Politics and Government

Subterms

    More stories

    • 138 Shares109 Views

      in Elections

      Bolsonaro Está Ficando Desesperado, e Não Há Dúvidas Sobre Suas Intenções

      by

      SÃO PAULO, Brasil — Há semanas, o presidente brasileiro Jair Bolsonaro tem incitado seus apoiadores a tomar as ruas. Por isso, no dia 7 de setembro, Dia da Independência, eu quase esperava ver hordas de pessoas armadas vestindo camisas verde-amarelas, algumas com chapéus de pele com chifres, invadindo o edifício do Supremo Tribunal Federal — nossa própria versão da invasão do Capitólio.Felizmente, não foi o que ocorreu. (A multidão acabou indo para casa, e ninguém tentou se sentar nas cadeiras dos juízes do Supremo.) Mas os brasileiros tiveram sua cota de caos e consternação.Para Bolsonaro, foi uma demonstração de força. Pela manhã, dirigindo-se a uma multidão de cerca de 400 mil pessoas em Brasília, ele disse que pretendia usar o tamanho do público como um “ultimato para todos os que estão na Praça dos Três Poderes.” À tarde, em um protesto em São Paulo com 125 mil pessoas, o presidente chamou as eleições de 2022 de “uma farsa” e afirmou que não irá mais cumprir as decisões de um dos juízes do Supremo. Seu propósito: “dizer aos canalhas”, urrou, “que nunca serei preso!”Parece ser parte de um plano. Ao comprar briga especificamente com o Supremo Tribunal Federal — que abriu inúmeras investigações sobre o presidente e seus aliados, incluindo seu papel em um esquema potencialmente corrupto de compra de vacinas e seus esforços para desacreditar o sistema de votação brasileiro — Bolsonaro está tentando semear uma crise institucional, com vistas a se manter no poder. No dia 9 de setembro ele tentou recuar um pouco, dizendo em uma carta que não teve “nenhuma intenção de agredir quaisquer dos poderes.” Mas suas ações são claras: ele está de fato ameaçando dar um golpe.Talvez essa seja a única saída para Bolsonaro. (Com exceção de governar propriamente o país, algo que aparentemente não lhe desperta o interesse.) Os atos bizarros do presidente, que está debilitado nas pesquisas e se vê ameaçado pela perspectiva de um impeachment, são um sinal de desespero. Mas isso não quer dizer necessariamente que não podem ter êxito.Bolsonaro tem bons motivos para se desesperar. A incompetência do governo em lidar com a pandemia de Covid-19 resultou na morte de 587 mil brasileiros; o país ostenta taxas históricas de desemprego e desigualdade econômica; e também sofre com uma crescente inflação, pobreza e fome. Ah, e temos uma enorme crise energética a caminho.Tudo isso cobrou um preço alto do prestígio de Bolsonaro junto aos brasileiros. Em julho, a taxa de reprovação do presidente subiu para 51 por cento, maior índice da história, de acordo com o Datafolha. E para as eleições presidenciais do ano que vem, a situação também não é muito favorável. Na verdade, as pesquisas indicam que ele vai perder. Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, ex-presidente de centro-esquerda, está superando Bolsonaro com certa folga. Se as coisas continuarem como estão, Bolsonaro perde para todos os possíveis adversários no segundo turno.Isso explica a avidez do presidente em promover acusações infundadas de fraude no sistema eletrônico de votação do Brasil. “Não tem como comprovar que as eleições foram ou não foram fraudadas,” ele declarou sobre eleições passadas (inclusive a que ele venceu), durante uma transmissão pela TV que durou duas horas, em julho, enquanto falhava em fornecer quaisquer provas para apoiar suas alegações. Ele ameaçou repetidamente cancelar as eleições se o sistema de votação atual continuar em vigor — e embora o Congresso tenha recentemente rejeitado sua proposta de emitir recibos impressos, continua a lançar dúvidas sobre o sistema eleitoral. (Parece familiar? Alguém?)E tem também a corrupção. Há um número crescente de acusações de corrupção contra o presidente e dois de seus filhos, que também detêm cargos públicos. (Um deles é senador e o outro é vereador do Rio de Janeiro.) Promotores sugerem que a família Bolsonaro participou de um esquema conhecido como “rachadinha,” que consiste em contratar familiares ou pessoas próximas como funcionários e embolsar uma parte de seus salários.Para Bolsonaro, que foi eleito em parte com a promessa de acabar com a corrupção, essas investigações lançam uma pesada sombra. Diante desse cenário de inépcia e escândalo, os eventos de 7 de setembro foram uma tentativa de distrair e desviar a atenção pública — e, é claro, de cimentar a discórdia.Os esforços para destituir Bolsonaro por meios parlamentares estão empacados. Ainda que a oposição tenha apresentado 137 pedidos de impeachment, o processo precisa ser iniciado pelo presidente da Câmara dos Deputados, Arthur Lira, que não parece inclinado a aceitá-los. (Isso não é nada surpreendente: Lira é um dos líderes de um conjunto de partidos de centro-direita conhecido como “Centrão,” a quem Bolsonaro distribuiu cargos importantes no governo, na esperança de se blindar contra processos de impeachment.) Apenas enormes manifestações populares são capazes de quebrar o impasse.Não há tempo a perder. Os protestos da semana passada não foram um simples espetáculo político. Foram mais um passo para fortalecer a posição de Bolsonaro para uma eventual tomada de poder antes das eleições do ano que vem. Ele não conseguiu exatamente o que queria — os números, ainda que expressivos, foram muito menores do que os organizadores esperavam — mas ele vai continuar tentando.O 7 de setembro agora marca um outro momento emblemático na história do Brasil — quando os objetivos totalitários do nosso presidente se tornaram inequívocos. Para a nossa jovem democracia, pode ser uma questão de vida ou morte.Vanessa Barbara é a editora do sítio literário A Hortaliça, autora de dois romances e dois livros de não-ficção em português, e escritora de opinião do The New York Times. More

