, on the social safety net, which also appealed to voters who like Medicare, and like Medicaid, and like Social Security, and don’t want to give those things up to vote for a Republican. And I think that the Republican politicians, Republican officials, they may be generating a lot of fervent enthusiasm amongst their strongest supporters. But it’s unclear to me whether this is going to really make an impact with voters at large.I mean, I live in Virginia, and we just had our gubernatorial election last year. And for as much attention as the C.R.T. stuff got in the Virginia gubernatorial race, later analysis suggests that it wasn’t the C.R.T. stuff that drove Glenn Youngkin’s victory. It was traditional kind of midterm backlash to the party in power. And also, Youngkin ran on lowering the grocery tax and increasing teacher pay. So, bread-and-butter issues are what helped attract a lot of voters to him.Lulu Garcia-Navarro: So you’re saying that maybe these very controversial things that the G.O.P. is enacting are kind of a sideshow to what really matters for voters. Jane, I want you to jump in, because G.O.P. strategy aside, these laws are having real-world consequences, as Ezra said, that will be hard to undo. It wasn’t so long ago that same-sex marriage was legalized in this country, and it seemed that things had turned a corner. Why do you think this is the issue the G.O.P. are trying to mainstream, and where do you think it’s going?Jane Coaston: Well, I mean it’s because we live in hell.But it is interesting how repetitive this strategy is. I went back to some old Times pieces talking about the Southern Baptist Convention’s boycott of Disney, because Disney started offering same-sex health care benefits in 1995. I think that for anyone who is L.G.B.T. and over the age of 30, this all seems very repetitive.Ezra noted that one of the challenges that the G.O.P. is having now is that they’ve got this wave of people who are just screaming, “OK, groomer,” at literally any L.G.B.T. person on the internet. And then you’re having National Review articles, like, “Maybe don’t say that?” And no one’s listening.But I think that part of this is because these issues have to do, one, with a conceit of what L.G.B.T. people are and how L.G.B.T. people become L.G.B.T. I think we’ve seen over the last couple of days, some social conservatives who essentially argue that bills like in Florida, which keep being posited as being about sex ed — they aren’t about sex ed. There’s no mention of sex education or sexual activity in that bill. It mentions sexual orientation and gender identity. But the idea is that if you simply do not ever let people know that there is such thing as gay or trans people, then people will not be gay or trans.Rod Dreher, the conservative writer said that, oh, no, no, when we’re talking about grooming, we’re not talking about pedophiles — which is ridiculous. But he essentially said that, oh, it means that an adult who wants to separate children from a normative sexual and gender identity to inspire confusion in them, which just reminds me of Anita Bryant in 1978, essentially arguing that homosexuals must recruit, and that all children are cisgender and heterosexual until something happens.I guess I just keep thinking, like, I saw the movie “Mannequin” once when I was a kid. And that was it! It just did it. I saw Kim Cattrall and that was it, I was off to the races.But I also think that for as much as Trump held a Pride flag and made some bones out of performatively not caring about the “debate” about L.G.B.T. rights and L.G.B.T. people, that’s not to say that people within the conservative caucus stopped caring. They are still mad about Bostock. They’re still mad about Obergefell.For people who are troubled by trans rights, and specifically the rights of trans kids, I think that you’re seeing a lot of people who are like, “Oh, you’re just being homophobic. You’re yelling at teachers who mention that they’re gay. You’re very upset about gay and lesbian kids, gay and lesbian parents.” That’s something that we keep needing to relearn: that there is no part of the L.G.B.T. community that’s OK for some social conservatives. It’s not as if like, “Trans rights went too far, but we’re totally fine with gay couples. We’re totally fine with everything like that.” That might have been how it was parlayed, but that was never true.Lulu Garcia-Navarro: You all seem to agree on this fundamental point that there’s a great deal of danger for the G.O.P. in pushing these culture-war issues.Jane Coaston: I mean, I want to be clear here because I don’t think that the danger is not to the Republican Party. I think that there’s a good chance that at the end of this year they win in the midterms having an entirely different messaging set. What I do think is that the real risk is to L.G.B.T. people and to see L.G.B.T. people as a danger once again. This is the caravan, but even more so because this has been going on for 50 years.Ezra Klein: I want to add something also to that, that Jane’s comments jogged for me, because one of the dangers is the composition and motivating energies of the Republican coalition. And I think a story you could tell about conservatives over the past 10, 15, 20 years is this constant mainstreaming, this constant effort to figure out how to harness the energy of the most toxic parts of their coalition that two years earlier they were pushing to the side. So birtherism is a relatively fringe movement that becomes the core of the party. They nominate the guy who is leading the birther charge a few years after most of the more sober politicians are pushing it to the side. And this, “OK, groomer” stuff, this is the mainstreaming of QAnon. I think it’s important to be very clear about this.I mean, to coin a term here — I’m in California, so there’s a fair amount, or was a fair amount, of Woo-Anon out there, like yoga-doing QAnon followers — but this is “Trad-Anon,” right? This is a point where the traditional Christian conservative coalition is finding a way to meet the QAnon energy and come up with this strange —Jane Coaston: It’s a secular fundamentalist religion. It’s QAnon, but they’ve taken — you don’t hear talk about traditional marriage anymore. You don’t hear talking about sincerely held religious beliefs. This is not the RFRA fight of 2015, 2016. This is QAnon, but an areligious QAnon.Ezra Klein: Well, it’s both, right? Because on the one hand, you have a Rod Dreher version of it, which is very, very Christian, “We’re trying to protect traditional gender roles.” It’s why he’s out there tweeting that Viktor Orban in Hungary is now the leader of the entire West. And on the other side you have this groomer thing, which is an attempt to take QAnon’s view — which is one reason it’s resonating on the far right — that all of politics is an effort by Democrats to protect pedophiles and then find some way to sort of wink, wink that you’re on board with that view of politics while saying it’s actually a little bit about something else.And so this is just one of the dimensions of it that I find really unnerving. Countries live or fall on how well they police the fringes in their political parties. And the Republican Party is so unbelievably bad at doing it. And every two years you think they can’t possibly be worse at not keeping out the worst elements of their party. And they show you, no, no, no, no, they’re going to bring those people into the core, too.Lulu Garcia-Navarro: Jamelle, I want to ask you this, though, because we’ve been talking a lot about the G.O.P., but what can be said about the Democrats? Because what is always fascinating to me is that you have Democrats that have policies that enjoy broad support. But they can’t seem to get their agenda passed while they are in power. I mean, one thing is the G.O.P. and what they’re doing. But it seems like the Democrats can’t seem to get traction on things that enjoy broad support.Jamelle Bouie: I think there are a few things here. I mean, in terms of getting policies through Congress, they just don’t have the votes. They’re reliant on their majority in the Senate — in particular on one senator, Joe Manchin, whose entire political brand kind of depends on him publicly being an obstacle to Democratic priorities, and then another senator, Kyrsten Sinema of Arizona, who seems to want to try to cultivate a kind of John McCain maverick energy, which for her also means publicly and visibly standing in the way of Democratic priorities.And so I think this picture would look very different if there was one more or two more senators, right? If Cal Cunningham in North Carolina had won, if Susan Collins’s opponent in Maine had won, we’d be looking at a very different situation than we are now.But I think beyond the problem of winning elections and having a larger majority, which is just ultimately what the issue is here, I do think Democrats have adopted a faulty idea of what is going to drive political success. It’s very clear that the idea Democrats had going into 2021 was if they just delivered economic growth, and they delivered policies, and they kept their heads down and did hard work, then that would produce a public that was inclined to re-elect Democrats.But what seems to be happening, what Republicans seemed to have figured out, is that the actual popularity of the things you’re saying may be a little less important than your ability to seize attention, drive conversations, create a strong impression in the minds of people. And I don’t think Democrats have really been doing that. And I think that the arguments over these bills are actually a good example of it.I think the Democratic Party is having a hard time figuring out exactly how to go about pushing against this stuff because it runs into this theory of the case they have. There doesn’t seem to be an