Politics and Government

Subterms

    More stories

    • 100 Shares119 Views

      in Elections

      Imran Khan, Pakistan’s Former Leader, Appears in Court

      by

      The police were ordered not to arrest the former prime minister, who has been charged under Pakistan’s antiterrorism act, before a hearing set for next Wednesday.Former Prime Minister Imran Khan appeared in court in the Pakistani capital on Thursday after being charged under the country’s antiterrorism act, the latest step in an intensifying crackdown on Mr. Khan and his allies since he was removed from office in April.It was his first court appearance since being charged on Sunday, after giving a speech in which he threatened legal action against police officers and a judge involved in the recent arrest of one of his top aides.Mr. Khan made no public comment during his brief appearance Thursday before an antiterrorism court in Islamabad, where his bail bond was set at 100,000 rupees, or roughly $450. The court set the next hearing in the case for Wednesday and ordered the police not to arrest him before then.“Pakistan is being mocked all over the world,” Mr. Khan said outside the courthouse after the hearing. He said the government was afraid of his popularity, and that the case against him had “made Pakistan look like a banana republic.”Before the hearing, many in Pakistan had been worried about the possibility of violent unrest. A day earlier, Interior Minister Rana Sanaullah had warned that if the court rejected Mr. Khan’s bail plea, the government would arrest him — a move that his supporters have said would cross a “red line.”The charges against Mr. Khan have been seen as an escalation of the monthslong clash between Pakistan’s current government, led by Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif, and its former leader, who has made a stunning political comeback in recent months.His court appearance was the latest twist in Mr. Khan’s political second act, since falling out with the country’s powerful military and being removed from office in a no-confidence vote.Supporters of Mr. Khan gathered outside his residence in Islamabad on Monday.Anjum Naveed/Associated PressIn recent months, Mr. Khan has drawn tens of thousands to his rallies, where he has doubled down on accusations that the United States and the country’s powerful military conspired to topple his government. His speeches have also tapped into Pakistanis’ growing frustration with the country’s economic downturn, which the current government has struggled to address.His message has resonated widely, and his party, Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf, has won seats in provincial elections in two crucial regions.“I would say there is a soft revolution taking place in Pakistan,” Mr. Khan said in an hourlong interview with New York Times journalists on Wednesday. “I never thought in my life I would see this sort of thing happening in the country — people sort of spontaneously coming out without being led out by political parties.”But his growing popularity has also prompted a clampdown on Mr. Khan’s supporters and allies, in what is widely considered a coordinated campaign by the authorities to force him out of politics.Journalists considered “pro-Khan” have been harassed, intimidated and arrested by the authorities, he said. A top aide to Mr. Khan, Shahbaz Gill, was imprisoned after making anti-military remarks, and the television channel that broadcast them was forced off the air. Mr. Khan has accused the authorities of torturing Mr. Gill, who remains in custody. Government officials have denied the claim.In the interview on Wednesday, Mr. Khan went to lengths not to directly condemn the country’s powerful military, which has long served as the true power broker in Pakistani politics.Shahbaz Gill, center in blue shirt, an aide to Mr. Khan, at a court appearance on Monday. Mr. Khan has accused the authorities of torturing Mr. Gill, a claim the government has denied.Associated PressBut in toeing a careful line, Mr. Khan suggested the military establishment had played a role in the current crackdown, claiming that some officials involved in detaining Mr. Gill had said they were being “pushed from behind” — a common phrase in Pakistan referring to coming under military pressure.The Pakistani military has denied accusations that it has played any role in the recent clampdown, insisting the institution has adopted a “neutral” stance amid the political uncertainty. Military officials have also emphasized that the military is not involved with police cases and civilian courts.Mr. Khan’s lawyers claim that the case against him is little more than a sham. The Islamabad police charged Mr. Khan under a section of the country’s antiterrorism laws, and a police report stated that he had “terrorized and threatened top police officials and a respected female additional sessions judge” during the speech.“We won’t spare you,” Mr. Khan had said, addressing the officials.Mr. Khan has called for fresh elections. And he has repeatedly insisted that he hopes the country can avoid violent unrest even as political tensions build.“One thing I don’t want is violence,” he said. “That would not suit us; that would suit the guys who have been put in power, because the last thing they want are elections. For us, any violence or disruption would mean there won’t be an election.”But given widespread frustration over the economic crisis and a political scene that has been dominated for decades by often-corrupt family dynasties, many fear that any street action over Mr. Khan’s fate could easily spill into violent unrest.“There’s been this ratcheting up of the rhetoric, the instigation,” said Adil Najam, a professor at Boston University’s Frederick S. Pardee School of Global Studies and an expert on Pakistani politics. “I cannot imagine a world where his arrest — if it happens — will go down quietly.” More

