Midterm Elections (2022)

Subterms

    More stories

    • 163 Shares129 Views

      in Elections

      Anthony Gonzalez, a Republican Who Voted to Impeach Trump, Won't Run in 2022

      by

      Representative Anthony Gonzalez, one of the 10 House Republicans who voted to impeach Donald Trump, is the first of the group to retire rather than face a stiff primary challenge.WASHINGTON — Calling former President Donald J. Trump “a cancer for the country,” Representative Anthony Gonzalez, Republican of Ohio, said in an interview on Thursday that he would not run for re-election in 2022, ceding his seat after just two terms in Congress rather than compete against a Trump-backed primary opponent.Mr. Gonzalez is the first, but perhaps not the last, of the 10 House Republicans who voted to impeach Mr. Trump after the Jan. 6 Capitol riot to retire rather than face ferocious primaries next year in a party still in thrall to the former president.The congressman, who has two young children, emphasized that he was leaving in large part because of family considerations and the difficulties that come with living between two cities. But he made clear that the strain had only grown worse since his impeachment vote, after which he was deluged with threats and feared for the safety of his wife and children.Mr. Gonzalez said that quality-of-life issues had been paramount in his decision. He recounted an “eye-opening” moment this year: when he and his family were greeted at the Cleveland airport by two uniformed police officers, part of extra security precautions taken after the impeachment vote.“That’s one of those moments where you say, ‘Is this really what I want for my family when they travel, to have my wife and kids escorted through the airport?’” he said.Mr. Gonzalez, who turns 37 on Saturday, was the sort of Republican recruit the party once prized. A Cuban American who starred as an Ohio State wide receiver, he was selected in the first round of the N.F.L. draft and then earned an M.B.A. at Stanford after his football career was cut short by injuries. He claimed his Northeast Ohio seat in his first bid for political office.Mr. Gonzalez, a conservative, largely supported the former president’s agenda. Yet he started breaking with Mr. Trump and House Republican leaders when they sought to block the certification of last year’s presidential vote, and he was horrified by Jan. 6 and its implications.Still, he insisted he could have prevailed in what he acknowledged would have been a “brutally hard primary” against Max Miller, a former Trump White House aide who was endorsed by the former president in February.Yet as Mr. Gonzalez sat on a couch in his House office, most of his colleagues still at home for the prolonged summer recess, he acknowledged that he could not bear the prospect of winning if it meant returning to a Trump-dominated House Republican caucus.“Politically the environment is so toxic, especially in our own party right now,” he said. “You can fight your butt off and win this thing, but are you really going to be happy? And the answer is, probably not.”For the Ohioan, Jan. 6 was “a line-in-the-sand moment” and Mr. Trump represents nothing less than a threat to American democracy.“I don’t believe he can ever be president again,” Mr. Gonzalez said. “Most of my political energy will be spent working on that exact goal.”Mr. Gonzalez said there had been some uncertainty after the assault on the Capitol over whether Republican leaders would continue to bow to Mr. Trump.But the ouster of Representative Liz Cheney from her leadership post; the continued obeisance of Representative Kevin McCarthy, the House minority leader; and the recent decision to invite Mr. Trump to be the keynote speaker at a major House Republican fund-raiser were clarifying. At least in Washington, this is still Mr. Trump’s party.“This is the direction that we’re going to go in for the next two years and potentially four, and it’s going to make Trump the center of fund-raising efforts and political outreach,” Mr. Gonzalez said. “That’s not something I’m going to be part of.”His decision to leave rather than fight, however, ensures that the congressional wing of the party will become only more thoroughly Trumpified. And it will raise questions about whether other Trump critics in the House will follow him to the exits. At the top of that watch list: Ms. Cheney and Representative Adam Kinzinger of Illinois, who are both serving on the otherwise Democratic-dominated panel investigating the Capitol riot.Mr. Gonzalez said he believed he could have prevailed in a “brutally hard primary” against Max Miller, right, a former Trump White House aide, who appeared with the former president at an Ohio rally in June.David Maxwell/EPA, via ShutterstockAsked how he could hope to cleanse the party of Mr. Trump if he himself was not willing to confront the former president in a proxy fight next year against Mr. Miller, Mr. Gonzalez insisted that there were still Republicans in office who would defend “the fundamentals of democracy.”With more ardor, he argued that Mr. Trump has less of a following among grass-roots Republicans than the party’s leaders believe, particularly when it comes to whom the rank-and-file want to lead their 2024 ticket.“Where I see a big gap is, most people that I speak to back home agree with the policies but they also want us to move on from the person” and “the sort of resentment politics that has taken over the party,” Mr. Gonzalez said.Congressional maps are set to be redrawn this year, and it’s unclear what Mr. Gonzalez’s district, the 16th, will look like afterward. But he said he would probably not take sides in the primary to succeed him, which is now likely to include additional candidates.He said he would remain in the House through the end of his term unless something changed with his family.Mr. Gonzalez was emphatic that the threats were not why he was leaving — the commute was more trying, he said — but in a matter-of-fact fashion, he recounted people online saying things like, “We’re coming to your house.”In accordance with the advice House officials gave to all members, Mr. Gonzalez had a security consultant walk through his home to ensure it was well protected.“It’s a reflection of where our politics looked like it was headed post-Jan. 6,” he said.Neither Mr. Trump nor any of his intermediaries have sought to push him out of the race, Mr. Gonzalez said.Asked about Mr. Trump’s inevitable crowing over his exit from the primary, Mr. Gonzalez dismissed the former president.“I haven’t cared what he says or thinks since Jan. 6, outside when he continues to lie about the election, which I have a problem with,” he said.What clearly does bother him, though, are the Republicans who continue to abet Mr. Trump’s election falsehoods, acts of appeasement that he said were morally wrong and politically foolhardy after the party lost both chambers of Congress and the White House under the former president’s leadership.“We’ve learned the wrong lesson as a party,” Mr. Gonzalez said, “but beyond that, and more importantly, it’s horribly irresponsible and destructive for the country.” More

