New Mexico

Subterms

    More stories

    • 113 Shares199 Views

      in Elections

      While Democrats Debate ‘Latinx,’ Latinos Head to the G.O.P.

      by

      Democrats working to save their slim majority in the House in November’s elections have been sounding alarm bells lately over research showing that Republican attacks on culture-war issues are working, particularly with center-left, Hispanic and independent voters. Hispanic voters, many of us alienated by progressive labels and mottos like “Latinx” and “defund the police,” have been drifting rightward as Donald Trump marginally increased the G.O.P. Hispanic vote share in 2016 and again in 2020 — a phenomenon, it should be noted, that goes beyond Mr. Trump or any individual campaign.Democrats now understand that they are losing support among Hispanics on culture as well as pocketbook issues, leaving little in the message arsenal for the party’s candidates to use to stanch what appears to be a long-term bleed.The Democrats’ problems with Hispanics are especially glaring when you consider that Republicans are not exactly flawless when it comes to appealing to these voters. Both parties have committed a mind-boggling form of political malpractice for years: They have consistently failed to understand what motivates Hispanic voters, a crucial and growing part of the electorate.As the growth of the Hispanic eligible electorate continues to outpace other new eligible voting populations, the caricatures and stereotypes of “Hispanic issues” are proving further and further removed from the experience of most Hispanics. Yet, for all the hype and spin about Republican gains with Hispanic voters, the rightward shift of these voters is happening despite Republicans’ best efforts, not because of them.In the eyes of some on the American right, Hispanics are hyper-religious Catholics or evangelicals, entrepreneurial, anti-communist, social conservatives reminiscent of the ethnic white voters of yesteryear. To some on the left, we’re seen as angry, racially oppressed workers of the cultural vanguard who want to upend capitalism while demanding open borders. While none of these caricatures are accurate, in them there are enough grains of truth to lull self-righteous partisans on both sides into believing that they may be on the winning side of the emerging ethnically pluralistic American majority.In our current era of negative partisanship, voters are as often motivated to oppose the party they dislike or view as extreme as they are to support the party with which they align. Latinos, of course, are no different, and it is at the cultural extremes where Democrats face the greatest threat to losing what they have long viewed as the foundational base of their long-term majority prospects. As “culture” grows as a proxy for “race,” the electoral math for Democrats will most likely get bleaker as political campaigns continue as referendums on “critical race theory” and “defunding the police.” It will be worse still if Hispanics increasingly do not view themselves as an aggrieved racial minority.This understanding will help determine which party controls Congress and the White House, beginning with the 2022 midterms. Under newly drawn district lines, four of the most competitive House seats will have Hispanic populations of at least 38 percent and are in California, Texas, New Mexico and Colorado. Additionally, Hispanic voters will be essential components of Senate and other statewide contests in Arizona and Nevada. The Latino voters in these states and districts are important for both parties. As the Democratic Party drifts away from its working-class roots and emphasizes cultural issues, Republicans are well positioned to pick up these politically untethered voters and with them the reins of power.The recent debate over the term “Latinx” symbolizes the cultural alienation of institutions far removed from the realities of life for an overwhelming number of working-class Hispanics. “Latinx” was created as a gender-neutral alternative term in Spanish, a gendered language, that refers to males as “Latino” and females as “Latina’.”Commonly used by media, political and academic elites as a sign of gender inclusivity, it is virtually nonexistent in the communities it refers to. In 2020 Pew Research revealed that only 3 percent of Latinos use the term, while 9 percent of white liberals think it is the most appropriate term to use. In fact, only 14 percent of Latinos with just a high school degree or less had even heard of it.This was not a sign of intolerance but rather was emblematic of one class with the luxury of being consumed with such matters trying to impose their values on working-class families trying to keep up with paying the rent on Friday. Members of the Democratic Party don’t just live in a distinct cultural bubble removed from the realities of their blue-collar counterparts, they are so removed from the rapidly growing Hispanic working class that many of them are now literally speaking a different language.The growing cultural divide in America, in which Hispanics appear to be increasingly turned off by progressive mottos and movements, is linked to the education divide in America between college-educated and noncollege-educated voters of all ethnicities. According to Pew Research, Republicans increasingly dominate in party affiliation among white noncollege voters, who make up 57 percent of all G.O.P. voters. This in a country where 64 percent of voters do not have a college degree.The Democratic Party is losing its brand among white, working-class voters and Hispanics. This is especially pronounced among Hispanic men and Hispanic noncollege-educated voters, who are trending more Republican, just as their white noncollege-educated peers are. Latinos are increasingly voting similarly to noncollege whites, perhaps because they don’t view themselves all that differently from them. Pew Research studies on Hispanic identity have shown that fully half of the country’s Hispanics view themselves as “a typical American”; fewer responded as identifying as “very different from a typical American.”For all the discussion about diversity within the Latino community, and the now-trite adage that the community is not ‘‘monolithic,’’ in fact what unites most Hispanics is that they are an important share of the blue-collar noncollege-educated work force, and their presence in the labor force is only growing. The “essential workers” of the pandemic are disproportionately Black and Latino, and as a decidedly younger demographic, Hispanic workers are filling the roles of manufacturing, agricultural and construction trades in states with large Hispanic populations.Democrats have increasingly become a party shaped by and reliant upon white voters with college degrees. Compared with 40.1 percent of white adults age 25 and older, only 18.8 percent of Latino adults in this age group have a bachelor’s degree. Latinos are, and increasingly will be, a key part of the blue-collar work force of the future and their politics are reflecting that.From 71 percent support for President Barack Obama in 2012 to 66 percent for Hillary Clinton and 59 percent for Joe Biden in 2020, Democrats find themselves slowly but measurably losing hold of Latinos, the fastest-growing segment of the electorate. As Latino voters grow in number in key battleground states, they are increasingly rejecting the minority construct promulgated by the media, academia and Democratic politicians and consultants.The party that is able to express the values of a multiethnic working class will be the majority party for the next generation. As we continue to watch the country’s culture war increasingly divided by education levels, it is quite likely that Latino voters will continue to trend, even if marginally, into the ranks of Republican voters. The country stands on the precipice of a significant political shift. As President Ronald Reagan once quipped, quoting a Republican sheriff nominee, “I didn’t leave the Democratic Party, the Democratic Party left me.”Mike Madrid is an expert in Latino voting trends, was a visiting professor at the University of Southern California, where he taught “Race, Class and Partisanship,” and is on the board of directors of the League of Minority Voters.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 Shares179 Views

