More stories

  • in

    What Harris Must Do to Win Over Skeptics (Like Me)

    What does Kamala Harris think the United States should do about the Houthis, whose assaults on commercial shipping threaten global trade, and whose attacks on Israel risk a much wider Mideast war? If an interviewer were to ask the vice president about them, would she be able to give a coherent and compelling answer?It’s not an unfair or unprecedented question. As a presidential candidate, George W. Bush was quizzed on the names of the leaders of Taiwan, India, Pakistan and Chechnya. He got one right (Taiwan’s Lee Teng-hui) but drew blanks on the rest. It fueled criticism, as The Times’s Frank Bruni reported in 1999, that “he is not knowledgeable enough about foreign policy to lead the nation.”A few more questions for Harris: If, as president, she had intelligence that Iran was on the cusp of assembling a nuclear weapon, would she use force to stop it? Are there limits to American support for Ukraine, and what are they? Would she push for the creation of a Palestinian state if Hamas remained a potent political force within it? Are there any regulations she’d like to get rid of in her initiative to build three million new homes in the next four years? What role, if any, does she see for nuclear power in her energy and climate plans? If there were another pandemic similar to Covid-19, what might her administration do differently?It may be that Harris has thoughtful answers to these sorts of questions. If so, she isn’t letting on. She did well in the debate with Donald Trump, showing poise and intelligence against a buffoonish opponent. But her answers in two sit-down interviews, first with CNN’s Dana Bash and then with Brian Taff of 6ABC in Philadelphia, were lighter than air. Asked what she’d do to bring down prices, she talked at length about growing up middle-class among people who were proud of their lawns before pivoting to vague plans to support small business and create more housing.Lovely. Now how about interest-rate policy, federal spending and the resilience of our supply chains?All this helps explain my unease with the thought of voting for Harris — an unease I never felt, despite policy differences, when Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden were on the ballot against Trump. If Harris can answer the sorts of questions I posed above, she should be quick to do so, if only to dispel a widespread perception of unseriousness. If she can’t, then what was she doing over nearly eight years as a senator and vice president?We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    Elon Musk Deletes His Post Asking Why No One Has Tried to Assassinate Biden or Harris

    Hours after what the F.B.I. called a second attempted assassination of former President Donald J. Trump, Elon Musk wrote on his social media site — and then deleted — a post suggesting it was odd that nobody had tried to kill President Biden or Vice President Kamala Harris.Mr. Musk said the post on X had been intended as a joke.In response to a user who asked, “Why they want to kill Donald Trump?” Mr. Musk, who has endorsed the former president and comments frequently on the U.S. presidential campaign, wrote: “And no one is even trying to assassinate Biden/Kamala.” His post, which was captured by X users, included a thinking-face emoji.Mr. Musk took down the post after it immediately drew outrage. X says he has more than 197 million followers on the platform, which he bought in 2022.“Well, one lesson I’ve learned is that just because I say something to a group and they laugh doesn’t mean it’s going to be all that hilarious as a post on X,” he said in a follow-up post early Monday. “Turns out that jokes are WAY less funny if people don’t know the context and the delivery is plain text,” he wrote in another.The Secret Service said on Sunday that it had fired on an armed man at Mr. Trump’s golf club in West Palm Beach, Fla., while the former president was playing. A suspect was later arrested. The incident followed one in July in which Mr. Trump was shot in the ear by a would-be assassin while he was holding a rally in Pennsylvania. The shooter was killed by law enforcement officers.Mr. Musk, the world’s richest man, has established a reputation as an edgy plutocrat not bound by social conventions when it comes to expressing his opinions and broadcasting what is on his mind to his followers. His power and wealth have made him relatively impervious to criticism, and his bluntness has made him a hero to many on the right who oppose what they call political correctness.Several of his recent posts about the election have drawn criticism. Last week, he amplified the bogus right-wing claims that immigrants were eating pets in Springfield, Ohio. And after the music superstar Taylor Swift said last week that she would vote for Ms. Harris, signing her endorsement “Childless Cat Lady” in a reference to comments by Mr. Trump’s running mate, Mr. Musk appeared to offer jokingly to impregnate Ms. Swift, writing: “Fine Taylor … you win … I will give you a child and guard your cats with my life.” More

  • in

    Harris Is Good on Abortion Rights. Now She Needs to Take It to 11.