    • 125 Shares119 Views

      in Elections

      Newsom’s Anti-Trump Recall Strategy Offers a Warning for 2022 Midterms

      by

      California Democrats were able to nationalize the vote — thanks to an avalanche of money, party discipline and, above all, an easily demonized opponent.SAN LEANDRO, Calif. — California basks in its clairvoyance. “The future happens here first,” says Gov. Gavin Newsom, calling his state “America’s coming attraction.”By emphatically turning back the effort to recall him from office, however, Mr. Newsom made clear that California’s cherished role presaging the politics of tomorrow was not as significant as another, larger factor in Tuesday’s results: the tribal politics of today.The first-term Democratic governor will remain in office because, in a deeply liberal state, he effectively nationalized the recall effort as a Republican plot, making a flame-throwing radio host the Trump-like face of the opposition to polarize the electorate along red and blue lines.Mr. Newsom found success not because of what makes California different but because of how it’s like everywhere else: He dominated in California’s heavily populated Democratic cities, the key to victory in a state where his party outnumbers Republicans by five million voters.“Gavin may have been on a high wire, but he was wearing a big, blue safety harness,” said Mike Murphy, a California-based Republican strategist.The recall does offer at least one lesson to Democrats in Washington ahead of next year’s midterm elections: The party’s pre-existing blue- and purple-state strategy of portraying Republicans as Trump-loving extremists can still prove effective with the former president out of office, at least when the strategy is executed with unrelenting discipline, an avalanche of money and an opponent who plays to type.Larry Elder, the Republican front-runner in the bid to replace Mr. Newsom, thanked supporters at his election night party Tuesday at the Hilton Orange County in Costa Mesa.Mark Abramson for The New York Times“You either keep Gavin Newsom as your governor or you’ll get Donald Trump,” President Biden said at an election-eve rally in Long Beach, making explicit what Mr. Newsom and his allies had been suggesting for weeks about the Republican front-runner, the longtime radio host Larry Elder.By the time Mr. Biden arrived in California, Mr. Newsom was well positioned. Yet in the days leading up to the recall, he was warning Democrats of the right-wing threat they would face in elections across the country next November.“Engage, wake up, this thing is coming,” he said in an interview, calling Mr. Elder “a national spokesperson for an extreme agenda.”California, which has not elected a Republican governor since the George W. Bush administration, is hardly a top area of contention in next year’s midterms. Yet for Republicans eying Mr. Biden’s falling approval ratings and growing hopeful about their 2022 prospects, the failed recall is less an ominous portent than a cautionary reminder about what happens when they put forward candidates who are easy prey for the opposition.The last time Democrats controlled the presidency and both chambers of Congress, in 2010, the Republicans made extensive gains but fell short of reclaiming the Senate because they nominated a handful of candidates so flawed that they managed to lose in one of the best midterm elections for the G.O.P. in modern history.That’s to say that primaries matter — and if Republicans are to reclaim the Senate next year, party officials say, they will do so by elevating candidates who do not come with the bulging opposition research files of a 27-year veteran of right-wing radio.“Larry Elder saved their lives on this,” Rob Stutzman, a Republican strategist in Sacramento, said of Democrats. “Until this race had a general election context, there was not a lot of enthusiasm for life in California. But when you have the near-perfect caricature of a MAGA candidate, well, you can turn your voters out.”Gray Davis, the Democratic former California governor who was recalled in 2003, put it more pithily: “He was a gift from God,” he said of Mr. Elder. “He conducted his entire campaign as if the electorate was conservative Republicans.”Gray Davis, center, and Arnold Schwarzenegger, right, who took the governor’s office from Mr. Davis after a 2003 recall election, watched Mr. Newsom’s inauguration in 2018.Jim Wilson/The New York TimesHungry for some good news after a bleak month, Democrats will nonetheless happily seize on Mr. Newsom’s apparent triumph. After all, Mr. Biden himself knows all too well from his experience as vice president in 2010 — when his party lost the Massachusetts Senate seat vacated by the death of Senator Edward M. Kennedy — that even the safest-seeming races can’t be taken for granted in special elections.Moreover, Mr. Newsom’s success politically vindicates the president’s decision to enact a mandate on businesses to require the Covid-19 vaccine. The governor campaigned aggressively on his own vaccine requirements and lashed Mr. Elder for vowing to overturn them.In fact, before Mr. Biden announced that policy on Thursday, Mr. Newsom’s lieutenants believed they were showing the way for other Democrats — including the president. “We’re doing what the White House needs to do, which is get more militant on vaccines,” Sean Clegg, one of the governor’s top advisers, said in an interview last week.Historically, much of California’s political trendsetting has taken place on the right.From Ronald Reagan’s first election as governor, signaling the backlash to the 1960s, to the property-tax revolt of the 1970s, foreshadowing Reagan’s national success in the 1980s, the state was something of a conservative petri dish.Even in more recent years, as California turned to the left, it was possible