Politics and Government

Subterms

    Latest story

    150 Shares28 Views

    DeSantis Clears a Debate Hurdle. Will It Be Enough to Build On?

    by

    The Florida governor projected confidence onstage, but time is running out to stop his slide in the polls and convince voters he’s the best Trump alternative.At a time when his standing in the polls has slid — and Republican donors have talked about finding another candidate to stop Donald J. Trump from cruising to the nomination — Gov. Ron DeSantis acted like the former president’s leading challenger at the second Republican presidential debate.Standing center stage at the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library on Wednesday night, he deployed a newly assertive tone against the absent Mr. Trump, using criticisms he has been honing in recent weeks at the urging of his allies. He drew attacks from rivals who did show up, but none seemed to land a killer blow. And despite not saying a word until 15 minutes in, he ultimately imposed himself on the proceedings, speaking more than any other candidate.“Donald Trump is missing in action,” Mr. DeSantis said during his first remarks of the debate. “He should be on this stage tonight. He owes it to you to defend his record where they added $7.8 trillion to the debt.”The question is whether the performance will be enough now to stop him from losing ground and to build momentum. Time is running out to convince both skeptical voters and skittish donors that he is still the most competitive challenger to Mr. Trump than anyone else in the field. Mr. Trump’s standing in the race has only risen since the first debate in August, which he also skipped, and national surveys show him leading Mr. DeSantis by roughly 40 percentage points But as his rivals onstage Wednesday night clamored for airtime, conscious of their fading window, the Florida governor projected an air of confidence.“This is a two-man race,” Andrew Romeo, Mr. DeSantis’s communications director, told reporters in the spin room following the debate.Still, it was not exactly a breakout showing, and the debate may be best remembered for the seven candidates chaotically shouting over each other as the moderators tried to regain control. Even Mr. DeSantis conceded in an interview with Fox News after the debate that, had he been watching as a viewer, he would have “changed the channel.”Steven Cheung, a spokesman for Mr. Trump, said that Mr. DeSantis had “embarrassed” himself in front of the entire country, a seeming confirmation that the former president’s team still sees him as enough of a threat. (Mr. Trump’s team also sent out an email blast assailing Nikki Haley, the former South Carolina governor and former ambassador to the United Nations.)Over the summer, Mr. DeSantis’s campaign strategy crystallized into one clear imperative: beat Mr. Trump in Iowa, the first state to vote in the Republican primary. Such a victory would pierce the sheen of the former president’s invincibility and potentially force some of the other candidates to drop out, his supporters say, allowing Mr. DeSantis to consolidate support.Having poured his resources into Iowa, and seen Mr. Trump attack the state’s popular governor and anger its influential anti-abortion activists, a win there seems more plausible for Mr. DeSantis than it did ahead of the first debate in Milwaukee. At that encounter, the other candidates avoided criticizing Mr. DeSantis, even as they could have taken advantage of his reputation as prickly and awkward when attacked.By the second debate on Wednesday night, however, their calculations had changed, and Mr. DeSantis was squarely in the cross hairs.Former Vice President Mike Pence went after him over increased government spending in Florida, as well as the Parkland school shooter’s not receiving the death penalty (a decision by a jury that was not in Mr. DeSantis’s control and to which he responded by signing a bill making it easier to execute people). Senator Tim Scott of South Carolina sparred with the governor over how slavery is taught in Florida schools, a frequent topic of dispute between the two men.Ms. Haley attacked him for opposing offshore drilling and fracking in Florida as governor while pushing for more oil and gas extraction in the United States as a presidential candidate. Of all the barbs, that one seemed to cut the sharpest. As Ms. Haley talked, Mr. DeSantis theatrically and somewhat uncomfortably laughed, saying that she was “entirely wrong,” although the thrust of her criticism was largely accurate.The attacks helped make Mr. DeSantis the center of attention in a way he was not in Milwaukee. And rather than starting fights of his own, and allowing other candidates to take back the spotlight, Mr. DeSantis generally stuck to his talking points on immigration, China and the economy while criticizing President Biden and Democrats.He even led the other candidates in a mini-revolt against the moderators, refusing to engage in a gimmicky attempt to have those onstage write down the name of the rival they thought should drop out of the race.Still, the bulk of Mr. DeSantis’s attention clearly remains on Mr. Trump.After the debate, he told the Fox News host Sean Hannity that he wanted to face Mr. Trump one-on-one.“I think he owes it to our voters to come and make the case,” Mr. DeSantis said. More

