Pennsylvania

Subterms

    More stories

    • 75 Shares159 Views

      in Elections

      The Big Lie and the Midterms

      by

      Eric Krupke, Mooj Zadie, Nina Feldman and Paige Cowett and Marion Lozano and Listen and follow The DailyApple Podcasts | Spotify | StitcherIn Pennsylvania, a candidate falsely claiming election fraud in 2020 prevailed in a crowded Republican primary for governor. But in Georgia, two incumbents — the governor and the secretary of state — beat back challenges from “stop the steal” opponents.Is re-litigating the 2020 election a vote winner for Republicans? Or is it increasingly becoming a losing issue?On today’s episodeReid J. Epstein, a politics reporter for The New York Times who covers campaigns and elections.Gov. Brian Kemp of Georgia resoundingly won the Republican nomination against a candidate backed by former President Donald J. Trump.Nicole Craine for The New York TimesBackground readingTwo G.O.P. primaries in Georgia exposed the limit of Donald J. Trump’s hold on his party’s base.But Doug Mastriano’s win in Pennsylvania has provoked dissension and anxiety among Republican strategists, donors and lobbyists.There are a lot of ways to listen to The Daily. Here’s how.Transcripts of each episode are available by the next workday. You can find them at the top of the page.Reid J. Epstein contributed reporting.The Daily is made by Lisa Tobin, Rachel Quester, Lynsea Garrison, Clare Toeniskoetter, Paige Cowett, Michael Simon Johnson, Brad Fisher, Larissa Anderson, Chris Wood, Jessica Cheung, Stella Tan, Alexandra Leigh Young, Lisa Chow, Eric Krupke, Marc Georges, Luke Vander Ploeg, M.J. Davis Lin, Dan Powell, Dave Shaw, Sydney Harper, Robert Jimison, Mike Benoist, Liz O. Baylen, Asthaa Chaturvedi, Kaitlin Roberts, Rachelle Bonja, Diana Nguyen, Marion Lozano, Corey Schreppel, Anita Badejo, Rob Szypko, Elisheba Ittoop, Chelsea Daniel, Mooj Zadie, Patricia Willens, Rowan Niemisto, Jody Becker, Rikki Novetsky and John Ketchum.Our theme music is by Jim Brunberg and Ben Landsverk of Wonderly. Special thanks to Sam Dolnick, Paula Szuchman, Cliff Levy, Lauren Jackson, Julia Simon, Mahima Chablani, Sofia Milan, Desiree Ibekwe, Wendy Dorr, Elizabeth Davis-Moorer, Jeffrey Miranda, Renan Borelli and Maddy Masiello. More

    • 225 Shares99 Views

      in Elections

      ‘The G.O.P. Has Gone Even Farther to the Right Than I Expected’: Three Writers Talk About the Midterms