to discern the Republican future in Gov. Pete Wilson’s hard line on illegal immigration in the 1990s, and in Arnold Schwarzenegger’s potent cocktail of celebrity, populism and platitudes in the 2000s.Earlier this summer, it appeared that, once again, California could augur national trends. Burdened by rising crime, homelessness and Covid fatigue, Mr. Newsom was seen in polls as in danger of being recalled.His challenge, however, was not a tidal wave of opposition, but Democratic apathy.That began to change when Mr. Newsom outspent his Republican opponents and supporters of the recall four-to-one on television over the summer. Voter sentiment turned even more sharply away from replacing him once Mr. Elder emerged, transforming the contest from a referendum on Mr. Newsom into a more traditional Republican-versus-Democrat election.Every Democratic campaign sign and handbill, and even the ballot itself that was mailed to registered California voters, termed the vote a “Republican Recall,” emblazoning a scarlet R on the exercise.“We defined this as a Republican recall, which is what it is,” Rusty Hicks, the California Democratic chairman, boasted shortly before Mr. Newsom and Vice President Kamala Harris took the stage at a rally Sept. 8 near Oakland.A rare convergence of interests between Democrats and Republicans ultimately favored Mr. Newsom: The only people more thrilled to elevate the profile of Mr. Elder, a Black conservative who delights in puncturing liberal pieties, were the paid members of the governor’s staff.Mr. Elder campaigning in Monterey Park on Monday.Alex Welsh for The New York TimesMr. Elder appeared on Fox News in prime time 52 times this year, according to the liberal media watchdog group Media Matters. No other Republican candidate appeared more than eight times.While that exposure helped Mr. Elder become the most popular alternative, it served to undermine the cause of removing Mr. Newsom from office, by ensuring the contest would feel more like a general election than like the last, and to date only, successful California gubernatorial recall.In 2003, Mr. Schwarzenegger was better known for his Hollywood credits than for his politics. He also hammered away at a distinctly local issue, California’s tax on automobiles, which kept the race centered on state rather than federal policies. And the incumbent, Mr. Davis, was far more unpopular than Mr. Newsom is.California then was also a different state in a way that illustrates how politically polarized it has become. In 2000, Mr. Bush lost California by about 11 percentage points, while still carrying Republican redoubts like Orange and San Diego Counties. Last year, Mr. Trump was routed in the state by nearly 30 points and lost the same two counties decisively.“There is no safe landing place today for moderates because, even if you’re mad at Gavin, the alternative is Ron DeSantis,” said Mr. Murphy, alluding to the Trumpian Florida governor.Indeed, what so delighted conservatives about Mr. Elder — his slashing right-wing rhetoric — is what made him an ideal foil for Mr. Newsom.Mr. Newsom turned his stump speech into a chapter-and-verse recitation of the greatest hits on Mr. Elder: comments he made disparaging women, minimizing climate change and questioning the need for a minimum wage. Joined by a parade of brand-name national Democrats who arrived in California equipped with anti-Elder talking points, the governor spent more time warning about a Republican taking over than he did defending his record.He also invoked the specter of red states and their leaders, scorning Republicans’ handling of Covid, voting restrictions and, in the final days of the campaign, Texas’s restrictive new abortion law.While House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy, the most prominent California Republican, kept his distance from the recall, Mr. Newsom was regularly joined by Democratic members of the state’s congressional delegation, who linked the recall to Mr. Trump’s refusal to concede defeat and to the Jan. 6 assault on the Capitol.“A different type of insurrection in California,” as Representative Karen Bass put it at a rally in Los Angeles.Mr. Elder, for his part, happily ran as the provocateur he is, overwhelming more moderate G.O.P. hopefuls like former Mayor Kevin Faulconer of San Diego. He vowed to end vaccine mandates for state employees the day he was sworn in, which prompted chants of “Larry, Larry!” from conservative crowds but alienated the state’s pro-vaccine majority.California recall supporters rallied for the Mr. Elder in the Los Angeles suburb of Thousand Oaks.Allison Zaucha for The New York TimesMr. Newsom’s polling showed him leading 69-28 among Californians who said they were vaccinated, his advisers said, a significant advantage in a state where nearly seven in 10 adults have gotten their shots.The possibility that Elder-style figures could win primaries in more competitive states alarms many establishment-aligned Republicans as they assess the 2022 landscape.Nominees too closely linked to Mr. Trump, or laden with personal baggage, or both, could undermine the party’s prospects in states like Georgia, Arizona, Missouri and Pennsylvania that will prove crucial to determining control of the Senate.Similarly, Republicans could struggle in battleground governor’s races in Ohio, Georgia and Arizona if far-right candidates prevail in primaries thanks to Mr. Trump’s blessing.In few states, however, is the party’s Trump-era brand as toxic as it is in California.“This is not about Schwarzenegger, this is not even Scott Walker,” Mr. Newsom said, alluding to the former Republican governor of Wisconsin who fended off a recall. “This is about weaponizing this office for an extreme national agenda.”It is, the governor said, “Trump’s party, even here in California.” More