    • 113 Shares199 Views

      in Elections

      After Brazil’s Independence Day, It’s Clear What Bolsonaro Wants

      by

      SÃO PAULO, Brazil — For weeks, President Jair Bolsonaro of Brazil has been urging his supporters to take to the streets. So on Sept. 7, Brazil’s Independence Day, I was half expecting to see mobs of armed people in yellow-and-green jerseys, some of them wearing furry hats and horns, storming the Supreme Court building — our very own imitation of the Capitol riot.Fortunately, that was not what happened. (The crowds eventually went home, and no one tried to sit in the Supreme Court justices’ chairs.) But Brazilians were not spared chaos and consternation.For Mr. Bolsonaro, it was a show of force. In the morning, addressing a crowd of around 400,000 people in Brasília, he said he intended to use the size of the crowd as an “ultimatum for everyone” in the three branches of government. In the afternoon, at a demonstration in São Paulo of 125,000 people, the president called the elections coming in 2022 “a farce” and said that he will no longer abide by rulings from one of the Supreme Court justices. “I’m letting the scoundrels know,” he bellowed, “I’ll never be imprisoned!”It seems to be part of a plan. By picking a fight in particular with the Supreme Court — which has opened several investigations of him and his allies, including of his role in a potentially corrupt vaccine procurement scheme and his efforts to discredit Brazil’s voting system — Mr. Bolsonaro is attempting to sow the seeds of an institutional crisis, with a view to retaining power. On Sept. 9 he tried to back down a little, saying in a written statement that he “never intended to attack any branch of government.” But his actions are plain: He is effectively threatening a coup.Perhaps that’s the only way out for Mr. Bolsonaro. (Apart from properly governing the country, something that apparently doesn’t interest him.) The antics of the president, struggling in the polls and menaced by the prospect of impeachment, are a sign of desperation. But that doesn’t mean they can’t succeed.Mr. Bolsonaro has good reason to be desperate. The government’s mishandling of the Covid-19 pandemic has resulted in the deaths of 587,000 Brazilians; the country faces record rates of unemployment and economic inequality; and it’s also afflicted by soaring inflation, poverty and hunger. Oh, and there’s a huge energy crisis on the way, too.That has taken its toll on Mr. Bolsonaro’s standing with Brazilians. In July, his disapproval rating rose to 51 percent, its highest-ever mark, according to Datafolha Institute. And ahead of next year’s presidential elections, things are not looking rosy. In fact, polling suggests he’s going to lose. Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva, the center-left politician and former president, is comfortably outstripping Mr. Bolsonaro. As things stand, Mr. Bolsonaro would lose to all possible rivals in a second-round runoff.This explains Mr. Bolsonaro’s eagerness to push unfounded claims of fraud in Brazil’s electronic voting system. “There’s no way of proving whether the elections were rigged or not,” he said about past elections (including the one he won), during a two-hour TV broadcast in July, while failing to provide any evidence to support his allegations. He has repeatedly threatened to call off the elections if the current voting system remains in place — and although Congress recently rejected his proposal to require paper receipts, he continues to cast doubt on the voting process. (Sound familiar, anyone?)Then there’s the corruption. A growing number of corruption accusations have been made against the president and two of his sons, who both hold public office. (One is a senator; the other sits on Rio de Janeiro’s City Council.) Prosecutors have suggested that the Bolsonaro family took part in a scheme known as “rachadinha,” which involves hiring close associates or family members as employees and then pocketing a portion of their salary.For Mr. Bolsonaro, who was elected in part for his promise to rout out corruption, these investigations cast a long shadow. Against this backdrop of ineptitude and scandal, the events of Sept. 7 were an attempt to distract and divert attention — and, of course, to cement divisions.Efforts to remove Mr. Bolsonaro by parliamentary means are stalled. Though the opposition has so far filed 137 impeachment requests, the process must be initiated by the speaker of the lower house, Arthur Lira, who does not seem inclined to accept them. (That’s not especially surprising: Mr. Lira is a leader of a cluster of center-right parties, known as the “centrão,” to whom Mr. Bolsonaro has handed out important government positions, in the hope of shielding himself from impeachment proceedings.) Only enormous public protests can break the impasse.There’s no time to lose. The demonstrations last week were not simply political showmanship. They were yet another move to strengthen Mr. Bolsonaro’s position for an eventual power grab ahead of next year’s elections. He didn’t get exactly what he wanted — the numbers, though substantial, were far less than organizers hoped for — but he will keep trying.Sept. 7 now marks another signal moment in Brazil’s history — when the totalitarian aims of our president became unmistakably clear. For our young democracy, it could be a matter of life or death.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 Shares169 Views

      in Elections

      How is Voting Going in California? Elections Chief Says 'Smoothly'