      by

      Frank Bruni, a contributing Opinion writer, hosted an online conversation with Lis Smith, a Democratic communications strategist, and Matthew Continetti of the American Enterprise Institute about a month of primaries, how they have shaped the midterms and what Democrats and Republicans can hope for and expect.FRANK BRUNI: On Tuesday, at least 19 children and two teachers were killed in the latest mass school shooting in a country that has witnessed too many of them. In my heartfelt (and heartsick) opinion, that should change the political landscape. But, realistically, will it?LIS SMITH: It should, but I unfortunately don’t think it will move the needle a ton.MATTHEW CONTINETTI: I agree. Unfortunately, history suggests that the political landscape won’t change after the horror in Texas.There’s a long and terrible list of school shootings. Each incident has been met with public horror and with calls for gun controls. But little has happened to either reduce the number of guns in America or to shift power to advocates for firearm regulation.SMITH: After Sandy Hook, we did see a number of states — Colorado, Connecticut, Maryland, New York — take strong action on gun control, and I still believe that we will most likely see gun-control legislation on the state versus the federal level.And this does raise the stakes of the midterms. It will allow Democrats in marginal, suburban seats to use the issue against their Republican opponents, given that nearly every Republican in the House voted against H.R. 8, which would implement background checks and common-sense restrictions of the sort that have had broad public support.BRUNI: After that cheery start, let’s pull back and zoom out to a bigger picture. Have the primaries so far conformed to your expectations — or are there particular results or general patterns that surprise you and that challenge, or throw into doubt, your assumptions about what will happen in November?CONTINETTI: I’d say they are shaping up as one might expect. The president’s party rarely does well in midterms. The Biden Democrats appear to be no exception. What has surprised me is the depth of public disillusionment with President Biden, his party and the direction of the country. My guess is Democrats are surprised as well.SMITH: We have seen common-sense Democrats like Shontel Brown in Ohio, Valerie Foushee in North Carolina and Morgan McGarvey in Kentucky win against far-left Democrats, and that’s a good thing for the party and our chances in November.The G.O.P. has gone even farther right than I expected. Just look at Doug Mastriano, who won the Republican governor’s primary in Pennsylvania. He funded buses to shuttle people to the Capitol on Jan. 6 and helped efforts to overturn the 2020 election in the state. He opposes abortion without exceptions. He makes Ron DeSantis look like Charlie Baker.BRUNI: Matt, do ultra-MAGA Republican candidates like him or for that matter Ted Budd in the North Carolina Senate race potentially undermine what might otherwise be a red-wave year? I’m thinking about a guest essay you wrote for The Times not long ago in which you raised the concern that Donald Trump and his minions would spoil things. Does that concern persist?CONTINETTI: Indeed, it does. Where Republicans got the idea that Trump is a political winner is a mystery to me. By the end of his presidency, Democrats were in full control of government. And he has been unpopular with the independents and suburban moderates necessary for any party to win a majority.I draw a distinction, though, between Mastriano and Budd. Mastriano is, as you say, ultra-MAGA. Even Trump was wary of him until the very end of the primary. Budd is a more typical fusion of conservative movement traits with Trump MAGA traits. If I had to guess, Budd is more likely to win than Mastriano.BRUNI: Lis, is Matt splitting hairs? I mean, in the House, Budd voted to overturn the 2020 election results. I worry that we’re cutting certain Republican conspiracists a break because they’re not as flagrant conspiracists as, say, Marjorie Taylor Greene or Madison Cawthorn.SMITH: It’s splitting hairs a bit. But he’s right — Mastriano proved so polarizing and so toxic that you had a former Trump adviser in Pennsylvania, David Urban, say that he was too extreme. He was too MAGA for the MAGA crowd. The G.O.P. has been more welcoming of Budd, but he also wanted to overturn 2020 and he also opposes abortion in every instance. North Carolina voters have a history of turning back candidates with extreme social views. That’s one of the reasons Roy Cooper won his first race for governor — the G.O.P. overreached on the bathrooms issue, the law that restricted restroom access for transgender people.BRUNI: What shall we call “too MAGA for MAGA”? Mega-MAGA? Meta-MAGA? Maxi-MAGA? Regardless, we keep asking, after every primary: What does this say about Trump’s level of sway? Is that question distracting us from bigger, more relevant ones?SMITH: Trump is a factor here, but Democrats really need to keep the focus on these candidates and their beliefs and make this an election between the Democratic candidate and the Republican candidate. As we saw in Virginia, Democrats can’t rely on painting their opponents as Trump 2.0 — they need to explicitly define and disqualify the opposition, and these mega-MAGA extremists give us plenty of material. The people who aren’t as out there as Mastriano give us plenty of material, too.BRUNI: Matt, I know you’re not here to help Democrats, but if you were advising them, what would you tell them to do to head off a possible or probable midterms drubbing?CONTINETTI: If I were a Democratic consultant, the first thing I would tell my clients would be to take shelter from the storm. There is no escaping Biden’s unpopularity. The best hope for Democratic incumbents is to somehow denationalize their campaigns. Even that probably won’t be enough to escape the gravitational pull of Biden’s declining job approval.BRUNI: Lis, the “plenty of material” you refer to must include abortion. Along those lines, do you see anything potentially happening in the months ahead that could change the trajectory of the midterms? For example, what if the Supreme Court in June in fact overturns Roe or further weakens gun regulations? What about hearings on the Jan. 6 storming of the Capitol?SMITH: Roe is an example of something that could change the trajectory of the election. I usually think of the presidential election as when the broad electorate turns out and midterms as when pissed-off voters come out to vote. The Supreme Court taking away something that has been a fundamental right for 50 years will definitely piss people off and bring some of the Biden voters who might have otherwise voted Republican this year back into our