More stories

  • in

    She Was Supposed to Become Prime Minister but Was Locked Out of Parliament

    A constitutional crisis deepened in the Pacific Island nation of Samoa, which now has two competing governments and two claimants to the prime ministership.Fiame Naomi Mata’afa walked toward Samoa’s beehive-shaped Parliament House on Monday morning intending to be sworn in as the first female prime minister in the Pacific Island nation’s 56-year history.What she and her fellow party members found instead were locked doors. The speaker of Parliament had issued orders to keep them out. And so deepened a constitutional crisis that has convulsed this long-stable nation and thrown into doubt whether Ms. Mata’afa, whose party won the April 9 election, would actually take office.Still shut out of Parliament by Monday evening, Ms. Mata’afa’s party held its own swearing-in under a tent erected right outside. As the sun set, she took the oath of office, flanked by members of her party dressed in cardinal-red blazers and traditional men’s wraparound skirts known as ie faitaga.With the party’s defiant act, the country now has two competing governments and two claimants to the prime ministership. Each side has accused the other of carrying out a coup.The incumbent prime minister, Tuilaepa Aiono Sailele Malielegaoi, who has led Samoa for 23 years, and members of his political party were nowhere in sight during Ms. Mata’afa’s ceremony. He emerged afterward, delivering a speech in which he said he would not recognize her appointment and called her swearing-in an act of “treason.”“Leave it to us to handle this situation,” he said, vowing to take action against what he called “the highest form of illegal conduct.”The turmoil is a stark departure from Samoa’s ordinarily peaceful political history. Mr. Tuilaepa, 76, has been leader since 1998, and his party has held power for nearly four uninterrupted decades.While its neighbor Fiji has been rocked by a series of coups since the 1980s, Samoa — a country of about 200,000 people with no military and a largely unarmed police force — has had stability, although at the cost of being a virtual one-party state. Samoa’s incumbent prime minister, Tuilaepa Aiono Sailele Malielegaoi, right, has refused to resign, preventing the peaceful transition of power.Kena Betancur/Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesThose costs have become clear as Mr. Tuilaepa has made no secret of the fact that he would not recognize a government led by Ms. Mata’afa and her party, known as FAST. The party was formed last year in response to what it saw as the erosion of rule of law under Mr. Tuilaepa, the world’s second-longest-serving prime minister.A tortuous seven weeks have followed the April election as Ms. Mata’afa has grappled with Mr. Tuilaepa, the leader of the Human Rights Protection Party.A coalition led by FAST won 26 of the 51 seats in the election. After a legal challenge appeared to give the H.R.P.P. an additional seat, leaving both parties with 26, the appointed head of state called for a rerun. The judiciary rejected the request and ejected the 26th H.R.P.P. member of Parliament. Some 28 legal challenges to the election result have yet to be determined.Over the weekend, the machinations reached a head. Late on Saturday night, the head of state, an ordinarily ceremonial position, issued a proclamation suspending Parliament “until such time as to be announced and for reasons that I will make known in due course.”The proclamation, Ms. Mata’afa, 64, told The New York Times, was tantamount to a coup.The suspension would have made it impossible for Parliament to convene within a mandated 45-day window after the election. But Samoa’s Supreme Court, in an extraordinary session on Sunday, dismissed the proclamation as unlawful and cleared the way for Parliament to convene. That was followed by a notice from the Parliament speaker, who said he would not abide by the court’s ruling.On Monday morning, Ms. Mata’afa and her party members approached Parliament House as police officers stood outside. The clerk of Parliament refused to open the doors, leaving them stranded and preventing the peaceful transition of power. The chief justice of the Supreme Court, dressed in his red robe and powdered wig, also walked to the Parliament building, confirming with a pull on the door that it was locked.The ceremony held on Monday was a last-ditch attempt to comply with the 45-day constitutional requirement. It was a high-stakes gamble, said Michael Field, a journalist and expert on the region, warning that the ultimate loser risked going to jail. “It’s winner takes all,” he wrote on Twitter.Samoa’s chief justice, Satiu Simativa Perese, arriving at Parliament in Apia on Monday to find the doors closed.Keni Lesa/Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesA statement issued on Monday evening by the country’s attorney general seemed to bear out that assessment. The official, Savalenoa Mareva Betham Annandale, an ally of Mr. Tuilaepa’s, declared the swearing-in unlawful and said everyone involved was subject to civil and criminal prosecution.The delays could put Mr. Tuilaepa closer to his goal of a return to the polls.“A second election would be an absolute farce,” said Patricia O’Brien, an expert on the region at the Australian National University. “You can’t trust any of these officials anymore to run a clean election because Tuilaepa wants a foregone conclusion — which is that he wins.”For Samoans on either side of the political divide, seeing Ms. Mata’afa, a respected veteran of Samoan politics, locked outside Parliament House was a highly emotional moment, said Lagipoiva Cherelle Jackson, a scholar and journalist based in Samoa. Feelings ran especially high as people there began to sing historical Samoan protest songs, she said.“People were singing songs about our Mau movement,” she said, referring to Samoa’s peaceful movement for independence. “One of the leaders of the Mau movement was Fiame’s grandfather. No matter which side you’re on, that is just a very, very emotional thing to witness.”For the most part, she said, supporters of both parties have remained loyal to their side throughout the process, though some H.R.P.P. voters appeared to be deterred by what seemed to many to be a power grab by Mr. Tuilaepa.Around the region, governments encouraged Samoan officials to follow the will of the people.Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern of New Zealand voiced her support for Samoa’s judiciary. “Here in New Zealand, we have complete faith in Samoa’s institutions, and that includes its judiciary,” she told reporters. “Our call would be to maintain and uphold the rule of law and that democratic outcome.”In a Twitter post, Australia’s foreign minister, Marise Payne, echoed her sentiments. “Australia values our close friendship with Samoa,” she wrote. “It is important that all parties respect the rule of law and democratic processes. We have faith in Samoa’s institutions including the judiciary.” More