    • 125 Shares99 Views

      in Elections

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

      by

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

    • 125 Shares189 Views

      in Elections

      In N.Y. Primaries, a Fight for the Democratic Party’s Future

      by

      The party’s more moderate establishment declared victory, but a closer look reveals the battle for the soul of the party will grind on.Representative Sean Patrick Maloney, a moderate Democrat from New York City’s northern suburbs, saw a clear-cut lesson in his lopsided primary victory Tuesday night over one of his home state’s brightest left-wing stars.“Tonight, mainstream won,” Mr. Maloney, who also leads House Democrat campaign committee, declared afterward. “Common sense won.”The 30-point margin appeared to be a sharp rebuke to the party’s left flank, which had tried to make the race a referendum on Mr. Maloney’s brand of leadership in Washington. A second, narrower win by another moderate Democrat, Daniel Goldman, in one of the city’s most liberal House districts prompted more hand-wringing among some progressives.But as New York’s tumultuous primary season came to a close on Tuesday, a survey of contests across the state shows a more nuanced picture. Four summers after Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s surprise victory ignited Democrats’ left flank and positioned New York at the center of a fight for the soul of the Democratic Party, the battle has entered a new phase. But it is far from abating.Mostly gone this year were shocking upsets by little-known left-leaning insurgents like Ms. Ocasio-Cortez and a gaggle of challengers in Albany. They dislodged an entrenched block of conservative Democrats controlling the State Senate in 2018. Representative Jamaal Bowman defeated a powerful committee chairman in 2020. Those contests made the political left appear ascendant.Kristen Gonzalez, a State Senate candidate supported by the Democratic Socialists of America, won her primary race in a district in Brooklyn and Queens.Janice Chung for The New York TimesTwo years later, though, the tension within the party appears likely to grind on, as progressives struggle to marshal voters into movements as they did during the Trump presidency. At the same time, the party’s establishment wing has regained its footing after President Biden and Mayor Eric Adams, avowed moderates, won the White House and City Hall.“We are past that political and electoral moment,” said Sochie Nnaemeka, the director of New York’s liberal Working Families Party, said of the rapid gains of past election cycles. “The headwinds are a real amount of voter fatigue, economic malaise and just the pressures of everyday life.”Ms. Nnaemeka and her allies still found reason to celebrate on Tuesday though, particularly over state-level contests. Kristen Gonzalez, a tech worker supported by the Democratic Socialists of America, won a marquee Brooklyn-Queens State Senate race over Elizabeth Crowley, despite Mayor Adams and outside special interests openly campaigning against her.“Today, we really proved that socialism wins,” Ms. Gonzalez told jubilant supporters after her win.As moderates backed by well-financed outside groups and well-known leaders like Mr. Adams sought to oust them, progressives also successfully defended key seats won in recent election cycles.Among them were Jabari Brisport, a member of the Democratic Socialists, and Gustavo Rivera, another progressive state senator targeted by Mr. Adams. Mr. Bowman, whose district had been substantially redrawn in this year’s redistricting process, also survived.“We had some really good wins,” Ms. Nnaemeka added. “Despite the headwinds, despite the dark money, despite the redistricting chaos, we sent some of the hardest working champions of the left back to the State Senate to complete the work the federal government isn’t doing right now.”But in many of the most recognizable races, there were clear signs that those wins had limits.Mr. Maloney provided moderates with their most resonant victory, defeating Alessandra Biaggi, a progressive state senator who was part of the 2018 insurgency, by a two-to-one margin. This time, she had the vocal backing of Ms. Ocasio-Cortez. She fiercely critiqued Mr. Maloney as “a selfish corporate Democrat with no integrity.”Alessandra Biaggi mounted an aggressive challenge to Mr. Maloney from the left.Karsten Moran for The New York TimesBut she was drowned out by a flood of outside spending that came to Mr. Maloney’s aid, with attacks centered on her harsh past criticisms of the police. She struggled to quickly introduce herself to voters in a district she had never run in before. Speaker Nancy Pelosi and former President Bill Clinton also openly lent their support to the congressman.In the race for an open Democratic seat in New York City, Mr. Goldman, a former federal prosecutor, beat out three progressive stars in some of the city’s most liberal enclaves. All had once enjoyed the backing of the Working Families Party. And former Representative Max Rose, an avowed centrist attempting to make a comeback on Staten Island, handily turned back a primary challenger championed by activists.The outcomes — along with Gov. Kathy Hochul’s yawning primary victory in June over a left-aligned challenger, Jumaane Williams — left leaders of the party’s more moderate wing crowing over what they see as a more pragmatic mood among the electorate in the aftermath of the Trump presidency. More