      in US Politics

      US Capitol attack trial begins for Cowboys for Trump founder

      by

      US Capitol attack trial begins for Cowboys for Trump founderTrial of Couy Griffin is the second among hundreds of people charged with federal crimes related to the January 6 riot An elected official from New Mexico went on trial on Monday with a judge, not a jury, set to decide if he is guilty of charges that he illegally entered the US Capitol grounds on the day a pro-Trump mob disrupted the certification of Joe Biden’s presidential election victory.That’s not the only unusual feature of the case against Otero County Commissioner Couy Griffin, an Otero county commissioner, whose trial in Washington DC, is the second among the hundreds of people charged with federal crimes related to the January 6 riot.Griffin is one of the few defendants not accused of entering the Capitol or engaging in violent or destructive behavior. He claims he has been prosecuted for his political views.One of three members of the county commission in southern New Mexico, he is among a handful of defendants who either held public office or ran for a government post in the years before the attack.He is among only three defendants who have asked for a bench trial, which means a judge will decide his case without a jury. A US district court judge, Trevor McFadden, was scheduled to hear one day of testimony.Griffin, a 48-year-old former rodeo rider and pastor, helped found a political committee called Cowboys for Trump. He vowed to arrive at the courthouse on horseback. Instead, he showed up on Monday as a passenger in a pickup truck that had a horse trailer on the back.Griffin is charged with two misdemeanors: entering and remaining in a restricted building or grounds and disorderly and disruptive conduct in a restricted building or grounds. His attorney, Nicholas Smith, said prosecutors apparently believe Griffin engaged in disorderly conduct by peacefully leading a prayer on the Capitol steps.“That is offensive and wrong,” Smith told the judge in brief opening statements.Prosecutors didn’t give any opening statements. Their first witness was Matthew Struck, who joined Griffin at the Capitol as his videographer. Struck has an immunity deal with prosecutors.In a court filing, prosecutors called Griffin “an inflammatory provocateur and fabulist who engages in racist invective and propounds baseless conspiracy theories, including that communist China stole the 2020 presidential election”.Griffin’s attorneys say hundreds if not thousands of other people did exactly what Griffin did on January 6 and have not been charged.“The evidence will show that the government selected Griffin for prosecution based on the fact that he gave a speech and led a prayer at the Capitol, that is, selected him based on protected expression,” they wrote.More than 770 people have been charged with federal crimes. More than 230 have pleaded guilty, mostly to misdemeanors, and at least 127 have been sentenced. About 100 others have trial dates.Earlier this month, a jury convicted a Texas man, Guy Wesley Reffitt, of storming the Capitol with a holstered handgun in the first trial for a riot defendant. Jurors also convicted him of obstructing Congress, of interfering with police officers guarding the Capitol and of threatening his two children if they reported him to law enforcement.Reffitt’s conviction could give prosecutors more leverage in negotiating plea deals or discourage other defendants from going to trial. The outcome of Griffin’s trial also could have a ripple effect, helping others decide whether to let a judge or a jury decide their case.In a video taken in a parking lot outside the Capitol on 5 January, Griffin said he came to Washington for “possibly the most historic day for our country in my lifetime” and trusted that the vice-president, Mike Pence, would “do the right thing” and stop certification of Biden’s win.After attending Donald Trump’s “Stop the Steal” rally, Griffin and Struck walked over barriers and up a staircase