corner. But voters have more reasons to be angry than just Roe.BRUNI: What are you thinking of? I’d like to hear it and then what Matt has to say about it.SMITH: We need to be screaming from the rooftops about what the Republicans in Congress are doing. They voted against the American Rescue Plan (then took credit for the checks that went to American households), mostly voted against infrastructure (then took credit for projects in their districts), mostly voted against capping the price of insulin, voted against stopping oil companies from price gouging, mostly voted against a bill that would include importing baby formula.Why? Because they want to impose as much misery as possible on the American people so that voters blame Biden and vote Republican in November. It’s really cynical, dark stuff. And then when they win, they want to criminalize abortions and ensure that we never have free and fair elections again. That’s my rant.CONTINETTI: Voters will hear a lot of what Lis is saying before November, but the Democrats’ problem is that they are in power as inflation comes roaring back after a 40-year absence. I am open to the idea that the end of Roe v. Wade may induce pro-choice voters off the sidelines in some swing districts, but in the weeks since the leak of Justice Samuel Alito’s draft opinion, the evidence of a pro-abortion-rights surge among voters is scattered at best. As the great Mark Shields likes to say, “When the economy is bad, the economy is the only issue.” Right now the economy is the issue, and it’s hurting the Democratic Party.BRUNI: As we were all typing, Beto O’Rourke, a Democrat who’s running for governor in Texas, where this latest horrible massacre occurred, interrupted a news conference being held by the incumbent Republican governor, Greg Abbott, to shout at Abbott that he was doing nothing to stop such bloodshed. In its urgency and passion, is that smart politics that could make a difference, Lis?SMITH: That’s a great example of going on the offensive, generating the emotion and pissed-off-ness that Democrats need to turn out our voters in the midterms. We often lose the gun debate because it’s about policy particulars. If Democrats can channel the outrage that a lot of Americans feel — particularly parents — toward the politicians who are just sitting behind tables and choosing inaction and make this about political courage, we can potentially flip the script. Sometimes these sorts of confrontations can come across as a little stunt-y, but in this case, it was executed well and made Governor Abbott and his lackeys look cowardly.CONTINETTI: O’Rourke is running 10 points behind Abbott, and I don’t think his outburst will help him close that gap. Many Democrats believe that pissed-off-ness is the key to winning elections, but I don’t know what evidence there is for that case. The key to winning elections is to appeal to independent voters and moderates in the suburbs.SMITH: Trump’s whole pitch is to play on grievances! And midterm elections are traditionally where voters air their grievances: They’re mad about inflation, mad about gas prices — in 2018, they were mad about Republicans’ trying to repeal Obamacare. This is a strategy that appeals to independent and moderate voters in the suburbs — they are often with Democrats on abortion, with us on guns.CONTINETTI: As you know, Trump did not win the popular vote in either 2016 or 2020. Pissed-off-ness gets you only so far. I agree that it helps when you are the out party in a national election and can blame the incumbent for poor economic and social conditions. Whether getting angry will work in Texas this year and for this candidate is another matter.BRUNI: Matt, why aren’t the Republicans who are losing to other Republicans in these primaries, as Lis put it earlier, “screaming from the rooftops” about election irregularities and rigged results the way they do when they lose to Democrats? Either a state holds trustworthy elections or it doesn’t, no?CONTINETTI: We’ve been reminded in recent weeks of what you might call Trumpian Exceptionalism. Whenever Trump loses, he says the result is fraudulent. He’s been urging his choice in the Pennsylvania Senate primary, Mehmet Oz, to declare victory in a race too close to call. Yet Oz has refrained, as have other Trump picks like the former senator David Perdue, who lost in a landslide in Georgia to the incumbent governor, Brian Kemp. Is there a Republican future in which candidates regularly ignore Trump? Some of us hope so. Though we’ve learned not to hope too much.BRUNI: Let’s end with a lighting round of short questions. At this point, just over five months out, what percentage chance would you say the Democrats have of holding the House? The Senate?CONTINETTI: Math, much less statistics, has never been my strong suit. Let’s just say that the Democrats have a very slim chance of holding the House and a slightly less-than-even chance of holding the Senate.SMITH: Emphasis on “at this point”: 51 percent chance Democrats hold the Senate, 15 percent House.BRUNI: In 2028 or 2032, will we be talking about Sarah Huckabee Sanders, possible Republican presidential nominee?!?!SMITH: Wow, I’ve never thought of that, but I can see it. At some point the Republicans will nominate a woman for president — let’s hope that you didn’t just conjure this one.CONTINETTI: I can see that, too — maybe that’s when Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez will make her presidential debut as well.BRUNI: Thoughts on Herschel Walker (potentially) in the Senate, in five words or less.SMITH: Death of an institution.CONTINETTI: Fun to watch.BRUNI: Lastly, in one sentence without too many conjunctions and clauses, give me a reason not to feel too despondent-verging-on-hopeless about our political present and immediate future?SMITH: We’ve gotten through worse.CONTINETTI: When you study history, you are reminded that America has been through a lot like this before — and worse — and has not only endured but prospered. We’ll get through this moment. It will just take time.Sorry, that’s three sentences — but important ones!Frank Bruni (@FrankBruni) is a professor of public policy at Duke, the author of the book “The Beauty of Dusk,” and a contributing Opinion writer. He writes a weekly email newsletter and can be found on Twitter, Instagram and Facebook. Matthew Continetti (@continetti) is a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute and the author of “The Right: The Hundred Year War for American Conservatism.” Lis Smith (@Lis_Smith), a Democratic communications strategist, was a senior adviser to Pete Buttigieg’s presidential campaign and is the author of the forthcoming memoir “Any Given Tuesday: A Political Love Story.”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 Shares129 Views