    • 125 Shares179 Views

      in Elections

      Abortion Arrives at the Center of the American Political Maelstrom

      by

      The Supreme Court’s decision not to block a Texas law banning most abortions left Republicans eager to replicate it. Democrats reeled, but sensed a winning issue in coming elections.WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court’s decision not to block a Texas law sharply curtailing abortions abruptly vaulted the issue to the forefront of American politics on Thursday, reshaping the dynamics of elections in California this month, in Virginia in November and in midterms next year that will determine control of Congress and statehouses.Republicans hailed the court’s 5-to-4 decision, explained in a one-paragraph middle-of-the-night ruling, as a tremendous victory, allowing a nearly complete ban on abortions to stand in the nation’s second-largest state.For Democrats, it was a nightmare come true: A conservative Supreme Court, led by three appointees of former President Donald J. Trump, had allowed a highly gerrymandered, Republican-controlled state legislature to circumvent Roe v. Wade, the half-century-old decision that enshrined abortion as a constitutional right.Suddenly, supporters of abortion rights found themselves grappling not only with the political and policy failures that had led to this point, but also with the prospect that other Republican-controlled legislatures could quickly enact copycat legislation. On Thursday, G.O.P. lawmakers in Arkansas, Florida and South Dakota promised to do so in their next legislative sessions.Yet Democrats also embraced the opportunity to force an issue they believe is a political winner for them to the center of the national debate. After years of playing defense, Democrats say the Texas law will test whether the reality of a practical ban on abortions can motivate voters to support them.Senator Catherine Cortez Masto of Nevada, a Democrat up for re-election in 2022, said people in her state had fought to protect women’s reproductive freedom and would vote accordingly. “If a Republican is going to go to Washington to roll those freedoms back, I will make it an issue,” she said in an interview. “I don’t think you should underestimate the impact that this issue has to Nevadans.”Republicans held up the Texas law as an example for the country to follow. “This law will save the lives of thousands of unborn babies in Texas and become a national model,” said Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick of Texas. “I pray that every other state will follow our lead in defense of life.”Gov. Kristi Noem of South Dakota, who is considered a potential Republican candidate for president in 2024, said she had directed her office to “make sure we have the strongest pro-life laws on the books.”Senate Democrats’ campaign arm has signaled that it will use abortion rights as a cudgel against Republicans running in key states like Nevada, where Senator Catherine Cortez Masto faces re-election in 2022.Sarahbeth Maney/The New York TimesThe court’s decision, which did not address the substance of the Texas law, creates new urgency for President Biden and congressional Democrats to do more than issue public statements vowing to defend women’s reproductive rights.“The temperature just got a lot hotter on this issue, and I certainly now expect Congress to join in these fights,” said Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham of New Mexico, the chairwoman of the Democratic Governors Association. “Our voters expect us all to do more.”Yet Senate Democrats do not have the votes to eliminate the filibuster, which would be necessary to change federal abortion law in the evenly divided chamber.In Washington on Thursday, Democratic leaders dutifully scrambled to show their determination to push back against the possibility that the Texas law could be replicated elsewhere — or to respond if the Supreme Court rolls back abortion rights when it rules on a Mississippi law that seeks to ban most abortions after 15 weeks of pregnancy, two months earlier than Roe and subsequent decisions allow.Speaker Nancy Pelosi promised to bring a vote on the Women’s Health Protection Act, which would effectively codify abortion rights into federal law.And Mr. Biden pledged “a whole-of-government effort” in response to the Texas law, directing the Department of Health and Human Services and the Justice Department to identify possible federal measures to help ensure that women in the state have access to safe and legal abortions.“The highest court of our land will allow millions of women in Texas in need of critical reproductive care to suffer while courts sift through procedural complexities,” Mr. Biden said. “The impact of last night’s decision will be immediate and requires an immediate response.”Vice President Kamala Harris added, “We will not stand by and allow our nation to go back to the days of back-alley abortions.”The first election that could test Democrats’ capacity to energize voters over abortion rights comes on Sept. 14 in California, where voters will determine the fate of Gov. Gavin Newsom, who faces a recall effort. Mr. Newsom warned on Twitter that the Texas abortion ban “could be the future of CA” if the recall were successful.In Virginia, Democratic candidates for the state’s three statewide offices and House of Delegates pounced on the issue on Thursday. Former Gov. Terry McAuliffe, who is running to recapture the office in November, said the fight for abortion rights would help motivate Democratic voters who might be complacent after the party captured full control of state government in 2019 and helped Mr. Biden win the state last year.“We are a Democratic state. There are more Democrats,” Mr. McAuliffe said. “But this is an off-off-year, and getting Democrats motivated to come out, that’s always the big challenge.”Eyeing 2022, the Democrats’ Senate campaign arm has signaled it will use abortion rights as a cudgel against Republicans running in states like Florida, New Hampshire, Nevada and North Carolina. Democrats planning campaigns for governor next year are preparing to brand themselves as the last line of defense on abortion rights, particularly in states with Republican-controlled legislatures.“People are now waking up to the fact that the battle will now be in the states, and they recognize that the only thing, literally the only thing standing in the way of Pennsylvania passing the same ban that Texas just passed, is the veto pen of our Democratic governor,” said Josh Shapiro, the Pennsylvania attorney general, a Democrat who has said he expects to enter the race to succeed Gov. Tom Wolf. “I’ve given up on the politicians in Washington. I don’t think we can count on them anymore.”Former Gov. Terry McAuliffe of Virginia, who is running for his old post this year, believes abortion access will be a motivating factor for voters.Pete Marovich for The New York TimesThough Republicans have long made overturning Roe a central political goal — as a candidate in 2016, Mr. Trump predicted that his eventual Supreme Court appointees would do so — there was still a palpable sense of shock among Democrats. Despite the court’s 6-to-3 conservative majority, many Democrats seemed mentally unprepared for Wednesday’s ruling.“You can’t plan for a blatantly false or unconstitutional court ruling like this,” said Representative Conor Lamb of Pennsylvania, a Democrat who is running for his state’s open Senate seat next year.Understand the Texas Abortion LawCard 1 of 4The most restrictive in the country. More