inclination to really just swing — to make what may sound like outlandish accusations, but that push strongly against the messaging and the rhetoric coming from the Republican Party.Ezra Klein: I think that Jamelle gets that right, on both the levels. The reason the Democrats can’t pass bills is they don’t have enough votes to pass them. It’s as simple as that. It’s not a messaging problem, fundamentally. Although, I will say that the point of Joe Biden is that he was going to be good at negotiating with egotistical, hard-to-deal-with members of the U.S. Senate.And I do worry about a sense of resignation that has set in at the White House around Joe Manchin. I would like to see more constant efforts at trying than I’m currently seeing. They seem to be letting their poor relationship with Manchin simply deteriorate when they need to be figuring out how to fix it. And at least from my reporting, what I can tell, I’m not seeing it.Lulu Garcia-Navarro: But Ezra, I want to ask you this about the Democrats. I mean, it is a numbers game. Of course it is. But on the other hand, I don’t see Democratic leaders really standing up and saying, this is the ground that I’m going to die on, this is the hill that has to be crested, in the same way that the Republicans are on these very controversial bills.Ezra Klein: So, one, I don’t think that it’s the national Republicans who are trying to make the controversial bills the center of it. But to this broader point you’re making, and to something Jamelle said, the Democratic leaders have had a theory that they’re going to push popular bills. They’re going to try to pass those bills and they’re going to try to run on them.And that theory basically has failed. They passed the American Rescue Plan. It was a very popular bill. They tried to run using it to generate more momentum for Build Back Better. They did not get Build Back Better passed, and now the child tax credit is expiring. And now they’ve fundamentally lost agenda control.So it’s like, the agenda is now Russia, which is a world event. They can’t do anything about that. And I think broadly speaking, Joe Biden’s been doing a good job, with the exception of occasional ad-libs. And then there’s inflation, which they’re also really struggling with and to some degree bear some responsibility for.What they are not doing is the other side of populism, which I think of as unpopularism. And agenda control in American politics comes from courting, choosing, engaging in controversy. For something to dominate the news, it needs the energy of not just support but opposition. That’s why some of these G.O.P. bills in Florida and elsewhere are dominating the news in the way they are.There are things that Joe Biden could do that would have that internal electricity. They could cancel student loan debt. I don’t know that they think that’s a good idea at the moment. But if they decided to actually try, which is something Chuck Schumer wants them to do, something Elizabeth Warren wants them to do, that would be controversial enough that it would reshape the agenda. American politics would be seized by arguments over whether or not canceling student loan debt is a good idea, and that might be territory more favorable to them. I do not myself understand what fights Democrats want the 2022 election to be over. They seem to me to be in a fundamentally quite reactive place right now —Jamelle Bouie: Yes.Ezra Klein: — responding to world events, responding to every month’s economic news drop. And at some point, if they want to do anything differently than that, they’re not just going to have to choose which popular things they say. They’re going to have to choose which controversial things they say, such that Republicans and others engage on the other side, and the locus of American political conflict moves back onto ground they’ve chosen.Jamelle Bouie: An example of this, pulling from what we’ve been talking about, is if Joe Biden were to, on Friday, give a national speech — from the Oval Office, from the Rose Garden, wherever, a big national set piece speech denouncing the Republican Party as embracing gross homophobia, this would be controversial. People would get upset. But it would seize the agenda. It would reorient things toward talking about these issues on ground that might be more favorable to Democrats. And I see no indication that Democratic leaders are even thinking in those terms.Lulu Garcia-Navarro: Jane, I want to think about this idea of unpopularism, that the Democrats, as Ezra says, are not wanting to push something that might not have broad support. But of course, there is someone who loves to do that a lot: Trump. And I am wondering about what you see his role is coming up in the 2022 midterms. Because we have him endorsing a lot of candidates, including Sarah Palin for Congress this week, targeting some major G.O.P. incumbents who have stood up to him, like Lisa Murkowski and Gov. Brian Kemp of Georgia, all the while still peddling the big lie. How much influence do you see him having these days? And how should we regard Trump as a force in politics, a force in society — and, I guess, are those two the same thing?Jane Coaston: I know that I’m probably the only extreme sports fan on here. But I feel like sometimes when we’re talking about Democratic strategy, it’s like, if only they would run the offense we think they should run, they would win. I actually don’t know what Democrats should do or what would be best. There’s what I would want them to do, and I don’t know if it would work.But as to Trump, I think what you’re going to see is actually a decline in his influence, because he absolutely will not move on past the 2020 election. He can’t do it. He is physically unable to do so. And you’re seeing with his endorsements in the upcoming cycle — actually a number of his endorsements aren’t doing very well.You’re seeing this in Georgia. You’re seeing this in other places, with Herschel Walker or something like that where, yes, Mitch McConnell has said that he’s got his support, but there is some concern, I think, on the ground that that could be another losing race. Because, again, if your litmus test for Trump has nothing to do with anything that is taking place in 2022, but all has to do with whether or not you’re willing to say that Trump actually won the 2020 election …He is a losing one-term president who is existing interminably as a losing one-term president. It is important to note that Democrats want him to be more influential than he actually is because he is a major vote-driver for Democrats, as we’ve seen in Georgia and elsewhere.And so I think that you’re seeing a lot of Republicans who are like, “Can we move on, can we move on,” and Donald Trump will not. Donald Trump will talk about how, oh, Ron DeSantis is fine, but I would absolutely beat him in 2024. He will do interviews. He will put out very bad failing social media networks. And so I think how he should be considered is, he is an angry man who won’t move on and who won’t go away. And no matter what Republicans want him to say or want him to do, he will not be on any party line that is not his own.Lulu Garcia-Navarro: Trump’s influence is solidified in one very particular place, and that’s on the conservative Supreme Court. And today, a big win for Democrats — the confirmation of Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson. I want to bring her into this because it actually fits into what we’ve been discussing. Because the G.O.P. slammed her in the hearings with a lot of partisan attacks about C.R.T., asking her to define what a woman is and QAnon-adjacent questions about child pornography. And yet, in polling, people said that they hated the attacks, and she has a majority of support. So, Jamelle, what should we take away from that?Jamelle Bouie: We should take away from that that these attacks are not some sort of, pardon the expression, trump card. That when you have someone like Judge Jackson, who looks like a perfectly lovely woman, and is obviously very qualified and obviously very successful, and you have Ted Cruz shouting about how she is friendly to criminals and child pornographers. I think that for ordinary people who aren’t paying super close attention — they’re really just taking in images and impressions — it just looks ridiculous. And it seems unconvincing.To go back to what we’ve been talking about, I think that something similar may happen with these bills. Screaming that your kids’ gay third-grade teacher is a pedophile or a groomer when you know that this person has been absolutely lovely to you, your child and your family — it’s not going to fly, I think, for most people or for people outside of this narrow bubble.One thing I will say about the experience of Judge Jackson and her nomination and how this has all played out, is I think it is a point in favor of the argument that back in 2016 President Barack Obama made a grave mistake in nominating Merrick Garland for the Supreme Court in an attempt to find bipartisan support. Not because Garland was not qualified to be on the court — although I think I have somewhat idiosyncratic views about what it means to be qualified — but because Garland didn’t engender really any kind of popular support in his favor. No one was excited by him. Just another boring guy you put on the Supreme Court.I think what Jackson has in her favor is simply that she’d be the first Black woman on the court. And that excites people. That makes people enthusiastic. And that makes people much more willing to buckle down in her defense than they would otherwise be.And so I think one lesson to take away from this, should Joe Biden get another Supreme Court nomination, either in the next two years or if he serves another term, is that for as much as it’s clear that Democratic Party elites and people at the highest echelons