      by

      With false allegations of voter fraud trailing the California recall election, we checked in with Secretary of State Shirley Weber, who oversees the state’s elections, about how voting has progressed and how her office is dealing with efforts to undermine faith in the contest. The interview has been lightly edited and condensed.How is voting going?We’ve seen over eight million ballots mailed back thus far, which is a very significant number of ballots coming in. So that in itself is rather exciting, as well as ballots still being dropped off at the ballot boxes this morning.We’ve had folks calling all of our hotlines asking where their polling places are or looking for additional information. It’s clear that people are interested in voting today.Why have people been calling the hotlines?Sometimes people have familiar polling places that they used to go to forever and now they’ve changed. We’ve had a couple of calls saying, “Where is it now?”Secretary of State Shirley Weber in Sacramento last year. Dr. Weber oversees California’s elections.Rich Pedroncelli/Associated PressWe’ve had folks who couldn’t find their ballots — misplaced them after they came in the mail. And we’ve had folks who left the state for a bit and wonder how can they still vote, those kinds of things.But we’ve had no long lines, no folks waiting. We have a wait time of zero right now.Any other hitches today?We’ve seen small things. One polling place opening 10 minutes late, that kind of stuff.Because of the fires, we’ve had some folks who moved away from their places. So we have to deal with that issue. We had one county the telephones were not servicing. We’ve just adapted and adjusted to every little new thing that comes along. But we haven’t had anything that’s been a major shutdown.For those facing difficulties because of the wildfires, what else have you done?We have made sure that all of those who were in the fire zones got their mail-in ballots.We made sure that those who had to leave or who’ve lost their homes, that they had access to voting in various other ways, in terms of being able to go to another county to vote, making sure they had their mail-in ballots, making sure they knew where the ballot boxes were in other counties or other areas. So we have made outreach to all of those who might have been affected by any fire or any kind of tragedy.We also set up remote mobile voting for our firefighters to make sure that those who are away from their homes had access to vote.How are you preparing your office for the claims and possible litigation of election fraud that Republicans say they may bring?I think the whole discussion of fraud across the nation kind of gives us a preview of what people will do. They may file various lawsuits. We know that they have been trying to collect information — they set up a website saying, ‘If you see any irregularities, show us your irregularities.’ And, you know, people go to court, and thus far across the nation, they’ve lost because there is no widespread fraud in the election process. But whether they decide to go to court or not, we will be there to defend the process.We know that they will always talk about the fact that it was a stolen election or fraud, — or there’s a new term, “shenanigans.” We have no evidence of that, and when we’ve had allegations of any type, especially if there’s any specific information, we investigated. And as most folks have found across the nation, there is no there there.So we’re not totally freaking out. We’re just making sure that everything we do is correct by the book. That we’ve taken our time to make sure that there’s transparency. And thus far, we’ve not found anything ourselves.Are there extra steps of transparency that you’ve taken in this hyperpartisan era when the process itself is contested?We do what we’ve always done. This is a unique election as a recall. But keep in mind, we’ve had four or five elections this year, special elections, as well as last November.Anytime we discover something that might be an area of concern, we do our best to make sure that we shore that up. If we discover that somebody is complaining that the signs are too small, they couldn’t really see a sign at a voting booth, we try to make sure that next time, we do more. If folks feel disenfranchised because of language, if there’s enough folks in that community, we make sure that we increase the number of languages and make sure that those languages are clear.And so it’s not like we are gearing up because Mr. Elder says something or someone else says something. We are aware that the question of fraud or questions of transparency are constant. And, as I travel to different registrars’ offices, I see them responding to different issues, like making sure that there’s space that people can observe the opening of ballots.When I was in one area, they had basically created pathways for folks to be able to do that. So those are the kinds of things that we respond to all the time to make sure that those who want to build issues of transparency and fairness have an opportunity to do so. More