      in Elections

      Pennsylvania’s G.O.P. Senate primary is officially headed to a recount.

      by

      The Republican primary for a Senate seat in Pennsylvania will go to a recount, with Dr. Mehmet Oz, the celebrity physician backed by former President Donald J. Trump, clinging to a narrow advantage over David McCormick, a former hedge fund executive, in one of the nation’s most intensely watched midterm contests.Dr. Oz was leading Mr. McCormick by 902 votes as of Wednesday, according to Leigh M. Chapman, the state’s acting secretary of the commonwealth, who said that all 67 of Pennsylvania’s counties had reported unofficial tallies to the state.The recount could lead to a series of lawsuits and challenges in the marquee primary, one that could ultimately determine control of the closely divided Senate. That legal wrangling has already begun: On Monday, Mr. McCormick filed a lawsuit demanding that undated mail-in ballots should be counted.A victory for Mr. McCormick — a West Point graduate and the former chief executive of Bridgewater Associates, the world’s largest hedge fund — would be a significant rebuke to Mr. Trump, who supported Dr. Oz and campaigned for him in Pennsylvania. The seat will be open after Senator Patrick J. Toomey, a Republican, steps down this year.Pennsylvania presents perhaps the best chance for Democrats to add a seat to their fragile 50-50 control of the Senate, in which Vice President Kamala Harris holds the tiebreaking vote. The seat is the only one open in a state that President Biden won in 2020. For Republicans, holding the seat would ease their path to the majority in a year when the political winds are at their back.Dr. Mehmet Oz, the celebrity physician, leads the Senate race against David McCormick, a former hedge fund executive, by 902 votes. Pennsylvania law calls for an automatic recount if the margin in a statewide race is 0.5 percent or less of the total vote.Alexandra Wimley/Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, via Associated PressAt a news conference in Harrisburg, Pa., the state capital, Ms. Chapman said that the recount would be conducted transparently and would allow for observers from the campaigns.Counties can begin the recount on Friday and must start no later than June 1, she said. They must complete the process by June 7 and report their results to the state by June 8. Pennsylvania law calls for an automatic recount if the margin in a statewide race is 0.5 percent or less of the total vote.State elections officials acknowledged that the recount could be a slog, one that they said could cost taxpayers in Pennsylvania more than $1 million.“I know Pennsylvanians and indeed people throughout the country have been following this race attentively and are eagerly awaiting the results,” said Ms. Chapman, who was appointed to her post last December by Gov. Tom Wolf, a Democrat.The lawsuit from Mr. McCormick asks the Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania to allow county election officials to accept mail-in ballots from voters who turned them in by the May 17 deadline but did not write the date on the outer return envelopes.That step is required by a state law, which Republicans have fought to preserve.“Because all ballots are time-stamped by the County Boards of Elections on receipt, a voter’s handwritten date is meaningless,” said Chuck Cooper, Mr. McCormick’s chief legal counsel, in a statement on Monday.But G.O.P. leaders objected to the counting of these ballots. The Pennsylvania Republican Party and Republican National Committee were expected to intervene in the case.Ms. Chapman, who was named as a defendant in Mr. McCormick’s lawsuit, along with dozens of county election boards, said that the office’s guidance to counties was to segregate the ballots at issue and tabulate them separately, pending the outcome of litigation.“It’s our position that undated ballots and incorrectly, wrongly dated ballots should count,” Ms. Chapman said, calling the handwritten dates immaterial.Jonathan M. Marks, the deputy secretary of the commonwealth who oversees elections and commissions, said at the news conference that about 10,000 mail-in, absentee and provisional ballots statewide were still being adjudicated. A breakdown of whether those ballots were cast by Republicans or Democrats was not available because they were still being tabulated by the counties.Mr. McCormick said on Twitter on Tuesday night that he looked forward to a swift resolution so that Republicans could unite against Lt. Gov. John Fetterman, the Democratic primary winner.“We are proud our campaign received nearly 418,000 votes, won 37 of 67 counties, and contributed to a historic turnout with a razor-thin difference between myself and Mehmet Oz,” Mr. McCormick said.Dr. Oz’s campaign did not immediately respond to a request for comment on Wednesday.“I thank everyone for their patience as we count every vote,” said Ms. Chapman, a lawyer who previously led a nonprofit that promoted mail-in voting, a flashpoint in recent elections in the state.The Republican primary, which included five major candidates, was dominated by the nearly $40 million in television ads spent by the two front-runners and their allies, much of it on attacks bludgeoning opponents.Both Dr. Oz and Mr. McCormick tried to transform themselves from members of the East Coast elite with middle-of-the-road politics into staunch Trump supporters.Their bitter feud opened a lane, late in the race, for Kathy Barnette, a hard-right conservative who stood out in debates, primarily for her attacks on Dr. Oz over his late-to-the-party opposition to abortion. Ms. Barnette appeared to siphon votes away from Dr. Oz, who did not have a monopoly on Trump supporters.Trip Gabriel More

