Nadler, Jerrold

Subterms

    Latest story

    150 Shares129 Views

    How Biden Is Leveraging His Defiance to Try to Stem Democratic Defections

    by

    President Biden’s increasingly emphatic declarations that he will not exit the presidential race are delivering an unmistakable message to potential wayward Democrats: Any criticisms going forward damage the party’s chances against Donald J. Trump.For days, Mr. Biden has said he will remain his party’s nominee after his poor debate short of an intervention from “the Lord Almighty.” On Monday, he put that assertion into action.It began with an open letter to congressional Democrats saying he was definitely running. It continued with a defiant call into one of his favorite cable news shows decrying the “elites” trying to shove him out. It included a midday appearance on a private video call with some of his campaign’s top financiers as well as a call into a virtual meeting on Monday evening with a bulwark of his past support: the Congressional Black Caucus.“I am not going anywhere,” Mr. Biden told the donors.The moves amounted to a show of defiance that the Biden operation hoped would earn him some deference, as uneasy Democratic lawmakers trickled back to Capitol Hill after a holiday break. At the same time, the Biden team was trying to reframe the pressure campaign to get him to step aside as one hatched by the elite party establishment rather than a genuine reflection of grass-roots voter fears about the 81-year-old commander in chief’s age and acuity.“I love this fighting Joe Biden,” said Representative Robert Garcia of California, a Democrat and an outspoken Biden supporter. “When he takes a punch, he’s going to come back and punch harder.”As lawmakers returned to Washington, Mr. Biden received some key words of support, including from Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York (“He is in this race; the matter is closed”), but also some concerns among influential lawmakers, including Senator Patty Murray of Washington, who is in the Democratic leadership (“We need to see a much more forceful and energetic candidate”).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

    More stories

    • 150 Shares139 Views

      in Elections

      At Rally for Hostages, Nadler Is Booed After Calling for Gaza Aid

      by

      Representative Jerrold Nadler of New York was booed on Sunday at a demonstration in Manhattan calling for the release of hostages held by Hamas after he encouraged attendees to also push for humanitarian aid for Palestinians in Gaza.“As we remember the heinous crimes committed by Hamas, we must continue to press for lifesaving humanitarian aid for the Palestinian people, too,” Mr. Nadler, a Democrat and the longest-serving Jewish member of the House of Representatives, said during a speech at the event at Dag Hammarskjold Plaza, near the United Nations headquarters.While some people in the crowd applauded, others began to boo as he went on: “We must do more, because we are better than Hamas. We must do more to bring food and assistance to those who are suffering.” The heckling grew louder and continued until the end of the congressman’s remarks as more attendees joined in, some chanting “bring them home” or “shame.”A crowd that appeared to number in the thousands had gathered for the demonstration, whose date was chosen to mark six months since the Oct. 7 Hamas attacks on Israel. As police officers looked on, participants arrived holding Israeli flags and signs that said “Bring them home now.” The event was coordinated by over 150 organizations, including synagogues, pro-Israel groups and the New York chapter of the Hostages and Missing Families Forum, which was founded in the wake of the attacks. About 100 hostages are still being held in Gaza, according to the Israeli authorities.Mr. Nadler, introduced as a “leader who is a strong supporter of Israel and a fighter of antisemitism,” was among a list of speakers that included family members of hostages and Naftali Bennett, a former Israeli prime minister.The response to Mr. Nadler reflected a divide among Jewish New Yorkers over the way Israel is conducting its war against Hamas. Some reject any criticism of Israel, while others, including activist groups like Jewish Voice for Peace, have rallied for a cease-fire, denouncing the Israeli and U.S. governments over the mounting death toll and humanitarian crisis in Gaza.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

    • 75 Shares109 Views

      in Elections

      Authorities Investigate Threats to Democratic Lawmakers

      by

      The inquiry by the Capitol Police and the F.B.I. came after a website released a recording that it said captured Roger J. Stone Jr. in 2020 expressing a desire for the deaths of two Trump critics.The Capitol Police and the F.B.I. are investigating remarks reported to have been made by Roger J. Stone Jr., a longtime Republican operative and informal adviser to former President Donald J. Trump, in which he expressed a desire for the deaths of two Democratic lawmakers in the weeks before the 2020 election, a government official familiar with the matter said on Tuesday.The investigation into Mr. Stone was opened shortly after the website Mediaite released an audio recording in which someone sounding like him can be heard discussing Representative Jerrold Nadler of New York and Representative Eric Swalwell of California, who are among Mr. Trump’s most vocal congressional critics.“It’s time to do it,” the speaker can be heard saying. “Let’s go find Swalwell. It’s time to do it. Then we’ll see how brave the rest of them are. It’s time to do it. It’s either Swalwell or Nadler has to die before the election. They need to get the message.”An article by Mediaite accompanying the recording claimed that Mr. Stone made the remarks to an associate, Salvatore Greco, a former New York City policeman, at a restaurant in Fort Lauderdale, Fla. But the recording itself does not make clear whom the speaker was addressing.Mr. Stone has denied making the comments, calling the recording “a deep fake.” He repeated that denial on Tuesday, claiming that “forensic examinations” had shown the recording to be fake. He did not respond to a question about the F.B.I. and Capitol Police investigation.Both agencies declined to comment on the inquiry.Mr. Greco, who was dismissed from the Police Department in 2022 after an internal inquiry into his relationship with Mr. Stone, responded to the initial release of the recording on Friday by calling it “political fodder.” Neither he nor his lawyer responded on Tuesday to a message seeking comment about the investigation.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?  More