    • 38 Shares159 Views

      in Elections

      Deniers, Enablers, Accepters

      by

      We break down elected Republicans into three groups, based on their stances toward false claims about the 2020 election.Dozens of Republican officials continue to tell lies about the 2020 election, claiming that Donald Trump lost only because of fraud. These claims are especially worrisome for the future of American democracy because they suggest that those same officials might be willing to overturn a future election result and hand power to the rightful loser.On the other hand, dozens of other Republicans have never claimed that Trump lost because of fraud. This list includes most Republican senators (like Mitch McConnell, the party’s Senate leader), several governors (like Mike DeWine of Ohio) and other state-level officials.In the latter group of Republicans, however, a split is emerging. Some have decided that lies about the 2020 election are a red line they will not cross, and they have refused to endorse other Republicans making the claims. Others are actively campaigning for election deniers — and, in the process, enabling the spread of the false claims.In today’s newsletter, we will break down the three groups of Republicans: the deniers, the enablers and the accepters.We’ll also give you the latest results from last night’s primary elections in Florida, New York and Oklahoma.The deniersRepublicans who falsely claimed that the 2020 presidential election was fraudulent now make up more than half of the party’s major elected officials in some states. In the House of Representatives, almost two-thirds of current Republican members objected to the 2020 result in at least one state. So did eight senators and attorneys general in 17 states.This faction of Republicans seems to be growing, too. Overall, Republican voters have nominated more than 100 candidates for Congress or statewide office who echo Trump’s false claims of fraud. The Washington Post has compiled a list, and it includes top officials in several swing states — like Michigan and Pennsylvania — that could determine the 2024 presidential election.Last night’s voting: In Oklahoma, Republicans nominated Markwayne Mullin, a Trump-endorsed congressman who has claimed that the 2020 election was stolen, in a Senate primary runoff.The enablersGov. Ron DeSantis of Florida is a telling case study. Many political analysts believe that DeSantis is likely to run for president in 2024. As he prepares for a potential campaign, DeSantis is trying to distinguish himself from Trump while also appealing to Trump’s supporters.Ron DeSantis at a rally in Phoenix this month.Rebecca Noble for The New York TimesOne way he seems to be doing so is his approach to the false claims about the 2020 election. He has studiously avoided making them himself. (As Politico puts it: “When asked by reporters whether the last presidential election was rigged, DeSantis has instead highlighted changes to election laws he has supported or simply changed the topic.”) At the same time, DeSantis is embracing other Republicans who do echo Trump’s lies.He traveled to Arizona to campaign for Kari Lake, the Republican nominee for governor, and Blake Masters, the Senate nominee. In Pittsburgh last week, DeSantis gave a 40-minute speech at an event for Doug Mastriano, the Pennsylvania governor nominee. DeSantis has also held a rally with J.D. Vance, the Ohio Senate candidate who has claimed that 2020 featured “people voting illegally on a large-scale basis.”Among the other Republican enablers:Gov. Doug Ducey of Arizona — despite saying that Lake was “misleading voters” about election fraud — is supporting her in the general election. “It’s important for Arizona Republicans to unite behind our slate of candidates,” he tweeted.Gov. Glenn Youngkin of Virginia is scheduled to campaign this week with Tudor Dixon, the Republican nominee for Michigan governor, who has made false election claims.McConnell has endorsed Herschel Walker, the Trump-backed Georgia Senate candidate who has also repeatedly made false election claims. And a group affiliated with McConnell recently announced it would spend tens of millions of dollars on TV and radio ads to boost Vance.The acceptersThe number of Republicans who have treated false election claims as a defining issue is much smaller, but it’s not zero:Larry Hogan, Maryland’s Republican governor (who cannot run again, because of term limits), is refusing to endorse and is harshly criticizing his party’s nominee for governor this year, Dan Cox. Cox has called the 2020 election fraudulent and chartered buses for the Trump rally that preceded the Jan. 6 riot.John Bridgeland, a Republican former staffer to Rob Portman and George W. Bush, endorsed Tim Ryan, the Ohio Democrat running for Senate, over Vance. “If Vance is willing to undermine his own integrity and character for public office, imagine what he might do if he were a U.S. senator,” Bridgeland wrote in The Cincinnati Enquirer.In the Colorado Senate race, Joe O’Dea won the Republican nomination over a rival who attended Trump’s Jan. 6 “Stop the Steal” rally. O’Dea criticized his opponent for focusing on the past.Most prominently, Representative Liz Cheney, who lost in a primary last week to Harriet Hageman, called on voters