    More stories

    • 113 Shares14 Views

      in Elections

      The Messy G.O.P. Debate Didn’t Turn Off These Voters

      by

      Ron DeSantis won praise for his education policies and Nikki Haley got points for passion at a debate watch party in New Hampshire.The voters gathered at a brewery in Goffstown, N.H., to watch the second Republican presidential debate on Wednesday night were excited about many of the options on the stage at the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library. They were also looking forward to having fewer of them.“I’m hoping they’re going to narrow down the candidates,” said Jennifer Vallee, 45, a stay-at-home mom who lives in Goffstown. “I want to hear more from the candidates that actually have a fighting chance to make it towards the end.”Ms. Vallee, a supporter of former President Donald J. Trump, was among 28 local Republicans and Republican-leaning independents who gathered at Mountain Base Brewery in this suburb of Manchester for an informal watch party and potluck organized by Lisa Mazur, a local state representative. Over barbecue and smoked Gouda dip, they considered the contenders, seeing more to like than dislike among the seven candidates vying for their votes.“Who do we think did better than expected?” Jared Talbot, 46, a defense contractor employee and local school board member, asked as the debate wound down.“DeSantis!” several people called out.Although many in the group favored Gov. Ron DeSantis of Florida, they had been underwhelmed by his performance in the first Republican debate, on Aug. 23, and were hoping for a stronger showing on Wednesday. Many in the room were self-identified “parents rights” advocates, and cheered Mr. DeSantis’s criticism of college gender studies programs and his boast that “I ended up getting through Yale and Harvard Law School and somehow came out more conservative than when I went in.”Several of Mr. Trump’s rivals for the nomination are banking on New Hampshire’s early primary, with its storied history of scrambling, or at least spicing up, presidential races, as their best hope for breaking the former president’s stride toward the nomination.The debate watchers in Goffstown had seen many of the candidates in person during their dozens of appearances in the state in recent months. Although the crowd tilted toward Mr. DeSantis and the entrepreneur Vivek Ramaswamy, most candidates on the stage had their partisans — even Gov. Doug Burgum of North Dakota, who narrowly qualified for the stage hours before the debate. (“I’m always the person who likes the outlier,” John Lombo, 45, a hazardous materials auditor for UPS and the lone Burgum supporter in the room, explained.)Many of them were using the debate as an opportunity to shop for vice-presidential favorites. “She’s passionate!” Mr. Talbot, who has endorsed Mr. DeSantis, said admiringly as Nikki Haley, the former South Carolina governor and ambassador to the United Nations, clashed with Tim Scott, the South Carolina senator, late in the evening.Ms. Mazur, who also supports Mr. DeSantis, was less impressed by the exchange. “I liked her in the first debate,” she said. “This time, it was a little much.”Still, most of the crowd seemed impressed by the former governor’s feisty back-and-forth with Mr. Scott, whom she appointed to the U.S. Senate, which seemed to establish her mettle even as it made them question his.“I’m looking to see who can hold their ground, because that is someone who can hold their ground in the long term,” Heather Pfeifer, 48, a home-schooling mother who lives in Goffstown, said. “I love Tim Scott, I’m just not sure he’s a strong enough candidate to get to the place he needs to be.”She added, “I really think Haley might be my favorite.”Nikki Haley is among the candidates who have made dozens of appearances in New Hampshire in recent months.John Tully for The New York TimesMr. Ramaswamy, a first-time candidate, won a number of fans with his Aug. 23 debate performance. “I went into that debate really watching Ron DeSantis,” said Henry Giasson, a 44-year-old leather store owner and Army veteran, “and I came out watching Vivek Ramaswamy.”Some attendees remarked appreciatively on Mr. Ramaswamy’s toned-down demeanor Wednesday night after his attention-grabbing turn in August. “He’s a brilliant speaker,” Mr. Giasson said.When former Vice President Mike Pence took a jab at Mr. Ramaswamy’s patchy voting record — he has said he did not vote in the 2008, 2012 or 2016 elections — on Wednesday night, Mr. Giasson leaped to his defense: “Where’d that come from?” he said, adding sarcastically, “That was classy.”In the Granite State, Republican candidates face an electorate uncommonly marbled with libertarians, moderates and independents — unaffiliated voters are allowed to vote in primaries. The state’s voters delight in unmaking inevitabilities and legitimizing long shots — among them Mr. Trump, whose landslide victory in New Hampshire in 2016 jolted the Republican Party into taking his candidacy seriously.Mr. Trump remains the Republican primary favorite in New Hampshire by a large margin in the early polling in this election, too. But a recent CNN poll found him performing well below his national average in the state, with fewer than half of Republican voters naming him as their first or second choice. The same survey found Mr. DeSantis, Mr. Trump’s closest rival in early polling, in free-fall in New Hampshire, suggesting an open contest for second place at the very least.Perhaps none of the candidates has invested as heavily in the state as Chris Christie, the former New Jersey governor and the only overtly anti-Trump candidate in the field, who launched his campaign in Goffstown and has made more than two-thirds of his campaign appearances in the state. But Mr. Christie’s moments in the debate were mostly met with silence from the Goffstown crowd.“He’s the only one I’d take off the stage,” said Karen Monasky, 73, a retired occupational therapist and a Republican-voting independent who met Christie during one of his many swings through the area.Still, reviewing the performances as the debate came to a close, several of the attendees conceded that Mr. Christie had a decent night.“The goal is to beat Biden,” Mr. Lombo said. “Even Chris Christie, who I can’t stand, is better than Joe Biden.” More

