Fetterman, John (1969- )

Subterms

    More stories

    • 125 Shares159 Views

      in Elections

      Senate Debate Will Have Real-Time Transcriptions to Accommodate Fetterman’s Recovery

      by

      In most ways, Pennsylvania’s Senate debate Tuesday night between Dr. Mehmet Oz, a Republican, and Lt. Gov. John Fetterman, a Democrat, will look like what viewers expect: two candidates in a television studio standing behind lecterns, in this case made of clear plastic — one red and one blue.But to accommodate Mr. Fetterman’s recovery from a stroke in May, the campaigns agreed to add something to the set: two large monitors, a few feet above the heads of the two moderators. Professional typists who usually create closed captions for the hearing-impaired will transcribe in real time the questions and Dr. Oz’s statements for Mr. Fetterman to read.Mr. Fetterman speaks “intelligently without cognitive deficits,” according to a statement by his doctor that the campaign released on Oct. 15. But he continues to have symptoms of what his doctor called an auditory processing disorder that “can come across as hearing difficulty.”Dr. Oz, of course, will also see the monitors, and viewers may catch glimpses of them when the moderators appear on camera.The debate’s host, WHTM-TV in Harrisburg, is expected to explain the setup to viewers before the debate begins. More

    • 75 Shares159 Views

      in Elections

      Fetterman-Oz Debate Tonight: What to Watch

      by

      The Pennsylvania Senate debate on Tuesday between Dr. Mehmet Oz, a Republican, and Lt. Gov. John Fetterman, a Democrat, is likely to be among the most widely viewed of all midterm debates. It is a clash of two large personalities, who have by turns mocked and scathingly attacked one another, over matters trivial (fresh vegetables) and deeply serious (violent crime).Interest in the debate, for a contest that is critical to control of the Senate, is sky-high as polls show the race tightening two weeks before Election Day, and because of Mr. Fetterman’s recovery from a stroke two days before the May primary.The 60-minute debate will be broadcast at 8 p.m. Eastern time from a TV studio in Harrisburg, Pa. There will be no live audience. Here is what to watch for:How Fetterman soundsMr. Fetterman still has difficulty processing spoken words, and he will read the two moderators’ questions and Dr. Oz’s responses on large monitors with closed captions. The Fetterman campaign warns that the accommodation could slow down his responses, and it worries that Republicans will try to make snippets of the debate go viral with Mr. Fetterman’s pauses and dropped or slurred words. The State of the 2022 Midterm ElectionsBoth parties are making their final pitches ahead of the Nov. 8 election.Florida Governor’s Debate: Gov. Ron DeSantis and Charlie Crist, his Democratic challenger,  had a rowdy exchange on Oct. 24. Here are the main takeaways from their debate.Strategy Change: In the final stretch before the elections, some Democrats are pushing for a new message that acknowledges the economic uncertainty troubling the electorate.Last Dance?: As she races to raise money to hand on to her embattled House majority, Speaker Nancy Pelosi is in no mood to contemplate a Democratic defeat, much less her legacy.Secretary of State Races: Facing G.O.P. candidates who spread lies about the 2020 election, Democrats are outspending them 57-to-1 on TV ads for their secretary of state candidates. It still may not be enough.Major style differencesDon’t expect quick-witted repartee. The candidates have big differences in style. Dr. Oz spent 13 years as a TV host and has transitioned from an empathetic broadcast persona into a political candidate with sharp, succinct attack lines. Mr. Fetterman, even before his stroke, was a so-so debater with a meandering, regular-guy speaking style.Oz’s shift away from Fetterman’s healthA month ago, the Oz campaign was mockingly calling attention to Mr. Fetterman’s refusal to commit to a series of debates (a spokeswoman said he might not have had a stroke if he’d eaten his vegetables). But after the intense focus on the Democrat’s health appeared to produce a backlash, Dr. Oz’s camp now says it will stick to the candidates’ policy differences and to highlight what it calls Mr. Fetterman’s “extremism.”.css-1v2n82w{max-width:600px;width:calc(100% – 40px);margin-top:20px;margin-bottom:25px;height:auto;margin-left:auto;margin-right:auto;font-family:nyt-franklin;color:var(–color-content-secondary,#363636);}@media only screen and (max-width:480px){.css-1v2n82w{margin-left:20px;margin-right:20px;}}@media only screen and (min-width:1024px){.css-1v2n82w{width:600px;}}.css-161d8zr{width:40px;margin-bottom:18px;text-align:left;margin-left:0;color:var(–color-content-primary,#121212);border:1px solid var(–color-content-primary,#121212);}@media only screen and (max-width:480px){.css-161d8zr{width:30px;margin-bottom:15px;}}.css-tjtq43{line-height:25px;}@media only screen and (max-width:480px){.css-tjtq43{line-height:24px;}}.css-x1k33h{font-family:nyt-cheltenham;font-size:19px;font-weight:700;line-height:25px;}.css-1hvpcve{font-size:17px;font-weight:300;line-height:25px;}.css-1hvpcve em{font-style:italic;}.css-1hvpcve strong{font-weight:bold;}.css-1hvpcve a{font-weight:500;color:var(–color-content-secondary,#363636);}.css-1c013uz{margin-top:18px;margin-bottom:22px;}@media only screen and (max-width:480px){.css-1c013uz{font-size:14px;margin-top:15px;margin-bottom:20px;}}.css-1c013uz a{color:var(–color-signal-editorial,#326891);-webkit-text-decoration:underline;text-decoration:underline;font-weight:500;font-size:16px;}@media only screen and (max-width:480px){.css-1c013uz a{font-size:13px;}}.css-1c013uz a:hover{-webkit-text-decoration:none;text-decoration:none;}How Times reporters cover politics. We rely on our journalists to be independent observers. So while Times staff members may vote, they are not allowed to endorse or campaign for candidates or political causes. This includes participating in marches or rallies in support of a movement or giving money to, or raising money for, any political candidate or election cause.Learn more about our process.Who’s the real Pennsylvanian?Mr. Fetterman will likely attack his opponent as a “Hollywood doctor” who owns several houses, only moved to the state in 2020 and has poured $23 million of his fortune into the race. Dr. Oz may come back with the defense that he earned his fortune, while Mr. Fetterman received an allowance from his family until he was nearly 50. (He collected only a token salary as mayor of Braddock, Pa., for 13 years.)Attacks over abortionPerhaps Mr. Fetterman’s strongest issue against Dr. Oz, and one crucial in the battle for suburban voters, is Dr. Oz’s right-wing tack on abortion since he entered politics. Look for Mr. Fetterman to call attention to a statement Dr. Oz made that life begins at conception and terminating a pregnancy any time is “still murder.” A focus on crimeThis is the issue that Dr. Oz has leaned into most aggressively, accusing Mr. Fetterman of coddling criminals because of his advocacy for clemency for long-incarcerated men convicted of murder. Dr. Oz calls him “the most pro-murderer candidate” in the country. Viewers may hear Dr. Oz name individuals and their crimes for whom Mr. Fetterman advocated clemency. The focus on crime, especially homicides and street violence in Philadelphia, is meant to stir fears by voters outside the city. How will Mr. Fetterman defend his leadership of the state pardons board and his support for criminal justice reform?Energy and frackingWestern Pennsylvania has major reserves of natural gas. Because Mr. Fetterman cultivates an appeal to blue-collar union voters, especially in the Pittsburgh region, Dr. Oz will most likely seek to undermine him by attacking his past opposition to fracking, which provides thousands of jobs. Mr. Fetterman supports fracking now, but as recently as 2018 he opposed it. More