    • 138 Shares199 Views

      in Elections

      House Committee Budgets Swell as G.O.P. Plans Road Shows Across U.S.

      by

      Republican leaders have told their colleagues to get out of Washington for field hearings that allow the party to take their message straight to voters, a costly pursuit that can be a boon to big donors.WASHINGTON — When the House Ways and Means Committee traveled to Petersburg, W.Va., last month for its inaugural field hearing on “the state of the economy in Appalachia,” it met at the headquarters of a hardwood lumber manufacturer whose chief executive has donated the maximum campaign contribution allowed to a Republican member of the panel.The logo of his company was on prominent display during the event.When the committee descends on Yukon, Okla., this week for its second field hearing, this one on “the state of the economy in the heartland,” it will convene at Express Clydesdales, a restored barn and event space owned by a major donor to the super PAC aligned with Speaker Kevin McCarthy, the Republican National Committee, Senate Republicans’ campaign committee and former President Donald J. Trump.The owner, the business magnate Robert Funk, has also given the maximum campaign donation allowable to another member of the panel, Representative Kevin Hern, Republican of Oklahoma, for the past three cycles.Determined to take their message directly to voters at a time when they are hard-pressed to get anything concrete done on Capitol Hill, House Republicans are increasing the budgets of their congressional committees and going out on the road, planning a busy schedule of field hearings in all corners of the country aimed at promoting their agenda outside the Beltway.The Judiciary Committee, for example, which has held one field hearing at the U.S. border with Mexico to criticize the Biden administration’s immigration policies and is planning more, requested a travel budget of $262,000 for this year. That is more than 30 times what the panel spent on travel last year. (In 2019, before the coronavirus pandemic significantly curtailed travel, the Judiciary Committee spent about $85,000 on travel costs, according to a public disclosure form, one-third of what Republicans are planning this year.)It is part of a well-worn political strategy to reach voters where they live and generate local media attention for activity that would most likely draw little notice in Washington.Representative Jason Smith of Missouri, the chairman of the Ways and Means Committee, said last week that he had “made it a priority” to take the committee’s work “outside the halls of Congress, away from the politically connected voices of Washington lobbyists and into the communities of the American people whose voices have for too long been ignored.”But it also has a direct payoff for Republicans, allowing them to reward major donors with publicity and exposure for their businesses.In West Virginia, the chief executive of Allegheny Wood Products, John Crites, whose company hosted the first Ways and Means field hearing, gave the maximum contribution allowed to Representative Carol Miller, Republican of West Virginia and a member of the panel, for the past two cycles.A spokesman for the committee declined to comment on the choice of venues. Staff aides noted that some of the witnesses who they can hear from in remote locations may not have the time or resources to travel to Washington to testify.Representative Jason Smith of Missouri, the Republican chairman of the Ways and Means Committee, said that he had “made it a priority” to take the panel’s work “outside the halls of Congress.”Haiyun Jiang/The New York TimesGetting out of Washington and into “real America” is part of a mandate that House Republican leaders have issued to their members, whose narrow, four-seat majority, coupled with deep party divisions, is making it difficult to pass any major legislation.“One of the things we committed is we would bring Congress to the people,” Representative Steve Scalise, Republican of Louisiana, said at a news conference last week. “We’d actually have field hearings in communities across America to listen to real citizens.”A Divided CongressThe 118th Congress is underway, with Republicans controlling the House and Democrats holding the Senate.Resolution of Disapproval: Republicans are scoring wins and dividing Democrats by employing the arcane maneuver to take aim at policies that they oppose and see as political vulnerabilities for Democrats.‘Weaponization’ of Government: The first three witnesses to testify before the new Republican-led House committee investigating the “weaponization” of the federal government have offered little firsthand knowledge of any wrongdoing or violation of the law, according to Democrats on the panel.Merrick Garland: Republicans subjected the attorney general to a four-hour grilling in a contentious Senate hearing, a harbinger of the fights that loom ahead as the G.O.P. targets the Justice Department.The uptick in budgets comes as Republicans are pledging not to raise the federal debt ceiling, threatening a first-ever default, unless Democrats agree to deep budget cuts and an end to what they describe as profligate bureaucratic spending..