in Elections
The Trump G.O.P.’s Plot Against Liz Cheney — and Our Democracy
I met a girl who sang the bluesAnd I asked her for some happy newsBut she just smiled and turned away— “American Pie” More
Elections
Subterms
More stories
- in Elections
UK's Labour Party Reels After Panicked Response to Election Loss
The party leader, Keir Starmer, was seen as scapegoating a key aide, causing more turmoil in an already divided party after a disappointing performance in local elections. LONDON — Sober, cerebral and with the poise of the top-shelf lawyer he once was, Keir Starmer promised competence rather than charisma when he became leader of Britain’s opposition Labour Party last year, following its crushing general election defeat in 2019.But his panicky response to last week’s poor local election results and a clumsy reshuffle of his top team have left his party in turmoil, diminishing his authority and raising doubts about whether Labour has a credible path back to power.Mr. Starmer found himself embroiled in fierce recriminations over local election results that, with smoother communication, could have been explained away as disappointing, but instead pointed to a deeper crisis.“The one thing Keir Starmer was supposed to be was competent,” said Steven Fielding, professor of political history at the University of Nottingham. “The election results were not good but they weren’t as bad as some people liked to present them. He completely messed up his reaction, and that highlights concerns about his ability to communicate.”Behind the latest setback lie profound structural changes in British politics, with Prime Minister Boris Johnson making deep inroads into former Labour heartlands in working class districts with a mixture of populist pro-Brexit politics and promises to bring jobs and prosperity.Jonathan Powell, who served as chief of staff to Tony Blair, Labour’s last election-winning prime minister, believes that critics are “massively over-interpreting” the local election results, adding: “The number of times I’ve read about the end of the Labour Party is legion.” However, he said, the Conservatives, under Mr. Johnson, have effectively fused left-wing economic policy with a right-wing appeal on cultural issues. The Labour Party, deprived of its traditional appeal to so-called “red wall” voters in the north and middle of the country on economic issues, now relies on liberals in ethnically diverse metropolitan areas, like London and Manchester.That is too small a base to win a national election, he said, and squaring those voters with Labour’s vanishing “red wall” constituency will be difficult. “Labour is trying to hold together university-educated liberal voters with the old Labour party voters that they’ve lost to the Tories,” Mr. Powell said. “They can’t stand on two horses going in different directions at the same time.”The scale of the challenge became clear last Friday when Labour lost a parliamentary by-election in Hartlepool, an economically struggling port town in the northeast of England. Labour had expected a defeat in this staunchly pro-Brexit region, because the seat would have been lost in the 2019 election had the Brexit Party not contested it and taken votes away from Mr. Johnson’s Tories.Prime Minister Boris Johnson with Jill Mortimer, who won the recent by-election in Hartlepool, once a Labour stronghold.Scott Heppell/Associated PressBut Labour recorded a lower vote than in 2019 and, grim faced, Mr. Starmer refused to comment as he left his London home on Friday morning. When he did surface later he gave an unconvincing, at times almost robotic, interview that took responsibility for the result but provided no detail on changes.The following day, just as a set of better results for Labour were being announced, news leaked out that Mr. Starmer was stripping his deputy, Angela Rayner, of key responsibilities.With an impressive personal story of succeeding against the odds, Ms. Rayner, who has said she left school at 16 while pregnant and with no qualifications, is not only a popular figure in the Labour Party but comes from the sort of community with which the party is trying to reconnect. So the backlash was swift and ferocious.“The scapegoat sacking of Angie Rayner contradicted everything Keir Starmer said only 48 hours ago about taking personal responsibility for election defeats and his promise a year ago that he would unite the party,” John McDonnell, the party’s former spokesman on the economy under its last leader, Jeremy Corbyn, said on Twitter.Some on the center and right of the Labour Party were unimpressed too, including the newly re-elected mayor of Manchester, Andy Burnham. By late Sunday, Mr. Starmer had to beat an embarrassing retreat, ending up giving Ms. Rayner even more responsibilities, albeit away from campaigning.The humiliation seemed to encapsulate the disorientation of a Labour Party struggling to adapt to a world in which Mr. Johnson has not only stolen many of its traditional voters but also some of its redistributive, high-spending, political agenda.Unlike predecessors who presided over austerity, Mr. Johnson is promising to “level up” and bring jobs and prosperity to voters who feel ignored in the