    • 100 Shares30 Views

      in Elections

      J.D. Vance Is Not Your Usual Political Opportunist

      by

      J.D. Vance was trying to find his groove. I had just shown up at his office last week to interview the Ohio Republican about his first nine months in the Senate, where he has proved curiously hard to pigeonhole. As we sat down, Mr. Vance — at 39, one of the chamber’s youngest members — squirmed in his ornate leather arm chair, complaining that it was uncomfortable. Whoever used it previously, he explained, had created a “giant ass print” that made it a poor fit for him.Then the senator kicked a foot up on the low coffee table in front of him. This gave me a glorious view of his custom socks: a dark-red background covered with pictures of his 6-year-old son’s face. On the far end of the table was a Lego set of the U.S. Capitol that his wife had bought him on eBay for Father’s Day. With his crisp dark suit, casual manner and personal touches, Mr. Vance suddenly looked right at home. I suspected there was some grand metaphor in all this about the young conservative working to carve out his spot in this world of old leather and hidebound traditions.I asked what had been his most pleasant discovery about life in the Senate. “I’ve been surprised by how little people hate each other in private,” he offered, positing that much of the acrimony you see from lawmakers was “posturing” for TV. “There’s sort of an inherent falseness to the way that people present on American media,” he said.This may strike many people as rich coming from Mr. Vance, who is one of the Republican Party’s new breed of in-your-face, culture-warring, Trump-defending MAGA agitators. And indeed, Mr. Vance knows how to throw a partisan punch. Yet in these early days on the job, he has also adopted a somewhat more complicated political model, frequently championing legislation with Democrats, including progressives such as Elizabeth Warren and Tammy Baldwin.Pragmatic bipartisan MAGA troll feels like a dizzying paradoxical line to toe. And it risks feeding into the larger critique of Mr. Vance as a political opportunist. This is, after all, the guy who won attention in the 2016 election cycle as a harsh conservative critic of Mr. Trump, only to undergo a stark MAGA makeover and spend much of his 2022 Senate race sucking up to the former president. “I don’t know that I can disrespect someone more than J.D. Vance,” Mitt Romney, the Utah senator and former Republican presidential nominee, told his biographer about the party’s 2022 midterm contenders. “It’s like, really? You sell yourself so cheap?”Mr. Vance is not one to ignore such swipes. “Mitt Romney is one to talk about changing his mind publicly. He’s been on every side of 35 different issues,” he clapped back to Breitbart News.But there seems to be something going on with Mr. Vance beyond the usual shape-shifting flip-floppery. He contends that his approach is the more honest, hopeful path to getting things done for the conservative grass roots. In his telling, he’s not the cynical operator; his critics are.In some respects — especially with his defense of Mr. Trump — the freshman senator is transparently full of bull. But when it comes to how to navigate and possibly even make progress in today’s fractious G.O.P., not to mention this dysfunctional Congress, he may well be onto something.Mr. Vance and I sat down on a morning when Congress was all a dither over a possible government shutdown being driven by a spending fight among House Republicans. While sympathetic to his colleagues’ concerns, Mr. Vance saw the battle as unfocused, unproductive and bad for the party.“My sense is this shutdown fight will go very poorly for us unless we’re very clear about what we’re asking for,” he told me. With different blocs of Republicans demanding different things, “that’s just going to get confused, and the American people are going to punish us for it.”He argued that if the conservatives would hunker down and focus, they could get one major concession. “And we should be fighting for that one thing,” he said. What did he think they should prioritize? “If we could get something real on border security, then that would be a deal worth taking.”Mr. Vance described himself less an ideological revolutionary than a principled pragmatist. He did not come to Washington to blow up the system or overhaul how the Senate operates. He said his outlook was, “There are things I need to get done, and I will do whatever I need to do to do them.”If this means making common cause with the political enemy now and again, so be it. “I am a populist in a lot of my economic convictions, and so that will lead to opportunities to working with Democrats,” he reasoned.Mr. Vance’s cross aisle endeavors include teaming up with Ms. Warren to push legislation that would claw back compensation from bank executives who were richly paid even as they were “crashing their banks into a mountain,” as Mr. Vance put it. He has joined forces with Ms. Baldwin on a bill that would ensure that technologies developed with taxpayer money are manufactured in the United States. He is working with Senators Amy Klobuchar and Ron Wyden on a bill to reduce thefts of catalytic converters. And in the coming weeks, his focus will be on pushing through railway safety reform that he and Ohio’s senior senator, Sherrod Brown, introduced in the wake of the derailment disaster in East Palestine. That is the bill about which he was most optimistic. “We have 60 votes in private,” he said.Even if nothing makes it through this year, Mr. Vance is playing the long game. “Those productive personal relationships are quite valuable because they may not lead to an actual legislative package tomorrow, but they could two years from now,” he said.Squishy “relationship” talk can be dangerous in today’s G.O.P., even for members of the relatively genteel Senate. Being labeled a RINO — that is, a Republican in Name Only — generally earns one the sort of opprobrium normally reserved for child sex traffickers.But here’s where his MAGA antics may provide a bit of cover. In his brief time in Washington, the senator has proved himself an eager and a prolific culture warrior. The first bill he introduced — an important moment in any senator’s career — aimed to make English the