to enter a stage under construction on the Capitol’s Lower West Terrace for Biden’s inauguration, according to prosecutors.Struck is listed as one of three government witnesses. Prosecutors also intend to call a Capitol police inspector and a US Secret Service inspector. Prosecutors want to use Griffin’s own words against him. They plan to play video recordings of his statements and actions in Washington.After climbing over a stone wall and entering a restricted area, Griffin said: “This is our house. We should all be armed.” He called it “a great day for America” and added: “The people are showing that they have had enough,” prosecutors said.A key question is whether he entered a restricted area while Pence was on Capitol grounds, a prerequisite for the US Secret Service to invoke access restrictions. Griffin’s attorneys say Pence had departed before Griffin could have entered a restricted area.“The government responds that the vice-president’s precise location ultimately doesn’t matter,” the judge wrote on Friday. “Perhaps, although the lack of clarity about the metes and bounds of the restricted area and the vice-president’s movements on January 6 undermine this argument.”TopicsUS Capitol attackNew MexicoMike PenceUS politicsnewsReuse this content More

    • 138 Shares169 Views

      in Elections

      Albuquerque mayoral candidate interrupted by drone carrying sex toy – video

      by

      Manuel Gonzales, a New Mexico sheriff who is running for mayor of Albuquerque, was interrupted at a campaign event by a flying drone with a sex toy attached to it. A man tried to grab the item, swinging his fist and calling Gonzeles a tyrant.
      The campaign group for Gonzales said the Democrat was unharmed and ‘will not be intimidated’

      Kerfuffle after drone carrying sex toy disrupts Albuquerque mayoral event More

    • 125 Shares129 Views

      in US Politics

      Kerfuffle after drone carrying sex toy disrupts Albuquerque mayoral event

      by

      A New Mexico sheriff who is running for mayor of Albuquerque was interrupted at a campaign event by a flying drone with a sex toy attached to it and a man who called him a “tyrant” while swinging his fist.The campaign group for the Bernalillo county sheriff, Manuel Gonzales, said the Democrat was unharmed and “will not be intimidated”.A video posted on Facebook shows Gonzales answering questions from the audience while standing on a stage at an events centre, when the drone bearing the sex toy starts buzzing near the stage.A sheriff’s office report said the owner of the event centre grabbed the device and that a 20-year-old, Kaelan Ashby Dreyer, also tried to grab it.The report said Dreyer then turned his attention to Gonzales, swinging his fist and calling him a tyrant. A deputy wrote that Dreyer punched Gonzales’ hands and was then removed from the event.Gonzales said at a news conference on Wednesday he believed Dreyer was with several companions and spotted someone standing on the other side of a fence who he believes was flying the drone. “It became so distracting from the sound and everything I couldn’t really get my point across,” Gonzales said.Dreyer has been charged with petty misdemeanor battery and misdemeanor resisting, evading or obstructing an officer. According to a deputy in the report, Dreyer said he did not intend to hit Gonzales but was upset at the way the sheriff answered a question and intended to swing his fist through the air.Gonzales suggested on Wednesday that the stunt with the drone might have been sent by the rival campaign of the incumbent mayor, Tim Keller, also a Democrat.Keller’s campaign condemned the stunt as “disruptive, rude and immature” and denied any involvement. “To suggest we were behind it is pathetic and the kind of desperation that has marked Manny’s troubled campaign,” Keller’s campaign manager, Neri Holguin, said.Dreyer denied he was working for Keller’s campaign and said he was not a fan of the incumbent either, the Albuquerque Journal reported. He declined to comment further. More