to oust election-denying Republicans. “Let us resolve that we will stand together — Republicans, Democrats and independents — against those who would destroy our republic,” Cheney said in her concession speech.The bottom line: It remains unclear whether the Republicans denying the 2020 election result — or the Republicans enabling those deniers — would ultimately be willing to overturn a future election. But their words and behavior certainly suggest that they might participate in such an effort or at least tolerate it.More resultsIn Florida, Democrats chose Representative Charlie Crist — the former Republican governor — to challenge DeSantis.Democrats outperformed polls in two House special elections in upstate New York, winning one and losing the other by single digits.In New York City, Jerry Nadler defeated Carolyn Maloney in a battle between powerful, long-serving House Democrats after a redrawn map combined their districts.In New York’s suburbs, Sean Patrick Maloney, chair of the Democratic House campaign committee, beat Alessandra Biaggi, a progressive state senator endorsed by Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.THE LATEST NEWSWar in UkraineCaptured Russian tanks on display in central Kyiv.Jim Huylebroek for The New York TimesRussia invaded Ukraine six months ago today. Though Ukraine has ceded about one-fifth of its territory, the Kremlin has failed to accomplish many goals.See photos from Times photojournalists chronicling the war.Months after Russia took over the Zaporizhzhia nuclear plant, all that prevents disaster are dedicated Ukrainian operators working at gunpoint.PoliticsThe Biden administration will offer updated Covid booster shots to Americans 12 and older this fall.Trump took more than 700 pages of classified documents to his Florida home.Other Big StoriesA former Louisville, Ky., detective pleaded guilty to misleading the judge who authorized the raid of Breonna Taylor’s apartment.Two men were convicted of plotting to kidnap Michigan’s governor in 2020.OpinionsA new approach to fighting homelessness in Seattle is working, Maia Szalavitz says.In a short documentary, John Hendrickson describes the frustration of having a stutter.MORNING READSStigma: The case for renaming monkeypox.Feeling off? How to tell whether you’re depressed or burned out.A Times classic: Get stronger.Advice from Wirecutter: Tips for hanging outdoor lights.Lives Lived: Julian Robertson didn’t invent short-selling, but he made it a central part of his investment strategy, helping to create the modern hedge fund industry. He died at 90.SPORTS NEWS FROM THE ATHLETICNew intel on a famous scandal: M.L.B.’s sign-stealing investigation found that former Astros GM Jeff Luhnow permanently deleted data from his phone before handing it over to investigators. This and more details are revealed in Evan Drellich’s upcoming book about the saga.A remarkably reasonable twist: After all that, Kevin Durant will remain with the Brooklyn Nets for the time being. His consolation prize is a lineup that features multiple All-Stars and has N.B.A. title aspirations. The resolution is best for all involved, Sam Amick writes.Another M.L.B. team up for auction? Los Angeles Angels owner Arte Moreno is exploring a sale after two decades characterized by losing despite cashing out for big stars. Oops. He’ll still fetch a massive return on his investment, however.ARTS AND IDEAS Harry Styles in New York on Saturday.The New York Times15 nights of StylesOver the weekend, Harry Styles began a 15-show run at Madison Square Garden, part of a trend of concert residencies, Ben Sisario writes. Celine Dion helped pioneer the form in Las Vegas, and Billy Joel brought it to New York in 2014. Now, younger artists like Styles and Adele are doing the same.By asking fans to come to them, artists can lower tour costs. But, experts say, residencies are only financially viable for superstars. “This doesn’t mean nobody’s going to Louisville,” Nathan Hubbard, a former Ticketmaster executive, said. “Most artists are still going to have to go market to market to hustle it.”For more: “The purest release of pent-up demand”: Times critics review Styles’s show.PLAY, WATCH, EATWhat to CookLinda Xiao for The New York Times. Food Stylist: Monica Pierini.Serve this tender golden almond cake with peaches and cream.What to Read“The Stolen Year,” by Anya Kamenetz, recounts Covid’s effects on American youth.FashionLinda Evangelista’s British Vogue cover presents an antiquated vision of fashion, Vanessa Friedman writes.Now Time to PlayThe pangram from yesterday’s Spelling Bee was midtown. Here is today’s puzzle.Here’s today’s Mini Crossword, and a clue: Orange coat? (four letters).And here’s today’s Wordle. After, use our bot to get better.Thanks for spending part of your morning with The Times. See you tomorrow. — DavidP.S. The word “squishathon” — an event inviting New Yorkers to kill invasive lanternflies — appeared for the first time in The Times recently.Here’s today’s front page. “The Daily” is about the rise of workplace surveillance.Kitty Bennett, Matthew Cullen, Natasha Frost, Lauren Hard, Claire Moses, Tom Wright-Piersanti and Ashley Wu contributed to The Morning. You can reach the team at themorning@nytimes.com.Sign up here to get this newsletter in your inbox. More