nation’s official language. In July, after the Supreme Court ruled against affirmative action in university admissions, he fired off a letter to the eight Ivy League schools, plus a couple of private colleges in Ohio, warning them to retain any records that might be needed for a Senate investigation of their practices. That same month, he introduced a bill to ban gender-affirming care for minors. He even waded into the hysteria last winter over the health risks of gas stoves. This month, he’s out hawking a bill that would ban federal mask mandates for domestic air travel, public transit systems and schools, and bar those institutions from denying service to the maskless.Perhaps most vitally, Mr. Vance remains steadfast in his support of Mr. Trump. In June, he announced he was putting a hold on all Justice Department nominees in protest of “the unprecedented political prosecution” of Mr. Trump. And he plans to work hard as a surrogate to return the MAGA king to the White House. “I’m thinking about trying to be as active a participant as possible.”J.D. Vance during a Trump campaign rally last year.Megan Jelinger/Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesHis critique of Mr. Trump’s critics can be brutal.“Trump is extraordinarily clarifying on the right and extra confusing on the left,” he said. The hatred for Trump among progressives is so strong that people cannot see past it to acknowledge the former president’s “good parts,” he contended. While among conservatives, “Trump has this incredible capacity to identify really, who the good people are on the right and who the bad people are on the right.”Elaborating on the “bad” category, he points to former Representative Liz Cheney and the neoconservative writer Bill Kristol. “They say, ‘Donald Trump is an authoritarian’ — which I think is absurd. ‘Donald Trump is anti-democratic’ — which, again, in my view is absurd. I think they’re hiding their real ideological disagreements,” he argued.Mr. Vance is entitled to his view, of course. But glibly rejecting stated concerns about Mr. Trump’s anti-democratic inclinations — and characterizing his critics’ reactions as “obsessive” — would strike many as the real absurdity.Asked specifically about Mr. Trump’s election fraud lies, which Mr. Vance has at times promoted, the senator again shifted into slippery explainer mode. “I think it’s very easy for folks in the press to latch onto the zaniest election fraud or stolen election theories and say, ‘Oh this is totally debunked,’” he said. “But they ignore that there is this very clear set of institutional biases built into the election in 2020 that — from big tech censorship to the way in which financial interests really lined up behind Joe Biden.”“People aren’t stupid. They see what’s out there,” he said. “Most Republican grass roots voters are not sympathetic to the dumbest version of the election conspiracy. They are sympathetic to the version that is actually largely true.”Except that, as evidence of what is “actually largely true,” Mr. Vance pointed to a 2021 Time article detailing a bipartisan effort not to advance a particular candidate but to safeguard the electoral system. More important, the “dumbest” version of the stolen election conspiracy is precisely what Mr. Trump and his enablers have been aggressively spreading for years. It is what drove the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol, landed many rioters in prison, led to Fox News paying a $787.5 million defamation settlement and prompted grand juries to indict Mr. Trump in federal and state courts. Mr. Vance may want to believe that most Republicans are too smart to buy such lunacy, but he is too smart not to recognize the damage to American democracy being wrought by that lunacy.As for those who criticize his approach, Mr. Vance saw them as out of sync with voters. The conservative grass roots are “extremely frustrated with Washington not doing anything,” he said. “I think if you are a critic of them — if you are a critic of the way they see the world — you see people who want to blow up the system. Who are just pissed off. And they want fighters.” And not necessarily fighters who are “directed” or strategic in their efforts, he said, so much as just anyone who channels that rage.By contrast, “if you’re sympathetic to them and you like them,” he continued, you understand that “the problem is not that people don’t bitch enough or complain enough on television.” Rather, it’s that voters are fed up that “nothing changes” even when they “elect successive waves of different people. So I actually think being a bridge builder and getting things done is totally consistent with this idea that people are pissed off at the government as do-nothing.”When I asked how Mr. Vance defined his political positioning, he abruptly popped out of his chair and hurried over to his desk. He returned with a yellow sticky note on which he drew a large grid. Along the bottom of the paper he scrawled “culture” and on the left side, “commerce.” He started drawing dots as he explained: “I think the Republican Party has tended to be here” — top right quadrant, indicating a mix of strong cultural and pro-business conservatism. He added, “I think the Democratic Party has tended to be here,” pointing to the bottom left quadrant, which in his telling represents a strong liberal take on both. “And I think the majority, certainly the plurality of American voters — and maybe I’m biased because this is my actual view — is somewhere around here,” he said, placing them on the grid to suggest that people are “more conservative on cultural issues but they are not instinctively pro-business.”Michelle CottleMr. Vance reminded me that he has always been critical of his party’s pro-business bias. And it is primarily in this space that he is playing nice with Democrats.Bridge builder. Deal Maker. MAGA maniac. Trump apologist. Call Mr. Vance whatever you want. And if you find it all confused or confusing, don’t fret. That may be part of the point. Mr. Trump’s Republican Party is something of a chaotic mess. Until it figures out where it is headed, a shape-shifting MAGA brawler who quietly works across the aisle on particular issues may be the best this party has to offer.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 Shares51 Views