    • 125 Shares199 Views

      in Elections

      Melanie Stansbury, a Democrat, Cruises in New Mexico House Race

      by

      Ms. Stansbury won a landslide victory in a special election to fill the seat vacated by Interior Secretary Deb Haaland. The result is likely to hearten national Democrats worried about the 2022 midterms.Melanie Stansbury, a Democrat, won a landslide victory in a special House election in New Mexico on Tuesday, claiming the seat previously held by Interior Secretary Deb Haaland and easily turning back a Republican effort to make the race a referendum on rising crime in the Albuquerque-based district.Late Tuesday night, Ms. Stansbury, a state representative, had captured 62 percent of the vote, while her Republican rival, Mark Moores, had won 34 percent.Her dominating performance represented an early vote of confidence in the Democratic-controlled White House and Congress in a heavily Hispanic district and could quiet some anxiety in the party about its prospects going into the 2022 midterm elections.An environmental policy expert who has worked as a congressional and White House aide, Ms. Stansbury emphasized economic fairness, the urgency of addressing climate change and the importance of Democrats’ retaining their four-seat House majority.Mr. Moores, a state senator, ran almost entirely on crime and related issues. He assailed Ms. Stansbury for endorsing a bill in Congress that would shift money away from police departments, noting that there have been twice as many murders in Albuquerque this year as there were at this point in 2020.Ms. Stansbury’s victory illustrates that the crime issue alone is insufficient for Republicans to win on in Democratic-leaning districts, at least when their candidates receive little financial help from the national party, as was the case with Mr. Moores.Special elections in the first year after a president is newly elected can often carry grim tidings for the party in control of the White House. And with few such contests this year taking place on even remotely competitive terrain, Democrats moved aggressively to ensure that they were not caught by surprise in New Mexico.Ms. Stansbury enjoyed a commanding financial advantage while benefiting from the Democratic tilt of the district, the First Congressional, which President Biden carried by 23 percentage points last year.She also moved to rebut Mr. Moores’s line of attack, broadcasting a commercial that featured a retired sheriff’s deputy and trumpeted her work in the Legislature bringing state dollars for law enforcement back to Albuquerque.Washington-based Republicans, determining that the heavily urban seat was out of reach, did little to help Mr. Moores. Conversely, national Democrats flooded Ms. Stansbury with assistance.Mark Moores speaking in Albuquerque in May. National Republicans did little to help his campaign financially. Sharon Chischilly for The New York TimesGuarding their thin House majority and fearing the political echo of a loss, or narrow victory, in a race centered on law and order, Washington Democrats dispatched Jill Biden, the first lady, and Doug Emhoff, the second gentleman, to appear with Ms. Stansbury in Albuquerque.House Democrats and their allies in the nation’s capital also showered their nominee in New Mexico with an infusion of money in the final weeks of the race, enabling her to overwhelm Mr. Moores on the television airwaves.Ms. Stansbury raised nearly $1.2 million in the last reporting period, from April 1 to May 12, while Mr. Moores brought in just $344,000 in the same period.Mr. Moores made little attempt to hide his frustration at the lack of national assistance, but congressional Republicans said it would have been a waste of resources to spend significant money in a district that has been held by a Democrat since 2009.In dismissing the race, though, Republicans ceded an opportunity to test just how politically potent the crime issue may prove in the midterm elections next year. With violence dominating the daily headlines in the district, Mr. Moores sought to capitalize on Ms. Stansbury’s support for a little-known bill that would, among other provisions, cut funding to local police departments.She declined to say she regretted supporting the bill, but she largely avoided discussing the subject on the stump, even as she aired the ad emphasizing her efforts to secure funding for law enforcement.After House Democrats were shut out entirely from the runoff in a Republican-tilting special House election in Texas, the New Mexico results were welcome for the party.Representative Sean Patrick Maloney of New York, the chairman of the caucus’s campaign arm, traveled to Albuquerque on Tuesday to join the celebration and to claim a share of credit for retaining Ms. Haaland’s seat.“New Mexico voters chose a leader with the grit and determination to deliver results and rejected the tired Republican tactics of lies and fear-mongering,” Mr. Maloney said after Ms. Stansbury’s victory. More