    • 138 Shares119 Views

      in Elections

      A New Generation of Voters Will Test Angola’s Longtime Governing Party

      by

      The election may not change the country’s government, but the contest reflects the growing discontent of young voters, many of whom are unemployed.LUANDA, Angola — A new generation of Angolans, many disillusioned with their country’s political system and corruption, will vote for the first time on Wednesday, posing a challenge to a governing party that has traditionally presented its continued dominance as a stable alternative to the country’s bloody past.The Popular Movement for the Liberation of Angola, a liberation army turned political party, is expected to win — as it has in four previous elections. But while the result is unlikely to be a surprise, analysts will be watching the margin closely for signs about the country’s political future. Across southern Africa, historic political movements are falling out of favor among younger urban voters for whom economic obstacles are beginning to outweigh nostalgic rhetoric. In Angola’s capital, Luanda, where streets are named for war heroes, the youths are largely unemployed, as is more than 30 percent of the population.Half the voters in the country are under 35. Those who do find jobs in Angola, Africa’s second-largest oil producer, work mostly in the informal sector, often as food vendors or motorcycle drivers.This generation, disaffected by the governing party, is more willing to speak out.“This will be my first time voting, and I can tell you, I’ve made up my mind really easily,” said Carlos Quitembe, 22, holding up three fingers, a gesture referring to the opposition party’s position on the ballot.Supporters of the Angolan opposition party the National Union for the Total Independence of Angola, or UNITA.John Wessels/Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesThe main opposition party, the National Union for the Total Independence of Angola, or UNITA, was the wartime foe of the Popular Movement for the Liberation of Angola, or MPLA. The two parties were born as guerrilla movements that drove out Portuguese colonists in 1975 but turned on each other in a bitter civil war that ended in 2002.UNITA has tried to rebrand itself as a party for urban voters. For the first time, it is led not by a former guerrilla fighter, but by a charismatic former exile, Adalberto Costa Júnior, who returned from Europe and used social media to build his base. Mr. Costa has joined forces with civil society groups, smaller opposition movements and disgruntled members of the governing party on an anticorruption ticket.The opposition has fielded candidates “representing an open mind to build the future, not a partisan proposal but solutions for the big problems Angola has now,” Mr. Costa said in an interview. That coalition, he said, is held together by the need to overhaul the electoral system that favors the dominant party.In Angola’s electoral system, voters cast a single ballot to select their party of choice for provincial and national seats. Card-carrying members of the party decide the list of candidates, and the leader of the winning party becomes president of the country.UNITA’s leader, Adalberto Costa Júnior, joined a coalition on an anticorruption ticket.Paulo Novais/EPA, via ShutterstockPresident João Lourenço is seeking a second term, asking for more time to make good on his 2017 election promises to fight corruption and build the economy. A former guerrilla fighter who later became defense minister, Mr. Lourenço was handpicked by the longtime President José Eduardo dos Santos as his successor. Once in power, Mr. Lourenço turned on Mr. dos Santos, blaming his administration for Angola’s economic malaise. He prosecuted one of Mr. dos Santos’s children for corruption and tried to charge another.But as the economy stagnated, this tactic began to backfire, as people directed their anger at Mr. Lourenço, dismissing his anticorruption efforts as factional fighting instead of real reform. Mr. Lourenço’s party has also leaned on nostalgia for its glory years as a liberation movement, analysts said. After Mr. dos Santos died last month, a fight ensued between some of his adult children and his widow, backed by the government, over where to bury his body.Mr. Lourenço’s office did not respond to numerous requests for comment.His party, which has been in power since 1975, controls the state and its budget. State media spotlights the governing party, while the constitutional court is packed with pro-MPLA justices. This is why Angola’s election is unlikely to be free or fair, said Borges Nhamirre, a consultant with the Institute of Security Studies, headquartered in South Africa.Angolans mourning the death of former President José Eduardo dos Santos in Luanda last week.Paulo Novais/EPA, via ShutterstockA June poll by the Mudei Civic Movement, a citizen-based election monitoring group, found the MPLA trailing by 19 percentage points behind the opposition coalition, while an earlier poll by the continental research group Afrobarometer showed the MPLA winning by its lowest margin yet.In response, a state-owned broadcaster conducted its own poll, which showed the governing party far ahead of its rival. In May, the MPLA majority in Parliament passed a law restricting polling, forcing polling agencies to pay large sums of money as purported assurance of their legitimacy. The voters’ roll is also packed with the names of dead people, opposition groups and civil society groups say. “My brother and I were shocked to find out that our father, who died nine years ago, is registered to vote,” said Adérito Malungo, who plans to vote in Luanda.Any demonstrations in the face of these irregularities are likely to face a bloody crackdown, according to scenarios mapped out by security analysts, as the military and the police are firmly controlled by MPLA loyalists. Results will begin trickling in within the first 24 hours after the vote, but it is unclear when the final tally will be announced.Unlike in previous years, Angolans in the capital seem more willing to talk about their political choices ahead of the election. On a weekday afternoon in Luanda, Mr. Quitembe and two friends — all preparing to vote for the first time, all unemployed and all under the age of 30 — discussed their options.“Right now, I would rather have been working if someone had kept his promise to create 500,000 jobs for the youth,” said Martins Lourenço, 21, referring to the president’s 2017 election promise.The port of Luanda. Angola’s state oil company has been plagued by years of mismanagement, analysts say.John Wessels/Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesBut the president maintained some support.“Things are pretty bad right now and I know it, but I think we should give the benefit of the doubt and keep JLo,” said Arminda Kisanga, 28, using the president’s nickname. “These weren’t easy years for him up there.”Mr. Quitembe scoffed at the party’s promises of reform. “Do you truly believe these guys stopped looting our money?” he asked, laughing. “They only changed some people; it’s all the same.”Angola’s economy has dipped in and out of recession since Mr. Lourenço took over the reins of the party in 2017 and then the country a year later. Under Mr. dos Santos, Angola experienced a postwar boom propelled by oil and diamond exports. The country went on an infrastructure-construction spree, building megaprojects like a new Parliament, often with loans from Chinese banks. As new skyscrapers appeared on Luanda’s skyline, slums around the city grew, creating an economically unequal society where the vast majority of the population lived below the poverty line.The vast majority of Angola’s population lived below the poverty line.John Wessels/Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesLast year, Angola’s public debt was 110 percent of its gross domestic product, said Francisco Paulo, a Luanda-based economist. Years of mismanaging the state oil company meant that Angola missed out on the profits other oil producers reaped after the Russian invasion of Ukraine, Mr. Paulo said. Recently built roads and bridges have fallen into decay, driving up the cost of goods, as transportation has become more expensive, particularly in rural areas. Mr. Lourenço’s previous election promises to root out corruption and overhaul the economy have not been fulfilled.“In terms of the economic outlook, there is no reason for people to vote for the M.P.L.A. again,” Mr. Paulo said.But many have benefited from the party.Nova Cidade de Kilamba, a housing project just outside Luanda, was once a feather in the government’s cap. In the decade since it opened, the project has fallen into decay.Still, some like Maura Gouveia, a 26-year-old engineering student and a resident of the project, said she trusted the stability of the party.“I vote for continuity,” she said.Experts say that Angola’s election is unlikely to be free or fair.John Wessels/Agence France-Presse — Getty Images More