      in Elections

      Trump vs. Biden Would Be a Battle of Two Words

      by

      Politicians’ language can tell you a lot about the way they think, sometimes unintentionally.In this audio essay, Opinion columnist Carlos Lozada breaks down the significance behind Joe Biden’s favorite word for talking about America and how it contrasts with Donald Trump’s word of choice.Illustration by The New York Times; photographs by Evan Vucci/Associated Press and Jamie Kelter Davis for The New York TimesThe 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.This Opinion short was produced by Phoebe Lett and Derek Arthur. It was edited by Stephanie Joyce and Annie-Rose Strasser. Mixing and original music by Sonia Herrero. Fact-checking by Mary Marge Locker. Audience strategy by Kristina Samulewski. More

    • 113 Shares28 Views

      in Elections

      AfD Candidate Loses Race for Mayor in Nordhausen, Germany

      by

      Voters on Sunday rejected the candidate for the hard-line Alternative for Germany Party, which is rattling German national politics, in the race for mayor in the city of Nordhausen.With a colorless and reputedly prickly small-city mayor being challenged by a far-right candidate known for his charisma and business success, many Germans feared that the hard-line Alternative for Germany party was about to win its first City Hall.But when the ballots were counted Sunday evening, voters in the city of Nordhausen had decisively returned their mayor to office, dealing a setback to a party that has drawn on nationalist and anti-immigrant sentiment to secure a firm hold in German politics.“I thought it would be much, much closer,” said an early-round mayoral candidate, Andreas Trump, who ran for the conservative Christian Democrats and did not endorse a candidate for fear of driving voters into the arms of the rightists.The election came as Alternative for Germany, which has a nationalist, anti-migrant platform, is on the rise across the country. The party, known as the AfD, won only 10 percent of the votes in the 2021 general election, but since then, it has benefited from frustration with Chancellor Olaf Scholz’s three-party government, the rising cost of living, worries about the war in Ukraine and a surge in immigration.Now, the AfD is regularly above 20 percent in national opinion polls, well ahead of Mr. Scholz’s center-left Social Democrats. In the five states that were once part of East Germany, nearly a third of voters say they back it.A question-and-answer session for AfD supporters and residents in Gera, in eastern Thuringia, in June.Lena Mucha for The New York TimesBefore the vote in Nordhausen, in which the incumbent, Mayor Kai Buchmann, was challenged by the AfD candidate, Jörg Prophet, many thought the rightists might make a significant inroad into German governance.“Nordhausen is simply swept up in the blue wave,” Thomas Müller, a former local journalist, said, referring the party’s campaign color.Still, it was unclear if Nordhausen, despite its history as an East German municipality, would topple. A quaint city of 42,000 known for its schnapps distillery, it is an exemplar of Germany’s investment in its east, with modern trams and an impeccably maintained medieval quarter.“It’s not an especially right-leaning place,” Mr. Müller said.On Sunday, 55 percent voted for Mr. Buchmann, with 45 percent voting for Mr. Prophet.Benjamin Höhne, a political scientist who studies Alternative for Germany, said that winning the mayor’s office would have represented “another important step in the AfD’s normalization strategy.”“By showing they can take on communal executive responsibility, the hard-right-wing extremist core, which is increasingly crystallizing, appears to recede into the background,” he said,Nordhausen, a city with modern trams and a well-maintained medieval quarter, is home to about 42,000 people.Ronny Hartmann/Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesThis summer, AfD candidates won runoffs to lead a district in southern Thuringia and a small town in another eastern state, Saxony-Anhalt. The party has also gained ground at the state level. In Thuringia, Christian Democrats recently pushed through a property tax measure with AfD votes, three years after an outcry when mainstream parties allied with the far right to briefly oust the state’s leftist governor.None of this, however, means that the AfD is abandoning its extremes.That may have proved Mr. Prophet’s undoing.In the days after the first mayoral vote in Nordhausen, he turned away from city issues and solicited the help of two prominent AfD party figures who came to give speeches. He also refused to distance himself from Björn Höcke, the party’s most famous far-right extremist.“If he had really limited himself to just the municipal issues — there’s no telling how it would have turned out,” said Mr. Trump.The AfD leader Björn Höcke, speaking at a rally in Dresden in 2020, is viewed as one of the party’s most extreme figures.Gordon Welters for The New York Times More

    • 113 Shares63 Views

      in Elections

      Menendez Indictment Could Undercut G.O.P. Attacks on Justice Department

      by