    • 200 Shares199 Views

      in Elections

      Why a New Mexico House Race Is a Crucial Test of the G.O.P. Focus on Crime

      by

      In a special election to replace Deb Haaland, Democrats are bolstering their nominee, taking no chances that a law-and-order argument against her will cost them what should be a safe House seat.ALBUQUERQUE — In theory, the special election to fill Interior Secretary Deb Haaland’s seat in the House should not be competitive. President Biden carried the Albuquerque-based district by 23 points last year, and there has not been a close race for Congress here since George W. Bush was president.Democrats in Washington and New Mexico, however, are not taking any chances ahead of the election Tuesday. They have flooded Melanie Stansbury, their nominee, with an infusion of late money, dispatched Jill Biden and Doug Emhoff to appear with her in the state, and sought to energize volunteers on her behalf.“This race is the highest priority for us,” House Speaker Nancy Pelosi told nearly a thousand national progressive activists on a conference call Thursday night, adding: “Any victory is good, but we want a nice, decisive victory.”Ms. Pelosi’s eagerness to notch a resounding win reflects the party’s anxiety over one of the most pressing challenges it faces: defusing Republican attacks over law and order.More immediately, it signals the urgency House Democrats feel to maintain their tissue-thin majority in the House. With only a four-seat advantage and a largely unified Republican opposition, Ms. Pelosi needs every vote.The contest between Ms. Stansbury and her opponent Mark Moores, both state legislators, carries symbolic as well as practical implications. Special congressional elections in the first year of a new administration have historically offered insight on the strength of the party in power. And this race may prove to be one of the few competitive elections to fill a vacancy ahead of next year’s midterms.Further, with a number of House Democrats already retiring or running for another office, a surprise loss or even a close victory in New Mexico could accelerate the race to the exits among lawmakers who have little appetite to face a difficult re-election only to serve in the minority.Most of the attention on Ms. Haaland’s seat, however, has focused on a central issue in the race: crime. Mr. Moores, a former University of New Mexico football player who now runs a medical diagnostic testing business, has effectively run a one-note campaign against Ms. Stansbury, an environmental consultant who did stints on Capitol Hill and in former President Barack Obama’s Office of Management and Budget.Mr. Moores has spotlighted the rising murder rate in Albuquerque and assailed Ms. Stansbury as soft on crime for supporting a little-known proposal in Congress that would cut funding for local police departments.“We’ve been talking about that a lot because there’s a lot of bad things in that bill that will make New Mexico more dangerous,” he said in an interview, noting there were already nearly 50 murders in Albuquerque so far this year, double the number in the same time frame last year.At a moment when crime is soaring nationally, any success Republicans have with a law-and-order argument here will embolden them to lash Democrats next year with the “defund the police” calls from some on the party’s left.Senior party officials acknowledge that Ms. Stansbury has handed Mr. Moores a political weapon, and complicated an otherwise sleepy race, by coming out for a measure that has little support in Congress and would almost certainly never come to a vote.In an interview, Ms. Stansbury offered no regrets for her support of the measure, the so-called BREATHE Act, an expansive criminal justice proposal pushed by racial justice activists.“Our country is facing a major reckoning and having a major conversation about racial and social injustice, and I think it’s really critical that we address these issues and we have the conversation,” she said.Ms. Stansbury said she had “helped to bring home tens of millions of dollars of public safety funding back to Albuquerque” through her work in the statehouse.She is trumpeting that achievement in a well-aired advertisement aimed at rebutting Mr. Moores’s charges.Mark Moores, the Republican nominee, has focused almost solely on the issue of crime in his campaign.Sharon Chischilly for The New York TimesYet in a series of speeches to supporters two Saturdays ago, Ms. Stansbury avoided mentioning crime or her work to deliver state dollars to local police. She mostly stuck to platitudes about the community, leaning heavily on the jargon of upscale progressives.The election is about “making sure that New Mexico voices are heard in Congress, that everybody has a seat at the table, that our families are taken care of and that people feel empowered,” Ms. Stansbury told a group of voters before a canvassing drive.Some of her supporters, however, were less reluctant to discuss the violence dominating headlines in this city.