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.Their plans to pour substantial money into field hearings have for the most part received little pushback from Democratic committee leaders, who hope to take back the majority in two years and are eager to codify the precedent of larger travel budgets.“If we’re going to be able to do more field hearings, which I think are important, we are going to need more money,” said Representative Frank Pallone Jr., Democrat of New Jersey, who led the Energy and Commerce Committee in the last Congress and said his ability to hold such sessions was limited by a lack of funding.But the focus on getting out of Washington also appears to be deepening partisan divisions on congressional committees, where Democrats are complaining about not being given enough notice about the travel, or rejecting field trips out of principle.The Judiciary Committee’s hearing last month on the “Biden border crisis” in Yuma, Ariz., capped a two-day tour of the border where House Republicans accompanied law enforcement officials in an unsuccessful effort to see undocumented immigrants crossing the border.Democrats on the panel boycotted that hearing, dismissing it as a political stunt and noting that they had not been consulted about it.“It’s a shame that not one Democratic member of Congress would join us on this trip despite having weeks of advance notice,” said Representative Jim Jordan, Republican  of Ohio and the chairman.Representative Jerrold Nadler of New York, the top Democrat on the committee, said Democrats on the panel planned to make their own trip to the border to hear from government officials and community members.“Republicans are so desperate to change the narrative from their failing agenda that they’re gearing up to spend millions of taxpayer dollars on political stunts,” he said. “These guys are roaming around the desert at night like part-time vigilantes, looking for migrants with their flashlights and with right-wing media outlets in tow. That’s not a solution; that’s a made-for-TV stunt.”Only one Democrat on the Ways and Means Committee, Representative Donald S. Beyer Jr. of Virginia, attended the West Virginia hearing. “There was very little notice,” he said in an interview, explaining the absence of his Democratic colleagues. Mr. Beyer said he worried about the cost of relying primarily on field hearings, which often require the use of chartered planes to get members on location. For the upcoming Oklahoma hearing, he said, “they’re flying most of their 25 members and at least eight Democrats — they’re flying them and feeding them. There’s no reason not do to it, but we still live in a world of scarce resources.”Two different subcommittees of the Energy and Commerce Committee scheduled two different field hearings last month in Texas, roughly 18 hours and 600 miles apart. When inclement weather tanked the lawmakers’ commercial travel plans to get to the second hearing in Midland, they ended up chartering a plane to get them there in time.The House Judiciary Committee, led by Representative Jim Jordan, Republican of Ohio, held a field hearing in Yuma, Ariz., last month.Randy Hoeft/The Yuma Sun, via Associated PressRepublicans said they were planning to ramp up the travel throughout the next two years despite the criticism, whether or not Democrats join them, and would need substantial budgets to accomplish that.“We’d like to do a lot more field hearings,” said Representative Cathy McMorris Rodgers of Washington, the chairwoman of the Energy and Commerce Committee. “The reality is they also cost a lot more money.”Representative Bruce Westerman, Republican of Arkansas and the chairman of the Natural Resources Committee, testified last week to the House Administration Committee, which oversees panels’ budgets, that he anticipated his committee would hold “10 to 15” field hearings each year. That is a significant increase from previous years.Some panels appear to be taking the mandate to travel to greater extremes than others. Representative Mike Bost, Republican of Illinois and the chairman of the Veterans Affairs Committee, said panel members should prepare to get “out in the field” at “the drop of a hat” to respond to crises at veterans’ facilities across the nation. He requested a travel budget of $150,000, up from $100,000 last year.So many panels requested more travel spending this year that it raised some eyebrows during the House Administration Committee hearing when some said they did not plan to do so. When Representative Tom Cole, Republican of Oklahoma and the chairman of the Rules Committee, testified that he was not requesting a budget increase for his panel, a G.O.P. member of the Administration Committee sounded surprised.“You’re not having field hearings in Alaska or anything?” asked the fellow Republican, Representative Greg Murphy of North Carolina. More