    • 113 Shares189 Views

      in Elections

      The John Fetterman-Mehmet Oz Debate: The Midterms in Miniature

      by

      Let’s imagine that someone wanted to design a debate scenario that captured the high-stakes, uncertain, migraine-inducing essence of this freaky election cycle. (Don’t ask me why. Politics makes people do weird stuff some times.) The final result could easily wind up looking an awful lot like the Senate showdown in Pennsylvania on Tuesday night between John Fetterman and Mehmet Oz.Here we are, two weeks out from Election Day, with Pennsylvania among a smattering of states set to determine which party controls the Senate. For various reasons, Pennsylvanians have had limited opportunities to take an extended measure of the candidates. With the race now tighter than a bad face lift, this debate may be the candidates’ last big chance for a breakout performance — or a catastrophic belly flop. Rarely have so many expectations been heaped onto one measly debate.Consider the stark contrast between the candidates’ core brands. On the Republican side, there’s Dr. Oz: a rich, natty, carpetbagging TV celebrity with a smooth-as-goose-poop manner and Mephistophelean eyebrows. Mr. Fetterman, the state’s Democratic lieutenant governor, is 6-foot-8 and beefy, with tats, a goatee and the sartorial flair of a high school gym teacher — an anti-establishment, regular-Joe type better known for his trash-tweeting than for his oratorical prowess.Hovering over this hourlong prime-time matchup are questions about Mr. Fetterman’s health. He suffered a stroke in May that has left him with auditory processing issues, and he will rely on a closed captioning system in the debate. Voters can be unforgiving — and the opposition ruthless — about verbal stumbling. (Just ask President Biden.) And the closed captioning technology Mr. Fetterman uses can lead to lags between questions being asked and answered.Already there has been chatter about his performance on the stump. This month, an NBC reporter said that, in a pre-interview sit-down, Mr. Fetterman seemed to be having trouble understanding her. Republicans have accused him of lying about the severity of his condition and suggested he is not up to the job. A major blunder on the debate stage, or even the general sense that Mr. Fetterman is struggling, could prove devastating.On the other hand … Dr. Oz and his team have mocked Mr. Fetterman’s medical travails — which seems like a particularly jerky move for a medical professional. This may tickle the Republican base but risks alienating less partisan voters. In appealing to a general-election audience, Dr. Oz will need a better bedside manner to avoid coming across as a callous, supercilious jackass.And here’s where the dynamic gets really tense: After much back-and-forth between the campaigns, Mr. Fetterman agreed to only a single debate, pushed to this late date on the campaign calendar. There are no second chances on the agenda, and precious little time to recover if something goes sideways for either candidate.While the particulars of the Pennsylvania race are unusual, the minimalist approach to debating is ascendant. For the past decade, the number of debates in competitive races has been on a downward slide, and they appear headed the way of floppy disks and fax machines. This election season, barring unforeseen developments, the major Senate contenders in Georgia, Arizona, North Carolina and Florida, as in Pennsylvania, will face off only once — which is once more than those in Nevada, where debates seem to be off the table altogether. Likewise, the Republican and Democratic candidates in Missouri have yet to agree on conditions for appearing together.This trend is not limited to the Senate. Several candidates for governor have so far opted to shun debates. And starting with the 2024 presidential election, the Republican National Committee has voted to keep its candidates out of events hosted by the nonpartisan Commission on Presidential Debates unless it overhauls its rules for how the debates are conducted, including when they are held and who can be a moderator. Even if the committee eventually backtracks (which seems likely), its threat emphasizes just how far debates have fallen.This is a not-so-great development for a democracy already under strain.Once upon a time, candidates felt obligated to participate in debates. But as campaigning increasingly take place inside partisan bubbles, and the ways to directly communicate with voters proliferate, the contenders have become less inclined to brave this arena. Why endure intense, prolonged, unscripted scrutiny when it is so much less stressful to post on social media? Increasingly, campaigns are deciding these showdowns simply aren’t worth the work or the risk involved.But this misses the point. Debates aren’t supposed to be conducted for the electoral advantage of the candidates. They are meant to benefit the voting public. Debates require political opponents to engage face-to-face. They give voters an opportunity to watch the candidates define and defend their priorities and visions beyond the length of a tweet or an Instagram post. They are one of the few remaining political forums that focus on ideas. They contribute to an informed citizenry. Failure to achieve these aims suggests that the practice should be reformed, not abandoned.Admittedly, this seems like wishful thinking as members of both parties grow more comfortable with ducking debates. Republicans in particular are conditioning their supporters to believe that such matchups, and the journalists who typically run them, are biased against them.Those who view debates as some combination of boring, artificial and pointless will probably cheer their decline. (I feel your pain. I really do.) But the loss of this ritual is another troubling sign of our political times, and of a democracy at risk of sliding farther into crisis as its underpinnings are being steadily eroded.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 Shares129 Views