so-called red wall area that was once Labour’s electoral citadel.To many that may have sounded all the more attractive in the absence of a compelling message from Mr. Starmer, a former director of public prosecutions who often sounds as if he would be more at home in a courtroom than on a political stage.Following the 2019 general election defeat — Labour’s worst since 1935 — Mr. Starmer’s short-term strategy was to concentrate less on policy and more on detoxifying the party brand after its electoral disaster under his left-wing predecessor, Mr. Corbyn. Mr. Starmer has embraced the Jewish community, in contrast to Mr. Corbyn, whose leadership was dogged by allegations of anti-Semitism. Though he presents himself as a patriot, Mr. Starmer studiously avoids the culture-war issues that Mr. Johnson exploits, such as what to do with statues commemorating contested chapters in Britain’s history.Given that voters rarely care much about the policy platform of opposition parties until a general election is close, that looked like a sensible approach.Mr. Starmer at his office in London last week.Toby Melville/ReutersYet, while he should not have been expected to roll out a detailed policy agenda just 16 months after a general election, Mr. Powell said, Mr. Starmer “has to convince people he has a cause.” Mr. Blair did that effectively in the 1990s when he rebranded the party “New Labour,” embracing the free market and the European Union.Perhaps that did not seem urgent for Mr. Starmer, because voters normally use local elections and by-elections like those held last week to punish governments. His main campaign theme was to highlight claims Mr. Johnson broke electoral rules over the financing of a pricey refurbishment of his apartment.But Britons apparently ignored those goings on in Westminster, and with the country now emerging from Covid-19 restrictions seemed to reward politicians who controlled health policies. The ruling Scottish National Party in Scotland performed strongly, as did the governing Labour Party in Wales.In England, Mr. Johnson was forgiven for his chaotic early handling of the pandemic and rewarded for the country’s highly successful vaccination roll out.Not all is lost for Mr. Starmer, particularly when the entirety of last week’s results are taken into account. According to a BBC analysis projecting the local voting into a national vote share, Labour was seven points behind the Conservatives, hardly a good result but progress on the 12-point deficit recorded in the 2019 general election.With no credible challenger waiting in the wings, Mr. Starmer is unlikely to face any immediate threat to his leadership. Nonetheless, the speed with which critics attacked his reshuffle raises pressure on Mr. Starmer to at least identify a message that can appeal to two very different groups of Britons — the old working class stalwarts and the more youthful, liberal and better educated city dwellers.“Under Starmer it has been two steps forward and one step back,” said Mr. Fielding, “and he hasn’t addressed the problem of how you win back the red wall without losing metropolitan liberal voters.” More
- in Elections
Scotland Election Results Complicate Hopes for Independence Referendum
The Scottish National Party fell short of an outright majority, though pro-independence parties appeared to retain control of Scotland’s Parliament.LONDON — Hopes for a swift path to independence in Scotland were tempered on Saturday, as the dominant Scottish nationalist party fell one seat short of a majority in the country’s Parliament.The Scottish National Party’s results, though impressive, deprived it of a symbolic victory in a closely fought election. That, in turn, is likely to stiffen the determination of Prime Minister Boris Johnson of Britain to deny Scottish voters the chance to hold a second referendum on independence.Yet pro-independence parties stayed in control and even expanded their overall majority in Thursday’s election, which will keep the flame of Scottish nationalism alive and ensure that the threat of Scotland’s breaking away from the United Kingdom will continue to bedevil British politics.The number of seats won by the Scottish National Party is in some ways less important than the political winds, which are still blowing in the separatists’ direction. By allying with the pro-independence Scottish Greens, the Scottish nationalists will tighten their control over the regional Parliament.Party leaders have signaled that they will put a second referendum at the top of the agenda as soon as Scotland recovers from the coronavirus pandemic. The last time the Scots voted on independence, in 2014, they opted to remain in the United Kingdom by 55 percent to 45 percent. Polls show close to a 50-50 split on the question now, with support for breaking away having weakened in recent months.While disappointing to the Scottish nationalists, the lack of a clear majority might ultimately work to their advantage, by giving them time to build support for a referendum rather than being stampeded into an immediate campaign by the pressure of an overwhelming mandate.Demonstrators for Scottish independence in Glasgow last week.Andrew Testa for The New York TimesStill, the