    Among the many critical issues at stake in the 2024 election, one will be central for many Americans: Whom do you trust to make medical decisions — women and their doctors, or Donald Trump and JD Vance?Vice President Kamala Harris cast the issue of abortion in stark relief in her first debate with former President Trump last week, striking a chord with voters across political lines. Ms. Harris’s answers on abortion emerged as her strongest moments onstage in a strong night for her overall — and provided a glimpse of a winning strategy for this election.That involves the Harris-Walz ticket turning the volume up to 11 on abortion. Ms. Harris, Gov. Tim Walz and their campaign surrogates must keep emphasizing — on the stump, in ads and at every chance they get — how Mr. Trump and Mr. Vance are impossible to trust on these issues.They must refuse to let Mr. Trump and other Republicans suggest that leaving decisions about abortion up to the states is a benign proposition and continue to point to the wide-ranging impact of abortion bans on pregnancy care, miscarriage treatment and training opportunities for an entire generation of doctors.Ms. Harris would do well, even, to devote an entire speech to the issue, laying out her plan to take action in support of abortion rights, with or without Congress.At the same time, she should keep deploying campaign surrogates such as Kaitlyn Joshua, a mother from Baton Rouge, La., who described being denied care at not one but two emergency rooms in the midst of a painful miscarriage because of her state’s abortion ban. Personal stories like these can break through and reach voters more effectively than any campaign talking point. According to PerryUndem, a research and polling firm, exposure to these stories is helping to shift public opinion in support of reproductive rights — an imperative in this election and beyond.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    Trump’s Proposal to End Taxes on Overtime Pay Could Cost Billions

    Former President Donald J. Trump is calling for exempting overtime pay from taxes, the latest in a string of vague tax proposals that have befuddled tax experts, worried fiscal hawks and seemingly charmed voters.Mr. Trump floated the idea this past week during a campaign rally in Tucson, Ariz., telling the crowd that it would supercharge incentives to work more and put money back in the pockets of many Americans.“It’s time for the working man and woman to finally catch a break, and that’s what we’re doing because this is a good one,” he said.The pitch is part of what has become Mr. Trump’s playbook during the presidential race: tossing out potentially huge tax cuts, defined in just a few words, to try and win over middle- and working-class voters. He has also vowed to exempt tips from taxes and end taxes on Social Security benefits, two ideas that have proven popular. At the same time, he has said he would further cut the corporate tax rate.As with his promise to end taxes on tips, though, Mr. Trump left many key details about the overtime plan unaddressed, making it hard to estimate its costs. Among the open questions is whether overtime pay would be exempt from just the income tax or if the exception would also apply to the payroll taxes that fund Social Security and Medicare.There is also the issue of how many Americans could benefit from Mr. Trump’s idea. More than 34 million Americans worked over 40 hours a week in 2023, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, but only a subset of that group are owed time-and-a-half pay for overtime under federal law. The rules are complex, but in general Americans earning a salary of more than $43,888 a year may not be owed overtime, depending on their job. Americans paid by the hour, currently about 55 percent of the work force, are broadly eligible for overtime pay.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    In Pennsylvania, Wary Voters Wonder if Harris Can Deliver

    Economic issues including soaring rents, student loan debt, supply chain issues and a stagnant minimum wage are on their minds.In a packed college gym in downtown Wilkes-Barre, Pa., on Friday evening, Vice President Kamala Harris closed out a long, successful week by elaborating on her vision for “an opportunity economy,” a centerpiece of her presidential campaign: Three million new homes. A pledge to take on “corporate price gouging.” Tax cuts for more than 100 million Americans.About a mile away, Judith Johnson was watching Ms. Harris’s rally on television in her apartment. A registered Republican, Ms. Johnson, 54, thought Ms. Harris had been “wonderful” in the debate on Tuesday; she was eager to learn more, especially about the economy.But Ms. Johnson’s vote, at least for now, remains with former President Donald J. Trump. “He’s a businessman,” she said. “And I think he sees what’s going on.”Ms. Johnson exemplifies the challenge facing Ms. Harris in Pennsylvania and in other critical battleground states. People like her say they are open to switching their vote. But they want to know: An opportunity economy — how? And for whom?Wilkes-Barre, a former industrial city, is seat of Luzerne County, which Mr. Trump has won handily, twice. While Democrats tend to do best in the Philadelphia and Pittsburgh regions, they see narrowing the gap in places like Wilkes-Barre as key to winning the state. In 2020 President Biden, who was born in nearby Scranton, ate into Mr. Trump’s margin there by several points, part of a wave of support that lifted him to victory in the state.Polls suggest Ms. Harris may struggle to replicate that success. Despite her modest upbringing and her emphasis, on the campaign trail, on the needs of “middle-class, working people,” as she put it on Friday, she is still laboring to persuade many voters that she understands them, or that she can deliver on her promises.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    Trump’s Vile Lie About Haitians Is the Latest in a Long and Grim Tradition