    • 125 Shares99 Views

      in Elections

      What Two Primaries Reveal About the Decline of Working-Class Democrats

      by

      The results of the Democratic congressional primaries in New York City on Tuesday give us a hint of just how far the working-class liberalism once associated with city politics has declined. The winners of two races in particular, Jerrold Nadler and Daniel Goldman, who will almost surely represent much of Manhattan (and a bit of Brooklyn) in the House, emerged as the victors of complicated congressional primaries in districts that were redrawn to reflect national shifts in population.They represent different kinds of New York City Democrats — Mr. Nadler, a longtime congressman, has deep roots in the old grass-roots liberalism of the Upper West Side, while Mr. Goldman is a political newcomer whose star has risen through his association with opposition to Donald Trump — but their shared success nonetheless highlights socioeconomic divisions in Manhattan that have a long history.The primaries reflected the tensions and divisions within contemporary liberalism itself and raise the question of how (or whether) Democrats can effectively represent such radically different constituencies.The changes in the city districts were a result of math — subtraction, to be specific. New York State lost a seat in the House because its population came up short by 89 people in a census conducted in 2020, at the height of Covid in New York. Indeed, if so many New Yorkers had not died in the early months of the pandemic, these contests — particularly the one that pitted Mr. Nadler against his House colleague Carolyn Maloney — would almost certainly not have taken place.Beyond the numbers, though, the primaries were part of a continuing story of class divisions in New York City. In the mid-1930s, the Columbia University sociologist Caroline Ware wrote a study of Greenwich Village that focused on the Irish and Italian immigrants who moved there in the late 19th century and whose Catholic churches still dot the neighborhood.Some at the time saw the Village as a success story of immigrant assimilation. But Professor Ware had a different interpretation. The people of the Village, she suggested, lived side by side but had little contact with one another. They were left to navigate a complicated city as “isolated individuals rather than as part of coherent social wholes.”The national Democratic Party faces a similar class divide between highly educated urbanites and the working-class voters for whom it often claims to speak. It’s no secret that the party has moved away from the fiercely pro-union New Deal politics of the mid-20th century. For much of the 20th century, New York State’s congressional delegation included more than 40 representatives (compared with 27 today), a voting bloc that generally collaborated in support of an expansive social welfare state and working-class interests. New York representatives included many of the country’s most left-leaning politicians (like the Upper West Side’s Bella Abzug).Mr. Nadler and Mr. Goldman come from different backgrounds, politically and economically. Mr. Nadler grew up in the city and got active in politics opposing the Vietnam War. Mr. Goldman is a Washington native who attended Sidwell Friends, Yale, Stanford; he served as assistant U.S. attorney with Preet Bharara in the Southern District of New York.For Mr. Nadler, despite his victory on Tuesday night, the political world he emerged from no longer exists as a vital force. This is in part because of transformations within Democratic politics.Mr. Nadler’s political career was forged at a pivotal moment in the aftermath of New York’s fiscal crisis of the 1970s. He was first elected to the State Assembly in 1976. In the following years, Democratic city officials were forced to increase subway fares, close public hospitals, charge tuition at CUNY and cease to embrace a politically ambitious role for local government. Mr. Nadler was elected to Congress in the early 1990s, when Democratic leaders like Bill Clinton proclaimed the end of the era of big government and were most optimistic about free trade and deregulation despite its impact on cities like New York.He has supported many measures over his long career that would aid working-class people, but at the same time the Democrats have generally backed away from politics that would more forcefully address inequality and the economic divide.Meanwhile, the economic fortunes of Manhattan were also changing — as part of an effort to secure a steadier tax base in the aftermath of the collapse of manufacturing, the city under Ed Koch began to reorient its economy toward Wall Street and real estate development.As Wall Street became an engine of the city’s economy in the administration of Michael Bloomberg, Manhattan’s demographics began moving in largely the opposite direction from the city as a whole. From 2010 to 2020, the white and Asian share of the borough’s population grew, while the Black and Latino share fell.Today, the institutions that had once helped to stitch together constituencies from different ethnic and racial backgrounds, like unions, are far weaker in the city and nationally than they once were. People confront the problems of living in New York through the lens of personal ambition — as “isolated individuals,” as Professor Ware put it — rather than through collective efforts to improve the city’s life.The narrow victory of Mr. Goldman illustrates even more sharply the political crisis of working-class New York. In addition to being an heir to the Levi-Strauss fortune, Mr. Goldman is a type well known to denizens of Lower Manhattan, a successful lawyer who was able to self-fund his campaign. He is clearly a candidate whose political appeal was strongest for the new leaders of the Village and Lower Manhattan, the professional upper classes who work in law firms and investment banks, who fund their children’s schools’ parent-teacher associations and the park conservancies.This is a social world that has little meaningful overlap with the working-class population, often Asian and Latino, that still dwells here but lacks the confident political organization and alliances with the middle class that it once possessed.Mr. Goldman’s political fortunes rose with his role as lead counsel in the first impeachment suit against Mr. Trump; his path to the House was largely paved by this rather than any deep engagement with the kinds of material issues that affect the lives of working- or even middle-class New Yorkers.Mr. Goldman’s race was very close — he won by roughly 1,300 votes. The runner-up, Yuh-Line Niou, a state assemblywoman, ran a campaign whose rhetoric focused on class appeals, but unions and progressive groups proved unable to act in a coordinated way to support any single candidate in a crowded field.Despite their different backgrounds, both Mr. Goldman and Mr. Nadler embody a Manhattan that has shifted in ways that affect not only its own politics but those of the country at large. Their careers point to the divides that Professor Ware pointed out decades ago.In her account, the Village — and New York, and America as a whole — faced the problem of how to respond to the collective problems of a modern industrial society through the lens of a political culture that had been shaped by ruthless individual acquisition. The particular problems have changed, and yet Lower Manhattan remains home to a population that, as dense as it is, is intensely divided by class and ethnicity, that is characterized (as Professor Ware put it) by “an almost complete lack of community integration.”The bitter politics of the August primaries, which reveal yet again the declining power of New York’s liberalism, are the result.Kim Phillips-Fein, a historian at Columbia University, is the author, most recently, of “Fear City: New York’s Fiscal Crisis and the Rise of Austerity Politics” and “Invisible Hands: The Businessmen’s Crusade Against the New Deal.”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