result is a relief to Mr. Johnson, for whom the dissolution of the United Kingdom looms as a potentially defining event for his premiership. He remains deeply unpopular in Scotland, and it is not clear how well prepared his government is to counter a reinvigorated push for Scottish independence.For his part, Mr. Johnson was basking in the Conservative Party’s victories in regional elections across England, which left the opposition Labour Party in disarray and reinforced his reputation as an inveterate vote-getter.However, some of the same post-Brexit populism that won the Conservatives votes in working-class parts of the Midlands and northern England worked against him in a more liberal, Brexit-averse Scotland.Mr. Johnson vowed to reject demands for a referendum, saying that as Britain emerged from the pandemic, the country should focus on rebuilding the economy rather than fighting over constitutional issues.“I think a referendum in the current context is irresponsible and reckless,” he said on Friday to The Daily Telegraph. “I think that there’s no case now for such a thing. I don’t think it’s what the times call for at all.”That showed no signs of stopping Scotland’s independence-minded leaders. Nicola Sturgeon, the first minister and leader of the Scottish National Party, pronounced the results, which represented a gain of one seat over 2016, as “historic and extraordinary.” She promised to push for another referendum.Speaking in Glasgow on Saturday, Ms. Sturgeon said there was “no democratic justification whatsoever for Boris Johnson or anyone else seeking to block the right of the people of Scotland to choose our future.”She and other officials claimed a mandate like that of 2011, when the Scottish National Party last won an absolute majority and petitioned for a referendum. Mr. Johnson’s predecessor, David Cameron, yielded to their demand.“He saw that there was a clear democratic mandate for it, and there will be another clear democratic mandate this time,” Lorna Slater, a leader of the Scottish Greens, told the British Broadcasting Corporation on Saturday. “What kind of country are we if we ignore that kind of democratic mandate?”Prime Minister Boris Johnson of Britain, center, said on Friday that the country should focus on rebuilding the economy rather than fighting over constitutional issues.Owen Humphreys/PA Images, via Getty ImagesAnalysts said the cause of independence might be helped by a drawn-out battle with the Westminster government, since it would alienate Scottish voters, potentially driving more of them into the separatist camp. There is also the prospect of bitter legal battles, potentially ending up in Britain’s Supreme Court, if the Scots threaten to proceed with a referendum in defiance of London.“That’s not a bad thing for the S.N.P., because Nicola Sturgeon has said our priority is to solve Covid first,” said Nicola McEwen, a professor of politics at the University of Edinburgh. The nationalists, she noted, also do not yet “have answers to tough questions regarding what would happen with the border.”Problems in Northern Ireland, which emerged from Brexit with a hybrid status as a part of the United Kingdom but with no border checks with the Irish republic, underscore the difficulties of even a partial split from the union. Economists warn that the cost to Scotland of leaving would be profound.Pro-independence sentiment in Scotland was fueled by the Brexit referendum in 2016, which a majority of Scots voted against. Many in Scotland would like to rejoin the European Union and view an independence referendum as a step in that direction.That is one reason Professor McEwen and other analysts predict that Scotland would not stage a “wildcat referendum,” since the European Union and other governments would be unlikely to recognize the results.Mr. Johnson, analysts said, would probably seek to blunt pro-independence sentiment by pouring money into Scotland. If the pressure continues to mount, he could offer to delegate more authority to Scotland’s government.Under the terms of limited self-government in the United Kingdom, the Scottish authorities are responsible for matters like health and education, while the British government handles immigration, foreign policy and fiscal policy.Mr. Johnson’s goal, analysts said, would be to play for time, delaying any referendum until after the next British general election, which is due to be held in 2024. But repeatedly rebuffing Scottish calls could backfire.The border between Scotland and England.Andrew Testa for The New York Times“There is a view in Westminster that denying a referendum will only fire independence sentiment,” said Mujtaba Rahman, an analyst at the Eurasia Group, a political risk consultancy. “This is not a problem that is going away. It is only going to get bigger over time.”For Ms. Sturgeon, failing to win a clear majority by such a close margin was nevertheless deflating. It seemed within her grasp last summer when she was getting credit for steering Scotland’s response to the coronavirus, an approach that was more cautious than Mr. Johnson’s and seemed, for a time, to produce better results.But Britain’s successful rollout of vaccines blurred the