      The indictment of the Democratic senator from New Jersey comes at a politically opportune moment for the besieged Justice Department.On Wednesday, Republicans on the House Judiciary Committee repeatedly accused Attorney General Merrick B. Garland of singling out former President Donald J. Trump for selective prosecution, slamming him for what they call a “two-tiered system” of justice.Forty-eight hours later, the Justice Department indicted one of the most powerful Democrats in the Senate — Bob Menendez of New Jersey, the chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee — on bribery charges, making public a trove of evidence, including cash and gold bars stashed at his house.The department’s aggressive pursuit of Mr. Menendez appeared to undercut claims that Mr. Trump is the victim of pervasive political bias that targets leaders on the right while shielding transgressors on the left.The entanglement of electoral politics and law enforcement is becoming the norm, and the prosecution of a top Democrat up for re-election in 2024 has political as well as legal reverberations. And the indictment, brought by federal prosecutors in Manhattan with limited participation from the Justice Department’s national security division in Washington, comes at a politically opportune moment for the besieged department.“This case really should silence any critic who wrongly suggests that D.O.J. is politicized under Garland,” said Anthony D. Coley, a former spokesman for the department. “This D.O.J. follows the facts — and isn’t influenced by partisan politics, political affiliation or wealth — not anything but facts and law.”Barbara Comstock, a former Republican congresswoman from Virginia, said recent indictments showed the department was functioning as it should. “The department goes where the facts lead them,” she wrote on X, formerly known as Twitter. “Trump, Hunter Biden, Menendez now. That’s how it’s supposed to work.”But the indictment could cut the other way, playing into the Republican argument, used so effectively by Mr. Trump during the 2016 campaign, that Washington is a swamp lorded over by corrupt Democrats. Republican reaction to the news was initially muted, but the Republican National Committee and House Republicans took to social media in an attempt to link Mr. Menendez to President Biden and the Hunter Biden scandal.Rules adopted by Senate Democrats require Mr. Menendez to immediately step aside as chairman of his committee, as he did when he was first indicted in 2015, reclaiming his post when the charges against him were dropped three years later.Mr. Menendez, one of the most powerful Democrats in the Senate, is the chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee. He is now required to step down from his leadership role.Haiyun Jiang/The New York TimesIf that buys Democrats some breathing space, it does little to weaken the longer-term political challenges, with President Biden and Senator Charles Schumer, the majority leader, likely to face increasing pressure to urge a defiant Mr. Menendez to voluntarily resign his seat.“Active matter, not going to comment,” said the White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre, when asked whether the president wanted the senator to quit.Gov. Philip D. Murphy of New Jersey, who would have the power to appoint Mr. Menendez’s successor, called on Mr. Menendez to resign on Friday. His message was soon followed by like-minded calls from political leaders throughout the state.Earlier in the day, several other Democrats made similar statements. Representative Dean Phillips of Minnesota compared the senator with Representative George Santos, the Long Island Republican indicted in May on 13 charges, including wire fraud. “It’s appalling,” Mr. Phillips told CNN.But Mr. Menendez showed no sign of backing down. Some top Democrats, including Mr. Schumer and Senator Benjamin L. Cardin of Maryland, who is likely to take over his gavel on the committee, released statements urging patience while the judicial process played out.Shortly after the charges were announced, Mr. Menendez issued a blistering one-page-long denial that was not unlike the vehement pushback by Mr. Trump and his supporters in response to his multiple criminal indictments.“For years, forces behind the scenes have repeatedly attempted to silence my voice and dig my political grave,” he wrote. “The excesses of these prosecutors is apparent.”Mr. Trump has not been accused of bribery or pay-to-play corruption. Yet Mr. Menendez’s indictment carries faint echoes of the investigation into the former president’s retention of classified documents at his Florida estate — most notably the inclusion of photographs from the senator’s house that were instantly disseminated on social media.But the charges against Mr. Menendez, whose opposition to the administration’s efforts to thaw relations with Cuba rankled many in the White House, are highly unlikely to influence the Republican strategy of undermining public confidence in the Justice Department under Mr. Garland and federal law enforcement more generally.During the contentious oversight hearing on Wednesday that foreshadowed the looming impeachment inquiry of President Biden, Republicans blasted Mr. Garland, time and again, for slow-walking the investigation into Hunter Biden, the president’s son, while fast-tracking two indictments against Mr. Trump.“There’s one investigation protecting President Biden — there’s another one attacking President Trump,” said Jim Jordan, Republican of Ohio and chairman of the House Judiciary Committee. “The Justice Department’s got both sides of the equation covered.”The hearing, which lasted more than five hours, focused primarily on the department’s five-year investigation of Hunter Biden, and a plea deal negotiated by David C. Weiss, the U.S. attorney for Delaware overseeing the case, that would have spared Mr. Biden prison time on gun and tax charges. That agreement fell apart during a court hearing in July, and the government has indicted Mr. Biden on three felony weapons charges, while continuing its investigation into his lucrative consulting deals with foreign companies.The claim that Mr. Garland has weaponized the Justice Department for political purposes, while thus far unsupported by evidence, is a pillar of Republican messaging. Not only is it a way to rally the party’s base, but it is meant to counter a mountain of witness testimony and documentary evidence against Mr. Trump, who is accused of illegally retaining classified documents and trying to overturn the 2020 election.“Our job is not to take orders from the president, from Congress, or from anyone else, about who or what to criminally investigate,” the attorney general said. “I am not the president’s lawyer. I will also add that I am not Congress’s prosecutor. The Justice Department works for the American people.” More