    • 113 Shares119 Views

      in Elections

      In California, Republicans Struggle to Expand the Recall’s Appeal

      by

      California has not been as progressive lately as its reputation would suggest. Yet Republicans have had trouble breaking the recall out of the fringe.THOUSAND OAKS, Calif. — The small faction of Californians who still call themselves Republicans did something seemingly impossible when they forced Gavin Newsom, the Democratic governor of America’s largest Democratic state, to face voters in a recall.It was a side of California often overlooked: the conservative minority that for decades has been on the leading edge of the Republican Party’s transformation into a vehicle for the anti-establishment grievance politics that swept former President Donald J. Trump into office in 2016. The California conservative movement led a national campaign against affirmative action in the 1990s, later shaped the anti-immigration views of the Trump strategists Stephen Miller and Stephen K. Bannon, and gave rise to a new generation of media heavyweights such as Breitbart News and Ben Shapiro.But with Mr. Newsom leading the latest polls before the election on Tuesday, some of those same forces have struggled to gain mainstream support for the recall.California Republicans lack a single, unifying leader who has the ability to appeal beyond the hard right. The hollowed-out state party has left them with few avenues for organizing in such a vast place. And they have been unable to convert the populist anger at the governor over his handling of the pandemic into a broad-based backlash from voters who are right, left and somewhere in between. What started as a fringe campaign to flip the highest office in liberal California and upend the national political calculus seemed to be losing steam with Election Day approaching.Mr. Newsom’s allies blasted the state with advertising that linked the recall to a far-right coalition of conspiracy theorists, anti-vaccine activists and allies of the former president. And mainstream Republican supporters of the recall said the effort had become saddled with too much of the national party’s baggage.“The Republicans have struggled, I think, to identify with clarity that Democrats have been in charge out here for 15 years,” said Doug Ose, a Republican and former three-term congressman who recently dropped out of the race to replace Mr. Newsom after having a heart attack. Instead of focusing on questions such as whether Californians were better off today than they were 15 years ago, Republicans, he said, were being drawn into debates over abortion and other national issues.“Quit taking the bait,” Mr. Ose said of the Republican attention to the Texas abortion law. “Nobody in Texas is going to vote in this election. Why are we talking about what’s happening in Texas?”In a state where Democrats have been adding to their share of the electorate in recent years — now accounting for 46 percent of all registered voters, according to the Public Policy Institute of California — the Republican Party has been steadily shedding voters. Republicans are only 24 percent of the electorate, compared with 35 percent in 2003, the last time the state recalled its Democratic governor, Gray Davis.That is a far cry from the California that produced two Republican presidents — Richard M. Nixon and Ronald Reagan, who was twice elected governor — and that provided a national model for how to run as a celebrity conservative reformer in a deep-blue state: former Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger.Mr. Schwarzenegger left office in 2011, and the state has not elected a Republican for a statewide seat since then. But if ever there was a time for conservatives to notch a rare, consequential victory in California, this would seem to be it.Residents have been anxious about this latest round of state-mandated, pandemic-related closures, with almost half sharing the mistaken belief that California is in an economic recession, according to one recent study. Jarring reminders of the state’s inability to solve fundamental, perennial problems are everywhere, from the tent cities that lined the Venice boardwalk to wildfires that suffocated Lake Tahoe.And voters have demonstrated an independent streak lately, rejecting progressive initiatives at the ballot box by large margins. Last year, as the state went for President Biden by a margin of nearly 2 to 1, voters defeated a referendum that would have repealed the state’s ban on affirmative action, 57 percent to 43 percent. At the same time, Californians voted in favor of allowing drivers for Uber and other ride-hailing and delivery apps to remain independent contractors, rebuffing a push from labor and progressive groups to classify them as employees who are entitled to wage protections and benefits.In Orange County and other traditionally right-leaning parts of the state, voters who had swung toward the Democratic Party in 2018 swung back in 2020. Four of the 15 seats that Republicans flipped in the House of Representatives in 2020 were in California, including two in Orange County. And despite losing the state, Mr. Trump still received 1.5 million more votes from Californians in 2020 than he did in 2016.“You didn’t see it in the vote for Biden,” said Charles Kessler, a professor at Claremont McKenna College who studies the American right. But the results in California in 2020 overall, Mr. Kessler said, looked like “the beginnings of a kind of revolt against the Hollywood, high-tech San Francisco-led Democratic Party in the state.”Mr. Elder, the recall candidate, comes from the tradition of California conservatives whose appeal is in refusing to appeal to liberals. Jenna Schoenefeld for The New York TimesThe other California — the one of megachurches in the sprawl of the irrigated desert, Trump boat parades and a would-be secessionist enclave near the Oregon border that calls itself the “State of Jefferson” — occasionally finds common cause with moderates and independents to shake up state politics.But Mr. Kessler said that a major difference between today and 2003, when Mr. Schwarzenegger replaced Mr. Davis in the last recall, was that the Republican Party lacked a candidate with crossover appeal. Success, he said, would depend on a candidate “who gives you an alternative to the Democrat without having to embrace another party exactly.”That is not Larry Elder, the Republican front-runner in the recall race.A talk radio host, Mr. Elder comes from the tradition of California conservatives whose appeal was that they refused to appeal to liberals. The list includes Los Angeles-born Andrew Breitbart, the conservative writer and activist who founded Breitbart News, and Mr. Miller, who is the former architect of Mr. Trump’s anti-immigration agenda and who grew up in Santa Monica listening to Mr. Elder’s show.At times, Elder campaign events have felt not all that different from Trump rallies.At a Labor Day rally in the suburb of Thousand Oaks, about 40 miles outside downtown Los Angeles in Ventura County, Mr. Elder drew boos from the crowd when he mentioned The Los Angeles Times, and laughter when he said he intended to “speak slowly” because CNN was there. He dropped the kind of bombs that made him a national name in conservative talk radio, winning applause from of his mostly white audience.“What they’re afraid of,” Mr. Elder said, referring to his Democratic opponents, “is Larry Elder from the hood who went to a public school will be able to make the case to Black and brown people: ‘You are being betrayed. You are being used. You are being manipulated.’”“Racism has never been less significant in America,” added Mr. Elder, who is Black.Shelley Merrell, who runs a fire safety company in Ventura, nodded along as Mr. Elder called systemic racism “a lie” and rattled off statistics about police officers killing unarmed white people in larger numbers than they did Black people. Ms. Merrell, who is white, said that her support for the recall was rooted in her belief that California had become too inhospitable to businesses.“I love my employees, and I just want to give them the best life possible, but it’s getting more and more difficult,” she said as she urged passers-by at the event to take her pro-recall material, including one flier that read, “Don’t Vote By Mail.”The in-your-face, contrarian style of right-wing talk radio hosts who scorn the mainstream media and mock liberals has served Mr. Elder well, helping him build a weekly national audience of 4.5 million listeners. California was the ideal market to build out his brand, as it was for other stars of conservative radio. Rush Limbaugh got his start at KFBK in Sacramento, and Sean Hannity started his career at KCSB in Santa Barbara.But Mr. Elder may find that what works on talk radio is ill-suited to win a statewide election in California.“We cannot simply appeal to ourselves,” said Kevin Faulconer, the former mayor of San Diego and Republican recall candidate whose centrist campaign was often overshadowed by the far-right rhetoric of Mr. Elder. “We can be a party that wins again in California if we focus on solutions, if we focus on reform and if we’re inclusive. You cannot win office in California until you get Democrats and independents.”Kevin Kiley, a lawmaker in the State Assembly and one of the other more moderate Republican recall candidates, said he would not put a conventional political label of left, right or center on the kind of coalition he hopes to appeal to. Cognizant of what having an “R” after his name on the ballot means to many California voters, he has pitched himself as a bridge candidate.“Part of the unique opportunity with this recall is it is a chance to cross party lines,” Mr. Kiley said. “They’re not signing on for four years. They’re signing on for one year.” (If Mr. Newsom is recalled, the winning candidate to replace him would serve out the remainder of his term through 2022.)At the rally in Thousand Oaks, Mr. Elder seemed to acknowledge that his appeal was limited, and pivoted slightly to a more centrist message. He insisted that he was not merely a “Trump supporter” but a Republican through and through — since he cast his last vote for a Democrat in 1976, for former President Jimmy Carter, a decision he said he had regretted ever since.Mr. Kessler, the professor at Claremont McKenna College, said if there was another Republican renaissance coming to California, he doubted that this was the moment. But he also said he doubted that the current state of one-party control was sustainable. “This is a case where I think from the Republican point of view, things have to get worse in the state before they can get better,” he said. More