of this stuff very much believe that a Supreme Court nominee must be someone with a lot of judicial experience, etc., etc., they should also be looking for people who would actually excite the public, who would get people interested and excited about what’s going on in the court. Those are the sorts of nominees they should be looking for and putting forth and putting in public. Even if that nominee may fail, the mere fact of generating that enthusiasm is an important thing.I think this actually connects to our broader conversation about Democrats, which is that Democrats need to stop thinking of politics as some sort of mechanistic system in which, like, Good Input A gets you Good Result B. It’s much more fluid, much more chaotic in that oftentimes you just need to swing. You need to aim at people’s passions and see what happens. Maybe it’ll work. Maybe it won’t. But I think connecting the people’s passions and their enthusiasms, can be much more successful than trying to be openly and outwardly and ostentatiously respectable.Ezra Klein: Democrats are very taken, I think in general at the moment, with something political scientists like to call the median voter theorem, which is to say that the key thing in politics is getting to that median voter, the voter right in the middle, who’s the most ideologically moderate, and convincing them. And if you get that 50 percent plus one, or maybe you correct for the Senate bias, or it’s 55 percent plus one — whatever it might be — then you win.And there is some truth to that. I think that a lot of folks on the left and critics of Democrats underrate the importance of ideology and policy positioning in politics. There really are moderates. But the flip side of that, to what Jamelle is saying, is that you have to reach the median voter. They have to hear what it is you’re saying. And the thing about the voters you need to reach is they’re often not paying super close attention. The people who are paying super close attention almost, by definition, have already made up their minds, otherwise they would not be paying such close attention because they wouldn’t care that much.And so you need to do things that don’t just control the agenda but actually echo through the country. And that requires you to have not just a theory of what it is voters will find popular, but what it is that they will talk about, what it is the media will talk about. And this maybe goes to a big through line of this whole conversation. Democrats have a lot of theories of policy. They have a lot of theories of politics. They just do not have a theory of attention. And what I would say for the Trumpist Republican Party is it mostly doesn’t have a theory of policy. It has a middling theory of politics, and it is overwhelmed by its own theory of attention. And I don’t think there’s some kind of grand strategic plan happening over there.But I think that one way to think about the asymmetry, or maybe the inversion of the two sides right now, is that Republicans know how to get attention, but they don’t know how to be strategic about it. And Democrats know how to be strategic, but they don’t know how to get attention.Lulu Garcia-Navarro: I want to pivot to a piece of news that is less domestic culture wars, and more of a global culture war. The Boston Marathon announced this week that Belarusian and Russian citizens who reside in those countries are not allowed to run in the race as a response to the war. The Boston Athletic Association, which runs the Boston Marathon, announced that they were “horrified and outraged” by the war, and they believe that they must do what they can to “support the people of Ukraine.”I have a lot of thoughts about this, but I’d like to hear yours. I’m going to start with Jane, as I know you’re a sports aficionado. So I want your thoughts on this.Jane Coaston: I personally think that this is not quite like freedom fries territory. But I do think it seems to be targeted at a very small group of people — as you said, it was Belarusian and Russian citizens who do reside in those countries. But Belarusian and Russian citizens who don’t reside in those countries will be allowed to run, but they’re not going to recognize their affiliation or flags.I think it’s worth remembering that the process to enter or qualify for the Boston Marathon started for many people a year ago. You do not just decide to run the Boston Marathon. You are either running for a charity or you have a time in another marathon that qualifies you to run in Boston. And I’m trying to think, what is this going to do? Vladimir Putin is not going to be like, “Oh, no, a Russian citizen was not able to run a 2:03 at the Boston Marathon. I will ne’er sin no more!”I think that there is an element to so much of our politics, especially on foreign policy, where we’ve got the “we got to do something” impulse. But one of the challenges is that there isn’t something that the Boston Marathon organizers, or people who run an opera house, or people who work in the art world — there’s not something they could do exactly that will in their view adequately punish the aggressions of the Russian government. It falls flat. And I think it’s kind of repulsive.Lulu Garcia-Navarro: I have to say, Jane, I agree with you. I think this was a real misstep. I don’t know that banning citizens of particular countries because they actually live in the countries of their citizenship, and those leaders are autocratic and there isn’t the freedom to protest or do any of the things that you would think of in a democracy, is actually beneficial to the cause of freeing Ukraine. But I’m interested in, Jamelle, your thoughts, and then Ezra.Jamelle Bouie: I don’t disagree. It makes no real conceptual sense why you would do this. So Russian and Belarusian citizens who live in their countries cannot run in the Boston Marathon. OK. That doesn’t put any pressure on the leaders of those countries. If anything, it may encourage the view amongst the citizenry that the West is against them, that the West isn’t simply against the government or to the government’s actions, but actually actively against the citizens themselves. And it may prompt people to double down in their support for the government. So it just seems counterproductive.Issue a statement. Condemn. Say that government officials can’t participate, they can’t watch, they can’t be there. If you want to go as far as to say, you can’t fly the flag, I actually think that’s probably fair because the flag is a symbol of the government as well. But banning the citizens, like Jane said, it seems like just doing something for the sake of doing something, and it doesn’t really seem very constructive. It doesn’t even seem like it was particularly well thought-out, like anyone was thinking about what you actually are trying to accomplish by doing this.Lulu Garcia-Navarro: Ezra?Ezra Klein: I have a hard-and-fast rule that on any sports story I just think whatever Jane thinks. So on the specifics of this, I think whatever Jane thinks, and everything she said sounded correct to me.From a consequentialist perspective, we need to think a bit about whether we are creating pressure on citizens in these countries to pressure their governments, or whether we are hardening their support for their governments. And recognizing that they live in highly censored, highly manipulated media ecosystems, I think we have to be pretty thoughtful about whether we’re just giving grist to their leaders to manipulate them more. And for the people who are only half in and out of that ecosystem — because Russian and Belarusian control over media is not absolute — whether we’re actually doing things that are going to make those wavering feel more nationalistic.There’s a very big difference between strategically trying to win over a population and just trying to punish a country because it at a certain point just feels like we need to keep punishing. And, look, I want to punish Putin and those behind this war in every way that is possible. And I broadly support the sanctions, despite the tremendous pain they’re causing, because I do think that they are creating pressure in the long-run for Putin to end this. But I don’t know that doing things that actually target Russian citizens — without any obvious mechanism for pressuring the regime — makes a lot of sense.And I’m worried about some of the news I hear and some of the polling I see coming out of Russia. You can only believe what you can believe in it, but that there is rising support for Putin, that there is a rising belief that the entire West is arrayed against Russia. And that this might actually, in terms of the domestic political pressures Putin faces, be making him more worried about the hard-liners who think he needs to go further, further, further and show Russian strength in the face of Western opposition rather than what our initial effort was, which was to try to get the more Westernized Russians — these oligarchs with their lofts in London — to pressure Putin to bring an end to this. So I worry that our view of this has, without anybody noting it, kind of flipped. And we may not be creating the incentive system that we had hoped to.Lulu Garcia-Navarro is a Times Opinion podcast host. Ezra Klein is the host of “The Ezra Klein Show” and a Times columnist. Jane Coaston is the host of “The Argument” podcast. Jamelle Bouie is a Times columnist.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.Times Opinion audio produced by Lulu Garcia-Navarro, Alison Bruzek and Phoebe Lett. Fact-checking by Kate Sinclair, Mary Marge Locker and Alex Ellerbeck. Original music by Carole Sabouraud and mixing by Isaac Jones. Audience strategy by Shannon Busta, and editorial support from Kristina Samulewski. Our executive producer is Irene Noguchi. Special thanks to Lauren Kelley and Patrick Healy. More