differences, and Scotland’s case and death rates — while somewhat lower than those of England — are no longer all that far apart. Analysts cited the British vaccine campaign as a factor in the modest decline in support for independence, which was above 50 percent in polls for much of last year.Moreover, Ms. Sturgeon, 50, became embroiled in a bitter feud with her predecessor, Alex Salmond, over a botched internal investigation of sexual misconduct charges against him. She was accused of deceiving lawmakers, breaking rules and even conspiring against Mr. Salmond, a former close ally.Ms. Sturgeon was cleared of breaching the rules and misleading Parliament just as the campaign got underway, but the dispute dented her image. Mr. Salmond launched a breakaway party, Alba, which did not win any seats but served as a reminder of the internecine split.“This year has been quite difficult for the S.N.P. and for Nicola Sturgeon personally,” Professor McEwen said. Also, she added, “The broad shoulders of the U.K. have helped see us through the pandemic.” More
- in Elections
U.K. Conservatives Win Hartlepool Parliament Seat
His pillars of “getting Brexit done” and “leveling up” struggling areas in northern England and the Midlands have fueled separatist drives in Scotland and Northern Ireland.LONDON — Prime Minister Boris Johnson of Britain scored a striking political victory on Friday when his Conservative Party snatched a bellwether parliamentary seat from the opposition Labour Party, which had held it since the constituency’s creation in the 1970s.In a by-election in Hartlepool, in northeastern England, the Conservative candidate, Jill Mortimer, scored a convincing victory, capturing nearly twice as many votes as her Labour rival and consolidating Mr. Johnson’s earlier successes in winning over voters in working-class areas that had traditionally sided mainly with Labour.Better still for the prime minister, the vote on Thursday came despite days of publicity over claims that he had broken electoral rules over the financing of an expensive refurbishment of his apartment. That appeared to have counted for little with voters in Hartlepool, an economically struggling coastal town, when the results were announced on Friday morning after an overnight count.Mr. Johnson has built his considerable electoral success on the twin pillars of “getting Brexit done” and “leveling up” struggling areas in northern England and the Midlands with the prosperous south, bolstered by a successful Covid-19 vaccination program. But those very strategies could hold within them the seeds of future problems by creating centrifugal forces that have the potential to split up the United Kingdom.To get Brexit done, Mr. Johnson had to go back on his word and create a border down the Irish Sea, cutting off Northern Ireland from the rest of the United Kingdom. This has infuriated his allies in the territory who want it to remain part of the United Kingdom, and revived hopes among those seeking reunification with Ireland.Elections also took place on Thursday in Scotland, whose first minister, Nicola Sturgeon, leads the pro-independence Scottish National Party and is hoping for a strong performance that she can use to justify her call for a new independence referendum. By focusing mostly on England, Mr. Johnson’s leveling-up policy has created resentments in Scotland, where he is widely loathed further stoking the separatist fires.Though not unexpected, the outcome was a crushing defeat for Labour, underscoring the extent to which Mr. Johnson is rewriting Britain’s electoral map and dealing a blow to Keir Starmer, Labour’s leader. Mr. Starmer took over from Jeremy Corbyn last year after Labour’s rout in the December 2019 general election, its worst performance in more than 80 years.That landslide election victory for the Conservatives in 2019 followed the crisis over Britain’s exit from the European Union, and Mr. Johnson scored well in many traditional working-class communities with his appeal to voters to give him the power to “get Brexit done.”Though Britain has now completed its European Union withdrawal and the issue is fading somewhat, the new Conservative victory suggests that Mr. Johnson remains popular in areas — like Hartlepool — that voted for Brexit in a 2016 referendum.“There’s no sugaring this pill,” wrote Lucy Powell, a Labour lawmaker on Twitter, adding: “The challenges for Labour run deep and go far beyond Brexit and leadership. I don’t think most are under any illusion about the scale of that challenge.”Collectively known as the “red wall” because they were once heartlands of the Labour Party, these areas are being targeted by Mr. Johnson, who has promised to bring prosperity to northern and central England, and to areas that feel forgotten.Labour would probably have already lost the Hartlepool seat in the 2019 general election had the Brexit Party, then led by Nigel Farage, not run a candidate and won more than 10,000 votes, pulling pro-Brexit voters away from the Conservatives.The Labour Party lawmaker elected in Hartlepool then, Mike Hill, resigned from his seat in Parliament in March, because he faces an employment tribunal relating to sexual-harassment accusations, which he