    • 138 Shares119 Views

      in Elections

      To Save His Presidency, Biden Must Tell the Truth About Afghanistan

      by

      For days now, the news media has likened the chaotic end of our misadventure in Afghanistan, and the awful images of terrified people scrambling onto planes at the Kabul airport, to the final exit from South Vietnam. The comparison is overdrawn; the last American combat troops left Indochina two years before the collapse of the Saigon government.But there is at least one potential parallel between the two conflicts that should have President Biden worried: The last time a war blew up in the face of a Democratic president, it derailed his domestic agenda and stalled the most ambitious social reforms of a generation.To be sure, domestic political concerns should not overshadow the immediate urgency of getting all Americans and the Afghans who worked for them out of Afghanistan. But history shows how adversity abroad has often led to trouble for the governing party back home. Mr. Biden may not be able to save his ambitious legislative agenda unless he understands that lesson from the past.In 1964, Lyndon Johnson and his fellow Democrats secured crushing majorities that enabled them to enact a flurry of landmark legislation: the Voting Rights Act, the bill establishing Medicare and Medicaid, an overhaul of immigration law. It is a feat Mr. Biden and progressive Democrats in Congress today would dearly like to emulate.But Johnson’s decision early in 1965 to send thousands of troops to combat the Vietcong soon halted the momentum of his Great Society agenda and put Democrats on the defensive. A year later, as the war dragged on and protests mounted, Johnson’s approval rating dipped below 50 percent. In the midterm contests of 1966, the Republican Party picked up 47 seats in the House, and Democratic governors in eight states were replaced by Republicans — one of them a former actor in California named Ronald Reagan. By 1968, Republicans had taken back the White House, and Democrats never achieved a progressive policy agenda as far-reaching again.Joe Biden bears far less responsibility for the defeat in Afghanistan than Lyndon Johnson did for the debacle in Indochina. As Mr. Biden mentioned in his address to the nation on Monday, as vice president, he opposed the troop surge ordered by Barack Obama in 2009. He can also claim that he was merely carrying out an agreement Donald Trump signed last year.Furthermore, unlike the Vietnam War, which provoked a long, scorching debate that divided the country far more bitterly and profoundly than the more limited, if longer, battle with the Taliban ever did, this conflict could soon be forgotten. As the public’s attention shifts away from Afghanistan, Mr. Biden’s decision may seem less like a failure and more like a sober, even necessary end to a policy that was doomed from the start.Yet the president and his fellow Democrats face a political environment so daunting that even the slightest disruption could derail their domestic agenda. Even before the Afghan crisis, they needed the vote of every senator from their party to enact their budget blueprint, and Mr. Biden has never had the sky-high approval ratings that allowed Johnson to rule Congress with an iron fist. This week, for the first time, his rating dipped into the 40s. Whatever they manage to accomplish in Congress, Democrats could easily lose their narrow control of both houses in the next midterm elections, especially if Republicans effectively inflame fears about Afghan refugees being resettled in this country.The United States has not had a true majority party for 50 years, and that stalemate, with the enduringly fierce partisanship it engenders, is unlikely to end soon. To pass the big reforms he wants, Mr. Biden will need to describe what he did to end this war better than Johnson explained why he dispatched troops to meddle in another civil conflict in a nation thousands of miles from their homeland.President Lyndon Johnson with Gen. William Westmoreland in South Vietnam in 1967. The Vietnam War derailed Johnson’s domestic agenda.Yoichi Okamoto/LBJ LibraryTwo lessons from Johnson’s downfall are paramount. First, tell the truth, even if it makes you look bad, temporarily. The 1971 release of the Pentagon Papers demonstrated that Johnson lied continually when he lauded the progress the United States and its South Vietnamese allies were supposedly making. By 1966, the press was accusing the administration of creating a credibility gap that only yawned wider as the conflict escalated.All presidents lie at times, but those who admit mistakes, particularly obvious ones, can retain their popularity. This happened to John F. Kennedy after the Bay of Pigs fiasco in 1961 and to Bill Clinton when he acknowledged his affair with Monica Lewinsky in 1998 (although he benefited more from the Republicans’ failed attempt to throw him out of office).Mr. Biden made a decent start at such truth-telling during his speech this week. But he should give a fuller explanation of why his administration failed to prepare for a Taliban victory that, according to years of intelligence reports, was quite likely.Second, keep the coalition that elected you united in its response to the crisis. Though Johnson had a reputation as a masterful politician, he became despised by millions of his fellow Democrats because of his Vietnam policy. If Democrats in Congress follow through on their vows to carry out extensive hearings into the collapse of the Afghan government, they could provoke a similar intraparty battle.But the president may be able to stave off that kind of public bickering. If he chooses to declassify whatever vital documents exist, in an attempt to convince his Democratic critics that he is serious about revealing why his exit strategy went wrong, it may dissuade them from engaging in their own lengthy investigation.The defeat in Afghanistan, like the one in Vietnam, was a long time coming. Democrats can take steps to prevent such interventions. But if they repeat the errors of their predecessors in the 1960s, they may secure the triumph of an opposition party whose leaders have not stopped lying about the election that drove them from power.Michael Kazin (@mkazin), a professor of history at Georgetown University, is the author of the forthcoming book “What It Took to Win: A History of the Democratic Party.”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