    • 150 Shares119 Views

      in Elections

      California Has a Lot of Recall Attempts, and Not Just for Governors

      by

      While all eyes were on Gov. Gavin Newsom, a developer in Sonoma County was charging forward with an effort to recall the district attorney who had sued his company.All around California, other officials were facing recall campaigns, too. A member of the Fallbrook Union High School District board of trustees. A councilwoman in Kingsburg. A councilman in Morgan Hill. The mayors of Huntington Beach and Placerville, council members in Huntington Beach and Placerville, school board or board of education members in Chico, Santa Monica, Cupertino, Sunnyvale, Elk Grove and oh my goodness, are you tired yet?Recalls are a dime a dozen in California, and to read through the rationales for them is to confront a deluge of grievances, some serious and others remarkably petty.The recall efforts are because she voted against resuming full-time in-person schooling. Because of zoning disputes. Because she “has demonstrated a Marxist/socialist agenda.” Because of his homelessness policies. Because she declined to prosecute a police brutality case. Because he ostensibly “lacks mental competence.” Because she was convicted of welfare fraud several years before she was elected.If history is a guide, most of these campaigns will never come to a vote. But two, in addition to Mr. Newsom’s, will be on the ballot on Tuesday.The first is in wine country north of San Francisco, and its target is Jill Ravitch, the Sonoma County district attorney. The campaign is led by a local developer, Bill Gallaher, whose company was sued by her office in connection with the abandonment of residents of an assisted-living facility during a 2017 wildfire. (The case was ultimately settled.) Mr. Gallaher, who has said the recall is in service of “steady, competent leadership overseeing public safety in our county,” has bankrolled the campaign himself.The second is a convoluted saga concerning William Davis and Melissa Ybarra, who are on the City Council in Vernon and had backed a successful recall campaign this year against two other council members who had supported a solar and wind energy project whose developer was involved in an embezzlement investigation.Now those recalled council members, Diana Gonzales and Carol Menke, are supporting the new recall campaign, alleging — according to The Los Angeles Daily News — that Ms. Ybarra engaged in nepotism as the city’s housing commissioner and that Mr. Davis is mentally incompetent. Ms. Ybarra and Mr. Davis say the campaign is just retaliation.Before this year of two recall elections, Vernon — a city just southeast of Los Angeles that has a mere 108 residents — had never had one. More

    • 138 Shares199 Views

      in Elections

      Germany’s Election Is Armin Laschet's to Lose, but Will He Succeed?