      in Elections

      Fetterman’s Debate Challenges: Selling Policies and Proving He’s Fit to Serve

      by

      WASHINGTON — When John Fetterman, the Democratic candidate for Senate in Pennsylvania, faces his Republican opponent in a high-stakes debate on Tuesday night, he will face twin challenges: making the case for his policies while convincing voters he is healthy enough to serve.The debate, the first and only in a race that could determine whether Democrats keep control of the Senate, will look different than any other. Two 70-inch monitors above the heads of the moderators — scrolling the text of their questions, as well as transcribing the answers, attacks and ripostes of the Republican, Dr. Mehmet Oz — will be visible to TV watchers whenever a camera pans to the moderators.Mr. Fetterman, Pennsylvania’s lieutenant governor, needs the accommodations because the stroke he had in May left him with an auditory processing disorder, a condition that affects the brain’s ability to filter and interpret sounds, his primary care doctor said last week. He uses closed captioning to follow conversations. Sometimes his speech is halting. Sometimes he stumbles over his words. But he has “no work restrictions,” the doctor said.Democrats say this makes him seem relatable. Disability rights activists say Mr. Fetterman has been a victim of prejudice from Republicans and reporters who focus more on his health than the issues. But Mr. Fetterman — who also has a heart condition that his cardiologist says was exacerbated by his failure to seek care and take medicine — was cagey about answering health questions in the early months of his campaign, which has left him open to bipartisan criticism about a lack of transparency.“He handled the issue badly at first because he was evasive for months, and that’s changed,” said Shanin Specter, a politically active Philadelphia lawyer (and the son of former Senator Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania), who said he is not supporting either candidate. “He should be more worried about the electorate’s concerns about his evasion than about his capacity.”The race pits Mr. Fetterman, a tall, tattooed figure who favors hoodies and shorts and casts himself as a working man, against Dr. Oz, a former TV celebrity — and newcomer to Pennsylvania residency — who was scolded by senators in 2014 for using his TV show to promote foods and dietary supplements that falsely promised weight loss. Dr. Oz has been endorsed by former President Donald J. Trump, who has said his long television run was proof of his political viability.The general election contest has tightened in recent days, as once-skeptical Republican voters fall in line with Dr. Oz. Polls show Mr. Fetterman’s solid lead has nearly vanished this month.Dr. Mehmet Oz’s campaign spent months taunting and openly mocking Mr. Fetterman as mentally unfit to hold office.Laurence Kesterson/Associated PressThe Oz campaign spent months taunting and openly mocking Mr. Fetterman as mentally unfit to hold office. But now, amid a social media backlash from some voters as well as disability rights activists, Dr. Oz and his allies are shifting course. They have insisted the debate will be about policies, not health.“I don’t think that viewers are tuning into this debate to learn about John Fetterman’s health status,” said Barney Keller, a senior strategist for Dr. Oz. “I think they’ll tune into the debate to learn about the contrast between the candidates on the issues.”The State of the 2022 Midterm ElectionsBoth parties are making their final pitches ahead of the Nov. 8 election.A G.O.P. Advantage: Republicans appear to be gaining an edge in the final weeks of the contest for control of Congress. Nate Cohn, The Times’s chief political analyst, explains why the mood of the electorate has shifted.Ohio Senate Race: Tim Ryan, the Democrat who is challenging J.D. Vance, has turned the state into perhaps the country’s unlikeliest Senate battleground.Losing Faith in the System: As democracy erodes in Wisconsin, many of the state’s citizens feel powerless. But Republicans and Democrats see different culprits and different risks.Secretary of State Races: Facing G.O.P. candidates who spread lies about the 2020 election, Democrats are outspending them 57-to-1 on TV ads for their secretary of state candidates. It still may not be enough.Mr. Fetterman has long sought to turn the Oz campaign’s attacks on his health to his advantage. “Recovering from a stroke in public isn’t easy,” he recently wrote on Twitter. “But in January, I’m going to be much better — and Dr. Oz will still be a fraud.”Still, Democrats worry that any off-key moment by Mr. Fetterman could go viral and affect the outcome of the race.“We are prepared for Oz’s allies and right-wing media to circulate malicious viral videos after the debate that try to paint John in a negative light because of awkward pauses, missing some words, and mushing other words together,” Rebecca Katz, Mr. Fetterman’s senior communications adviser, and Brendan McPhillips, his campaign manager, wrote in a memo on Monday.Although Mr. Fetterman has sat for one-on-one interviews with news outlets using closed captioning, the debate will move much faster — with cross-talk and interruptions — and it is unclear how the technology that Mr. Fetterman relies on will keep up, and how he will respond.His auditory processing issues mean that he typically avoids situations when voices and noise come from multiple directions. He has held no free-for-all meetings with voters or a gaggle of reporters..css-1v2n82w{max-width:600px;width:calc(100% – 40px);margin-top:20px;margin-bottom:25px;height:auto;margin-left:auto;margin-right:auto;font-family:nyt-franklin;color:var(–color-content-secondary,#363636);}@media only screen and (max-width:480px){.css-1v2n82w{margin-left:20px;margin-right:20px;}}@media only screen and (min-width:1024px){.css-1v2n82w{width:600px;}}.css-161d8zr{width:40px;margin-bottom:18px;text-align:left;margin-left:0;color:var(–color-content-primary,#121212);border:1px solid var(–color-content-primary,#121212);}@media only screen and (max-width:480px){.css-161d8zr{width:30px;margin-bottom:15px;}}.css-tjtq43{line-height:25px;}@media only screen and (max-width:480px){.css-tjtq43{line-height:24px;}}.css-x1k33h{font-family:nyt-cheltenham;font-size:19px;font-weight:700;line-height:25px;}.css-1hvpcve{font-size:17px;font-weight:300;line-height:25px;}.css-1hvpcve