    • 100 Shares119 Views

      in Elections

      Elecciones presidenciales en Francia: lo que debes saber

      by

      Los franceses eligen a su presidente en abril, una votación crucial para Francia y clave para Europa. El presidente Emmanuel Macron es el favorito para ganar, pero la carrera se ha puesto reñida.PARÍS — Los franceses acuden a las urnas este mes para elegir a su presidente, el cargo más poderoso de Francia y que tiene un control considerable de la política interior y exterior, en uno de los Estados miembro más poblados e influyentes de la Unión Europea.La guerra en Ucrania ha dominado la cobertura informativa en Francia y ha eclipsado en gran medida la campaña. El presidente Emmanuel Macron ha sido acusado de utilizar su condición de líder en tiempos de guerra y de diplomático en jefe de Europa para evitar enfrentarse a sus oponentes y llegar a un segundo mandato, y algunos críticos se preocupan de que la campaña desigual haya carecido de un debate sustantivo.Sin embargo, la carrera se ha abierto recientemente con el auge de su principal contrincante, Marine Le Pen, la líder de extrema derecha con una plataforma anti-UE, anti-OTAN y pro-Rusia que repercutiría globalmente si llega a ganar.Esto es lo que hay que saber sobre la votación, que se celebrará en dos rondas el 10 y el 24 de abril.¿Qué está en juego?Francia, una nación de más de 67 millones de habitantes, es la séptima economía del mundo, el país más visitado, uno de los cinco miembros permanentes del Consejo de Seguridad de las Naciones Unidas y una potencia nuclear. Es miembro fundador de la Unión Europea y un motor clave de su política.El próximo presidente de Francia tendrá que ayudar al país a sortear dos fuerzas que actualmente azotan a Europa: la brutal invasión rusa a Ucrania, que ha desplazado a millones de personas a las puertas del continente, y una recuperación económica relacionada con una pandemia que está tensando las cadenas de suministro.Una familia de refugiados ucranianos esperando para subir a un tren a Budapest desde una ciudad del este de Hungría en marzo.Mauricio Lima para The New York TimesAunque las fuerzas de la derecha han ganado en gran medida las guerras culturales de Francia en los últimos años, las encuestas muestran que los votantes franceses están ahora preocupados principalmente por el creciente costo de la vida. El próximo presidente tendrá que compaginar estas preocupaciones con otras cuestiones a largo plazo en la mente de los votantes, como la transición de Francia a energías limpias, la sostenibilidad de su generoso modelo de bienestar, el temor a la inmigración y el nerviosismo por el lugar que ocupa el Islam en el país.La desilusión generalizada con la política también se ha convertido en una fuente importante de preocupación, y se teme que estas elecciones puedan ser las de menor participación en una elección presidencial en décadas.Learn More About France’s Presidential ElectionThe run-up to the first round of the election has been dominated by issues such as security, immigration and national identity.On the Scene: A Times reporter attended a rally held by Marine Le Pen, the far-right French presidential candidate. Here is what he saw.Challenges to Re-election: A troubled factory in President Emmanuel Macron’s hometown shows his struggle in winning the confidence of French workers.A Late Surge: After recently rising in voter surveys, Jean-Luc Mélenchon could become the first left-wing candidate since 2012 to reach the second round of the election.A Political Bellwether: Auxerre has backed the winner in the presidential race for 40 years. This time, many residents see little to vote for.¿Cuáles son los poderes de la presidencia francesa?Los presidentes franceses disponen de poderes extraordinarios, más que la mayoría de los líderes occidentales, con menos controles y equilibrios que limitan el poder ejecutivo en otros países.A diferencia de los primeros ministros británicos o los cancilleres alemanes, que son elegidos por los partidos que controlan el mayor número de escaños en sus parlamentos, los presidentes franceses son elegidos directamente por los ciudadanos para mandatos de cinco años. Poco después de esas elecciones, Francia vuelve a las urnas para elegir a los representantes de la Asamblea Nacional, la cámara más poderosa del Parlamento, cuyos mandatos también duran cinco años.El hecho de que ambas elecciones se celebren en el mismo ciclo de cinco años aumenta considerablemente la probabilidad de que Francia vote por legisladores que apoyen al presidente recién elegido, lo que significa que los presidentes franceses no tienen que preocuparse tanto como otros líderes por la agitación interna de los partidos o las elecciones de mitad de mandato. El primer ministro de Francia, como jefe de gobierno, desempeña un papel importante en el sistema constitucional, al igual que el Parlamento. Pero el presidente, que nombra al primer ministro, establece gran parte de la agenda de Francia¿Quiénes son los candidatos?Hay 12 candidatos oficiales, pero las encuestas sugieren que solo unos pocos tienen posibilidades de ganar.El actual favorito es Macron, de 44 años, un exbanquero de inversión que fue elegido en 2017 con poca experiencia política y que se presenta a un segundo mandato. Fue elegido sobre las ruinas de los partidos políticos tradicionales de Francia con una fuerte plataforma proempresarial. Reformó el código laboral, eliminó un impuesto sobre el patrimonio y reformó la compañía nacional de ferrocarriles. Pero su afán reformista ha sido atenuado por las huelgas masivas a raíz de sus planes de reforma de las pensiones, las protestas de los “chalecos amarillos” y la pandemia de coronavirus. La guerra de Ucrania lo puso por delante en las encuestas, pero su ventaja se ha reducido recientemente, hasta aproximadamente el 25 por ciento en los sondeos.El presidente Emmanuel Macron este mes en Nanterre, cerca de ParísDmitry Kostyukov para The New York TimesLa principal contrincante de Macron es Le Pen, de 53 años, la eterna líder de extrema derecha que se presenta por tercera vez y que perdió ante él en 2017. Lidera la Agrupación Nacional, un movimiento conocido desde hace mucho por su antisemitismo, su nostalgia nazi y su postura antiinmigrante, que ella ha tratado de sanear y convertir en un partido creíble y capaz de gobernar. Le Pen se ha enfrentado a las críticas por su anterior simpatía por el presidente ruso, Vladimir Putin, pero la inflación y el aumento de los precios de la energía encajan bien en su plataforma proteccionista. Actualmente ocupa el segundo lugar en las encuestas, con un 20 por ciento de apoyo.Marine Le Pen el año pasado en La Trinité-sur-MerDmitry Kostyukov para The New York TimesVarios candidatos, que tienen entre el diez y el 15 por ciento de los votos, se disputan el tercer puesto con la esperanza de lograr un aumento de última hora que los haga pasar a la segunda vuelta.Jean-Luc Mélenchon, de 70 años, es el líder del partido de extrema izquierda Francia Insumisa y el candidato de izquierda mejor posicionado para llegar a la segunda vuelta. Político veterano y hábil orador, conocido por su retórica apasionada y su personalidad divisiva, ha prometido invertir en energía verde, reducir la edad legal de jubilación, aumentar el salario mínimo mensual y redistribuir la riqueza poniendo impuestos a los ricos. También quiere reformar radicalmente la Constitución francesa para reducir los poderes presidenciales.Jean-Luc Mélenchon en enero en BurdeosPhilippe Lopez/Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesValérie Pécresse, de 54 años, es una política que preside la región francesa de Île-de-France, una potencia económica y demográfica que incluye a París. Es la candidata de Les Républicains, el principal partido conservador francés. Varias de sus propuestas económicas, como el aumento de la edad legal de jubilación a los 65 años, son similares a las de Macron. Pero en unas elecciones en las que las voces más radicales han marcado el tono del debate en la derecha, ella ha dado un giro duro en temas como la inmigración y la delincuencia, lo que la deja con problemas para sobresalir entre los otros candidatos de la derecha.Valérie Pécresse, en el centro y a la derecha, en febrero en Mouilleron-en-ParedsLoic Venance/Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesÉric Zemmour, de 63 años, es un escritor, comentarista y estrella de la televisión de extrema derecha que lleva años en los medios de comunicación franceses, pero cuya campaña, con ecos de Donald Trump, ha revuelto la política francesa. Es un nacionalista que evoca imágenes de una Francia en franca decadencia a causa de la inmigración y el islam, y ha sido condenado en múltiples ocasiones por infringir las leyes que castigan la difamación o los actos que provocan el odio o la violencia por motivos de raza y religión. Últimamente, sus perspectivas se han ido desvaneciendo.Éric Zemmour el domingo en ParísYoan Valat/EPA vía ShutterstockEl resto de los candidatos tienen un porcentaje de votos de un solo dígito y tienen pocas posibilidades de llegar a la segunda vuelta. Entre ellos se encuentran Anne Hidalgo, de 62 años, alcaldesa de París y candidata del moribundo Partido Socialista, y Yannick Jadot, de 54 años, candidato del Partido Verde, que ha tenido dificultades para avanzar a pesar del creciente apoyo a las causas medioambientales en Francia.¿Cómo funciona?El candidato que obtiene la mayoría absoluta de los votos en la primera vuelta es elegido directamente, un resultado improbable que no se produce desde 1965, la primera vez que un presidente francés fue elegido por votación popular directa. En su lugar, suele celebrarse una segunda vuelta entre los dos primeros candidatos.Las normas electorales francesas son estrictas, con rigurosos límites a la financiación de las campañas y al tiempo de emisión, y con un apoyo financiero y logístico del Estado que pretende igualar las condiciones. (Aun así, muchos medios de comunicación son propiedad de personas adineradas, lo que les da una vía para influir en las elecciones).Los gastos de campaña tienen un tope de unos 16,9 millones de euros para los candidatos en la primera vuelta, o sea, unos 18,5 millones de dólares, y de unos 22,5 millones de euros para los que llegan a la segunda. Los que se saltan las normas —como Nicolas Sarkozy, expresidente de derecha— enfrentan multas y sanciones penales.Las empresas privadas no pueden hacer donaciones de campaña, y los particulares únicamente pueden donar hasta 4600 euros para toda la elección. Los candidatos reciben el reembolso de una parte de sus costos de campaña, y el Estado paga algunos gastos.El tiempo de emisión está estrechamente regulado por el organismo de control de los medios de comunicación de Francia. En un primer momento, las televisiones y radios deben garantizar que los candidatos tengan una exposición que se corresponda aproximadamente con su importancia política, basándose en factores como los sondeos, la representación en el Parlamento y los resultados de las elecciones anteriores. Cuando la campaña comienza oficialmente, dos semanas antes de la votación, todos los candidatos tienen el mismo tiempo de emisión. Está prohibido hacer campaña los fines de semana de votación.Preparando los sobres con las boletas de los candidatos presidenciales y los folletos del programa el mes pasado en Matoury, Guayana FrancesaJody Amiet/Agence France-Presse — Getty Images¿Qué sucede después?A las 8 p. m. del día de las elecciones, el 10 de abril, los medios de comunicación franceses colaborarán con las encuestadoras para publicar los resultados previstos, basados en el recuento preliminar de votos. Eso dará una buena indicación de quién se espera que pase a la segunda vuelta, pero si la elección está reñida, las proyecciones podrían no estar claras hasta más tarde. Los resultados oficiales estarán disponibles en el sitio web del Ministerio del Interior.Los dos candidatos a la segunda vuelta se enfrentarán en un debate por televisión antes de la nueva votación, el 24 de abril. Si Macron no es reelegido, el nuevo presidente tendrá hasta el 13 de mayo para tomar posesión. La atención se centrará entonces en las elecciones para la Asamblea Nacional. Todos los escaños estarán en juego, en un sistema similar de dos rondas de votación, el 12 y el 19 de junio.Aurélien Breeden cubre Francia desde la oficina de París desde 2014. Ha informado sobre algunos de los peores atentados terroristas que ha sufrido el país, el desmantelamiento del campamento de migrantes en Calais y las tumultuosas elecciones presidenciales de Francia en 2017. @aurelienbrd More