      by

      Armin Laschet, Angela Merkel’s Christian Democratic Union party’s candidate for chancellor, is flagging in the polls, and he seems to be dragging the party down with him.FRANKFURT AN DER ODER, Germany — His party is the biggest in Germany. It has won all but three elections since 1950, including the past four. Its departing chancellor is more popular than any politician in the country. And German voters crave stability and continuity.Armin Laschet, the conservative Christian Democratic Union party’s candidate for chancellor, should be riding high. The race to replace Angela Merkel was his to lose.So far, he appears to be doing just that.Weeks before Germans vote on Sept. 26 in their most important election in a generation — one that will produce a chancellor who is not Ms. Merkel for the first time in 16 years — Mr. Laschet is sinking, and he is pulling his party down with him.The race is still close enough, and Germany’s coalition politics so unpredictable, that it would be dangerous to dismiss the conservative candidate. But after recent polls showed Mr. Laschet’s party dropping to record lows — of 20 percent to 22 percent support — his position is so dire that even some Christian Democrats have wondered aloud whether they picked the wrong candidate.More broadly, Mr. Laschet’s campaign has prompted queasiness among conservatives who fear they could be seeing a weakness in the party’s appeal that has been disguised for years by Ms. Merkel’s own popularity and is now exacerbated by her inability to groom a replacement.In 2018, she announced her personally chosen successor, Annegret Kramp-Karrenbauer, a moderate centrist. But even with Ms. Merkel’s support, Ms. Kramp-Karrenbauer had trouble stepping out of the chancellor’s shadow and building her own base. She quit in 2020 as leader of the conservatives, leaving the door open for Mr. Laschet.Mr. Laschet had long boasted that if he could run Germany’s most populous state, North Rhine-Westphalia, where he has been governor since 2017, he could run the country. But then extraordinary flooding this summer called even that credential into question, exposing flaws in his environmental policies and disaster management.Chancellor Angela Merkel and Mr. Laschet visited the flood-ravaged district of Iversheim in July.Pool photo by Wolfgang Rattay“The biggest problem for Laschet is that he has not been able to convince voters that he can do the job like Merkel,” said Julia Reuschenbach, a political scientist at the University of Bonn.She cited images of him laughing as the German president, Frank-Walter Steinmeier, made a somber speech after devastating flash floods that killed 180 people, and posing before a mound of trash to make a statement of his own. “He comes across as uncertain, flippant and unprofessional,” Ms. Reuschenbach said.In recent weeks, Mr. Laschet has seen his individual popularity drop below that of his Social Democratic rival, Olaf Scholz, while support for Mr. Laschet’s party has been in a free fall since late July. The situation is so dire that Ms. Merkel, who had said she wanted to stay out of the race, is now intervening and trying to rally voters for Mr. Laschet.“Let’s be honest: It is tight. It will be very tight in the coming weeks,” Markus Söder, the head of the conservatives’ Bavarian branch, the Christian Social Union, and an erstwhile rival, said at an election rally on Aug. 20 that was meant to propel Mr. Laschet’s campaign into a final, intense stretch. “It is no longer a question of how we could govern, but possibly of whether.”Mr. Söder openly challenged Mr. Laschet this year for the chance to succeed the chancellor, and he still enjoys a higher individual popularity rating among Germans than Mr. Laschet’s.Germans elect parties, not a chancellor candidate. But over the course of Ms. Merkel’s four terms in office, her party has enjoyed the so-called chancellor bonus, meaning the willingness of voters to effectively cast a ballot for consistency.Although Ms. Merkel remains Germany’s most popular politician, her recent attempts to drum up support for Mr. Laschet have failed to turn his fortunes around, partly because they have appeared last-minute and halfhearted.Election campaign billboards featuring Mr. Laschet, left, and his Social Democratic rival, Olaf Schoz.John Macdougall/Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesInstead, Mr. Scholz now appears to be reaping the incumbent benefit, playing up his closeness to Ms. Merkel to become the second most popular politician in the country.“Even conservative voters tend to approve of Mr. Scholz,” said Ursula Münch, the director of the Academy for Political Education in Tützing.Yet Mr. Laschet is known for comebacks, for surviving blunders — including making up grades for exam papers when he was lecturing — and for his ability to turn around a sagging campaign in the final stretch. In the weeks before the 2017 vote in North Rhine-Westphalia, he focused on the need to increase security against a backdrop of record break-ins, to better integrate migrants and to reposition the state’s industry to focus on the future. The strategy worked and he defeated the incumbent Social Democratic governor, whom he had trailed in the polls for most of the race.Among Mr. Laschet’s influences is his faith. At a time when more and more Germans are quitting the Roman Catholic Church, Mr. Laschet is a proud member. “I am not someone who uses Bible verses in my politics,” he said. “But of course it has influenced me.” And Ms. Merkel has praised his Christianity as a guiding moral compass.Mr. Laschet noted that his faith was something he had in common with President Biden, adding that the last time the leaders of the United States and Germany shared that faith was in the 1960s, with President John F. Kennedy and Chancellor Konrad Adenauer — also a Christian Democrat.Mr. Laschet talking with residents of Frankfurt an der Oder, in eastern Germany, last month.Jens Schlueter/Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesAnother influence for Mr. Laschet is Aachen, Germany’s westernmost city, where he was born and raised. Growing up in a place with deep ties to Belgium and the Netherlands, Mr. Laschet has been integrated into the larger European ideal all of his life. He still maintains a home in Aachen with his wife, Susanne, whom he met through their church choir and youth group. Together they have three grown children, including, Joe Laschet, a social media influencer and fashionista for classic men’s wear.Mr. Laschet’s first political post was as a municipal official in 1979. He was elected to the German Parliament in 1994, and then, five years later, he was elected to represent his home region as a member of the European Parliament. He entered state government in North Rhine-Westphalia in 2005, as Germany’s first minister for integration — a role focused on migrants and their descendants that earned him nationwide recognition.After the Christian Democrats suffered a stinging defeat in the 2012 state elections, Mr. Laschet helped rebuild the party. He supported Ms. Merkel’s decision to welcome more than a million migrants in 2015, and two years later, he became the governor of North Rhine-Westphalia.This January, he fought to become the leader of the Christian Democrats, beating Mr. Söder, who remains a more popular politician with many Germans, but whether Mr. Laschet can save himself remains to be seen.He has had some minor successes, including a feisty appearance in the first televised debate and deftly dealing with an angry vaccination opponent who stormed the stage during a campaign stop. Mr. Laschet has also assembled a team of experts, including former rivals, like Friedrich Merz, who is well liked among the party’s conservative wing, in an effort to show his bridge-building skills. But none of these things have made a dent in the widening gap with the Social Democrats.At a campaign stop in Frankfurt an der Oder, a woman wielding a cellphone pushed her way toward the candidate as he stood on a bridge overlooking the Polish border, making a statement to reporters about Germany’s role in Europe.Asked if she intended to vote for Mr. Laschet, she demurred. “I don’t know yet who I will vote for,” said the woman, Elisabeth Pillep, 44. “But I don’t think it will be him.” More