    • 100 Shares169 Views

      in Elections

      When Will We Get Election Results in Georgia?

      by

      While there are multiple close races across the country on Tuesday, it is not expected that any will result in the kind of protracted tabulation seen in Pennsylvania, where votes in the Republican Senate primary are still being counted. But the night could still run late in some states.In Georgia, primaries for governor and Senate appear unlikely to be close. Harder to forecast is the Republican primary for secretary of state, where Representative Jody Hice is challenging the incumbent, Brad Raffensperger.Similarly close races are possible in Alabama, where Representative Mo Brooks is facing challengers in the Republican Senate primary, and in Texas, where multiple runoff elections will be decided.But none of those states have a law like the one in Pennsylvania that prevents local election officials from processing absentee ballots before Election Day. In addition, voting by mail is not as popular in states voting on Tuesday as it proved to be in the Pennsylvania primary.Early in-person voting has surged in Georgia — accounting for more than 850,000 votes over three weeks. That should help election officials tabulate full results relatively early on election night.But keep in mind that extremely close races can lead to prolonged counting that may extend into the morning, delaying a final call. More

    • 138 Shares99 Views

      in US Politics

      US progressives show strength in primaries and predict more wins ahead

      by

      US progressives show strength in primaries and predict more wins aheadStronger-than-expected showing in elections has energized the movement and set the stage, they hope, for more successes In the battle for control of the Democratic party, progressives are increasingly confident they are winning. That’s how they explain the record sums of Super Pac money targeting their candidates in nominating contests for safely Democratic seats.“There’s a set of people who are uncomfortable with a new brand of politics,” said Maurice Mitchell, national director of the progressive Working Families party. “They’re trying to set the clock back. But the genie’s outta the bottle.”So far this election cycle, progressives have a mixed record. But a stronger-than-expected showing in last week’s primaries has energized the movement and set the stage, they hope, for even more success this summer.In Pennsylvania, state representative Summer Lee overcame a deluge of outside spending to win her congressional primary. Lee was declared the winner after three days of counting. She tweeted: “$4.5 mill” with a fire and trash can emoji.Oregon progressives cheered the victory of Andrea Salinas, who also went up against a crush of big money in one of the most expensive House Democratic primaries in the country. Meanwhile, the seven-term Oregon congressman Kurt Schrader, whose conservative politics drew the left’s ire, appears to be on the verge of losing his seat to progressive challenger Jamie McLeod-Skinner, though results have been delayed by a ballot-printing problem.US primary elections: voters to test Trump’s power over Republican party – liveRead moreAnd in what will be one of the cycle’s most competitive Senate races, John Fetterman, Pennsylvania’s iconoclastic, liberal lieutenant governor, beat Congressman Conor Lamb, a rising star of the center-left.The next test of progressive political power comes on Tuesday, in a Texas runoff election between Congressman Henry Cueller, a conservative Democrat backed by party leadership, and Jessica Cisneros, a progressive immigration lawyer endorsed by Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Bernie Sanders. And after that, there are competitive intra-party primaries in Illinois, New York and Michigan.“We’re not doing any victory laps,” Mitchell said. “If anything, those losses and the wins have redoubled our commitment and focus.”Moderates see the cycle very differently.They point to a trio of House races last week in North Carolina and Kentucky where the more moderate candidate won handily. Those victories came just two weeks after the Democratic congresswoman Shontel Brown won a fiercely contested rematch in Ohio against Nina Turner, a progressive activist who worked on Sanders’ presidential campaigns.