    • 100 Shares149 Views

      in Elections

      L.G.B.T.Q. Advocates Target Redistricting Ahead of 2022 Election

      by

      A national organization dedicated to increasing the number of L.G.B.T.Q. Americans who hold elected office began an effort on Wednesday to lobby states and localities to keep gay neighborhoods united as they begin the once-a-decade process of redrawing congressional districts and other political boundaries.The group, the L.G.B.T.Q. Victory Fund, will push entities tasked with redistricting to consider gay communities as “communities of interest,” or populations with shared political priorities. Its campaign, called “We Belong Together,” was announced a day before the Census Bureau is expected to release data that will be used to inform redistricting.“We’re a distinct population, and our voices need to be heard in government,” said Sean Meloy, the vice president of political programs at the Victory Fund. “We’re trying to empower more people to make that argument to their respective redistricting entity.”In the redistricting process, the officials redrawing a state’s political lines often consider the impact of dividing groups that have shared political interests. Grouping such communities into so-called opportunity districts enables those voters to elect candidates of their choice. Black and Latino Americans have historically been considered communities of interest under the Voting Rights Act, helping to elect thousands of people of color to local, state and national posts. Advocates trying to increase the representation of L.G.B.T.Q. Americans hope to recreate that success.According to a poll by Gallup, 5.6 percent of Americans identify as L.G.B.T.Q. But fewer than 1,000 elected officials in the United States — less than 0.2 percent — are openly gay, according to the L.G.B.T.Q. Victory Institute. And some areas where L.G.B.T.Q. residents are a higher percentage of the population, like Washington, D.C., have no openly gay representatives.The Victory Fund plans to focus its lobbying on the five states where independent redistricting commissions, instead of elected officials, redraw political boundaries. But it said it would support any local organizations looking to further the effort.“The L.G.B.T.Q. community is one that’s often forgotten about,” said State Representative Brianna Titone of Colorado, a Democrat. She signed a letter asking Colorado’s independent redistricting commission to treat L.G.B.T.Q. residents as a community of interest, arguing that the “community continues to fight for basic civil rights while experiencing hate and discrimination.”“The commission knew that we care about this issue,” said Ms. Titone, who is the first transgender person to be elected to the Colorado legislature. “However, they need to be guided on where those communities exist so we can make sure that the maps reflect them.”The Victory Fund hopes to capitalize on grass-roots momentum in areas where locals are already pushing for L.G.B.T.Q. residents to be considered a community of interest. In the absence of federal data, it is also relying on local advocates to identify where those residents live and congregate through other data points, like the locations of L.G.B.T.Q. businesses or health centers.In the early 1990s in San Diego, advocates pulled together data from a variety of sources in order to push for a council district that would encompass all of Hillcrest, an L.G.B.T.Q. neighborhood. That district elected the city’s first openly gay official, and the seat has been consistently held by a member of the L.G.B.T.Q. community ever since. Several have moved on to higher office, including the city’s current mayor, Todd Gloria.Activists cite that seat as evidence that a focus on redistricting is not only effective but can lead to a trickle-up effect in terms of political representation.According to the Gallup poll, nearly 16 percent of Americans aged 24 or younger who are eligible to vote identify as L.G.B.T.Q., much higher than the 5.6 percent among all age groups. Mr. Meloy said the growing population highlighted the need to treat L.G.B.T.Q. Americans as a community of interest.“We want to make sure this is standard practice the next time the census releases data,” Mr. Meloy said. “In order to even reach that 5.6 percent number — which is only going to increase — we need to elect 28,000 more people. So we’ve got a long way to go.” More