    • 100 Shares129 Views

      in Elections

      What Canada's Election Could Mean For Gun Ban

      by

      The Conservative Party leader, Erin O’Toole, rolled back a promise to end a ban on assault weapons, giving his opponents less room to maneuver.With the debates now over, we have come to the final days of the high-speed election campaign that was called last month by Prime Minister Justin Trudeau.Mr. O’Toole, the Conservative leader, with Mr. Trudeau, who leads the Liberals. Justin Tang/The Canadian Press, via Associated PressAt the official debates, moderators dominated and, in the view of many, party leaders hardly debated.[Read: 5 Takeaways From Canada’s Official Election Debates]Among the issues given cursory treatment was gun control, a topic that the Conservative Party’s platform has reversed course on.Few issues divide urban and rural Canada more than guns. In cities and suburban areas, polls have shown for years that there’s strong support for even tighter restrictions. Horrific crimes like last year’s shooting and arson spree in Nova Scotia increase that sentiment.But in many rural areas and Indigenous communities, guns are a part of everyday life. Totaling up the numbers has been difficult since the Conservative government led by Stephen Harper eliminated the registry for shotguns and standard rifles. But the Small Arms Survey, a project based in Switzerland, estimates that there are 12.7 million legal and illegal guns held by private owners in Canada. There are 2.2 million Canadians who hold a license to buy and own guns.Last year, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau banned 1,500 models of assault-style semiautomatic rifles after the shooting rampage in rural Nova Scotia that left 23 people dead. Although some designs of semiautomatics can still be owned, their use is limited.Erin O’Toole, the Conservative leader, began the election campaign by promising to roll back Mr. Trudeau’s assault weapon ban and roll back other Liberal anti-gun measures. He argued that they penalized law-abiding gun owners but did little or nothing to stop gun crime, although assault weapons have been used in mass shootings in Canada.In place of a ban, he proposed cracking down harder on smuggling, something Mr. Trudeau had already advanced, and hiring 200 additional members of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police who would be assigned to gun and gang crimes in Toronto and Vancouver.While there was little broad public support for loosening of gun rules, gun groups and many gun owners are strong and reliable supporters of the Conservatives.But as criticism grew over his plan to cancel Mr. Trudeau’s ban, Mr. O’Toole began to change his tune.An assault rifle of the type banned last year by Mr. Trudeau’s government.Chris Young/The Canadian Press, via Associated PressFirst, he said during an unofficial French debate on TVA, the Quebec-based broadcaster, that he would “maintain a ban on assault weapons.” While he didn’t make it immediately clear, he didn’t mean Mr. Trudeau’s ban. Instead, Mr. O’Toole was referring to a ban that dates to the 1970s on weapons like fully automatic rifles.But eventually Mr. O’Toole said that he would keep Mr. Trudeau’s assault weapon ban in place if the Conservatives take power. But that came with a significant qualifier: Mr. O’Toole also promised that a group that will include gun makers will review firearms laws and regulations.The National Firearms Association, which once hired one of Mr. O’Toole’s top aides as a lobbyist, soon issued a statement saying that it was “completely confident that the election of a Conservative government” and the review would lead to the repeal of Mr. Trudeau’s assault weapon ban. Mr. O’Toole has only said that he won’t prejudge the proposed review.The platform change that the Conservatives made appears to have worked for their campaign by muting criticism of Conservative gun policy — guns received just cursory attention at the English debate. And when Angus Reid Institute asked Canadians to list the top issues in the campaign, guns didn’t meet the minimum reporting threshold. Going Inside FacebookMy colleagues Sheera Frenkel and Cecilia Kang will be speaking on Sept. 14 at 5 p.m. Eastern about their new book “An Ugly Truth: Inside Facebook’s Battle for Domination” in a virtual event organized by the Rotman School of Management at the University of Toronto. The school has a special offer for Canada Letter readers. If you use the code NYTIMESROTMAN21 when registering here you’ll be able to join the livestream and receive a hardcover copy of their book by mail for 21.99 Canadian dollars, a 20-dollar reduction.Trans CanadaBen Solomon for The New York TimesPerhaps the biggest distraction from politics this week for many Canadians was the U.S. Open where Leylah Fernandez, 19, of Montreal will play in the women’s final against Emma Raducanu, a British player who was born in Toronto. David Waldstein writes that Fernandez is the most successful member of a group of Canadians at the Open, “where Canadian players are winning on courts across the grounds and beyond.” Fernandez is also part of a group of teenagers who are on a run at the open. But Matthew Futterman writes that, in tennis, early success can quickly “go off the rails.”As Hurricane Larry continues on a path that appears to be taking it to Newfoundland, you can track its progress here.In 2018, a team of paleontologists from the Royal Ontario Museum discovered the preserved shell of a spaceship-shaped creature during a fossil hunting expedition in the Rockies. Now Titanokorys gainesi has been declared to be one of the earliest-known large predators on Earth.Stephen Vizinczey, who formed his own publishing company in Toronto to publish his racy and successful novel “In Praise of Older Women: The Amorous Recollections of Andras Vajda,” has died at the age of 88.Jon Caramanica, a pop music critic for The Times, writes that Drake’s new album “demonstrates how sonically rigorous even the most casual, tossed-off Drake songs are.”Brandon Valdivia, a producer from London, Ontario, better known as Mas Aya, told Isabelia Herrera that he is “trying to meld a political take in addition to a very spiritual take” in his music.A native of Windsor, Ontario, Ian Austen was educated in Toronto, lives in Ottawa and has reported about Canada for The New York Times for the past 16 years. Follow him on Twitter at @ianrausten.How are we doing?We’re eager to have your thoughts about this newsletter and events in Canada in general. Please send them to nytcanada@nytimes.com.Like this email?Forward it to your friends, and let them know they can sign up here. More