“People who are far outside the mainstream of the Democratic conference make it harder for moderates to run in swing districts because their ideas and their rhetoric are used against people like Abigail Spanberger,” said Matt Bennett, a co-founder of the center-left thinktank Third Way, referring to the Virginia congresswoman who singled out progressives for costing the party seats in 2020.Bennett said it was important to distinguish between progressives. He argued that candidates who are “liberal but not radical”, such as McLeod-Skinner in Oregon, pose little risk to swing-state Democrats.Instead, “we are worried about the Squad”, Bennett said, the group of progressive congresswomen that includes Ocasio-Cortez, “because the people in that wing of the party do not regard it as part of their duty as Democrats to help ensure that we have majorities”.It’s a charge that angers progressives. Following Sanders’ lead in 2020, they united behind Biden to oust Donald Trump in 2020 and then spent the past year and a half working with congressional leaders and the White House to pass the president’s economic agenda. And yet progressives are the ones being pummeled by outside spending.A number of contentious Democratic contests have been shaped by Super Pacs, like the one formed by the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, known as Aipac, another supported by the LinkedIn co-founder Reid Hoffman, and another backed by a crypto-billionaire.Much – though not all – of the outside money has been spent in support of moderate candidates, including in Texas, where Cuellar, the nine-term congressman, is in the fight of his political life.“This is a David-and-Goliath sort of battle,” Mitchell said.The rash of spending has only exacerbated tensions between the party’s ideological factions. In a sign of progressives’ building resentment, Jeff Weaver, Sanders’ former campaign manager, warned that progressives could launch third-party candidates in swing districts to scuttle centrist Democrats’ chances.The suggestion infuriated Bennett, who called it the “most irresponsible thing I’ve seen a Democrat say … maybe ever, particularly in the face of a Republican party that has lost its ever-loving mind.”Though still early in the primary season, progressives appear poised to expand their numbers in Congress. Still, not every closely fought intra-party battle has fallen neatly along ideological lines.Oregon’s Schrader, a former leader of the conservative Blue Dog coalition, angered Democrats in the state after his vote against a provision that would allow Medicare to negotiate the price of prescription drugs. Local Democratic leaders voted to endorse his challenger, McLeod-Skinner, sharply breaking with tradition.In Texas, however, the battle lines are clearly drawn.Pundits there think the south Texas runoff between Cuellar and Cisneros will prove to be a bellwether of the Democratic mood in a political landscape that increasingly favors Republicans. Democrats have razor-thin majorities in Congress, and the party in power historically loses in the president’s first midterm election.Democrats are also struggling to outrun Biden’s low approval ratings, weighed down by inflation and widespread frustration with Washington.Since Cisneros forced Cuellar into a runoff earlier this year, the race has been reshaped by a draft supreme court opinion indicating the justices are prepared to overturn a constitutional right to an abortion.Cuellar is one of the only Democrats left in Congress who is against abortion. Cisneros, by contrast, has cast herself as a defender of reproductive rights in a state that has effectively banned abortion.They have also clashed on immigration. Whereas Cuellar staunchly criticizes the Biden administration’s immigration policies, appearing frequently on Fox News to air his grievances with the president’s handling of the border, Cisneros has advocated for a more progressive stance in that sector.No matter what happens on Tuesday in Texas, progressives believe they have made progress elevating candidates they say will excite the party’s base in November.In Kentucky, long a Republican stronghold, Democrats nominated Charles Booker, an unabashedly progressive ex-state lawmaker who would be the state’s first black senator. It’s a shift from two years ago, when he surprised the party establishment by nearly defeating its chosen candidate in the Senate primary that cycle.Booker now faces an uphill battle to unseat the entrenched Republican senator Rand Paul. But he says his progressive Kentucky New Deal agenda is popular with voters of both parties. It’s the partisan labels and political culture wars that get in the way.“The truth of the matter is, the people of Kentucky want real progress,” Booker said. “It’s just that no one listens to us.“The policies that I lift up, the issues that I fight for, they’re not radical and they don’t come from some national consultant. This comes from my lived experience of living the struggle that most Kentuckians know well.”TopicsDemocratsUS politicsTexasPennsylvaniaOregonnewsReuse this content More