    • 125 Shares99 Views

      in Elections

      Don’t Be Fooled By Mitch McConnell’s Sudden Bout of Bipartisanship

      by

      Are we entering a new era of bipartisanship? On the surface, the news from Washington seems remarkably encouraging. The Senate is close to passing a $1 trillion bipartisan infrastructure bill, with $550 billion in new spending on everything from transit to highways to broadband to climate change mitigation. Political insiders are hailing the bill as a breakthrough, with the Senate poised, at last, to overcome the partisan gridlock that has ground its legislative machinery to a halt. Many thought that President Biden’s belief that he could get Republican votes was naïve, but he delivered. In a surprise, even the Senate minority leader, Mitch McConnell, voted to move the compromise to a vote.Of course, this is the same Mitch McConnell who said of Mr. Biden, “100 percent of our focus is on stopping this new administration.” The same Mr. McConnell who made sure Donald Trump’s impeachment did not result in conviction, who filibustered the bipartisan plan for a commission to investigate the Jan. 6 violent insurrection until it died, who kept all of his Republican senators in line against the American Rescue Plan early in the Biden presidency. And the same Mr. McConnell who said that he would not confirm a Biden nominee to the Supreme Court if Republicans recaptured the Senate in 2022.So why the reversal on infrastructure? Why dare the brickbats of Donald Trump after the former president bashed the effort and tried to kill it? Mr. McConnell has one overriding goal: regaining a majority in the Senate in 2022. Republicans must defend 20 of the 34 Senate seats up for grabs next year; there are open seats in Ohio, Pennsylvania and North Carolina; and Senator Ron Johnson, if he runs again, could easily lose his seat in Wisconsin. Attempting to block a popular infrastructure bill that later gets enacted by Democrats alone would give them all the credit. Republicans would be left with the lame defense of crowing about projects they had voted against and tried to block, something that did not work at all with the popular American Rescue Plan.You don’t have to be a Machiavellian to understand another reason Mr. McConnell was willing to hand Mr. Biden a victory on infrastructure: By looking reasonable on this popular plan, claiming a mantle of the kind of bipartisanship that pleases Democrats like Joe Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema and that mollifies suburban moderate Republicans in key states, Mr. McConnell can more easily rally his troops behind their goal of obstruction and delay for every other important Democratic priority, including the blockbuster reconciliation bill, as well as voting rights and election reform.For Mr. Biden, this bill is a political victory; the fact that he worked across party lines distinguishes him from his Republican predecessor, which should give the president a powerful appeal among independents and moderate Republicans. But for congressional Democrats, despite the true achievement of persuading 10 Republicans to sign on to an ambitious infrastructure plan, the road ahead is bumpy, winding and complicated.If this bill is signed into law, the Democrats will still need to face hard reality: This will be their last major bipartisan piece of legislation.Of course, there may be other issues below the partisan radar, like criminal justice reform and mental health reform, that can secure significant Republican support. But thanks to Mr. McConnell, everything else will face a wall of obstruction. Since the midterms will take all the focus off policymaking in Congress, the Democrats need to achieve democracy reforms and move on with the rest of their agenda using reconciliation. (The Senate majority leader, Chuck Schumer, will also be navigating another confrontation over the debt ceiling, but he might be able to include eliminating the ceiling within reconciliation, taking it off the table as a hostage once and for all.)The two key words are discipline and filibuster. Overcoming Mr. McConnell’s obstruction will require all 50 Senate Democrats to stick together, to swallow hard with necessary compromises — and of course, the same is true for House Democrats, who cannot afford to lose the votes of even four of their members. To achieve anything else will require a change in the Senate rules. It does not have to be elimination of the filibuster, or what Senator Manchin would define as a “weakening” of the rule. It will require a way to put the burden on Mr. McConnell and the minority instead of where it is now, entirely on Mr. Schumer and the majority.Norman J. Ornstein (@NormOrnstein) is an emeritus scholar at the American Enterprise Institute. His latest book, which he wrote with E.J. Dionne and Thomas E. Mann, is “One Nation After Trump: A Guide for the Perplexed, the Disillusioned, the Desperate and the Not-Yet Deported.”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

    • 125 Shares139 Views

      in Elections

      Census Data Will Arrive Next Week, Setting Up Redistricting Fight

      by

      After a lengthy delay, the Census Bureau will release the data used to redraw congressional and state legislative boundaries next Thursday, Aug. 12, the agency said in a statement, setting up what is certain to be a highly contentious nationwide fight over redistricting before the midterm elections next year.The census data had been delayed largely because of difficulties in collecting and processing the enormous amount of information amid the coronavirus pandemic, but also because of efforts by President Donald J. Trump to meddle with the census by adjusting its timing.The pandemic and Mr. Trump’s actions — he also sought to add a citizenship question — have left some people questioning the count’s accuracy. The debate over the citizenship question, in particular, has raised worries about possible suppression of the participation of Latino communities.The delay forced many states to delay their redistricting plans, which will most likely lead to a compressed, scrambled process with elevated stakes. There is growing belief in Washington that the balance of power in the House of Representatives after the 2022 midterm elections will depend largely on the results of the redistricting process.Multiple battleground states, including Florida, Texas and North Carolina, are set to gain at least one new congressional seat, as are Colorado, Montana and Oregon. Seven states will lose a seat: New York, California, Ohio, Michigan, Pennsylvania, West Virginia and Illinois.Potential House and Senate candidates have also been forced to keep their political ambitions frozen in amber as they wait to see whether redistricting will affect their ability to hold on to a current seat, open up an opportunity to run for a newly drawn seat, or otherwise change their calculus for seeking a particular office. More