    • 113 Shares179 Views

      in Elections

      Takeaways From Tuesday’s Primaries in Florida and New York

      by

      From fiercely contested House races in New York to the battle in Florida to take on Gov. Ron DeSantis, pillars of the Democratic establishment prevailed in a series of late-August elections in both states on Tuesday.In the Hudson Valley in New York, another theme emerged: The political power of abortion rights in the post-Roe era.Here are five takeaways.A House race pivots on the issue of abortion.Two months after Roe v. Wade was overturned, the matter of abortion rights is helping Democrats close what had been a devastating enthusiasm gap.That dynamic has been building all summer, but it was on vivid display in a special House election in New York’s Hudson Valley on Tuesday. Pat Ryan, the Democratic nominee and the winner of the contest, made abortion rights a centerpiece of his campaign, infusing the issue into his messaging and yard signs.Mr. Ryan’s victory in a swing district — despite a difficult political environment for the party in power, and a well-known Republican opponent, Marc Molinaro — offers among the clearest signs yet that abortion can be a powerful motivator in congressional elections, even as voters weigh other concerns, including frustration with the White House and anger over inflation.Pat Ryan made abortion rights a centerpiece of his campaign in the Hudson Valley of New York.Richard Beaven for The New York TimesOne Hudson Valley woman, Alea Fanelli, a registered Republican who considers herself an independent, said in late July that she was leaning toward backing Mr. Ryan because of his support for abortion rights. If abortion is outlawed, she said, “then what, we’re back to back rooms, alleys, men kicking us in the stomach?”Republicans cautioned against reading too much into Mr. Ryan’s victory. They noted that independent voters, many of whom are unhappy with President Biden, are unaccustomed to voting on the same day as Primary Day. Strategists in both parties agree that Democrats still face significant headwinds. And a late-August special election is hardly a predictor of outcomes in November.But the race did offer a snapshot of political energy as the final stretch of the midterms arrives. Some voters who once appeared apathetic about the fall campaigns have plainly woken up.New Yorkers feel the power — and pain — of redistricting.When it came to the redistricting process, New York was once the great hope for Democrats: lawmakers had embraced an aggressive reconfiguration of congressional districts that was supposed to position the party to flip multiple House seats.Instead, New York was the scene of Democratic redistricting heartbreak on Tuesday. Multiple incumbent lawmakers were defeated in extraordinarily bitter primaries, the result of a court-ordered redrawing of those maps.Redistricting can often be divisive, but perhaps nowhere has it created more explosive Democratic infighting than in New York, illustrating the power of a seemingly obscure process to upend American politics.Representative Jerry Nadler on Tuesday night in Manhattan after winning his Democratic primary.Hiroko Masuike/The New York TimesTwo giants of Manhattan politics — Representatives Jerry Nadler and Carolyn B. Maloney — were forced to compete against each other in an increasingly vicious and personal battle when the East and West Sides were drawn into a single district for the first time since World War II. Ms. Maloney, the chair of the House Committee on Oversight and Reform — the first woman to hold that role — was defeated.And Representative Mondaire Jones, one of the first openly gay Black members of Congress, lost on Tuesday after moving from his suburban district to seek a New York City seat following tensions over redistricting.It was a good night for New York’s political establishment.Not long ago, New York was a haven for young insurgent candidates who defeated powerful, well-funded incumbents up and down the ballot.But despite clamoring among some Democratic voters this summer for generational change, and simmering frustrations with Democratic leadership after the overturning of Roe v. Wade, Tuesday was a strong night for the establishment, at least toward the top of the ticket.Representative Sean Patrick Maloney, the incumbent, on election night in Peekskill, N.Y.Lauren Lancaster for The New York TimesIn a newly redrawn New York district that includes parts of Westchester County and the Hudson Valley, Representative Sean Patrick Maloney, 56, who chairs the Democratic House campaign committee, easily dispatched a challenge from State Senator Alessandra Biaggi, 36, who ran to his left.In Manhattan, Suraj Patel, 38, a lawyer, ran an underdog campaign against Ms. Maloney and Mr. Nadler, two septuagenarians who were elected to Congress three decades ago. But his efforts to press a message that it was time for a new generation of leadership fell short against two established leaders. He came in third.And on the Republican side, Nick Langworthy, the chairman of the state party, defeated Carl Paladino, a fixture of New York Republican politics with a long history of making racist, sexist and homophobic remarks. Mr. Paladino had the support of far-right Republicans including Representatives Marjorie Taylor Greene and Matt Gaetz.Florida Democrats settle on a former Republican to challenge one of the country’s most pugilistic Republicans.If elections are about choices, Florida’s voters are about to get a true study in contrasts.Representative Charlie Crist won the Democratic nomination to take on Gov. Ron DeSantis on Tuesday, setting up a contest between a Democrat who calls for “unity” and “civility,” and a powerful Republican incumbent who has relished stoking cultural battles, even going to war with Disney, a storied company with deep ties to his state.Some Democrats have argued that, had they nominated a more moderate candidate to run against Mr. DeSantis in 2018 instead of the left-leaning Andrew Gillum, they could have eked out a victory. The centrist Mr. Crist, a former Republican and independent, will test that theory as he wages an uphill battle against the well-funded governor, who is now in a far stronger political position than he was four years ago, with a huge national platform.Representative Charlie Crist in St. Petersburg, Fla., on Tuesday night after winning the Democratic primary for governor.Zack Wittman for The New York TimesBut in nominating Mr. Crist by an overwhelming margin, Florida Democrats are betting on a contender they hope can engage at least some independent and moderate Republican voters uncomfortable with Mr. DeSantis’s hard-right postures.Florida’s Senate matchup was also set on Tuesday: Representative Val B. Demings of Orlando easily won the Democratic nomination to face off against Senator Marco Rubio, a Republican.Gen Z is poised to go to Washington.Maxwell Alejandro Frost, 25, a progressive activist, has some Democrats already talking him up as the future of the party.Mr. Frost, who is Afro-Cuban, won a House primary in Florida on Tuesday, defeating two former members of Congress in a crowded field, a difficult feat for any first-time candidate but especially for a political newcomer.Maxwell Alejandro Frost at a rally in Orlando, Fla., in 2021. Now 25, he won his Democratic primary on Tuesday in a heavily Democratic district, which makes him favored to be headed to Congress in January. Stephen M. Dowell/Orlando Sentinel via Reuters ConnectMr. Frost illustrates the political appeal of a young candidate of color who can tap into the urgency of the political moment. He drew a range of notable national endorsements and could be the first member of Generation Z to serve in Congress if he wins the heavily Democratic seat in November, as expected. He has been especially focused on organizing to combat gun violence.“This is something that my generation has had to face head-on: being scared to go to school, being scared to go to church, being scared to be in your community,” he said in an interview, referring to mass shootings. “That gives me a sense of urgency, because this is something I live day to day.”Maggie Astor More