    • 113 Shares179 Views

      in Elections

      McCormick Sues to Count Undated Mail-In Ballots, Trailing Oz

      by

      In a lawsuit filed on Monday in Pennsylvania, the Republican Senate candidate David McCormick demanded that undated mail-in ballots should be counted in his primary race against the celebrity physician Dr. Mehmet Oz, whom he trailed by less than 1,000 votes.Mr. McCormick, a former hedge fund chief, asked the Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania to allow election officials in the state’s 67 counties to accept mail-in ballots from voters who turned them in by the May 17 deadline but did not write the date on the outer return envelopes.That step is required by a state law, one that Republicans have fought to preserve.The legal action could be a prelude to a cascade of lawsuits and challenges in one of the nation’s most intensely watched primaries, one that could ultimately determine control of the divided Senate. The seat will be open after Senator Patrick J. Toomey, a Republican, steps down this year.The filing preceded a May 26 deadline for Pennsylvania’s secretary of state to determine whether a recount is triggered in the race, an automatic step when the top two candidates are within half a percentage point. About two-tenths of a percentage point separated Mr. McCormick on Monday from Dr. Oz, whom former President Donald J. Trump has been nudging to declare victory. The McCormick campaign was said to have invested heavily in its absentee-voting efforts.“These ballots were indisputably submitted on time — they were date-stamped upon receipt — and no fraud or irregularity has been alleged,” Ronald L. Hicks Jr., a lawyer for Mr. McCormick, wrote in the 35-page lawsuit.Mr. Hicks, a trial and appellate lawyer in Pittsburgh, was part of a phalanx of lawyers enlisted by Mr. Trump who unsuccessfully sought to challenge mail-in ballots after the 2020 presidential election. He later moved to withdraw from that case.In the McCormick campaign’s lawsuit, Mr. Hicks took the opposite view of mail-in ballots, saying that election boards in Allegheny County in Western Pennsylvania and Blair County in the central part of the state have balked at counting the undated ballots. Those counties, he said, were delaying taking action until after Tuesday when they are required to report unofficial results to the state.“The boards’ refusal to count the ballots at issue violates the protections of the right to vote under the federal Civil Rights Act and the Pennsylvania Constitution,” Mr. Hicks wrote.In the lawsuit, the McCormick campaign cited a recent ruling by a federal court panel that barred elections officials in Lehigh County, Pa., from rejecting absentee and mail-in ballots cast in the November 2021 municipal election because they were not dated.“Every Republican primary vote should be counted, including the votes of Pennsylvania’s active-duty military members who risk their lives to defend our constitutional right to vote,” Jess Szymanski, a spokeswoman for Mr. McCormick’s campaign, said in an email on Monday night.Understand the Battle Over U.S. Voting RightsCard 1 of 6Why are voting rights an issue now? More