    • 75 Shares129 Views

      in Elections

      Your Friday Briefing: Russia’s Growing Isolation

      by

      Plus Imran Khan’s unsteady future and growing frustrations over Shanghai’s lockdowns.Good morning. We’re covering Russia’s departure from the U.N. human rights council, a political blow to Pakistan’s Imran Khan and Shanghai’s growing frustration with Covid restrictions.Residents surveyed the damage in Dergachi, on the outskirts of Kharkiv.Tyler Hicks/The New York TimesRussia leaves U.N. rights councilThe U.N. voted to suspend Russia from the Human Rights Council on Thursday, leading Russia to withdraw. China said it opposed the measure. U.S. lawmakers also voted to strip Moscow of its preferential trade status and ban the import of Russian energy. Here’s the latest.The diplomatic pressure may continue to mount. The E.U. is weighing a ban on Russian coal, a significant step for a bloc that is heavily dependent on the country’s fossil fuels. But lengthy deliberations and the dilution of some measures indicated that the E.U.’s appetite for sanctions may be diminishing.Fighting may soon escalate, too. NATO met to discuss sending more military aid to Ukraine, in anticipation of an intensified Russian onslaught in the east. Officials there warned civilians that they faced their “last chance to leave” and urged them to evacuate.Soldiers: Body bags are returning to Russia from the front, causing some families of fallen soldiers to question the war — and leading others to harden their resolve.Diplomacy: Prospects for successful peace talks have dimmed: Russia’s foreign minister said Ukraine had proposed a new draft deal that deviated from previous versions, and President Aleksandr Lukashenko of Belarus demanded that his country be included in the negotiations.State of the war:Ukrainian forces were holding out amid fierce fighting in Mariupol, officials said, despite a dire humanitarian situation. The mayor said 5,000 people have died there.German intelligence intercepted radio transmissions in which Russians discussed killings of civilians, officials said.Facial recognition companies are being used to identify Russian soldiers, living or dead, to verify that they are not actors and show Russians the cost of the conflict.Prime Minister Imran Khan may soon be voted out of power.Saiyna Bashir for The New York TimesKhan in jeopardy after court rulingPakistan’s Supreme Court overturned Prime Minister Imran Khan’s move to dissolve Parliament on Thursday, setting the stage for a no-confidence vote on Saturday.The vote, which Khan had tried to block, is widely expected to remove him from office. Should that happen, a caretaker government will be formed and the country will prepare for elections in the coming months.The Supreme Court ruling is a major victory for opposition leaders, who said that Khan had attempted an “open coup.” New elections would be a test for the coalition of opposition parties, which are typically at loggerheads but have teamed up around the no-confidence vote.Learn More About France’s Presidential ElectionThe run-up to the first round of the election has been dominated by issues such as security, immigration and national identity.On the Scene: A Times reporter attended a rally held by Marine Le Pen, the far-right French presidential candidate. Here is what he saw.Challenges to Re-election: A troubled factory in President Emmanuel Macron’s hometown shows his struggle in winning the confidence of French workers.A Late Surge: After recently rising in voter surveys, Jean-Luc Mélenchon could become the first left-wing candidate since 2012 to reach the second round of the election.A Political Bellwether: Auxerre has backed the winner in the presidential race for 40 years. This time, many residents see little to vote for.Analysis: The military controls the main levers of power, and Khan’s relationship with key leaders soured after he refused to back a new chief of the country’s intelligence agency last year.Economy: The Pakistani rupee sank to a record low on Thursday. Analysts say the current crisis has further polarized the country and could lead to unrest.Workers erected barriers to seal off a Shanghai neighborhood last week.Aly Song/ReutersShanghai’s devastating outbreakThe city of 26 million is confronting its worst outbreak since the pandemic began, and Chinese authorities have deployed their usual hard-line restrictions to curb transmission.But Shanghai is different. Residents of the city — the wealthiest and most populous in China — are airing their grievances. They have signed petitions to protest a policy that separates infected children from their parents, criticized conditions at isolation facilities and defiantly confronted officials.Their grumblings could eat away at the central government’s power, as the crisis quickly becomes the most significant political test to date of the country’s zero tolerance approach — a policy on which the Chinese Communist Party has staked its legitimacy.Analysis: The city is home to a vibrant middle class and also many elites, who are accustomed to a relatively high level of political autonomy.Background: Officials had insisted that Shanghai was too important to quarantine. “The fact that Shanghai is being locked down suggests that we are pretty close to the red line, to the tolerable limit of how defensible zero Covid is,” a political scientist said.Here are the latest updates and maps of the pandemic.In other news:Several Biden administration officials and Nancy Pelosi, the House Speaker, have tested positive.German lawmakers rejected a vaccine mandate for people 60 and older, a blow to Chancellor Olaf Scholz’s coalition.THE LATEST NEWSWorld NewsPresident Biden and Ketanji Brown Jackson watched the vote together.Al Drago for The New York TimesJudge Ketanji Brown Jackson will now be Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson: The U.S. Senate confirmed her historic nomination to the Supreme Court in a 53-47 vote.At least two people were killed and eight wounded in a shooting in central Tel Aviv, the latest in a deadly wave of terrorism in Israel.The trial in the murder of the journalist Jamal Khashoggi will likely end without justice: A Turkish court moved the proceedings to Saudi Arabia.The leader of Yemen abdicated after a cease-fire took effect, a sign that Saudi Arabia may be looking to end the war. The kingdom’s callous moves exacerbated seven years of bloodshed and a humanitarian crisis.The French ElectionCampaign posters of the 12 official candidates, on display in northeastern France.Andrea Mantovani for The New York TimesFrance will head to the polls on Sunday for the first round of the country’s presidential election. Here’s an explainer.Marine Le Pen, the leading right-wing candidate, has tried to sanitize her extremist image and present herself as a clearheaded choice.President Emmanuel Macron, seeking a second term, is leading in the polls. But his economic promises have yielded checkered results.What Else Is HappeningAstronomers may have found the most distant galaxy to date.Novels by Olga Tokarczuk, Mieko Kawakami and Claudia Piñeiro are in the running for the International Booker Prize, a prestigious award for translated fiction.A Morning ReadAt the Dior show at Paris Fashion Week last month.Jeremy Moeller/Getty ImagesRihanna’s bare-belly maternity outfits are both haute couture and, perhaps, transgressive political statements. As right-wing lawmakers fight to control women’s bodies, Rihanna is “connecting the right to dress how you like with all sorts of other, more constitutional rights,” our chief fashion critic writes. “It’s a pretty radical move.”Who Is Running for President of France?Card 1 of 6The campaign begins. More