    • 138 Shares169 Views

      in Elections

      Nadler Routs Maloney in Marquee Showdown of Bruising New York Primaries

      by

      Representative Jerrold Nadler, the influential chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, handily defeated his longtime congressional neighbor, Carolyn B. Maloney, in a bruising three-way primary battle on Tuesday that was preordained to end one of the powerful Democrats’ political careers.The star-crossed skirmish in the heart of Manhattan was unlike any New York City — or the Democratic Party writ large — had seen in recent memory. Though few ideological differences were at stake, it pitted two committee chairs who have served side by side in Washington since the 1990s against each other, and cleaved party faithful into rival factions.Allies had tried to pull Mr. Nadler off the collision course into a neighboring race after the state’s calamitous redistricting process unexpectedly combined their West and East Side districts this spring. But he pushed forward, relying in a lightning-fast campaign on his reputation as an old-school progressive and leading foil to Donald J. Trump to win over voters in one of the nation’s most liberal districts.“Here’s the thing: I’m a New Yorker, just like Bella Abzug, Ted Weiss and Bill Fitts Ryan,” Mr. Nadler, 75, told supporters after his victory, referencing liberal lions who represented New York in Congress. “We New Yorkers just don’t know how to surrender.”Mr. Nadler, in thanking Ms. Maloney, said that the two had “spent much of our adult life working together to better New York and our nation.”He won the contest for New York’s redrawn 12th District with 56 percent of the vote, compared with Ms. Maloney’s 24 percent, with 93 percent of votes counted. A third candidate, Suraj Patel, earned 19 percent, siphoning crucial votes away from Ms. Maloney, whom he nearly beat two years ago.It all but assures Mr. Nadler a 16th full term in Congress and Ms. Maloney’s political retirement.The race — which ended in underhanded jabs about Mr. Nadler’s mental and physical fitness — was the highlight of a string of ugly primary contests that played out across the state on Tuesday, from Long Island to Buffalo, as Democrats and Republicans each fought over rival personalities and the ideological direction of their parties.In another of the most closely watched contests, Representative Sean Patrick Maloney, the moderate lawmaker tasked with protecting Democrats’ narrow House majority, easily fended off a challenge from Alessandra Biaggi, a state senator and a rising star of New York’s left wing.The race in the lower Hudson Valley had become an ideological proxy fight, and Ms. Biaggi’s defeat was the latest high-profile setback for leftists in New York. The former President Bill Clinton and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi endorsed Mr. Maloney, while Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez publicly backed Ms. Biaggi.“Tonight, mainstream won,” Mr. Maloney said in his victory speech. He will face Mike Lawler, a Republican assemblyman, in what may be a competitive general election.Outside Buffalo, Carl Paladino, a businessman known for his explosive, sometimes racist remarks, was leading a Republican primary against Nick Langworthy, the state Republican chairman who entered the race because he feared that Mr. Paladino could harm the party’s statewide ticket in November.A 13-candidate Democratic primary in the new 10th District connecting Brooklyn and Lower Manhattan remained too close to call, as Daniel S. Goldman held a narrow lead. The results were similarly close in a special election for a Hudson Valley swing seat, vacated by Lt. Gov. Antonio Delgado, that could offer a preview of the general election.The primary contests were particularly painful for Democrats, who entered the election cycle optimistic that the decennial redistricting process in blue New York would yield crucial pickup opportunities to protect their loose grip on the House of Representatives this fall.Instead, the state’s highest court ruled this spring that the Democrats’ congressional map was unconstitutional and put in place a neutral alternative. It set off anguishing intraparty brawls that have drained millions of dollars that party leaders had hoped would go toward defeating Republicans and will now cost the state Ms. Maloney’s important House Oversight and Reform Committee chairmanship in Washington. More

    • 125 Shares119 Views

      in Elections

      Jerry Nadler Routs Carolyn Maloney in Hard-Fought Matchup of Allies

      by