denies. His departure prompted Thursday’s vote.Sitting governments in Britain very rarely win parliamentary by-elections, because voters often use them to register discontent with their leaders. But there were also recriminations over the Labour Party’s decision to field Paul Williams, an opponent of Brexit, in an area that had voted overwhelmingly in support of it.The defeat in Hartlepool could intensify attacks from the left of the party on Mr. Starmer, although with no obvious alternative leader in sight, he is unlikely to face serious difficulties.The pandemic, plus the focus on the vaccine drive, has made it hard for the Labour leader to raise his profile, but critics say he lacks charisma and a compelling political vision.And the loss of Hartlepool will be keenly felt by Labour, given that it had been held by the party since the current constituency was created in 1974. Among those to have represented the seat are Peter Mandelson, a close ally of the former Prime Minister Tony Blair.Moreover, Mr. Starmer knows that if he is ever to become prime minister, he needs to rebuild support in the north of England and in the Midlands. More
- in Elections
Three Months After Coup, Myanmar Returns to the ‘Bad Old Days’
Every night at 8, the stern-faced newscaster on Myanmar military TV announces the day’s hunted. The mug shots of those charged with political crimes appear onscreen. Among them are doctors, students, beauty queens, actors, reporters, even a pair of makeup bloggers.Some of the faces look puffy and bruised, the likely result of interrogations. They are a warning not to oppose the military junta that seized power in a Feb. 1 coup and imprisoned the country’s civilian leaders.As the midnight insects trill, the hunt intensifies. Military censors sever the internet across most of Myanmar, matching the darkness outside with an information blackout. Soldiers sweep through the cities, arresting, abducting and assaulting with slingshots and rifles.The nightly banging on doors, as arbitrary as it is dreaded, galvanizes a frenzy of self-preservation. Residents delete their Facebook accounts, destroy incriminating mobile phone cards and erase traces of support for Myanmar’s elected government. As sleep proves elusive, it’s as if much of the nation is suffering a collective insomnia.Little more than a decade ago, the most innocuous of infractions — owning a photograph of pro-democracy leader Daw Aung San Suu Kyi or an unregistered cellphone or a single note of foreign currency — could mean a prison sentence. Some of the military’s Orwellian diktats rivaled those of North Korea.Security forces search for protesters as they crack down on a peaceful demonstration against the military coup in Yangon, in April.The New York TimesThree months after Myanmar’s experiment in democracy was strangled by the generals’ power grab, the sense of foreboding has returned. There is no indication that it will ease. For the better part of 60 years, the military’s rule over Myanmar was animated not by grand ideology but by fear. Today, with much of the population determined to resist the coup-makers, a new junta is consolidating its grip by resorting, yet again, to a reign of terror.“Myanmar is going back to the bad old days when people were so scared that their neighbors would inform on them and they could get arrested for no reason at all,” said Ko Moe Yan Naing, a former police officer who is now in hiding after opposing the coup.Prisons are once again filled with poets, Buddhist monks and politicians. Hundreds more, many young men, have disappeared, their families ignorant of their whereabouts, according to a group that tracks the military’s detentions. More than 770 civilians have been killed by security forces since the putsch, among them dozens of children.As they did years before, people walk the streets with the adrenaline-fueled sense of neck hairs prickling, a glance from a soldier or a lingering gaze from a passer-by chilling the air.Protesters fight with security forces in Yangon in March.The New York TimesYet if the junta is reflexively returning to rule by fear, it is also holding hostage a changed country. The groundswell of opposition to the coup, which has sustained protests in hundreds of cities and towns, was surely not in the military’s game plan, making its crackdown all the riskier. Neither the outcome of the putsch nor the fate of the resistance is preordained.Myanmar’s full emergence from isolation — economic, political and social — only came five years ago when the military began sharing power with an elected government headed by Ms. Aung San Suu Kyi. A population that barely had any connection to the internet quickly made up for lost time. Today, its citizenry is well versed in social media and the power of protests tethered to global movements. They know how to spot a good political meme on the internet.Their resistance to the coup has included a national strike and a civil disobedience movement, which have paralyzed the economy and roiled the government. Banks and hospitals are all but shut. Although the United Nations has warned that half the country could be living in poverty by next year because of the pandemic and the political crisis, the