    • 113 Shares149 Views

      in Elections

      How Marine Le Pen Threatens to Upend French Elections

      by

      The far-right presidential candidate has opened up about her personal life and tweaked her policies to gain sympathy and credibility among more mainstream voters.STIRING-WENDEL, France — Marine Le Pen, the far-right leader making her third attempt to become president of France, already had the backing of voters who came to listen to her recently in Stiring-Wendel, a former coal-mining town struggling to reinvent itself.But after a 40-minute speech focusing on the rising cost of living, Ms. Le Pen succeeded in doing what even few of her supporters would have predicted just months ago: impressing them. Voters trickling out of an auditorium into the cold evening said she had become “less extreme,” more “mature” and “self-assured” — even “presidential.”“She has softened, she is more composed, calmer, more serene,” said Yohan Brun, 19, a student who grew up in Stiring-Wendel and had come to listen to Ms. Le Pen because “she cares more about the French people than the other candidates.”As France votes on Sunday, polls are predicting that this election will be a rematch of the previous one, pitting Ms. Le Pen against President Emmanuel Macron in a second-round showdown. But that does not mean that precisely the same Ms. Le Pen is running.Ms. Le Pen has revamped her image since the last election five years ago. She has pragmatically abandoned certain ideas that had alienated mainstream voters. She has held on to others that certify her far-right credentials. And she has shifted emphasis toward pocketbook issues.Some who attended Ms. Le Pen’s speech in Stiring-Wendel said she had become “less extreme,” more “mature” and even “presidential.”Andrea Mantovani for The New York TimesBut as important, she has self-consciously sanded the rough edges off her persona in an effort to make herself appear more presidential and voter-friendly.The makeover is part of a long and deliberate strategy by Ms. Le Pen to “undemonize” herself and her party, and ultimately gain the French presidency. While the effort remains unconvincing to many who consider her a wolf in sheep’s clothing, it has nonetheless succeeded in giving her a last-minute surge in the polls before Sunday’s election that is worrying Mr. Macron’s camp.“Marine Le Pen appears more sympathetic than Emmanuel Macron,” said Pierre Person, a national lawmaker of the president’s party, adding that he was worried that she could win. More

    • 88 Shares199 Views

      in Elections

      France’s Presidential Election 2022: Your Questions, Answered

      by

      The French are choosing their president in April, an election that is crucial for France and key for Europe. President Emmanuel Macron is favored to win, but the race has gotten closer.PARIS — The French are going to the polls this month to choose their president, who holds the most powerful office in France and has considerable control of domestic and foreign policy, in one of the European Union’s most populous and influential member states.The war in Ukraine has dominated news coverage in France and largely overshadowed the campaign. President Emmanuel Macron has been accused of using his status as a wartime leader and Europe’s diplomat in chief to avoid facing his opponents and cruise into a second term, with some critics worrying that the lopsided campaign has lacked substantive debate.But the race has opened up recently with a surge from his main challenger, Marine Le Pen, the far-right leader with an anti-E.U., anti-NATO and pro-Russia platform that would reverberate globally if she won.Here is what you need to know about the vote, which will be held over two rounds on April 10 and April 24.What’s at stake?France, a nation of over 67 million people, is the world’s seventh-largest economy, the world’s most visited country, one of five permanent members of the United Nations Security Council and a nuclear power. It is a founding member of the European Union and a key driver of its policy. France’s next president will have to help the country navigate two forces currently buffeting Europe: a brutal Russian invasion of Ukraine that has displaced millions on the continent’s doorstep, and a pandemic-related economic recovery that is straining supply chains.A refugee family from Ukraine waiting to board a train to Budapest from a town in eastern Hungary in March.Mauricio Lima for The New York TimesWhile right-wing forces have largely won France’s culture wars in recent years, voter surveys show that French voters are now primarily concerned with the growing cost of living. The next president will have to juggle those worries with other long-term issues on voters’ minds, like France’s clean energy transition, the sustainability of its generous welfare model, fears of immigration and hand-wringing over the place of Islam in the country.Broad disillusionment with politics has also become a major source of concern, with worries that this election could see the lowest voter turnout for a presidential race in decades.What are the powers of the French presidency?French presidents have formidable powers at their disposal — more than most Western leaders, with fewer of the checks and balances that limit the executive branch in other countries.Learn More About France’s Presidential ElectionThe run-up to the first round of the election has been dominated by issues such as security, immigration and national identity.On the Scene: A Times reporter attended a rally held by Marine Le Pen, the far-right French presidential candidate. Here is what he saw.Challenges to Re-election: A troubled factory in President Emmanuel Macron’s hometown shows his struggle in winning the confidence of French workers.A Late Surge: After recently rising in voter surveys, Jean-Luc Mélenchon could become the first left-wing candidate since 2012 to reach the second round of the election.A Political Bellwether: Auxerre has backed the winner in the presidential race for 40 years. This time, many residents see little to vote for.Unlike British prime ministers or German chancellors, who are chosen by the parties that control the most seats in Parliament, French presidents are elected directly by the people for five-year terms. Shortly after that election, France returns to the polls to vote for representatives in the National Assembly, the more powerful house of Parliament, where terms also last five years.Having both of those elections on the same five-year cycle strongly increases the likelihood that France will vote in lawmakers who back their newly elected president, meaning French presidents do not need to worry as much as some other leaders about internal party turmoil or midterm elections. France’s prime minister, as the head of government, plays an important role in the constitutional system, as does Parliament. But the president, who appoints the prime minister, sets much of France’s agenda.Who is running?There are 12 official candidates, but polls suggest that only a handful have a shot at winning.The current favorite is Mr. Macron, 44, a former investment banker who was elected in 2017 with little political experience and is running for a second term. He was elected on the ruins of France’s traditional political parties with a strong pro-business platform. He overhauled the labor code, eliminated a wealth tax and reformed the national railway company. But his reformist zeal was tempered by massive strikes over his pension reform plans, Yellow Vest protests and the coronavirus pandemic. The war in Ukraine put him ahead in the polls but his lead has dwindled recently, to roughly 25 percent in voter surveys.President Emmanuel Macron this month in Nanterre, near Paris.Dmitry Kostyukov for The New York TimesMr. Macron’s main challenger is Ms. Le Pen, 53, the perennial far-right leader who is running for the third time and who lost to him in 2017. She leads the National Rally, a movement long known for antisemitism, Nazi nostalgia and anti-immigrant bigotry that she has tried to sanitize and turn into a credible, governing party. Ms. Le Pen has faced criticism of her past sympathy for President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia, but inflation and rising energy prices play well into her protectionist platform. She is currently polling in second place, with about 20 percent support in voter surveys.Marine Le Pen last year in La Trinité-sur-Mer.Dmitry Kostyukov for The New York TimesSeveral candidates are jostling for third place and polling between 10 and 15 percent, hoping for a last-minute surge that would send them into the second round of voting.Jean-Luc Mélenchon, 70, is the leader of the far-left France Unbowed party, and the left-wing candidate best positioned to reach the runoff. A veteran politician and skilled orator known for his fiery rhetoric and divisive personality, he has vowed to invest in green energy, lower the legal retirement age, raise the monthly minimum wage and redistribute wealth by taxing the rich. He also wants to radically overhaul France’s Constitution to reduce presidential powers.Jean-Luc Mélenchon in January in Bordeaux.Philippe Lopez/Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesValérie Pécresse, 54, is a politician who presides over the Ile-de-France region of France, an economic and demographic powerhouse that includes Paris. She is the candidate for Les Républicains, the mainstream French conservative party. Several of her economic proposals, like raising the legal retirement age to 65, are similar to Mr. Macron’s. But in an election where more radical voices have set the tone of the debate on the right, she has taken a hard turn on issues like immigration and crime, leaving her struggling to stand out from other right-wing candidates.Valérie Pécresse, center right, in February in Mouilleron-en-Pareds.Loic Venance/Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesÉric Zemmour, 63, is a far-right writer, pundit and television star who has been a fixture in the French media for years but whose campaign, with echoes of Donald J. Trump, has scrambled French politics. He is a nationalist who conjures images of a France in steep decline because of immigration and Islam, and he has been convicted multiple times for running afoul of laws that punish defamation or acts provoking hatred or violence on the basis of race and religion. His prospects have recently been fading.Éric Zemmour on Sunday in Paris.Yoan Valat/EPA, via ShutterstockThe remaining candidates are polling in the single digits and have little chance of reaching the runoff. Among them are Anne Hidalgo, 62, the mayor of Paris and the candidate for the moribund Socialist Party, and Yannick Jadot, 54, the candidate for the Green party, which has struggled to make headway despite growing support in France for environmental causes.How does it work?A candidate who gets an absolute majority of votes in the first round of voting is elected outright, an unlikely outcome that has not occurred since 1965 — the first time a French president was chosen by direct popular vote. Instead, a runoff is usually held between the top two candidates.French election regulations are strict, with stringent limits on campaign finances and airtime, and with financial and logistical support from the state that is intended to level the playing field. (Still, many news outlets are owned by the rich, giving them an avenue to influence elections.)Campaign spending is capped to roughly 16.9 million euros for candidates in the first round, or about $18.5 million, and roughly €22.5 million for those who reach the second one. Those who flout the rules — like Nicolas Sarkozy, France’s former right-wing president — face fines and criminal penalties.Private companies cannot make campaign donations, and individuals can only donate up to €4,600 for the entire election. Candidates are reimbursed for a portion of their campaign expenditures, and the state pays for some expenses.Airtime is closely regulated by France’s media watchdog. At first, television and radio stations must ensure candidates are given exposure that roughly matches their political importance, based on factors like polling, representation in Parliament and prior election results. When the campaign officially starts, two weeks before the vote, all candidates get equal airtime. Campaigning on voting weekends is banned.Preparing envelopes with the presidential candidates’ ballot papers and program leaflets last month in Matoury, French Guiana.Jody Amiet/Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesWhat comes next?At 8 p.m. on Election Day, April 10, the French news media will work with pollsters to publish projected results based on preliminary vote counts. That will give a good indication of who is expected to make it into the second round, but if the race is close, projections might not become clear until later. Official results will be available on the Interior Ministry website.The two runoff candidates will face off in a televised debate before the second round of voting, on April 24. If Mr. Macron isn’t re-elected, the new president will have until May 13 to take office. Attention will then shift to the elections for the National Assembly. All seats there will be up for grabs, in a similar two-round system of voting, on June 12 and June 19. More