    • 100 Shares75 Views

      in Elections

      Influx of Migrants Exposes Democrats’ Division on Immigration

      by

      Democratic voters far from the border say they want leaders to do more to address the growing number of migrants in their cities, but they don’t agree on what.In recent years, Alisa Pata, a lifelong Democrat living in Manhattan, has spent far more time worrying about Donald J. Trump than immigration. But now, as she reads about the influx of migrants coming to her city, that’s starting to change.“We have too many people coming in,” said Ms. Pata, 85, as her older sister unpacked a travel Scrabble board for a game in the park. “Biden could do something more about putting our borders up a little stronger. I mean, we’re not here to take in the whole world. We can only do so much.”Sitting a few feet away, Daniela Garduño, 24, who also supported President Biden, had the opposite view. She cringed when she heard Eric Adams, the city’s Democratic mayor, say that the asylum seekers would “destroy New York City.” It reminded Ms. Garduño of the conservative politicians in her native Texas.She left the state for New York expecting more liberal politics, said Ms. Garduño, a paralegal. “And now it seems like there’s just so many echoes.”In some of the country’s most liberal cities, Democrats are wrestling with the complications of a dysfunctional immigration system and a set of problems that for many years has largely remained thousands of miles away. The new wave of migrants, some bused north by Republican governors, is exposing fissures in a party that was for the most part unified against the hard-line immigration policies of the Trump administration.Most strikingly, much of the debate over incoming migrants is happening not in swing states or battleground suburban counties, but in some of the most diverse — and deeply blue — corners of the country.In interviews with more than two dozen voters in the Democratic strongholds of New York, Boston and Chicago, most embraced the migrants, whom they saw as fleeing difficult and desperate circumstances. They largely praised the Biden administration’s decision to expand temporary protected status to 472,000 Venezuelans, allowing them to work legally in the United States for 18 months. Many said they believed that the new arrivals should be allowed to try to support themselves and saw plenty of available jobs to be filled.“The restaurant industry has been lacking cooks, bus people and dishwashers for years now — we were calling cooks unicorns because nobody could find them,” said David Bonomi, 47, a Democrat who owns a restaurant in Chicago’s Little Italy. “If there’s people who are here looking for a better life, looking for opportunity and willing to do those jobs, I’m absolutely for it.”But many expressed frustration with the Democratic leaders managing the new arrivals, and some worried that the Biden administration’s new order was only encouraging more people to come.“There are all kinds of empty dwellings in Chicago. Put them in there, and let them work,” said Charles Kelly, a retiree who was riding his bike in Chicago’s Ravenswood neighborhood on Thursday. “People are lying on the sidewalks, and I’m like, why? People are begging for jobs and guess what, here’s your work force right here.”Recently arrived migrants in a makeshift shelter at O’Hare International Airport in Chicago in August.Armando L. Sanchez/Chicago Tribune, via Getty ImagesBut at the same time, Mr. Kelly wondered if the border could be temporarily closed to give cities time to accommodate the migrants already here, a policy once proposed by Mr. Trump and one that would face major legal hurdles.“It’s overwhelming the system,” he said. “They should be monitored closely. I don’t know exactly how to do that but the federal and state governments should be doing more.”The reality that Democrats like Mr. Kelly are grappling with is complex. After a drop this spring, unlawful crossings at the Southern border are rising sharply, and migrants cannot work legally while they wait to be processed through the clogged courts. While allowing some to work may ease the strain, critics note that it could also encourage more to come.For decades, attempts to pass systemic fixes through Congress have crumbled. A broad immigration overhaul is now considered a nonstarter given Republicans’ internal divisions.In New York, more than 113,300 migrants have arrived since the spring of 2022. Local officials have struggled to respond, and the city has estimated that it would spend about $5 billion this fiscal year to house and feed migrants. Last fall, Mr. Adams declared a state of emergency.Chicago has taken in 13,500 migrants and spent at least $250 million, while Washington has taken in 10,500 migrants since the first bus arrived outside the home of Vice President Kamala Harris. In Massachusetts, the state’s shelter population rose 80 percent in the last year after the arrival of thousands of migrant families. Many of the asylum seekers who have arrived in recent months are Venezuelans fleeing the economic collapse of their home country.LaQuana Chambers, 41, saw a racial bias in the way some Democratic politicians were talking about the new arrivals and denounced what she viewed as efforts to pit the migrants against citizens.“When it was Ukrainian immigrants coming in, there wasn’t this much of an uproar,” said Ms. Chambers, who works for the city’s education department and lives in Brooklyn. “If you’re white and European, people will easily digest that, they’re OK with that. But if you’re brown — no.”The situation presents a potential political danger for Mr. Biden and his party. Nationally, Republicans have gained an edge with voters on immigration over the past year. Roughly four in ten Americans said they broadly agreed with Republicans on the issue in a June survey by Pew Research Center, about 10 points more than agreed with Democrats. That was a notable shift from a year earlier, when roughly equal shares of Americans said they agreed with each party.Polling on views about the recent wave of migrants has been largely limited to New York. A survey released this week by Siena College found that 51 percent of registered Democrats in New York considered the recent migrants to be a “major problem.” Only 14 percent, however, ranked it as the single most important issue for the governor and state legislature, far fewer than those who selected economic factors like cost of living and the availability of affordable housing.Advisers to Mr. Biden’s campaign argue that the president’s voters haven’t changed their position on immigration; they just want to see steps taken to help handle the influx of migrants. The advisers said they believed those concerns would be assuaged by steps like the decision to expand temporary protected status this week.Still, some Democratic politicians have responded by adopting talking points that sound almost like they were lifted from their Republican rivals, a sign that they fear a political backlash. They have activated the national guard, petitioned the White House for expedited work authorizations and pleaded with Mr. Biden to take a more aggressive approach.Mr. Adams, who has said the president has “failed” the city by not doing more, praised Mr. Biden’s move this week to expand temporary protected status but also pressed the White House to extend protections to migrants from other nations.Mayor Eric Adams staged a rally in August to call on federal officials to expedite work authorization for asylum seekers.Jeenah Moon for The New York TimesMost Democratic voters said the issue was not prompting them to reconsider their support for Mr. Biden, whom they still vastly prefer over Mr. Trump or any of his Republican primary opponents. But the political implications might be most visible among swing voters in crucial suburban battlegrounds, where voters in recent elections have punished Democratic candidates for what they perceive as the declining quality of life in cities.Robert Speicher, 60, a retired social worker on Long Island who worked with undocumented immigrant families, said his heart broke for the migrants.“They just want to work and stay in the shadow. This myth that they’re here to suck our system dry — they don’t want that,” said Mr. Speicher, who voted for Mr. Trump in 2016 and skipped the election in 2020, after being disappointed by the former president.But he added that he believed Mr. Biden’s policies had failed to secure the border, escalating what he saw as a crisis.“Why are these 500,000 people getting to cut the line?” he said. In Watertown, Mass., a city outside of Boston, Josh Fiedler, 48, said that recent reports about cities struggling to deal with the new population of migrants made him think more about the border crisis that has animated Republicans for years.But it did not lead him to support Republican solutions. He said he would like to see an increase in foreign aid to Latin American countries to improve conditions.“I didn’t realize it was a problem until it happened,” said Mr. Fiedler, a quality assurance analyst and a Democrat. “The border states have complained for a long time. Something needs to be done.”Robert Chiarito in Chicago, Melissa Russell in Somerville, Mass., and More