em{font-style:italic;}.css-1hvpcve strong{font-weight:bold;}.css-1hvpcve a{font-weight:500;color:var(–color-content-secondary,#363636);}.css-1c013uz{margin-top:18px;margin-bottom:22px;}@media only screen and (max-width:480px){.css-1c013uz{font-size:14px;margin-top:15px;margin-bottom:20px;}}.css-1c013uz a{color:var(–color-signal-editorial,#326891);-webkit-text-decoration:underline;text-decoration:underline;font-weight:500;font-size:16px;}@media only screen and (max-width:480px){.css-1c013uz a{font-size:13px;}}.css-1c013uz a:hover{-webkit-text-decoration:none;text-decoration:none;}How Times reporters cover politics. We rely on our journalists to be independent observers. So while Times staff members may vote, they are not allowed to endorse or campaign for candidates or political causes. This includes participating in marches or rallies in support of a movement or giving money to, or raising money for, any political candidate or election cause.Learn more about our process.Ahead of the debate, the Fetterman campaign sought to lower expectations. “John is five months post-stroke and Oz has spent the last two decades literally in a TV studio; if there’s a home-field advantage, it’s definitely his,’’ said Ms. Katz, who is overseeing his debate preparations.In an earlier debate during the Democratic primary race that predated Mr. Fetterman’s stroke, he was considered the least verbally dexterous of the three candidates, though he went on to win the nomination easily.“Please remember that John did not get where he is by winning debates, or being a polished speaker,” Ms. Katz said. “He got here because he connects with Pennsylvanians.”Mr. Fetterman, who had a stroke days before the Democratic primary in May, later had a pacemaker and defibrillator implanted to address atrial fibrillation — an irregular heart rhythm — which was the underlying cause of the stroke. In June, the campaign released a statement from Mr. Fetterman’s cardiologist, Dr. Ramesh R. Chandra, that said the candidate also has cardiomyopathy, a weakened heart muscle.In a letter released last week, Mr. Fetterman’s primary care doctor, Dr. Clifford Chen, said he is “recovering well” from his stroke. He is continuing to get speech therapy, which experts say is standard treatment for an auditory processing disorder. Experts also say such disorders often improve with time, and do not render a person unable to hold public office.Research shows that people who have had strokes improve more rapidly in the beginning, said Dr. Clinton Wright, director of the division of clinical research at the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke. But Mr. Wright said the data show that patients can continue to improve a year after the stroke.“This is a teachable moment,” said Jean Hall, director of the Institute for Health and Disability Policy Studies at the University of Kansas. “My question would be, What if his stroke had resulted in him being deaf and he needed a sign language interpreter?”Medical experts say that is an apt comparison, though auditory processing disorders have nothing to do with hearing. Rather, people with such disorders have a hard time processing small sound differences in words, because their brains don’t hear sounds in the usual way. Closed captioning makes conversations easier to follow.“Auditory processing has nothing to do with a person’s intelligence or the ideas in their head or their thoughts,” said Dr. Peter Turkeltaub, a neurologist and director of the Cognitive Recovery Lab at Georgetown University Medical Center. “It’s just the input and output: Can you connect those ideas to the words you are hearing, and then can you take the ideas and connect them to your own words?”People with disabilities have long held public office. Franklin D. Roosevelt used a wheelchair, although he tried to hide it from the public. Gov. Greg Abbott of Texas, Senator Tammy Duckworth of Illinois and Representative Jim Langevin of Rhode Island also use wheelchairs.But visible physical limitations are easier to explain to voters, said Lisa Iezzoni, a professor at Harvard Medical School who researches health disparities on people with disabilities. Because voters can’t clearly see Mr. Fetterman’s disability, however, he must fight “this perception that his mind was altered in some way.”In Mr. Fetterman’s first live television interview since his stroke, which was broadcast on Oct. 11 by NBC News, the reporter Dasha Burns told viewers that before the formal interview, Mr. Fetterman seemed not to follow her attempts at small talk without his monitor.“Quite frankly, it really infuriated me,” said Judy Heumann, a longtime leader in the disability rights movement, who helped pass the Americans With Disabilities Act in 1990 and later served in both the Clinton and Obama administrations. “Voters should be looking at what he’s doing and what he’s saying, and not whether he uses a communications device.”Over the weekend, Dr. Oz steered the conversation away from Mr. Fetterman’s health toward his policies. “I just want him to show up on Tuesday so we can talk to Pennsylvania about our policies, and let them see how extreme his positions have been,” he told Fox News.The Fetterman campaign believes that Dr. Oz and his allies in the right-wing news media went too far in calling attention for months to Mr. Fetterman’s sometimes halting speech and fumbling for words. They say it might work to Mr. Fetterman’s advantage, by lowering expectations for his performance.“Even if he stumbles on a few words here and there, I don’t think it’s a big deal to voters,” said Mike Mikus, a Democratic strategist. “There’s a lot more opportunity than risk for John Fetterman in this debate.”Dr. Iezzoni, the Harvard professor, said the debate would be a referendum on voters as well. The World Health Organization, she said, has described having a disability as a “universal human experience.” Seeing Mr. Fetterman use closed captioning — and answer questions in a halting, not necessarily fluent way — will test the public’s tolerance for differences, she said.“It will be interesting to know whether the public has empathy for human frailty, which we all experience in some way or another,” she said. “Will they be willing to look past it or do they demand perfection?”Katie Glueck More