    • 63 Shares189 Views

      in Elections

      How Hungary’s Viktor Orban Won

      by

      BUDAPEST — Viktor Orban’s Fidesz party just won its fourth consecutive election by a landslide. As was the case four years ago, Mr. Orban’s election was not a fair contest between the Hungarian government and the opposition. Voters could vote for whomever they chose, but the playing field was tilted in favor of the current government, including campaign regulations that favored Fidesz, biased media coverage and a blurring of the line between the ruling political party and the state.The Hungarian prime minister’s win was due in part to how he protected his economic legitimacy during a cost-of-living crisis by issuing government handouts. He also strengthened his already solid position in rural Hungary. He won the clash of narratives over the war in Ukraine by portraying himself as the guarantor of peace and security, while accusing his challenger, Peter Marki-Zay, and the united opposition of potentially bringing Hungary into war.The consistent line throughout Mr. Orban’s public policies and communication is the concept of protection — a commitment to halting otherwise rapid changes in the demographic makeup of the country, extending even to cultural transformations and economic shifts. Who or what Mr. Orban thinks Hungarians need to be protected from changes from time to time. Over the past decade, he has fought against migration, the European Union institutions, the U.S.-Hungarian billionaire George Soros, nongovernmental organizations, Western liberals, the I.M.F. and high utility bills, among other enemies.Protection has been translated by Mr. Orban and his party into the language of family policy and an attack on Hungary’s L.G.B.T.Q. community (see the eventually invalid “Child Protection Referendum,” held on the same day as the parliamentary elections), which suggests that the concept of family is under threat and needs the state’s protection.In the 2022 election campaign, Fidesz’s most dangerous opponent was the cost-of-living crisis. Several studies done by Policy Solutions, of which I am the director, have shown that by 2021, the government’s parsimonious, socially insensitive handling of the economic effects of the pandemic had made living costs the most serious problem for Hungarians. This has been exacerbated in the past year by a soaring inflation rate, one of the highest in the E.U.During the campaign, Mr. Orban put in place welfare benefits a few months before the election (income tax rebate for families with children, 13th-month pension, minimum wage increase, exemption from income tax for Hungarians under 25), as well as a price freeze on fuel and some basic food products. The aim of these measures was to dampen the feeling, at least until the elections, that the economy was in a dire situation, and by taking extraordinary economic measures, the Orban government managed to maintain its economic legitimacy in the run-up to the election.To be competitive against Fidesz, the opposition had two important strategic tasks since the last parliamentary elections in 2018: to unite and overcome the fragmentation that had made Mr. Orban’s earlier challengers unsuccessful and to strengthen the opposition’s support in rural areas. It was already clear from the 2019 municipal elections that if Mr. Orban’s opposition failed to make inroads in rural Hungary, it would be limited to success only in Budapest and a few other cities.The success of Fidesz in rural districts and its defeat in Budapest show that the country is not only severely divided politically, but also increasingly polarized in geographic and educational terms. Fidesz is highly popular in villages and among the less-educated and older age groups but doesn’t perform as well in cities and among more-educated people and younger age groups.The highly unequal Hungarian media environment also played a role. It is precisely among demographic groups that are hardest to reach online that Fidesz performed strongest. In terms of traditional media, Mr. Orban’s party dominates, which allows it to effectively communicate its own message to its voters and protect them from opposing views.The battle to interpret the war in Ukraine shows the power of the Fidesz media empire. It’s a textbook example of how Mr. Orban can quickly give his voters a grip on even the most unpleasant issues.The Russian invasion pushed to center stage the question of whether Hungary is leaning toward the East or the West and the question of how reliable the country is as a member of the European Union and NATO. Yet Mr. Orban refused to let the opposition’s East vs. West narrative be seen by the whole of Hungarian society as a way of understanding the war issue. He instead transformed himself into a guarantor of peace and security, while accusing the opposition of trying to drag the country into war — a message trumpeted by public media, hundreds of pro-government media outlets and thousands of billboards across the country.By appealing to society’s craving for security and stability, Mr. Orban ensured that the election did not become a “Putin or Europe?” referendum. According to one poll, 91 percent of opposition voters said the invasion of Ukraine was more “aggression” than “defense” by Russia, compared with merely 44 percent among Fidesz voters. And a quarter of Fidesz voters identify with Russian propaganda.Despite its fourth election success in a row, it is safe to say that the Orban government cannot expect a honeymoon period. A huge budget hole created by its own measures now awaits it, double-digit inflation is in sight, and European Union funds are not flowing to Hungary because of concerns about corruption and the rule of law. The Orban government is already expecting a significant slowdown in the economy as a result of the war in Ukraine, and the public’s perception of the economy is likely to sour if temporary price-capping measures are rolled back.The next Orban government will also have to deal with Hungary’s place in the world. Its trademark Eastern Opening policy has become a failure, and — as its deteriorating relations with its most important ally, the Polish government, shows — if Mr. Orban does not change his stance on Russia, it will be impossible to recover. It seems that his reputation could suffer lasting damage from how his government has approached the war in Ukraine.All in all, the state of the economy and foreign policy make it likely that in spite of another big victory, this will be a difficult term for the Orban government.András Bíró-Nagy is a political scientist and the director of Policy Solutions, a Hungarian think tank. He is also a senior research fellow at the Center for Social Sciences in Budapest and a member of the board at the Hungarian Political Science Association. His main areas of expertise include Hungarian politics, European integration and radical-right 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