democratic opposition’s resolve shows no sign of weakening.More than 770 civilians have been killed by security forces since the putsch.The New York TimesIn late March, Ma Thuzar Nwe, a history teacher, branded her skin with defiance. The tattoo on the nape of her neck reads: “Spring Revolution Feb. 2021.”The police are now stopping people on the streets, looking for evidence on their phones or bodies of support for the National Unity Government, a civilian authority set up after the elected leadership was expelled by the military. A popular tactic is to affix an image of Senior Gen. Min Aung Hlaing, the coup leader, on the sole of a shoe, smashing his face into the ground with each step. During spot checks, the police now demand that people show their soles.Ms. Thuzar Nwe says she wears her hair down to cover her tattoo, hoping the police won’t be too inquisitive.“In Myanmar culture, if a woman has a tattoo, she’s a bad girl,” she said. “I broke the rules of culture. This revolution is a rare chance to eradicate dictatorship from the country.”But the Tatmadaw, as the Myanmar military is known, has built an entire infrastructure dedicated to one purpose: perpetuating its power for power’s sake.Its bureaucracy of oppression is formidable. An army of informers, known as “dalan,” has reappeared, monitoring whispers and neighbors’ movements.The blandly named General Administration Department, a vast apparatus that remained under military control even after the army had started sharing authority with the civilian government, is once again pressuring administrators to keep tabs on everyone’s political views. And local officials have taken to banging on doors and peering in homes, as a dreaded system of household registration is reintroduced.Military vehicles during the national Armed Forces Day in Naypyidaw, Myanmar, in March.Associated PressEach morning, as residents count the dead and missing, the military’s media present its version of reality, all the more pervasive since the junta has revoked the publishing licenses of major private newspapers. Democracy will return soon, the military’s headlines insist. Banking services are running “as usual.” Health care with “modern machinery” is available. Government ministries are enjoying English-proficiency courses. Soft-shell crab cultivation is “thriving” and penetrating the foreign market.The Tatmadaw may have modernized its military arsenal, acquiring Chinese-made weapons and Russian fighter jets. But its propaganda is stuck in a time warp from back when few challenged its narrative. There is no mention in its media of the military’s killing spree, the broken economy or the growing armed resistance. On Wednesday, the State Administration Council, as the junta calls itself, banned satellite TV.For all the fear percolating in Myanmar, the resistance has only hardened. On Wednesday, the National Unity Government said it was forming a “people’s defense force” to counter the Tatmadaw. Two days before, ethnic insurgents fighting in the borderlands shot down a Tatmadaw helicopter.Daw Aung San Suu Kyi and Senior Gen. Min Aung Hlaing in 2016.Hein Htet/European Pressphoto AgencyIgnoring such developments, the Tatmadaw’s media instead devote space to the supposed infractions of thousands of civilians who must be locked up for “undermining state peace and stability.” Among them are AIDS patients so weak they can barely walk.More than for the civilian population, such propaganda is meant to convince the military ranks that the coup was necessary, Tatmadaw insiders said. Sequestered in military compounds without good internet access, soldiers have little ability to tap into the outrage of fellow citizens. Their information diet is composed of military TV, military newspapers and the echo chambers of military-dominated Facebook on the rare occasions they can get online.Still, news does filter in, and some officers have broken rank. In recent weeks, about 80 Myanmar Air Force officers have deserted and are now in hiding, according to fellow military personnel.“Politics are not the business of soldiers,” said an air force captain who is now in hiding and does not want his name used because his family might be punished for his desertion. “Now the Tatmadaw have become the terrorists, and I don’t want to be part of it.”Myanmar’s citizens are now well versed in social media and the power of protests tethered to global movements, since the country opened up a few years ago.The New York TimesIn the cities, almost everyone seems to know someone who has been arrested or beaten or forced to pay a bribe to the security forces in exchange for freedom.Last month, Ma May Thaw Zin, a 19-year-old law student, joined a flash mob protest in Yangon, the country’s biggest city. The police, she said, detained several young women and crammed them into an interrogation center cell so small they barely had room to sit on the floor.For a whole day, there was no food. Ms. May Thaw Zin said she resorted to drinking from the toilet. The interrogations were just her and a clutch of men. They rubbed against her and kicked her breasts and face with their boots, she said. On the fourth day, after men shoved the barrel of a pistol against the black hood over her head, she was released. The bruises remain.Since she returned home, some family members have refused to have anything to do with her because she was caught protesting, Ms. May Thaw Zin said. Even if they hate the coup, even if they know their futures have been blunted, the instincts of survival have kicked in.“They are afraid,” she said, but “I can’t accept that my country will go back to the old dark age.”Riot police prepared to remove protesters who attempted to block a motorcade of security forces in February.The New York Times More