    • 88 Shares129 Views

      in Elections

      Ohio House Races: What to Watch For

      by

      Two primary contests for special elections, one in a heavily Democratic district and one in a Republican-friendly area, will provide some clues as to where the parties are headed.Ohio voters are set to offer small, early hints about the direction of the Democratic and Republican Parties leading up to the 2022 midterms, as voters in two congressional districts head to the polls on Tuesday to decide primary races for a pair of House special elections.One race, in a deep-blue district in the Cleveland area, is pitting a progressive Democrat against an establishment-backed candidate. The other, in a solidly red district near Columbus, includes a broad field of Republican contenders, including one endorsed by former President Donald J. Trump.Polls close at 7:30 p.m. Eastern; you’ll be able to see the results and our coverage of the winner at nytimes.com. Here’s what we’re watching for.Who will emerge on top on the Democratic side?In the Democratic race near Cleveland, Nina Turner, a former state senator, is facing off against Shontel Brown, the chairwoman of the Cuyahoga County Democratic Party. They are vying to replace Marcia Fudge, who held the seat in the 11th Congressional District until her confirmation as President Biden’s secretary of housing and urban development.Ms. Turner, who was a high-profile surrogate for Senator Bernie Sanders’s presidential campaigns, has been lifted by support from Mr. Sanders, Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York and other progressive leaders.But Ms. Brown has drawn the endorsements of Hillary Clinton, Representative James E. Clyburn of South Carolina and other party leaders.In recent weeks, the race has become increasingly bitter and outside money has flowed in to support both candidates. Essentially, it has become the latest proxy war between the Democratic Party’s activist left flank and its leadership in Washington.Shontel Brown is the chairwoman of the Cuyahoga County Democratic Party.Michael M. Santiago/Getty ImagesNina Turner, a former state senator, was a surrogate for Senator Bernie Sanders’s presidential campaigns.Michael M. Santiago/Getty ImagesWhat could the outcome tell us about Democrats’ mood?First, a caveat: It is always risky to read too much into the result of a single House race, especially a primary for a special election. Voter turnout is typically low, making it difficult to extrapolate broader trends about the electorate.But who wins, and her margin of victory, could tell us a little about what Democratic voters are thinking as the party tries to capitalize on its narrow control of Washington and prepares for a tough 2022 midterms challenge.If Ms. Turner wins, especially if she does so with ease, it would be a sign that the upstart progressive energy that propelled Mr. Sanders’s two presidential campaigns is not fading, as the movement seeks new national leaders to gradually succeed the 79-year-old Mr. Sanders. And it would most likely send to Congress another high-profile advocate for the left’s biggest priorities, like universal health care and far-reaching climate action.If Ms. Brown wins, particularly if she does so by a large margin, it would signal that Democratic voters prefer a candidate more in line with the party’s standard-bearers in Washington, and are wary about electing someone with a history of criticizing those leaders. Or, as Sean McElwee, the executive director of the polling firm Data for Progress, put it, it would suggest that Democratic voters “are interested in voting for the person who’s going to go to work and they’re not going to have to think about ever again.”In the other race, which Republican will win?In the Republican race near Columbus, a crowded field of Republicans is vying to upset Mike Carey, an energy lobbyist who was endorsed by Mr. Trump. He was largely unknown until the former president threw his support behind Mr. Carey in early June and all but ensured that he would be the front-runner.But the race is fluid, with more than 10 candidates running for the Republican nomination. Some of Mr. Carey’s rivals also have more established reputations in the district, the 15th Congressional, as well as the backing of prominent allies of Mr. Trump.These rivals include Bob Peterson, a state senator who also operates a 2,700-acre grain farm and has the support of Ohio Right to Life, the state’s leading anti-abortion group. There is also Ruth Edmonds, who has a following among Christian conservatives and the endorsements of Ken Blackwell, a prominent conservative activist and Trump ally, and Debbie Meadows, an activist and the wife of Mark Meadows, Mr. Trump’s last White House chief of staff.Mike Carey, an energy lobbyist, was endorsed by former President Donald J. Trump.Barbara J. Perenic/The Columbus Dispatch, via Associated PressWill Trump’s endorsement carry the day?If Mr. Carey does not win, it would be another sign that Mr. Trump’s endorsement doesn’t carry quite the weight that he and his allies insist it does.Mr. Trump and his allied political groups are hoping to avoid another loss after the defeat last week of a House candidate in Texas whom the former president had backed. In that race, State Representative Jake Ellzey beat Susan Wright, the widow of Representative Ron Wright, who held the seat until he died in February after battling lung cancer and being hospitalized for Covid-19.“The question is, ‘What does a Trump endorsement mean?’” said Aaron Baer, the president of the Center for Christian Virtue, a Columbus-based conservative advocacy group. “Typically, people would say it means a lot,” he added, with the caveats that the candidates are largely undistinguishable on the issues and that some of Mr. Carey’s rivals have also won endorsements from Trump allies.“When you have a number of people in the race with solid conservative credentials, and Trump world is spreading out its endorsements, it’s really anyone’s game,” Mr. Baer said. More