    • 113 Shares99 Views

      in Elections

      Biden Promotes Infrastructure Law in Pennsylvania Swing With Fetterman

      by

      PITTSBURGH — President Biden returned to his home state of Pennsylvania on Thursday to promote the fruits of the infrastructure law that he enacted this year and to make a final push to help Democrats maintain their slim control of the Senate.In traveling to Pennsylvania, Mr. Biden injected himself into one of the most hotly contested elections in the country, the fate of which could determine the prospects of his legislative agenda for the next two years. The backdrop represented a shift in Mr. Biden’s rhetorical approach to the midterm elections, which have focused in recent weeks on preserving abortion rights, Social Security and Medicare.“Instead of infrastructure week, which was a punchline under my predecessor, it’s infrastructure decade,” Mr. Biden said, standing in front of a crane situated next to the partially rebuilt Fern Hollow Bridge, which collapsed in January after years of neglect.Although the event was purported to be about the economy, politics was clearly in the air. Mr. Biden was greeted at the airport by John Fetterman, the lieutenant governor, who is locked in a tight race with Dr. Mehmet Oz, a Republican, to become the state’s next senator.The president opened his remarks by thanking Mr. Fetterman for running and acknowledging his wife.“Gisele, you’re going to be a great, great lady in the Senate,” Mr. Biden said, predicting that Mr. Fetterman would prevail.The State of the 2022 Midterm ElectionsBoth parties are making their final pitches ahead of the Nov. 8 election.Where the Election Stands: As Republicans appear to be gaining an edge with swing voters in the final weeks of the contest for control of Congress, here’s a look at the state of the races for the House and Senate.Biden’s Low Profile: President Biden’s decision not to attend big campaign rallies reflects a low approval rating that makes him unwelcome in some congressional districts and states.What Young Voters Think: Twelve Americans under 30, all living in swing states, told The Times about their political priorities, ranging from the highly personal to the universal.Debates Dwindle: Direct political engagement with voters is waning as candidates surround themselves with their supporters. Nowhere is the trend clearer than on the shrinking debate stage.The Pennsylvania Senate race has grown increasingly contentious during the final stretch. Mr. Fetterman, who suffered a stroke earlier this year, has faced questions from Republicans including his opponent, about his capacity to serve because of lingering health effects. During his recovery, Mr. Fetterman has at times struggled to articulate his thoughts on the campaign trail and has had to read questions on a screen during interviews.At the event with Mr. Biden in Pittsburgh on Thursday, Mr. Fetterman made no public remarks.The Fern Hollow Bridge, where Mr. Biden spoke on Thursday, is symbolic of the creaky state of American infrastructure that the president wants to rehabilitate. As Mr. Biden was preparing to visit the city in January, the thoroughfare crumbled and fell into the ravine below.Funding from the infrastructure law did not go directly to rebuilding the bridge, but Mr. Biden noted that the money allowed the state to fix it more quickly because Pennsylvania’s Transportation Department did not have to divert resources from other projects. The bridge is on track to be rebuilt in less than a year, which is far faster than the two to five years that similar projects might take.“I’m coming back to walk over this sucker,” Mr. Biden said.The president laid out the other ways he said the infrastructure law is helping Pennsylvania, pointing to investments in broadband, electric car chargers and lead pipe replacement. He said that much of the work would be completed using union labor.Mr. Biden, who is expected to return to Pennsylvania next week, acknowledged that he continues to gravitate to the state and to Pittsburgh, where he started his 2020 presidential campaign.“I’m a proud Delawarean, but Pennsylvania is my native state — it’s in my heart,” Mr. Biden said. “I can’t tell you how much it means to be part of rebuilding this beautiful state.”Mr. Biden, who has maintained a low profile on the campaign trail this fall, is also attending a fund-raising reception with Mr. Fetterman in Philadelphia on Thursday evening. They traveled together on Air Force One, along with Senator Bob Casey, a Pennsylvania Democrat, to make the journey across the state.Before leaving Pittsburgh, Mr. Biden stopped at Primanti Brothers, a local sandwich shop, and ordered the Pitts-burger sandwich, which comes with the French fries on the beef patty. The White House said Mr. Biden left a $40 tip.Speaking with reporters at the sandwich shop, Mr. Biden said that he felt “good” about the upcoming elections and expressed optimism that Democrats could retain control of the Senate.But at the fund-raiser in Philadelphia, Mr. Biden clearly laid out what he believes is at stake next month.“If we do not maintain the Senate and the House in this next election, a lot is going to change,” Mr. Biden said, lacing into “MAGA Republicans” who he warned would get rid of Medicare and Social Security.For his part, Mr. Fetterman said that he wants to be the 51st vote in the Senate and to give Democrats the power to eliminate the filibuster, raise the minimum wage and protect abortion rights that were lost when the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade in June.Mr. Fetterman also addressed his health, accusing Dr. Oz of rooting against his recovery from the stroke and mocking him for moving from New Jersey to Pennsylvania to run for office.“In January I’ll be feeling much better, but Dr. Oz will still be a fraud,” Mr. Fetterman said. More