“That’s what people care about,” said Vera Watson, a Democratic activist who has been canvassing for Ms. Stansbury, noting that almost everybody on her block has had their house burglarized.Scott Carreathers, the city of Albuquerque’s African-American liaison, said “crime is huge, obviously,” but did not know whether that was part of Ms. Stansbury’s platform.Mr. Carreathers called Mr. Moores an “attractive candidate” and, alluding to the traditionally liberal nature of the district, added: “I just don’t want Democrats to take that for granted.”Representative Sean Patrick Maloney of New York, who runs the House Democratic campaign arm, said suggesting his party is seeking to defund the police is “a pernicious lie.” But Mr. Maloney also authored a review of last year’s elections that highlighted that line of attack as one of the main reasons Democrats nearly lost the House, so he knows well the potency of the charge.What’s working in the Democrats’ favor is that while they have raced to prop up Ms. Stansbury’s campaign with money and reinforcements, out-of-state Republicans have all but abandoned Mr. Moores. Concluding that the heavily urban seat is unwinnable, House Republicans have sent him just $7,000. Ms. Stansbury has been showered with more than $100,000 just from congressional Democrats, enabling her to dramatically outspend Mr. Moores in the final weeks of the race.And with no outside Republican groups broadcasting commercials in the district, Ms. Stansbury has dominated the Albuquerque airwaves.“Yeah the money hasn’t come in like I would’ve liked,” said Mr. Moores. He said Washington Republicans had told him he “had to make this a race” to receive their help.Like other Republicans running in liberal-leaning areas, he has also had to tread gingerly around former President Donald J. Trump’s false claims that last year’s presidential election was stolen.Asked if Mr. Trump was still the leader of the G.O.P., Mr. Moores sighed, paused for a few seconds and said: “I think there’s a lot of leaders of the party.” He acknowledged Mr. Biden had won the election fairly. “We as a nation have to move on,” he said.The partisan composition of early voting returns suggests Ms. Stansbury is well-positioned going into the election on Tuesday: As of May 27, more than twice as many registered Democrats had cast ballots as registered Republicans, according to The Albuquerque Journal.The ballots cast only represent 15 percent of registered voters, though, and it’s unclear if Republicans will show up in larger numbers on the day of the vote, immediately after a holiday weekend.State and national Democrats are confident Ms. Stansbury will prevail, and say her lack of name recognition — she was only elected to the state legislature in 2018 — and a somewhat apathetic electorate are the only things injecting a measure of uncertainty into the race.“People are just exhausted from the election in November,” said State Representative Antonio Maestas, an Albuquerque Democrat. “Political junkies don’t understand that not everybody is a political junkie, so we have to remind our friends and family there’s an election.”After the party’s challenges with some Hispanic voters last year, Democrats have been pleasantly surprised that Mr. Moores, whose mother is a Latina, has not emphasized his ethnicity to contrast himself with Ms. Stansbury, who is white, in a district that’s 43 percent Hispanic.Still, they are working assiduously to avoid an unpleasant surprise on Tuesday. A number of New Mexico-based Democratic operatives with ties to the national party reached out to their contacts in Washington to ensure them that they took the race seriously.And Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham, a Democrat who represented the district before becoming governor, has spoken to her former colleagues in the Congressional Hispanic Caucus about the contest, according to people familiar with the conversations. On Saturday, Ms. Lujan Grisham and Ms. Stansbury were joined in Albuquerque by Representative Pete Aguilar of California, a member of the Democratic leadership.Representative Cheri Bustos of Illinois, who ran the House Democratic campaign arm in 2020, said there was an aggressive push in the caucus to help Ms. Stansbury.“The initial reaction is, ‘That’s a safe Democratic seat, right, why is everybody asking for money?’” Ms. Bustos said. “But I think everybody wants to be sure.”Ms. Stansbury said she had spoken to Ms. Pelosi about the stakes.“Everyone in Democratic leadership, from the House to the White House to our own Democratic leadership, know how important this race is — everything is on the line in terms of the House majority,” she said. More