    • 150 Shares179 Views

      in Elections

      When Will We Know Who Won in New York and Florida Elections?

      by

      Florida and New York are on the clock: A series of primaries on Tuesday, some fiercely competitive, are posing the latest test of each state’s efficiency at counting votes and reporting timely results.New York is holding its first primaries since it streamlined its process for counting mail-in ballots, which election experts say should reduce delays. And Florida makes few exceptions for accepting absentee ballots after in-person voting ends, so relatively few votes will remain uncounted after polls close.But close races could upend the timely reporting of results, those experts cautioned.In Florida, most of the polls close at 7 p.m. Eastern time, but voting ends an hour later for parts of the Panhandle in the Central time zone.A half-hour after the polls close, election supervisors in the 67 counties are required to report to the state early voting and vote-by-mail results that they have received by that point, said Mark Ard, a spokesman for the Florida Department of State.The first results should appear on the state’s election website shortly after 8 p.m. Eastern time, with counties required to release updates every 45 minutes until they have completed their counts, he said.Absentee ballots must be received by the counties by 7 p.m. local time, except for those from military and overseas voters. The number of uncounted ballots after Election Day should be relatively small, according to Mr. Ard, who said the state would track those totals.About 98 percent of the vote in Florida is typically counted on Election Day, said Stephen Ohlemacher, election decision editor for The Associated Press.In the 2020 general election, 100 percent of Florida’s precincts had reported election results as of 1:02 a.m. Eastern time the morning after the election, according to The A.P.In New York, in-person voting ends statewide at 9 p.m. Eastern time. Under a new state law, counties must start processing mail-in ballots within four days of receiving them and may begin tabulating those results an hour before the polls close, Mr. Ohlemacher noted. In the past, he said, the counting of mail-in ballots did not start until a week after the election.The change already had a major effect during the June 28 primaries in New York, which hosted intraparty contests for governor and the State Assembly, the lower chamber of the Legislature. Just 1 percent of the vote remained uncounted after Election Day. In the 2020 general election, it was 23 percent, according to The A.P.But New York continues to lag behind other states in providing information about the number of mail-in ballots cast, Mr. Ohlemacher said, adding that this could delay The A.P. from determining who wins close races.Counties will start to post results in real time on the state’s election results website around 10 p.m. Eastern time, said Jennifer Wilson, a spokeswoman for the New York State Board of Elections. More