    • 138 Shares179 Views

      in Elections

      Behind Oz’s Crime Attacks Is a Play for the Philly Suburbs

      by

      An impeachment vote against Larry Krasner, the Philadelphia district attorney, points to the potency of an issue that works against Lt. Gov. John Fetterman.There’s an oft-repeated maxim about the political geography of Pennsylvania: It’s Philadelphia and Pittsburgh on each end with Alabama (or Kentucky) in between.In broad strokes, it’s not wrong. Although Pennsylvania was one of the original 13 colonies, it is mountainous and overwhelmingly rural. In today’s political climate, that means a map of the state’s election results looks like a sea of red with a few blue islands.But maps and clichés can be misleading. The southeastern corner of the state, with Philadelphia and its surrounding “collar counties,” is far more populous than Pittsburgh or any of the other blue spots. It’s where statewide elections are won and lost.That geography explains why Dr. Mehmet Oz, the Republican nominee for Senate, and allied groups are spending millions of dollars in the Philadelphia media market to attack Lt. Gov. John Fetterman, the Democratic candidate.And it helps explain why, in mid-September, Republicans — to the puzzlement of some Democrats — largely stopped running ads hammering Fetterman on inflation and increasingly accused him of being soft on crime.One ad sponsored by the Senate Leadership Fund, a group close to Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, raps Fetterman as “dangerously liberal on crime” for his votes in favor of clemency while he served on a statewide parole board. Another accuses him of “releasing felony murderers.” In perhaps the most over-the-top ad, underwritten by the Trump-linked group MAGA Inc., a narrator says, “John Fetterman wants ruthless killers, muggers and rapists back on our streets, and he wants them back now.”Altogether, since Labor Day, Republicans have spent at least $5 million on television ads portraying Fetterman as a far-left radical who wants to let criminals out of jail, according to AdImpact, a media-tracking company.The State of the 2022 Midterm ElectionsWith the primaries over, both parties are shifting their focus to the general election on Nov. 8.The Final Stretch: With elections next month, a Times/Siena poll shows that independents, especially women, are swinging toward the G.O.P. despite Democrats’ focus on abortion rights as voters worry about the economy.Questioning 2020: Hundreds of Republicans on the ballot this November have cast doubt on the 2020 election, a Times analysis found. Many of these candidates are favored to win their races.Georgia Senate Race: The contest, which could determine whether Democrats keep control of the Senate, has become increasingly focused on the private life and alleged hypocrisy of Herschel Walker, the Republican nominee.Jill Biden: The first lady, who has become a lifeline for Democratic candidates trying to draw attention and money in the midterms, is the most popular surrogate in the Biden administration.Fetterman angrily disputes those accusations. But the amount of money pouring in and the ads’ focus on Philadelphia voters suggest that the G.O.P. groups behind them believe they’re working.Why the Philly suburbs matterConsider the difference between Hillary Clinton’s performance in Pennsylvania in 2016, when she lost the state to Donald Trump by more than 44,000 votes, and Joe Biden’s showing there four years later, when he beat Trump by more than 81,000 votes.The main reason Biden did so much better: He ran up huge margins in Philadelphia and its inner-ring suburbs in Bucks, Chester, Delaware and Montgomery Counties, where Trump’s political brand was toxic. Even when you include Berks County, a Republican exurban stronghold, Biden gained nearly 131,000 votes over Clinton’s 2016 results. That number is not far off the total ground — 124,000 votes — that he made up against Trump across the state.But that was a presidential election, with record-shattering turnout and Trump on the ballot. Consider instead the 2016 Senate race, in which Patrick J. Toomey, the Republican, defeated Katie McGinty, the Democrat, by about 87,000 votes. Toomey won Bucks and Chester Counties and kept Delaware and Montgomery Counties relatively close.“Absolutely, crime is hurting Fetterman,” said Josh Novotney, a former Toomey chief of staff who is now a partner at SBL Strategies, a lobbying firm based in Philadelphia.The big question in this year’s Senate race, then, is this: Can Fetterman, a tattooed and hoodie-wearing Bernie Sanders supporter from southwestern Pennsylvania, run up the score in and around Philadelphia as Biden did? And to do that, can he defuse the G.O.P.’s attacks over his crime record?The crime connectionIf there’s one thing we know about suburban voters, it’s that crime is important to them. Along with schools and taxes, it’s often an important reason they don’t live within city boundaries. And if you’ve ever watched the local television news, which millions of older voters still do, you know that crime often leads the broadcast.Polls are one way to measure whether Oz’s attacks are landing. But another is to watch the behavior of suburban politicians on the crime issue. And here, the signs are worrying for Fetterman.In mid-September, the Pennsylvania Statehouse voted to hold Larry Krasner, the progressive district attorney of Philadelphia, in contempt of the legislative body during an impeachment inquiry that has riveted the state’s political class. Republicans blame Krasner for the rise in violent crime in the city, and, fairly or unfairly, many Democrats seem to agree.Last month, the Pennsylvania Statehouse voted to hold Larry Krasner, the progressive district attorney of Philadelphia, in contempt. Republicans blame Krasner for a rise in violent crime.Michelle Gustafson for The New York TimesOf the 58 lawmakers who represent state districts in the collar counties, 37 voted to impeach Krasner on Sept. 13. Twenty-seven of those were Democrats. Even in Philadelphia, where Krasner was re-elected by roughly 40 percentage points last year, nine representatives voted for impeachment.Austin Davis, who is running on Attorney General Josh Shapiro’s ticket to replace Fetterman as lieutenant governor, voted for contempt, too. In 2018, Davis was elected to represent McKeesport in the Statehouse with nearly three-quarters of the vote.The contempt vote was a telling sign that these politicians — who we must assume are focused on their own political survival — view the crime issue as a dangerous one for them politically.After the vote, Krasner held a news conference at which he criticized the Democrats who voted against him as “uninformed.” Others, he said in a revealing comment, were driven by “what they perceive to be the short-term political consequences.”“Certainly, Krasner is the poster child that the G.O.P. uses,” said Larry Ceisler, a Democratic media consultant based in Philadelphia. But he expressed some uncertainty that crime was the main factor driving the poll numbers closer together, as opposed to Fetterman’s inability to campaign as vigorously as he ordinarily might and the natural contours of a marquee Senate race.“Is crime an issue? Yeah,” Ceisler said. But he noted that Fetterman had never been subject to a barrage of negative ads in previous races and that the question for him over the last few weeks of the campaign was: “Does he have a glass jaw or not?”What to readThe Times is offering live coverage of two debates tonight at 7. Gov. Brian Kemp of Georgia, a Republican who is seeking a second term, is facing off against Stacey Abrams, his Democratic opponent. In Ohio, Representative Tim Ryan, a Democrat, and J.D. Vance, a Republican, are holding a forum for the state’s marquee Senate race.Right-wing activists, driven by conspiracy theories about voter fraud, are inserting themselves in the election process, which has put officials on alert for disruptions and a wave of misinformation, Alexandra Berzon and Nick Corasaniti report.In Oregon’s wild governor’s race, an independent candidate is siphoning Democratic votes and Phil Knight, the billionaire Nike co-founder, is pouring in money. Mike Baker and Reid J. Epstein tell us how this may give an anti-abortion Republican a path to victory.A new breed of veterans is running for the House on the far right. Jonathan Weisman writes about the trend, which challenges assumptions that adding veterans to Congress fosters bipartisanship and cooperation.Thank you for reading On Politics, and for being a subscriber to The New York Times. — BlakeRead past editions of the newsletter here.If you’re enjoying what you’re reading, please consider recommending it to others. They can sign up here. Browse all of our subscriber-only newsletters here.Have feedback? Ideas for coverage? We’d love to hear from you. Email us at onpolitics@nytimes.com. More