- in Elections
DeSantis Shuts Out Reporters as he Signs Florida Voting Restrictions Into Law
MIAMI — Gov. Ron DeSantis of Florida signed new voting restrictions into law on Thursday that put him in line with other Republicans around the country — with a display of nose-thumbing contempt toward journalists that evoked former President Donald J. Trump.Mr. DeSantis’ brash style has made him stand out from other potential heirs to Mr. Trump’s populist legacy. But his actions are part of a national effort by Republicans to limit the use of popular ballot drop boxes, add identification requirements for voters requesting absentee ballots and do away with local laws that allow automatic registration for absentee voting.The next big move could happen in Texas, although the situation at the State Capitol in Austin is in flux. There is movement in virtually every state with a Republican-controlled legislature — including in Arizona, where G.O.P. lawmakers are conducting an audit of the November results, an exercise that has been plagued by lapses in basic security and accounting procedures.All of this comes in the wake of Mr. Trump’s loss, and his subsequent false claims that expansion of ballot access led to rampant voter fraud. Official audits of election results around the country, conducted by officials from both parties, found no evidence of widespread voter fraud in the 2020 election.Mr. DeSantis enacted the legislation even after he had promoted Florida’s handling of the November elections. Mr. Trump won the state by three percentage points.The governor gave Fox News, his preferred major cable news outlet — and Mr. Trump’s — an exclusive to broadcast the bill signing ceremony from West Palm Beach on Thursday morning, in an event that resembled a campaign rally as much as an official act of state government.Supporters of Mr. DeSantis gathered inside a Hilton near the airport, donning DeSantis and Trump campaign gear. Before they entered, some people waved Trump-DeSantis and DeSantis 2024 banners, according to photos on social media shared by journalists locked outside the doors.“Right now, I have what we think is the strongest election integrity measures in the country,” a seated Mr. DeSantis told Fox as a rowdy crowd cheered behind him.Mr. DeSantis and his predecessors have been known to sign bills, especially controversial ones, in private. Gov. Brian Kemp of Georgia, a lower-key politician who has kept Mr. Trump at a relative arm’s length, signed his state’s bill in a conference room in his office, as a Democratic state legislator knocked on the door, demanding to be let in.Giving exclusive access to a cable news network was unusual, if not unprecedented. A reporter from a local CBS station said it was supposed to carry the broadcast feed for other stations, a practice known as pooling, but was also not allowed inside.Florida is the latest state to pass voter restrictions as Republicans move to reverse gains made by Democrats in Georgia, Arizona and elsewhere. In Texas, Republicans in the legislature are brushing aside objections from corporate titans like Dell Technologies, Microsoft and American Airlines and moving on a vast election bill that would be among the most severe in the nation. It would impose new restrictions on early voting, ban drive-through voting, threaten election officials with harsher penalties and greatly empower partisan poll watchers. The main bill passed a key committee in a late-night session on Thursday, and could head to a full floor vote in the House as early as next week.Bills to restrict voting have also been moving through Republican-led legislatures in Arizona and Michigan. More
- in Elections
Réquiem por el centro en España. Se suicidó y lo mataron
MADRID — En mitad de la campaña electoral más crispada de la democracia, y con las encuestas en contra, Edmundo Bal se abrazó a un lema sencillo para desmarcarse de la competencia: “Vota al partido que no insulta”. El aspirante de Ciudadanos a la presidencia de la región de Madrid quedó último. El resultado deja a su partido, que en sus orígenes fue visto como una esperanza frente a los bandos tradicionalmente enfrentados, fuera del parlamento y al centro político español moribundo. Aunque Bal trató de focalizar su campaña en planes de acción concretos, nadie escuchaba en medio del ruido.Edmundo Bal, el aspirante de Ciudadanos a la presidencia de la región de Madrid, quedó último.David Fernandez/EPA, via ShutterstockEl debate político en Madrid quedó reducido a las consignas de los salvapatrias de uno y otro bando. Mientras la derecha sostenía que la democracia solo sobreviviría en sus manos —“comunismo o libertad”—, la