    • 88 Shares149 Views

      in Elections

      5 Takeaways From Canada’s Official Election Debates

      by

      Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, who called the snap election two years ahead of schedule, was repeatedly attacked by the other four candidates.OTTAWA — Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s decision to call an election two years ahead of schedule has not worked out as planned.Polls have consistently tracked a decline in voter support for his Liberal Party and a rise in backing for its nearest rivals, the Conservatives, leaving the parties in a statistical tie.The bulk of the 36-day campaign, the shortest allowed by law, came during Canada’s all-too-brief summer, when many voters’ minds were far from politics. The Taliban takeover in Afghanistan, where the Canadian military fought, further distracted the public’s attention.So for Mr. Trudeau and his rivals, particularly Erin O’Toole of the Conservatives, the debates this week in each of Canada’s official languages were crucial opportunities to define the campaign before Election Day, Sept. 20.Mr. Trudeau faced off not only against Mr. O’Toole, who is leading his party in an election for the first time, but also against Jagmeet Singh, the leader of the left-of-center New Democratic Party; Annamie Paul, who heads the Green Party; and Yves-François Blanchet of the Bloc Québécois, a regional party that endorses Quebec’s independence. With the five leaders receiving equal time, it was difficult for any to break through with a detailed message.The French-language debate on Wednesday often focused on issues of interest to Quebec. With English being the language of three-quarters of Canadians, the debate on Thursday in that language was considered the more important of the two.Trudeau struggled to justify his pandemic election.Mr. Trudeau said he called an election because he needed a new mandate to put pandemic recovery measures in place swiftly.Blair Gable/ReutersIn both debates, Mr. Trudeau’s rivals relentlessly challenged him for calling what they viewed as an unnecessary election in the middle of the pandemic. The subject came up 13 times during the French-language debate.In 2019, the Liberals under Mr. Trudeau failed to secure a majority of the seats in the House of Commons. That forced him to rely on votes from opposition parties, usually the New Democrats, to pass legislation and allowed the opposition parties to pool their votes in committees to tackle subjects embarrassing to the government.Mr. Trudeau said he needed a new mandate with a majority in order to put pandemic recovery measures in place swiftly. His opponents, however, repeatedly pointed out that none of Mr. Trudeau’s major objectives had been blocked during the past two years — although some important bills had been delayed and then died with the call for an election.In the Thursday debate, Mr. O’Toole challenged Mr. Trudeau’s decision to call for the election just as efforts to repatriate Canadians in Afghanistan and to aid Afghans who had worked for the Canadian military were in a critical phase.“You put your own political interests ahead of the well-being of thousands of people,” Mr. O’Toole said. “Mr. Trudeau, you should not have called this election; you should have gotten the job done in Afghanistan.”A complex format and a crowded stage limited debate.Mr. O’Toole, the Conservative leader, with Mr. Trudeau, who leads the Liberals. Justin Tang/The Canadian Press, via Associated PressThe two-hour debate had a complex structure. The moderator, Shachi Kurl, the president of the Angus Reid Institute, a nonprofit polling organization, asked questions written by a committee, with questions also posed via video by members of the public and at the site by journalists.Ms. Kurl assiduously enforced rules that prevented the candidates onstage from speaking out of turn or responding to questions not addressed to them. There were no closing statements.Duane Bratt, a professor of political science at Mount Royal University in Calgary, Alberta, said that the formula worked against Mr. Trudeau, who was constantly targeted by the four other leaders, and that it aided Mr. O’Toole.“O’Toole could talk about his climate plan in 30 seconds and then just move on to another subject, which is, I think, what he wanted,” Professor Bratt said. “The formula didn’t allow Trudeau time to really dig into some of O’Toole’s weaknesses.”But voters, Professor Bratt added, were the debate’s clear losers.“If this was the first time that you’re paying attention to the election, you were not well served tonight,” he said.Climate change and Indigenous issues got their due.Mr. Trudeau and Mr. Singh, who leads the left-of-center New Democratic Party.Pool photo by Sean KilpatrickClimate change, in particular, stood out as an issue, although no leader made a compelling case that his or her party offered the best approach, said Cara Camcastle, who lectures on political science at Simon Fraser University in Burnaby, British Columbia.“It’s good to see that all the leaders think it’s an important issue,” she said. “But none of them have the solutions of our own.”Mr. Trudeau was repeatedly attacked, particularly by Mr. Singh, for the rise in carbon emissions in Canada during each of the six years the prime minister has held office. Mr. Trudeau responded that his government’s climate measures, including the introduction of a national carbon price, had put Canada on a path to not just meeting but also exceeding its emissions commitment under the Paris Accord, which has a target date of 2030.Partly because of the organizer’s themed approach to the debate, reconciliation with Indigenous people received an unusual amount of attention.While all the other leaders picked apart Mr. Trudeau’s record — he has made Indigenous issues a top priority — they all agreed with his position that the process of replacing the 19th- century laws governing Indigenous people must be led by their communities rather than by the government.Guns and child care were largely absent in the English debate.Mr. O’Toole’s plan to scrap a Trudeau program under which several provinces provide child care for 10 Canadian dollars a day or less with a tax credit was prominent in the French debate but was largely bypassed on Thursday.Similarly, Mr. O’Toole’s backtracking on an earlier promise to eliminate Mr. Trudeau’s ban on 1,500 types of assault-style semiautomatic rifles received limited attention.The verdict: ‘A meaningless waste of time’?Professor Bratt and Dr. Camcastle said they believed that the two debates would not give form to what had been a largely shapeless campaign that lacked a clear issue — aside from Mr. Trudeau’s decision to call it.Frank Graves, president of EKOS Research Associates, a polling firm in Ottawa, offered a blunt assessment on Twitter.“Let me spare you the speculation of who won, lost, what impact,” he wrote. “It was a meaningless waste of time. Possibly the most vacuous and tedious debate in Canadian political history.”Bloc Quebecois Leader Yves-Francois Blanchet, left, and Green Party Leader Annamie Paul, taking part in the federal election English-language Leaders debate in Gatineau, Canada, on Thursday.Pool photo by Adrian WyldVjosa Isai More