      Representative Jerrold Nadler of New York, the powerful West Side Democrat and chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, handily won a bruising primary contest on Tuesday, defeating his longtime congressional neighbor, Carolyn B. Maloney, according to The Associated Press.The highly charged summertime skirmish in the heart of Manhattan was unlike any New York City had seen in a generation and rivaled any intraparty House battle in recent memory. It pitted two committee chairs who have served side by side for three decades against each other and compelled some party faithful to pick sides.The star-crossed matchup emerged from a state court ruling that unexpectedly combined their districts this spring. Mr. Nadler and Ms. Maloney ultimately chose to run against each other in her 12th District, as talks to have one of them seek a neighboring seat went nowhere.Oddsmakers initially rated the contest a tossup, and Ms. Maloney doggedly trawled the district for votes. But Mr. Nadler quietly managed to assemble an enviable roster of endorsements, while capitalizing on his notoriety as a leading antagonist of former President Donald J. Trump in ways that proved impossible for his opponent to overcome.“Here’s the thing: I’m a New Yorker, just like Bella Abzug, Ted Weiss and Bill Fitts Ryan,” Mr. Nadler told supporters after his victory, referencing liberal lions who represented New York in Congress. “We New Yorkers just don’t know how to surrender.”He was winning the contest with a commanding 56 percent of the vote, compared with Ms. Maloney’s 24 percent, with 90 percent of the vote counted. A third candidate, Suraj Patel, earned 19 percent, siphoning crucial votes away from Ms. Maloney, whom he nearly beat two years ago.An old-school progressive first elected in 1992, Mr. Nadler, 75, is expected to easily win a 16th full term this fall in the overwhelmingly Democratic district. But with his advancing age and noticeably halting debate performances, questions are likely to accelerate about who might succeed him in representing one of the nation’s wealthiest congressional seats.Given those uncertainties and the ideological similarities between Mr. Nadler and Ms. Maloney, the outcome offers relatively little insight into the future direction of the Democratic Party.For Ms. Maloney, 76, the defeat is likely to spell a painful end to a pathbreaking career in elected office. A former teacher and legislative aide, she first won a seat on the City Council from East Harlem in 1982 and a seat in Congress representing the East Side’s famed “Silk Stocking” district a decade later, eventually rising to become the first woman to lead the House Oversight and Reform Committee.In the shadow of the Supreme Court’s decision to overturn Roe v. Wade, Ms. Maloney campaigned aggressively on her record of fighting for feminist causes. She pointedly accused Mr. Nadler of trying to take credit for her legislative priorities, like the Second Avenue Subway, and ran a television ad for weeks telling New Yorkers, “You cannot send a man to do a woman’s job.” And as she veered toward defeat in recent days, her campaign fanned questions about Mr. Nadler’s physical health and mental acuity.A third candidate, Suraj Patel, 38, tried to make the race about generational change, arguing that the Democratic Party needed fresh leaders rather than failed “1990s politicians” like Mr. Nadler and Ms. Maloney.Neither frame ultimately proved persuasive to voters, though, or at least not enough to overcome the enthusiastic base of support that turned out for Mr. Nadler on the Upper West Side.On the campaign trail, the congressman cast himself as a consistent warrior for civil rights and civil liberties whose experience is needed as the former president and his acolytes shake some of the foundations of American government.Mr. Nadler sought to galvanize voters in what may be the most Jewish district in the country around his status as the last remaining Jewish congressman in New York City. As the race stretched on, he also went on the attack against Ms. Maloney, accusing her of poor judgment when she voted for the Iraq War (he voted against) and when she helped amplify questions about debunked ties between vaccines for children and autism. A shadowy super PAC that has yet to disclose its donors picked up on the attack and spent more than $200,000 on television ads driving it home.But above all, Mr. Nadler played a deft inside game, calling on decades-long relationships to build a stable of powerful supporters, including Senator Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts, New York’s Working Families Party and Senator Chuck Schumer of New York, the majority leader, who was the only member of the state’s congressional delegation to wade into the race. More