izquierda se presentó como muro de contención frente a un fascismo que supuestamente estaba a punto de tomar la Puerta del Sol.La victoria fue para la conservadora Isabel Díaz Ayuso, que disparó su popularidad durante la pandemia al mantener la economía abierta y resistirse a aplicar las restricciones impuestas en otras regiones españolas. La presidenta madrileña, del Partido Popular, consolida con su triunfo aplastante el ayusismo, una nueva variante de la derecha populista que ha explotado con habilidad la polarización de la política nacional.La votación confirmó la maldición histórica del centro en España. Los intentos de reinventar la tercera vía española han fracasado desde el declive de la Unión de Centro Democrático (UCD), el partido que pilotó los primeros años de transición democrática tras la dictadura del general Francisco Franco, entre 1975 y 1982. Las razones de ese fiasco continuo hay que buscarlas en una mezcla de errores propios, traiciones internas y sabotajes externos, a los que suelen unirse con similar entusiasmo derecha e izquierda. Ciudadanos es el mejor ejemplo de cómo llevar un partido desde lo más alto a la destrucción en apenas dos años.La formación “naranja” nació en Cataluña con el liderazgo carismático de Albert Rivera, un político entonces rompedor que en su campaña de 2006 se presentó literalmente desnudo ante la ciudadanía. Era su manera simbólica de ofrecer transparencia, reformismo, meritocracia y diálogo, la oferta con la que atrajo a las clases urbanas, liberales y profesionales de las grandes ciudades. Al partido no le importó pactar con los socialistas en Andalucía y con los conservadores en Madrid, porque sus objetivos regeneradores se imponían a las preferencias ideológicas.En abril de 2019, Ciudadanos se convirtió en la tercera fuerza del país.La idea era que Albert Rivera cambiaría la política, pero la política lo cambió antes a él. El éxito alimentó sus ambiciones y lo apostó todo a convertirse en el líder hegemónico de la derecha, alejándose del centro e incluso legitimando a la extrema derecha en un movimiento que traicionó los principios liberales de su partido. Su negativa a pactar un gobierno de coalición con Pedro Sánchez, forzando una repetición electoral, hizo que Ciudadanos pasara de 57 diputados a 10 entre las elecciones de abril y noviembre de 2019. Rivera dimitió y su sucesora, Inés Arrimadas, ha intentado desde entonces un regreso al centro.Inés Arrimadas, su sucesora, ha intentado regresar al centro, pero todo indica que ya es tarde.Seguidores de Isabel Díaz Ayuso en Madrid.Bernat Armangue/Associated PressEl espacio moderado se ha achicado y estos días la estrategia que mejor funciona pasa por la retórica agresiva, el enfrentamiento y la creación de enemigos, reales o ficticios. La extrema derecha lo comprendió muy pronto y en Madrid ha renovado esa estrategia, con la colaboración a veces voluntaria y otras entusiasta de medios de comunicación que se han convertido en altavoces de su histrionismo. Vox captó la atención estigmatizando con datos falsos a menores migrantes, redobló su lenguaje guerracivilista y alimentó miedos populares como el crimen, a pesar de que Madrid es una de las ciudades más seguras del mundo, con el único propósito de presentarse como solución. El partido mejoró sus resultados, incluso con el ayusismo amenazando parte de su espacio electoral.La política española sube el tono con cada votación y devora cada vez más rápido a sus líderes, quemados en un ambiente de polarización extrema y un sistema de partidos que castiga la disidencia interna. La renuncia en estos años de destacados dirigentes con talento y capacidad de diálogo —el socialista Eduardo Madina, el popular Borja Sémper o el centrista Toni Roldán, que abandonó Ciudadanos por su viraje a la derecha—, empobrece el debate público y deja el espacio abierto a demagogos y oportunistas. Triunfan políticos que, a izquierda y derecha, carecen de preparación o curiosidad intelectual, desprecian la inteligencia o la razón sin el menor complejo, ofrecen soluciones simples para problemas graves y explotan sin escrúpulos el hartazgo de la gente.El centro, mientras tanto, vuelve a quedar huérfano y no se vislumbra una alternativa a las expectativas que una vez generó Ciudadanos. Es una mala noticia porque se necesita con urgencia un partido dispuesto a acercar a las dos Españas, aún a riesgo de recibir golpes de ambas. En otro momento de gran tensión, cuando en los años setenta el país vivía un pulso entre fuerzas autoritarias y democráticas, la figura de Adolfo Suárez y la desaparecida UCD fueron clave para crear una atmósfera que lograra un consenso por el bien común.España vuelve a necesitar un partido que ejerza ese papel mediador y sea capaz de dejar las trincheras ideológicas para buscar soluciones pragmáticas a los problemas de los ciudadanos. En mitad del embrutecimiento actual de la política nacional, el coraje no reside en gritar más alto al adversario, hoy convertido en enemigo, sino en sentarlo a dialogar las diferencias. Un país sin espacio para el centro está condenado a enfrentarse en los extremos.David Jiménez (@DavidJimenezTW) es escritor y periodista. Su libro más reciente es El director. More