    • 88 Shares129 Views

      in Elections

      Should Candidates Be Transparent About Their Health?

      by

      More from our inbox:Revised Drone RulesLiving in Political FearPreparing for Future PandemicsHow Fossil Fuel Donations Sway Climate PoliticsLt. Gov. John Fetterman of Pennsylvania greets supporters following a Senate campaign rally.Kriston Jae Bethel/Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesTo the Editor:Re “Candidates Must Disclose Medical Issues,” by Lawrence K. Altman (Opinion guest essay, Sept. 30):Dr. Altman correctly calls for the full disclosure of medical issues by major candidates, especially presidential. He has championed this cause for years, but his voice has gone unheeded.The most famous candidate health cover-up was J.F.K.’s adrenal insufficiency, Addison’s disease. But John McCain’s recurrent melanoma, Bill Bradley’s atrial fibrillation, Joe Biden’s cerebral aneurysm in his 1988 campaign and Bernie Sanders’s significant coronary disease requiring a stent were all either downplayed or denied.The most egregious example of health misrepresentation was in 1992, when Paul Tsongas and his physicians declared he was cured of his non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma when he was not. If he had been elected president rather than Bill Clinton, he would have required ongoing cancer treatments while in office, which would have compromised his ability to fulfill his duties. He died on Jan. 18, 1997.With the likelihood of one or more candidates over 75 running for president in 2024, the case for full medical disclosure is more compelling than ever. The country would be well served to remember the advice given by William Safire in 1987, when he wrote, “The president’s body is not wholly his own; that is why we go to such lengths to protect it.”Kevin R. LoughlinBostonThe writer is a retired urologic surgeon and a professor emeritus at Harvard Medical School.To the Editor:I would like to respectfully disagree that candidates owe their voters full medical transparency. Confidentiality of medical records exists for good reason, and to throw it away — citing confusion over John Fetterman’s health in the Pennsylvania Senate campaign — is the wrong approach.For example: Does a female candidate owe it to voters to reveal whether she has ever had an abortion? Some would argue yes, she should. I would argue that it’s none of the voters’ business.What else should a candidate reveal? Therapist’s notes? Past substance use?A real-life example is Thomas Eagleton, who was tapped to be George McGovern’s running mate in 1972 until it was revealed that he had undergone electroshock therapy for depression 12 years earlier. Because of this, he was dropped from the ticket.In the U.S., we are extremely fortunate to have the rights we have, including a right to privacy. We should not be looking for ways to chip away at these rights.Gregory FedynyshynMalden, Mass.Revised Drone RulesAn Air Force Predator drone, right, returning from a mission in the Persian Gulf region in 2016. The new policy suggests that the United States intends to launch fewer drone strikes away from recognized war zones.John Moore/Getty ImagesTo the Editor:Re “Rules on Counterterrorism Drone Strikes, Eased by Trump, Are Tightened by Biden” (news article, Oct. 8):Are we supposed to be assured that the United States is now acting ethically, legally and judiciously with President Biden’s revised drone assassination policy?Our clandestine killing of terrorist leaders outside conventional war zones only provokes greater risk for American citizens and soul-searching trauma for drone operators thousands of miles way. It deeply stains our own sense of national righteousness.This is not a policy that needs to be reformed. It’s a policy that should be abandoned for ethical, tactical and practical reasons.Dave PasinskiFayetteville, N.Y.Living in Political FearHouse and Senate leaders have their own security details, including plainclothes officers and armored vehicles, but it can be more difficult for others to obtain such protection.Andrew Harnik/Associated PressTo the Editor:Re “Lawmakers Fearing the Worst as Intimidation Tactics Grow” (front page, Oct. 2):The appalling acrimony and threats directed against duly elected representatives have a chilling trickle-down effect to citizens as well. I recently received what I considered a banal lawn sign from the League of Women Voters. One side states, “Vote — Our Democracy Depends on It,” and the other, “Vote 411 — Election Information You Need.”In other election years, I would have placed it on my lawn without thinking twice. But after the Jan. 6 insurrection, I’m hesitant. Even though I live in a mostly progressive, blue-voting Westchester community, I know that many of my neighbors hold other political beliefs. There are a surprising number of “Blue Lives Matter” banners and “1776” flags in my neighborhood, which make me wonder how many of these neighbors doubt the legitimacy of the 2020 election.I worry that displaying a message that our democracy depends on voting would be more of a red flag than a civic reminder.And I am ashamed that in our current fractious, and dangerously degraded, political climate, my fear will keep me from exercising my political beliefs.Merri RosenbergArdsley, N.Y.Preparing for Future Pandemics Brynn Anderson/Associated PressTo the Editor:Re “Unprepared for Covid and Monkeypox. And the Next Outbreak, Too” (news analysis, Oct. 1):Apoorva Mandavilli highlights an important issue when she writes that the United States “remains wholly unprepared to combat new pathogens.”Governments do need to be ready for future pandemics when they hit, but their priority must be preventing them in the first place. We know that most infectious diseases can be traced to pathogen transmission between wildlife and people, particularly in our increasingly degraded and exploited natural world.Governments across the globe must prioritize efforts to reduce the risks of future pathogen spillovers, including via trade and at wildlife markets.A critical first step is recognizing the intrinsic links between the health of humans, animals and the ecosystem, and acknowledging the foundational importance of an intact and functioning environment to our well-being.A new international treaty or agreement can help bring governments together to catalyze needed change. With several hundred thousand yet undiscovered viruses in wildlife that can potentially infect humans, this is not the time to ignore the science and avoid action.The adage that “an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure” is now truer than ever.Susan LiebermanChris WalzerDr. Lieberman is the vice president for international policy at the Wildlife Conservation Society. Dr. Walzer is its executive director for health.How Fossil Fuel Donations Sway Climate PoliticsFrom left, Florida’s governor, Ron DeSantis, and two senators, Rick Scott and Marco Rubio, in 2019.Kevin Lamarque/ReutersTo the Editor:Re “Republicans Talk About Rebuilding, but Not the Cause of Climate Change” (news article, Oct. 5):Large political contributions from fossil fuel interests are blocking federal action against climate change even in Florida, one of the areas most vulnerable to hurricanes. Its vulnerability is fueled by warmer oceans along with storm surges worsened by rising seas and downpours increased by a warmer atmosphere that holds more moisture.The United States could become the world leader in battling climate change, inspiring and helping other countries to do more while creating millions of jobs. Incredibly, Florida’s Republican governor and two senators have voted against action to mitigate climate change.Why? “If you’re from Florida, you should be leading on climate and environmental policy, and Republicans are still reticent to do that because they’re worried about primary politics,” Carlos Curbelo, a former Republican congressman from South Florida, is quoted as saying.That is, Republicans who stray from the fossil fuel line will face a primary opponent well funded by fossil fuel interests.Public funding of election campaigns must replace big contributions if we want our democracy to stop being distorted. Indeed, if we want to safeguard our planet.Richard BarsantiWestern Springs, Ill. More