    • 113 Shares189 Views

      in Elections

      After Fetterman’s Stroke, Doctors Look at Senate Campaign Prospects

      by

      What really is the prognosis for John Fetterman, the Democratic Senate nominee from Pennsylvania who had a stroke on May 13?The 52-year-old lieutenant governor of Pennsylvania clinched his party’s nomination just a few days later, setting up one of the most consequential Senate contests of the midterm elections. But urgent medical questions remain.He was discharged from the hospital, his campaign said on Sunday, and Mr. Fetterman has said doctors assured him that he would make a complete recovery — but the campaign has not said when he will be able to return to campaigning.“I am going to take the time I need now to rest and get to 100 percent so I can go full speed soon and flip this seat blue,” Mr. Fetterman said in a statement on Sunday, adding that he felt “great” but intended to “continue to rest and recover.”With such an important race in the balance, one that could decide the Senate majority, the state of Mr. Fetterman’s health is of intense public interest. Yet, despite repeated requests, his campaign did not make him or his doctors available to discuss his stroke and his medical treatment.And specialists in stroke, heart disease and electrophysiology said that some of the campaign’s public statements do not offer a sufficient explanation for Mr. Fetterman’s described diagnosis or the treatment they say he has received.The stroke, he said in a statement released by his campaign, was caused by a blood clot. He said the clot was the result of atrial fibrillation, a condition in which the upper chambers of the heart beat chaotically and are out of sync with the lower chambers of the heart. The campaign said the clot was successfully removed by doctors at a nearby community hospital, Lancaster General Hospital.On May 17, the day of the primary election, Mr. Fetterman had a pacemaker and a defibrillator implanted in his heart which, his press office said in a statement, “will help protect his heart and address the underlying cause of his stroke, atrial fibrillation (A-fib), by regulating his heart rate and rhythm.” His press office said he is expected to fully recover from his stroke.Medical specialists asked questions about Mr. Fetterman’s treatment with a defibrillator. They say it would make sense only if he has a different condition that puts him at risk of sudden death, like cardiomyopathy — a weakened heart muscle. Such a heart condition may have caused the blood clot. Or, the doctors say the campaign could be correct about afib causing the clot.Thrombectomy, the method likely used to remove the clot, also indicates that Mr. Fetterman experienced more than a tiny stroke, although prompt treatment may have averted damage and saved his brain.“I was just in the hospital for over a week,” Mr. Fetterman said in a statement. “I am aware that this is serious, and I am taking my recovery seriously.”In a brief interview on May 20, Gisele Barreto Fetterman, Mr. Fetterman’s wife, told the story of his stroke, from her perspective.“We had been on the road campaigning,” she said. “We had had breakfast, and he was feeling fine.”The couple got into a car to go to an event at Millersville University when, she said, “the left side of his mouth drooped for just a second.”“I had a gut instinct that something was happening,” Ms. Fetterman said. “I yelled to the trooper, ‘I think he’s having a stroke.’ He said, ‘I’m fine. What are you talking about? I feel fine.’”Gisele Barreto Fetterman, Mr. Fetterman’s wife, spoke at a watch party in Pittsburgh on May 17.Maddie McGarvey for The New York TimesThe state trooper soon drove Mr. Fetterman to Lancaster General Hospital where his treatment began. Ms. Fetterman said it involved going through his groin, which suggests he had a thrombectomy, a procedure in which doctors slide a small plastic tube through the groin, advance it into the brain and then pull the blood clot out using suction or a wire mesh.It was not until two days later that his campaign reported that Mr. Fetterman had been hospitalized with a stroke. Asked about the delay, Ms. Fetterman said, “Less than 48 hours is pretty impressive timing when dealing with sensitive medical issues.”Shortly after that question, Rebecca Katz, a senior adviser in Mr. Fetterman’s campaign, abruptly ended the call with Ms. Fetterman.Medical specialists said that some aspects of the story were difficult to reconcile with their knowledge of stroke treatment.Dr. Lee Schwamm, a stroke specialist at Massachusetts General Hospital and professor of neurology at Harvard Medical School, said doctors do a thrombectomy only when a large artery in the brain is blocked.“You typically wouldn’t do it for someone with just a little bit of facial droop,” he said. Dr. Schwamm wondered if the doctors who examined Mr. Fetterman in the hospital had noticed other symptoms, like a loss of vision on his left side or lack of awareness of his left side, often called “neglect.”“These strokes tend to be very severe,” Dr. Schwamm said. “He is fortunate that he went to a hospital that could treat it.”Pressed about the stroke symptoms as described by Ms. Fetterman, a spokesman for Mr. Fetterman wrote in an email that he “told The Associated Press last week that Gisele ‘noticed that John was not himself, and shortly after he started slurring his speech.’”But what caused the stroke?Ms. Fetterman said her husband knew he had atrial fibrillation, which confers a high risk of stroke, and that he had taken anticoagulants, a standard method of reducing the stroke risk in people with atrial fibrillation, “on and off.”But the treatment with a pacemaker and defibrillator is a puzzle if all he had was atrial fibrillation, medical specialists said.“This doesn’t entirely make sense,” said Dr. Brahmajee Nallamothu, an interventional cardiologist at the University of Michigan.Dr. Elaine Wan, an associate professor of medicine in cardiology and cardiac electrophysiology at Columbia University Medical Center, said defibrillators — which always come with pacemakers — are used to prevent sudden death. They usually are implanted in people with weakened heart muscle, or those who survived an episode in which the heart stopped, or in people with a genetic predisposition for sudden cardiac death.“We would not use it for atrial fibrillation,” Dr. Wan said.Dr. Rajat Deo, an associate professor of medicine and a cardiac electrophysiologist at the University of Pennsylvania’s Perelman School of Medicine, agreed about the use of defibrillators and said he shared Dr. Wan’s suspicion that Mr. Fetterman has a damaged heart.“I think it would be fair to say he has at least two separate issues,” Dr. Deo said of Mr. Fetterman. “One is afib, from which he most likely suffered a stroke that was successfully treated.”He added, “The second issue is that he likely has some underlying cardiac condition that increases his risk for ventricular arrhythmias and thus sudden cardiac death.”The afib could be related to the other condition, Dr. Deo said. Patients with a weakened heart muscle are also at risk of developing atrial fibrillation.On the other hand, Dr. Deo says, Mr. Fetterman’s atrial fibrillation may have nothing to do with his weakened heart. Without more information from his doctors it is impossible to know.Dr. Deo added that if Mr. Fetterman is receiving appropriate state-of-the-art medical therapies and is protected with a defibrillator from sudden cardiac death, “he should do quite well while he continues his campaign.”Experts also raised concerns about the prospects for former Vice President Dick Cheney, who had a defibrillator implanted in 2001. He finished two terms in the White House, including a hard-fought re-election in 2004.And there is time before general election campaigning in Pennsylvania begins in earnest: It is unclear who Mr. Fetterman’s opponent will be, as the Republican race remains too close to call and may head to a recount.But Dr. Wan was less sanguine than Dr. Deo about Mr. Fetterman.“He is at risk for sudden cardiac death,” she said. “For someone on the campaign trail that might raise concerns.” More