    • 163 Shares139 Views

      in Elections

      New York: How to Vote, Where to Vote and Candidates on the Ballot

      by

      For the second time in two months, New Yorkers are voting in primary races, this time for Congress and the State Senate.There are several competitive congressional primaries and special elections, but there’s concern that a rare August primary, when many New Yorkers are distracted or away, will drive low turnout even lower than it usually is.How to votePolls are open from 6 a.m. to 9 p.m. Eastern time on Tuesday. In New York State, you must be enrolled in a party to vote in its primary; independents cannot do so.Early voting ended on Sunday. If you have an absentee ballot but have not mailed it yet, today is the deadline; the ballot must have a postmark of Aug. 23 or earlier. You can also hand it in at a polling site before 9 p.m. (If you have requested to vote absentee but cannot mail your ballot, you may use an affidavit ballot at a polling place — but not a voting machine.)New Yorkers having trouble voting can call the state’s election protection hotline at 866-390-2992.Where to voteFind your polling place by entering your address at this state Board of Elections website.Who is on the ballotEarlier this year, the state’s highest courts ruled that district maps created by Democrats were unconstitutional and ordered them to be redrawn. That’s why primaries for Congress and State Senate were pushed back to August from June.If you’re in New York City, go here to see what’s on your ballot. Ballotpedia offers a sample ballot tool for the state, as well.The marquee contest is in the 12th Congressional District in Manhattan, where Representative Jerrold Nadler, a Democrat who represents the Upper West Side, is facing Representative Carolyn B. Maloney, who represents the Upper East Side. A third candidate, Suraj Patel, is running on generational change.The 10th District, covering parts of Manhattan and Brooklyn, has a rare open seat that has drawn many Democratic entrants, including Daniel Goldman, an impeachment investigator in the trial of former President Donald J. Trump; Representative Mondaire Jones, who now represents a different district; and Elizabeth Holtzman, 81, who was once the youngest woman elected to the House of Representatives. Two local women, Councilwoman Carlina Rivera and Assemblywoman Yuh-Line Niou, have surged in the race.Two strong conservatives and Trump supporters are running in the 23rd District: Carl Paladino, a developer with a history of racist remarks, and Nick Langworthy, the state Republican Party chairman.In the revised 17th District, Alessandra Biaggi, a state senator, is challenging Sean Patrick Maloney, the chairman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, from the left. Mr. Maloney drew heavy criticism after the districts were redrawn and he chose to run in a safer district held by Mr. Jones, one of the first Black, openly gay men elected to Congress.The 19th District’s seat was vacated when Gov. Kathy Hochul chose former Representative Antonio Delgado as lieutenant governor. Two county executives are in a special election to finish his term: Marc Molinaro, a Republican, and Pat Ryan, a Democrat.Another special election is being held in the 23rd District to complete the term of Representative Tom Reed. Joe Sempolinski, a former congressional aide, is expected to keep it under Republican control. More