    • 113 Shares99 Views

      in Elections

      In Midterm TV Ad Wars, Sticker Shock Costs Republicans

      by

      Football fans in Las Vegas tuning into the Raiders game on Oct. 2 had to sit through multiple political ads, including one from Nevada’s endangered Democratic senator and another from a Republican super PAC trying to defeat her.The ads were each 30 seconds — but the costs were wildly different.The Democratic senator, Catherine Cortez Masto, paid $21,000. The Republican super PAC paid $150,000.That $129,000 disparity for a single ad — an extra $4,300 per second — is one sizable example of how Republican super PACs are paying a steep premium to compete on the airwaves with Democratic candidates, a trend that is playing out nationwide with cascading financial consequences for the House and Senate battlefield. Hour after hour in state after state, Republicans are paying double, triple, quadruple and sometimes even 10 times more than Democrats for ads on the exact same programs.One reason is legal and beyond Republicans’ control. But the other is linked to the weak fund-raising of Republican candidates this year and the party’s heavy dependence on billionaire-funded super PACs.Political candidates are protected under a federal law that allows them to pay the lowest price available for broadcast ads. Super PACs have no such protections, and Republicans have been more reliant on super PACs this year because their candidates have had trouble fund-raising. So Democrats have been the ones chiefly benefiting from the mandated low pricing, and Republicans in many top races have been at the mercy of the exorbitant rates charged by television stations as the election nears.The issue may seem arcane. But strategists in both parties say it has become hugely consequential in midterm elections that will determine which party controls Congress.From Labor Day through early this week, Senate Republican super PACs and campaigns spent more than their opponents on the airwaves in key races in Georgia, Nevada, Pennsylvania, North Carolina and New Hampshire, according to data from the media-tracking firm AdImpact. But when measured in rating points — a metric of how many people saw the ads — the Democratic ads were seen more times in each of those states, according to two Democratic officials tracking media purchases.In other words, Democrats got more for less.“One of the challenges we face in taking back the House is the eye-popping differences between what Democrat incumbents and Republican challengers are raising — and what that affords them in terms of different advertising rates,” said Dan Conston, who heads the Congressional Leadership Fund, a super PAC aligned with House Republican leadership that has raised $220 million and is one of the nation’s biggest television spenders.The price differences can be jarring.In Ohio, Representative Tim Ryan, the Democratic Senate candidate, paid $650 for a recent ad on the 6 a.m. newscast of the local Fox affiliate. The leading Republican super PAC paid $2,400.In Nevada, Ms. Cortez Masto paid $720 for an ad on CBS’s Sunday news show. Another Republican super PAC, the Club for Growth, paid $12,000.The State of the 2022 Midterm ElectionsWith the primaries over, both parties are shifting their focus to the general election on Nov. 8.The Final Stretch: With less than one month until Election Day, Republicans remain favored to take over the House, but momentum in the pitched battle for the Senate has seesawed back and forth.A Surprising Battleground: New York has emerged from a haywire redistricting cycle as perhaps the most consequential congressional battleground in the country. For Democrats, the uncertainty is particularly jarring.Pennsylvania Governor’s Race: Attacks by Doug Mastriano, the G.O.P. nominee, on the Jewish school where Josh Shapiro, the Democratic candidate, sends his children have set off an outcry about antisemitic signaling.Herschel Walker: The Republican Senate nominee in Georgia reportedly paid for an ex-girlfriend’s abortion, but some conservative Christians have learned to tolerate the behavior of those who advance their cause.And in Arizona, Senator Mark Kelly has been paying $2,000 per spot on the evening news on the ABC affiliate. A Republican super PAC is paying $5,000.An analysis by The New York Times of Federal Communications Commission records, along with interviews with media buyers in both parties, shows just how much the different prices that candidates and super PACs pay is influencing the 2022 midterm landscape.“What matters at the end of the day is what number of people see an ad, which isn’t measured in dollars,” said Tim Cameron, a Republican strategist and media buyer, referring to the rating-points metric.The partisan split between advertising purchased by candidates versus super PACs is vast.In Senate races, Democratic candidates have reserved or spent nearly $170 million more than Republican candidates in the general election on television, radio and digital ads, according to AdImpact.The price that super PACs pay is driven by supply and demand, and television stations charge Republicans and Democrats the same prices when they book at the same time. So Democrats have super PACs that pay higher rates, too. But the party is less reliant on them. Republicans have a nearly $95 million spending edge over Democrats among super PACs and other outside groups involved in Senate races, according to AdImpact. That money just doesn’t go nearly as far.Several candidates who were weak at raising funds won Republican nominations in key Senate races, including in New Hampshire, Arizona and Ohio, and that has hobbled the party.“We’re working hard to make up the gap where we can,” said Steven Law, the head of the leading Senate Republican super PAC, the Senate Leadership Fund.But Democrats — buoyed by robust donations through ActBlue, the Democratic online donation-processing platform — are announcing eye-popping money hauls ahead of Saturday’s third-quarter filing deadline that are helping them press their advantage. Senator Raphael Warnock of Georgia raised $26.3 million. In Pennsylvania, Lt. Gov. John Fetterman, the Senate nominee, raised $22 million. Mr. Ryan raised $17.2 million. Ms. Cortez Masto raised $15 million.“It’s a simple fact that candidates pay lower rates than outside groups, which means Democrats’ ActBlue cash tsunami could wipe out an underfunded Republican,” Mr. Law said.Republicans are hardly cash-poor. The Senate Leadership Fund alone has reserved more than $170 million in ads since Labor Day and raised more than $1 million per day in the third quarter. But the ad rates are eroding that money’s buying power.In the top nine Senate battlegrounds that drew significant outside spending, Republicans spent about 6.66 percent more on ads than Democrats from Labor Day through earlier this week, according to one of the Democratic officials tracking the media buys. But the Democratic money had gone further when measured by rating points, outpacing Republican ad viewership by 8 percent.In Nevada, for instance, the super PAC that paid $150,000 for the single commercial on Oct. 2, Our American Century, has been funded chiefly by a $10 million contribution by Steve Wynn, the casino magnate. Yet for a comparable price of $161,205, Ms. Cortez Masto was able to air 79 ads that week on the same station: daily spots each on the local news, daytime soap operas, “Jeopardy!” and “Wheel of Fortune” as well as in prime time — plus the Oct. 2 football ad, Federal Communications Commission records show.Las Vegas is perhaps the most congested market for political ads in the nation, with multiple contested House races, a swing Senate contest and a tight governor’s election, and some ballot measures. Both Democratic and Republican media-buying sources said the rates for super PACs had been up to 10 times that of candidates in some recent weeks.In a recent one-week period, Ms. Cortez Masto spent $197,225 on 152 spots on the local Fox station, an average price of $1,300 per 30 seconds. The Club for Growth Action, a Republican super PAC, spent $473,000 for only 52 spots — an average price of nearly $9,100 per 30 seconds.Republicans feel they have no choice but to pony up.“Republicans are facing a hard-money deficit, and it’s up to groups like Club for Growth Action to help make up the difference in these key races,” said David McIntosh, the president of the Club for Growth.Some strategists have privately pressed super PACs to invest more heavily in digital advertising, where candidate rates are not protected. Super PACs pay similar amounts and sometimes can even negotiate discounts because of their volume of ads. But old habits, and the continued influence of television on voters, means much of the funds are still going to broadcast.“Super PACs have one charter: to win races. And so they spend there because they have to,” said Evan Tracey, a Republican media buyer. “They’re not running a business in the sense that shareholders are going to be outraged that they have to spend more for the same asset. It’s a cost of doing business.”The National Republican Senatorial Committee, which has faced financial problems this year, cut millions of its reserved television “independent expenditures,” which are booked at the same rate as super PACs. Instead, in a creative and penny-pinching move, the committee rebooked some of that money in concert with Senate campaigns, splitting costs through a complex mechanism that limits what the ads can say — candidates can be mentioned during only half the airtime — but receives the better, candidate ad rates.Still, in Arizona, some of the canceled reservations from top Republican groups have further exacerbated the ad-rate disparity in the Senate race. That is because the party gave back early reservations only to have other super PACs step in — and pay even more.For instance, the Senate committee originally had reserved two ads for that Oct. 2 football game for $30,000 each and the Senate Leadership Fund had reserved another for $30,000. All three were canceled.Instead, a new Republican super PAC, the Sentinel Action Fund, booked two ads during the same game but had to pay $100,000 because rates had risen — forking over $10,000 more for one fewer ad.Data from one Republican media-buying firm showed that in Arizona, ads supporting Mr. Kelly, the Democrat, amounted to 84 percent of what viewers saw even though the pro-Kelly side accounted for only 74 percent of the dollars spent.The Sentinel Action Fund was paying $1,775 per rating point — a measurement of viewership — while Mr. Kelly’s campaign was spending around $300 per point, according to the Republican data. Blake Masters, Mr. Kelly’s Republican opponent, was receiving a price close to Mr. Kelly’s but could afford only a tiny fraction of the ad budget (around $411,000, compared with Mr. Kelly’s $3.3 million for a recent two-week period).“The disparity between Democratic campaigns’ strong fund-raising and Republican campaigns’ weak fund-raising is forcing the G.O.P. super PACs to make difficult decisions even though there continues to be a deluge of outside money on their side,” said David Bergstein, the communications director for the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee.In Ohio, the Senate Leadership Fund announced in August that it was making a $28 million television and radio reservation to prop up J.D. Vance, the best-selling author and first-time Republican candidate who emerged from the primary with a limited fund-raising apparatus.But despite outspending the Democratic candidate in dollars — the super PAC paid $3 million last week for ads, compared with Mr. Ryan’s nearly $1.5 million — Republicans were still at a disadvantage: Mr. Ryan’s campaign was sometimes getting more airtime, according to media buyers and F.C.C. records.The Republican super PAC was paying four or five times more than Mr. Ryan for ads on the same shows. And the sticker shock on big sports events is the most intense: On WJW, the Fox affiliate in Cleveland, last week’s Big Ten college football game cost Mr. Ryan $3,000 — and $30,000 for the Senate Leadership Fund. More