    • 138 Shares189 Views

      in Elections

      Even Before France Votes, the French Right Is a Big Winner

      by

      The dominance of right-wing ideas in France’s presidential election campaign follows years of cultural wars waged successfully by conservatives on television, in social media and in think tanks.PARIS — With just days to go before the first round of France’s presidential election, President Emmanuel Macron is still the odds-on favorite to make it through the political juggernaut and win a second term. But even if he does succeed, and before a single ballot is cast, another clear winner has already emerged from the race.The French right.Despite a late surge by Jean-Luc Mélenchon, the leading left-wing candidate, virtually the entire French campaign has been fought on the right and far right, whose candidates dominate the polls and whose themes and talking points — issues of national identity, immigration and Islam — have dominated the political debate. The far right has even become the champion of pocketbook issues, traditionally the left’s turf.Mr. Macron himself has pivoted to the right so consistently to confront the challenge that there is even discussion now of whether he should be regarded as a center-right president, though he emerged from a government run by the now-moribund Socialists in 2017.In a tightening race, the candidate he is most likely to face in a runoff two weeks from Sunday’s initial voting is Marine Le Pen, the far-right leader of the National Rally, according to polls. It would be her second consecutive appearance in the final round of the presidential election, cementing her place in the political establishment.“The great movement to the right — that’s done, it’s over,” said Gaël Brustier, a political analyst and former adviser to left-wing politicians. “It won’t set off in the other direction for 20 years.”Ms. Le Pen is the candidate most likely to face President Emmanuel Macron in a runoff two weeks from initial voting, according to polls.Andrea Mantovani for The New York TimesMs. Le Pen and her party for decades softened the ground for the growth of the right. But the right’s recent political ascendancy follows many years in which conservatives have successfully waged a cultural battle — greatly inspired by the American right and often adopting its codes and strategies to attract a more youthful audience.Not only has the French right in recent months wielded the idea of “wokisme” to effectively stifle the left and blunt what it sees as the threat of a “woke culture” from American campuses. But it also has busily established a cultural presence after years with few, if any, media outlets in the mainstream.Today the French right has burst through social barriers and is represented by its own version of a Fox-style television news channel, CNews, an expanding network of think tanks, and multiple social media platforms with a substantial and increasingly younger following.These things “did not exist in France or were at the embryonic stage” just a few years ago, said François de Voyer, 38, a host and financial backer of Livre Noir, a year-old YouTube channel focusing on politicians on the right and far right.Learn More About France’s Presidential ElectionThe run-up to the first round of the election has been dominated by issues such as security, immigration and national identity.Suddenly Wide Open: An election that had seemed almost assured to return President Emmanuel Macron to power now appears to be anything but certain as the far-right leader Marine Le Pen surges.The New French Right: A rising nationalist faction has grown its coalition by appealing to Catholic identity and anti-immigrant sentiment.Challenges to Re-election: A troubled factory in Mr. Macron’s hometown shows his struggle in winning the confidence of French workers.Behind the Scene: In France, where political finance laws are strict, control over the media has provided an avenue for billionaires to influence the election.A Political Bellwether: Auxerre has backed the winner in the presidential race for 40 years. This time, many residents see little to vote for.Private Consultants: A report showing that firms like McKinsey earned large sums of money to do work for his government has put Mr. Macron on the defensive.“We told ourselves, ‘Let’s do like CPAC in the United States,’” said Mr. de Voyer, referring to the Conservative Political Action Conference, the annual gathering of the right wing of American politics.So he did.In 2019, Mr. de Voyer co-organized “The Convention of the Right,” a one-day conference that featured leading figures of the right and the far right. It constituted a political launchpad for Éric Zemmour, the TV pundit and best-selling author.Mr. Macron has consistently pivoted to the right, so much so that there has been discussion of whether he should be regarded as a center-right president.Dmitry Kostyukov for The New York TimesMore than any other presidential hopeful, Mr. Zemmour has embodied the effects of the right’s cultural battle on the campaign.In his best-selling books and on his daily appearances on CNews, Mr. Zemmour over a decade became a leader of the new right-wing media ecosystem that painted France as being under an existential threat by Muslim immigrants and their descendants, as well as by the importation of multicultural ideas from the United States.Though he has now receded in the polls, to about 10 percent support, Mr. Zemmour’s meteoric rise last year captured France’s attention and ensured that the presidential campaign would be fought almost exclusively on the right’s home turf, as he successfully widened the boundaries of what was politically acceptable in France.Mr. Zemmour brought into the mainstream a racist conspiracy theory that white Christian populations are being intentionally replaced by nonwhite immigrants, said Raphaël Llorca, a French communication expert and member of the Fondation Jean-Jaurès research institute.The “great replacement,” as the theory is called, was later picked up as a talking point even by Valérie Pécresse, the candidate of the establishment center-right Republican Party.Such penetration into the mainstream is the result of a decade-old organizational effort by the right.Thibaut Monnier, a former councilor for Ms. Le Pen’s party who then joined Mr. Zemmour’s movement, said that in the mid-2010s conservatives like him set for themselves a “metapolitical” project of creating new political institutions and their own media.Éric Zemmour, right, and a French TV host before a French political show in February. Mr. Zemmour has embodied the effects of the right’s cultural battle on the campaign.Bertrand Guay/Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesIn 2018, along with Marion Maréchal, the niece of Ms. Le Pen, Mr. Monnier co-founded a conservative political institution in Lyon called Issep, or the Institute of Social, Economic and Political Sciences. The school is an alternative to what he describes as higher-education establishments dominated by the left.But even as it elbowed its way into the educational establishment, the far right also succeeded in a parallel campaign to spread its ideas on social media to make itself appear attractively transgressive.Central to Mr. Zemmour’s cultural battle has been his command of social media and pop culture codes, Mr. Llorca said.The far-right candidate is very active on networks like TikTok and Instagram, where he posts daily messages and videos aimed at a younger audience. His YouTube campaign-launching video, riddled with cultural references, drew millions of viewers.Mr. Llorca said that Mr. Zemmour had successfully waged a “battle of the cool” designed to “play down the radical content” of his ideas without ever changing their substance. He has been helped by a network of internet users who defuse with humor the violence of his extremist ideas. On Facebook and Instagram, accounts followed by tens of thousands of people frequently post lighthearted memes about Mr. Zemmour.Mr. Zemmour has received support from far-right YouTube influencers mocking everything from feminism to veganism to trade unions. One such influencer, Papacito, whose videos sometimes reach one million views, endorsed Mr. Zemmour recently.Families waiting for emergency accommodation in Paris. Mr. Zemmour has brought into the mainstream a racist conspiracy theory that white Christian populations are being intentionally replaced by nonwhite immigrants.Andrea Mantovani for The New York Times“Our goal is really to make a countercultural Canal+,” he told the magazine Valeurs Actuelles, referring to the entertainment TV channel that dominated the progressive cultural scene in the 1980s and 1990s. “One that is just as fun, but carrying patriotic and more reactionary ideas.”Who Is Running for President of France?Card 1 of 6The campaign begins. More