    When my family moved back to the United States from East Africa in the mid-1980s, one might have thought it was a peak time of compassion for people suffering in faraway places. A glittering group of music superstars had recorded “We Are the World,” a smash hit charity single to raise money and awareness for the victims of a brutal famine that had gripped my mother’s home country, Ethiopia.But when I told my new grade school classmates of my origins, I was met with cruel taunts. I was awfully fat for an Ethiopian, one said with a snigger. Must be nice to be able to have access to so much food, another joked. At the time, this was puzzling and upsetting — I had moved from Kenya, not Ethiopia, to my father’s home state, Minnesota. But the facts didn’t matter. These unkind remarks did the job the bullies hoped they would: They made me feel like an alien, an unwelcome stranger.We live in even crueler times now, with humanitarian catastrophes unfolding on several continents, but the response of the wealthy world has been to demand tighter borders and higher fences. There is no blockbuster charity single raising money for starving refugees from the civil war raging in Sudan. And now, the cruel taunts come not just from schoolyard bullies and cranks on the political fringes, but from the lips of a man who stood on the presidential debate stage on Tuesday, a former president who once again has a coin-flip shot at regaining the most powerful office in the world.And so I suppose I shouldn’t have been surprised by that lowest of moments at the debate, when Donald Trump repeated a vile, baseless claim that Haitian immigrants were killing and eating household pets in Springfield, Ohio. This allegation appears to stem from viral social media posts and statements at public meetings. It was picked up by some of the most rancid figures at the fringe of the MAGA-verse, then quickly hopscotched from there to a social media post by Trump’s running mate, JD Vance, and finally to the debate stage, sputtered by Trump himself.There is a temptation to treat this as yet another Trump rant, a disgusting lie about immigrants like the ones he uttered as he began his presidential bid in 2015, describing migrants crossing the border with Mexico as rapists and criminals. He’s done it time and again since. He is the master of exaggerated and fabricated claims against the boogeymen, a skill he has used for decades to polarize public opinion and raise his profile and power at the expense of others.But there is something particularly insidious about this claim, uttered at this time, from that stage. Food and pets are, to use a Freudian term, highly overdetermined symbols in our political life. They are capable of receiving and holding a multiplicity of very potent meanings, transmitting deep messages about identity and belonging.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    Elizabeth Warren: Don’t Be Fooled. Donald Trump Has a Plan.

    During the presidential debate on Tuesday, Donald Trump was pressed on the details of his plan to repeal Obamacare and replace it with something “better.” The question should’ve been a softball. After all, Mr. Trump has been promising the American people a plan for nine years, so he’s had time to prepare. His answer? After ducking and weaving, he came up with: “I have concepts of a plan.” Uh, that’s not a plan.Plans translate values into action. They test the quality of the ideas and the seriousness of the people advancing them. Plans reveal for whom candidates will fight and how effective they are likely to be. And in a presidential race, if either party’s nominee is asked about his or her plans for something as fundamental as health care, voters should get a straight answer.The problem is not that Mr. Trump can’t think up a way to put his values into action. The problem is that when he and other Republican leaders produce plans with actual details, they horrify the American people.Mr. Trump’s health care values have been on full display for years. In 2017, Republicans controlled Congress, and their first major legislative undertaking was a bill to repeal the Affordable Care Act. Every time they drafted something, independent experts would point out that their plan would toss tens of millions of people off their health insurance, jack up premium costs and slash benefits for those with ongoing health problems.After months of wrangling, Mr. Trump and Republican lawmakers voted a bill through the House to repeal the A.C.A. That night, Mr. Trump hosted a party at the White House to celebrate their big step toward taking away health care from millions of people.A.C.A. repeal then moved to the Senate. Republicans had the majority, so if they all stuck with Mr. Trump, the A.C.A. would die. As senators gathered to vote, nearly all of the Democrats — including Kamala Harris, then a senator from California — remained standing, too anxious even to sit down. We murmured stories about who would be affected by this vote: the uncle who had cancer and would lose coverage, the kid diagnosed with a heart anomaly whose parents wouldn’t be able to find new insurance, the college students who would just go without coverage and hope they didn’t fall on ice or get in a car accident. We felt the weight of people’s lives on the line.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    What Undecided Voters Might Be Thinking

    Since the populist surge that gave us Brexit and the rise of Donald Trump, politics in the Western world has polarized into a distinctive stalemate — an inconclusive struggle between a credentialed elite that keeps failing at basic tasks of governing and a populist rebellion that’s too chaotic and paranoid to be trusted with authority instead.The 2024 campaign in its waning days is a grim illustration of this deadlock. We just watched Kamala Harris, the avatar of the liberal establishment, smoothly out-debate Trump by goading him into expressing populism at its worst — grievance-obsessed, demagogic, nakedly unfit.But her smoothness was itself an evasion of the actual record of the administration in which she serves. Harris offered herself as the turn-the-page candidate while sidestepping almost every question about what the supposed adults in the room have wrought across the last four years.A historic surge in migration that happened without any kind of legislation or debate. A historic surge in inflation that was caused by the pandemic, but almost certainly goosed by Biden administration deficits. A mismanaged withdrawal from Afghanistan. A stalemated proxy war in Eastern Europe with a looming threat of escalation. An elite lurch into woke radicalism that had real-world as well as ivory-tower consequences, in the form of bad progressive policymaking on crime and drugs and schools.All of this and more the Harris campaign hopes that voters forgive or just forget, while it claims the mantle of change and insists that “we’re not going back.”Undecided voters in a polarized America generate a lot of exasperated criticism from both sides of the partisan divide. And no doubt it will exasperate many readers when I suggest that the choices presented in this election make indecision entirely understandable.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More