    • 113 Shares159 Views

      in Elections

      La democracia está bajo amenaza en todo el mundo

      by

      EE. UU. no está solo en cuanto a la presión que sufren las normas e instituciones democráticas. Según un estudio reciente, ahora hay más democracias que decaen que en cualquier otro momento del último siglo.Estados Unidos no es el único país que enfrenta presión contra sus reglas e instituciones democráticas. De acuerdo con datos de V-Dem, un instituto de monitoreo con sede en Suecia, en la actualidad, más que en ningún otro momento del siglo pasado, hay otras democracias en deterioro, e incluso hay algunas que están muy cerca de la autocracia. Los datos demuestran que, al parecer, esta tendencia, que lleva más de una década, va en aumento y está afectando tanto a las democracias bien establecidas como a las endebles.Este es una revisión de algunos de los acontecimientos más recientes.KeniaPese a ser considerada una de las democracias más sólidas de África, Kenia ha tenido que enfrentar turbulencias continuas. En ocasiones, los políticos han aprovechado la polarización en cuestiones étnicas y geográficas, sobre todo durante las elecciones. Esto ha dado origen a una serie de crisis, violencia comunitaria y ataques a instituciones como los órganos judiciales.Las reñidas elecciones de este mes han supuesto una prueba más para la democracia keniana, ya que un asesor sénior del candidato perdedor ha insinuado que quizá su campaña impugnará los resultados por considerarlos fraudulentos.“La democracia en nuestro país, Kenia, está actualmente en un territorio muy hostil”, señaló en un evento de marzo en Washington D. C. William Ruto, el candidato ganador de las recientes elecciones.Sri LankaEsta democracia multiétnica y diversa en términos religiosos ha sido cuestionada desde que el hermano del exdictador Mahinda Rajapaksa subió al poder en las elecciones de 2019. Desde hacía mucho tiempo, la familia Rajapaksa había sido acusada de abuso de poder y de denigrar a las minorías del país, lo que incrementó el temor de que Sri Lanka pudiera volver a la autocracia.Este verano, las protestas por los problemas económicos terminaron en un asalto al palacio presidencial por parte de los manifestantes. El presidente Gotabaya Rajapaksa renunció, pero designó como su sustituto a uno de sus aliados, el cual, con la aprobación del Parlamento, más tarde se convirtió en el presidente oficial. Esto ha dejado en un punto muerto el conflicto entre los manifestantes y la influencia de la dinastía Rajapaksa.Hungría“Este nuevo Estado que estamos construyendo es en un Estado iliberal”, declaró el primer ministro Viktor Orbán en 2014.Desde entonces, Orbán, quien se presenta como la vanguardia de la derecha populista a nivel mundial, ha reconfigurado el sistema judicial, la Constitución y las normas electorales a modo de fortalecer su mandato. También ha usado los medios de comunicación, tanto estatales como privados, para atacar a sus opositores mediante la divulgación de desinformación y discursos nacionalistas.Orbán ha planteado estas medidas como algo necesario para defender a Hungría de la influencia corruptora de la diversidad racial, la migración no europea y la Unión Europea. Aunque, debido al descontento con el mandatario, los partidos de oposición han repuntado, Orbán sigue contando con una importante base de apoyo.BrasilEl presidente Jair Bolsonaro, quien elogia la figura de Donald Trump como un modelo político, desde hace mucho tiempo ha tachado de corruptas a las instituciones democráticas de Brasil. También ha expresado muy buenas opiniones de la dictadura militar de derecha que gobernó el país de 1964 a 1985.Bolsonaro ya está cuestionando la legitimidad de la contienda presidencial de Brasil que se celebrará en octubre, para la cual ha quedado rezagado en las encuestas. Incluso ha conseguido la ayuda de algunos dirigentes militares que han planteado dudas sobre la integridad de las elecciones.Aunque no se sabe si Bolsonaro en verdad intentaría impugnar o rechazar una derrota, sus provocaciones han aumentado las inquietudes del mundo por la estabilidad de la democracia más poblada de Latinoamérica.FilipinasEn los seis años de la presidencia de Rodrigo Duterte en Filipinas, atestiguamos el encarcelamiento de enemigos políticos y periodistas, la propagación generalizada de desinformación en favor de Duterte y una ola de violencia ocasionada por grupos paramilitares que dejó miles de personas muertas.Duterte, un férreo populista, se posicionó como defensor de la democracia frente a sus opositores, a quienes describía como amenazas internas para el país, y obtuvo el apoyo de sus bases a pesar de sus excesos mientras ocupó el cargo.Aunque dejó la presidencia por voluntad propia cuando terminó su mandato en mayo, los ciudadanos eligieron a un nuevo presidente, Ferdinand Marcos, hijo, que los grupos de derechos humanos temen que continuará con el mismo estilo de gobierno. El nuevo Marcos es hijo de un exdictador del país. Su vicepresidenta, Sara Duterte, es la hija de Rodrigo Duterte.IndiaBajo el mandato de Narendra Modi, el primer ministro de India desde 2014, un