    • 125 Shares84 Views

      in Elections

      G.O.P. Candidates Focus on China to Demonstrate Foreign Policy Credentials

      by

      The 2024 hopefuls are rolling out plans to counter Beijing, criticizing President Biden while largely sidestepping topics more divisive among Republican voters.Republican presidential hopefuls eager to demonstrate their foreign policy credentials on the campaign trail have homed in on China, a topic that allows them to assail President Biden while focusing less on global issues more divisive with primary voters.While the candidates are in near-unanimous agreement that Beijing is the United States’ foremost foreign adversary, their remarks and policy prescriptions reveal significant divides within their party on how to approach it.Former Vice President Mike Pence used a China-focused speech on Monday at the Hudson Institute in Washington to criticize Donald J. Trump, his former running mate and the race’s front-runner, and other competitors as being isolationist. Nikki Haley, who was one of Mr. Trump’s ambassadors to the United Nations, has suggested he was not aggressive enough on China.Vivek Ramaswamy, in a policy speech on Thursday at a packaging plant in New Albany, Ohio, attacked the protectionist trade policies that have been promoted by some in the party, including Mr. Trump.Still, to a large extent, the Republican contenders have all raced to see who can be the most hawkish toward Beijing, following a path set by Mr. Trump in 2016 when he made attacking China a central policy plank and then sharply hardened America’s trade policy toward the country. By focusing on China, the candidates can make detailed policy pronouncements and play up their credentials, yet avoid discussion of Russia or Ukraine, an increasingly divisive topic among Republicans.All of the candidates have blasted President Biden’s attitude toward China. Mr. Biden has sought to stabilize relations after escalating espionage accusations inflamed tensions. But he has also tried to counter Beijing’s growing global influence with a multilateral approach, aiming to shore up economic and diplomatic ties with regional allies.One of the Biden administration’s focal points has been targeting China’s semiconductor industry. The administration has enacted export controls and helped push the CHIPS and Science Act, a bipartisan law that provided billions of dollars toward fostering a homegrown semiconductor industry that could make America less dependent on foreign suppliers.But even that bipartisan effort has come in for criticism. On Thursday, as Mr. Ramaswamy stood miles away from the site of a new Intel chip manufacturing complex that will be assisted by the CHIPS Act, he attacked the law for including provisions related to addressing climate change.“I am opposed to the CHIPS Act,” he said, “because it is really the Green New Deal masquerading in CHIPS masquerade clothing.”He also claimed without evidence that China had propagated the “climate change agenda” in order to hamper American industry.Mr. Ramaswamy also said he would focus on job training programs to develop a stronger work force for a robust chip industry. Doing so, he added, would make the United States less reliant on Taiwan, the world’s biggest chip producer, and reduce the threat that a Chinese attack on Taiwan might pose on American interests.Mr. Ramaswamy has previously suggested he would be less committed to defending Taiwan if the United States were less reliant on its semiconductors. That view, and his suggestion that Ukraine concede territory to Russia, have drawn fire from Mr. Pence and Ms. Haley.In his speech on Monday, Mr. Pence, who emphasized his role in crafting the Trump administration’s China policy, did not single out Mr. Ramaswamy. But he used the threat of Beijing as a lens through which he could posit his larger view of foreign policy: that America could not retrench from decades of global leadership.He accused some candidates of “abandoning the traditional conservative position of American leadership on the world stage, and embracing a new and dangerous form of isolationism.”Mr. Pence also criticized President Biden over the U.S. military’s chaotic withdrawal from Afghanistan, suggesting it had shown weakness on the world stage to China. (The Biden administration has said it was constrained in its options for ending the nation’s longest war by decisions made during the Trump-Pence administration.)During his term, Mr. Trump imposed tariffs on more than $360 billion worth of Chinese goods, initiating a protracted trade war that eased somewhat when the United States and China signed a trade deal in early 2020. Seeking the nomination, his talk on economic issues has been combative even as he has praised China’s president, Xi Jinping, for his “iron fist” leadership.He has vowed to “completely eliminate U.S. dependence on China,” in part by reducing imports, restricting American companies’ ability to invest there and revoking the “most favored nation” trade status.Ms. Haley said earlier this year that she believed Mr. Trump had been so focused on trade that he ignored other Chinese threats.At town halls in New Hampshire on Thursday, she warned that China was outpacing the United States in shipbuilding and developing “neuro-strike weapons” that she said could be engineered to change brain activity and be used to target military commanders and segments of the population.China was more than just an economic rival, she suggested.“They don’t see us as a competitor,” Ms. Haley said. “They see us as an enemy.”Jazmine Ulloa More

    • 88 Shares60 Views

      in Elections

      Discontent With Party Politics Reaches New Heights

      by

      Americans tend to agree on what is wrong with the political system, and majorities of voters from both parties are unhappy with the quality of the candidates. But there also seems to be little appetite for third-party candidates.Close to one year away from the 2024 presidential election, most Americans say they are discontent with their candidate choices, and 28 percent of Americans say they do not like either political party, quadruple the share that said the same thing 30 years ago.But the question remains whether voters will hold their noses and vote for a candidate they dislike or sit out this election.Americans are less satisfied than they were even five years ago with the quality of candidates running for office, according to a new study by Pew Research Center that attempts to understand the breadth and depth of political dissatisfaction in the country. Just 26 percent of Americans said candidates for office had been good in the last several years, with no split between Republicans and Democrats. That’s down from 47 percent in 2018 and 34 percent in 2021, when voters who aligned with the party in power were more likely to be satisfied.When it comes to the quality of candidates running for the presidency, Democrats are more likely than Republicans to say they are not satisfied, but majorities of voters from both parties are unhappy.“The two-party system just doesn’t work — there aren’t only two types of people,” said Madison Lane, a mother of two and political independent from Jacksonville, Fla. “I believe in global warming, gay rights and trans rights. I can’t really vote Republican and believe in those things. But at the same time, Democrats are just fueled by big corporations and money. So I feel like I’m left with no good candidates to choose from.”As more ideologically extreme voters decide primary elections, parties are also pushed to the extremes, which leaves a vast majority of the people in the middle feeling alienated, said Professor Ian Shapiro, a political science professor at Yale University and author of “Responsible Parties: Saving Democracy From Itself.”“I expect this number who feel alienated by the parties to continue to grow,” he said.Across the partisan spectrum, Americans tend to agree on what is wrong with the political system, citing political fighting, polarization, money in politics and lobbying influence. And when asked specifically to list any strengths of the political system, more than half of Americans either skipped the question entirely or said the system had no strengths. Respondents who did not list a strength tended to be younger and less educated.In an era where many delight in hate watching television shows, engagement in politics may be a part of the problem. Highly politically engaged Americans are more likely than those who are more tuned out to say they always or often feel exhausted and angry when they think about politics.Discontent with political options is not new, and nearly every presidential election features a quest to float a moderate, if often quixotic, alternative to the major parties. According to the Pew study, sizable shares of Americans say they wish there were more political parties from which to choose, and this sentiment is stronger among Democrats than Republicans.But only about a quarter of Americans actually think having more political parties would solve the nation’s problems. And most Republicans and Democrats think their own party governs in an honest and ethical way and is respectful and tolerant of different types of people.“Politicians are not focusing on the priorities of the public,” Morris Fiorina, a political scientist at Stanford, said. “They’re primarily focused on niche issues.” Even so, he said, “most Americans will hold their nose and pick from the available two parties.”Despite the rhetoric from many Republican elected officials focused on questioning the integrity of elections and vote counting, Americans — including sizable shares of Republicans — still see voting as the single best way to change the country for the better.Even so, only a quarter of Americans think who the president is makes a big difference in their lives. More