drástico incremento del ultranacionalismo hindú, que suelen apoyar los aliados de su gobierno, ha dividido a la sociedad del país.Los aproximadamente 200 millones de musulmanes del país han sufrido marginación política y, en muchos casos, una letal violencia religiosa, lo que ha sido ignorado en varias ocasiones por los funcionarios. Los periodistas críticos viven bajo una creciente presión del gobierno y de los medios de comunicación cada vez más nacionalistas.El gobierno de Modi reprimió con violencia la región en disputa de Cachemira y, el año pasado, respondió con dureza a una ola de protestas de los agricultores indios, lo que aumentó el temor de que su gobierno estuviera volviéndose cada vez más coercitivo.TurquíaEn sus casi 20 años en el poder, Recep Tayyip Erdogan ha reconfigurado la democracia turca para convertirla en un vehículo de su poder personal. Erdogan, quien era visto como una fuerza de liberalización, ha restringido las libertades políticas y centralizado el poder de manera tan drástica que ahora casi todos lo consideran un dictador.Después del intento de golpe de Estado en su contra en 2016, el gobierno de Erdogan arrestó a 100.000 personas y despidió a 150.000 empleados del gobierno, lo cual consolidó su poder. Sin embargo, sigue existiendo algo de democracia, puesto que en 2019 los grupos de oposición destituyeron al aliado de Erdogan de la poderosa alcaldía de Estambul y esperan lograr más triunfos.PoloniaPolonia, que solía ser la mayor historia de éxito de la era poscomunista en Europa del Este, ahora se enfrenta a una fuerte polarización política. El partido de derecha en el gobierno ha querido subordinar a su voluntad al sistema judicial y a los medios de comunicación, que siempre han sido independientes. También arremetió contra la Unión Europea, la cual ha puesto en duda que los dirigentes polacos estén defendiendo el Estado de derecho.En los últimos meses, la preocupación por la democracia polaca ha disminuido un poco. Los dirigentes polacos han querido reparar sus vínculos con la Unión Europea, incluso en los temas de la democracia, como una manera de combatir lo que ven como la amenaza de Rusia para Europa. No obstante, los grupos de derechos humanos afirman que la democracia polaca casi no ha revertido su retroceso.El SalvadorEste pequeño país de Centroamérica había establecido una democracia débil después de su dolorosa guerra civil, que terminó en 1992, pero dejó heridas sin sanar.En 2019, un joven desconocido, Nayib Bukele, ganó la presidencia con la promesa de un cambio. Sin embargo, ya en el cargo, ha restringido los derechos básicos, despedido a los jueces, encarcelado a miles de personas sin cumplir con el debido proceso y desplegado al ejército. Bukele alega que son medidas de emergencia para combatir la delincuencia.No obstante, aunque los grupos de derechos humanos y los observadores internacionales están alarmados, Bukele se ha vuelto muy popular, lo que nos recuerda que, en el mundo actual, a los futuros dictadores con frecuencia se les elogia mientras van en ascenso.VenezuelaEl país, que alguna vez fue la democracia más antigua y la economía más rica de Sudamérica, ha caído en una zona de desastre económico, en la que la mayor parte de la población padece hambre y está gobernada por lo que, en general, se considera una dictadura.Los estudiosos de la democracia a menudo sostienen que este país es representativo de la manera en que las democracias tienden a deteriorarse en la actualidad: con lentitud, socavadas desde el interior por populistas electos que tachan de ilegítimos a los opositores y a las instituciones y cuyas medidas iniciales pueden ser muy populares.El dirigente responsable de gran parte de este deterioro, Hugo Chávez, murió en 2013. Su sucesor, Nicolás Maduro, ha llevado a cabo represiones letales contra los manifestantes y ha ejercido un control férreo de los tribunales y las legislaturas.República Checa y EsloveniaCuando, en 2017, el populista y multimillonario magnate de los medios de comunicación Andrej Babis se convirtió en primer ministro de la República Checa, hubo temor de que siguiera el camino hacia el iliberalismo ultraconservador marcado por Orbán en Hungría. Cuando la vecina Eslovenia eligió a su propio populista de derecha, aumentó la preocupación de que se formara un bloque de países que acabaran con la Unión Europea desde el interior.Aunque Babis sí condujo poco a poco a su país en esa dirección, al final fue derrotado en las elecciones de 2021, ya que varios partidos de oposición se aliaron contra él, pues lo calificaban como una amenaza para la democracia checa. Al año siguiente, los electores eslovenos expulsaron a su gobierno populista. Ambos países fueron un ejemplo de que todavía, en ocasiones, se pueden disipar las dudas en torno a la democracia.Max Fisher es reportero y columnista de temas internacionales con sede en Nueva York. Ha reportado sobre conflictos, diplomacia y cambio social desde cinco continentes. Es autor de The Interpreter, una columna que explora las ideas y el contexto detrás de los principales eventos mundiales de actualidad. @Max_Fisher • Facebook More