  • in

    Samoa Is Set to Have Its First Female Leader

    A dead-heat election was followed by uncertainty and intrigue. But barring further surprises, Fiame Naomi Mata’afa will become prime minister on Monday.While its island neighbors in the Pacific weathered military coups and internal volatility, Samoa long followed a predictable political course, keeping the same leader in power for more than two decades.But as the country is set to usher in its first female prime minister, that status quo has been dramatically upended. The incoming leader, Fiame Naomi Mata’afa, represents a sharp break from what she describes as a worrying slide away from the rule of law, and she has vowed to scrap a major infrastructure project backed by China, her country’s largest creditor.And her ascension itself, after a dizzying seven-week period of uncertainty and intrigue that followed the April 9 election, has sent a rare charge through Samoan politics.First, there was a dead heat at the polls. Ms. Mata’afa’s upstart party won as many seats in Parliament as the one led by the swaggering prime minister, Tuilaepa Sailele Malielegaoi. An independent candidate took the remaining seat, making him a kingmaker.That set off feverish courting of that candidate by both parties. But the election commission intervened — paradoxically, blocking the rise of Ms. Mata’afa with the use of a law meant to ensure that more women served in Parliament.Under that law, women must hold at least 10 percent of the seats. The April election produced a count of 9.8 percent, which the electoral commission deemed insufficient. So it appointed another female member of Parliament — one representing Mr. Tuilaepa’s party. That handed him a majority, and a path to remaining in office.It didn’t last long. The independent candidate soon threw his weight behind Ms. Mata’afa’s party, and Samoa’s judiciary later tossed the additional female member out of Parliament, putting Ms. Mata’afa’s party in the majority. Although Mr. Tuilaepa has yet to concede, Ms. Mata’afa is scheduled to be sworn in as prime minister on Monday.Perhaps Samoa can then catch its breath.Apia, the capital of Samoa. Under Samoan law, women must hold at least 10 percent of the seats in Parliament. Matthew Abbott for The New York TimesMs. Mata’afa’s climb to the top job in Samoa — a country that was called Western Samoa until 1997 to distinguish it from American Samoa — is more than four decades in the making. Ms. Mata’afa, 64, a high chief who holds the title fiame, was propelled into political leadership after her father, the country’s first prime minister, died when she was 18. Not long after, she became the matai, or head of her family — an unusually early rise.“As an 18-year-old, I was looking forward to going to university, getting a degree, getting a job, maybe getting married,” she said by telephone on Friday. Always interested in politics, she had expected to move into the field over time. “But things were sped up unexpectedly. Sometimes life doesn’t work out necessarily how you thought it might.”She had long been expected to become prime minister one day — but as Mr. Tuilaepa’s successor, not his opponent, said Iati Iati, a political scientist at Victoria University of Wellington in New Zealand.Ms. Mata’afa spent three decades in Mr. Tuilaepa’s party, the Human Rights Protection Party, eventually becoming its deputy leader. But she left it in November over what she saw as a slide toward autocracy, including legislation that threatened to change the structure of the Samoan judiciary.“It wasn’t a difficult decision to make,” Ms. Mata’afa said. “What really led me to make the decision to step away was the dismantling of essentially the rule of law.”“Because of that huge majority that the H.R.P.P. had,” she added, “it became a lot more rampant, even the internal checks weren’t there — I was getting to feel a bit like the lone voice. If you can’t do it from the inside, you have to step outside.”She became the leader of a new opposition party, known as FAST, which drew a number of other H.R.P.P. defectors.Ballots from Samoa’s April 9 election, which ended in a dead heat. Samoa Electoral Commission, via Agence France-Presse — Getty Images“She’s such a strong, powerful, well-respected political leader, and she’s really probably the only politician in Samoa at the moment who can counter Tuilaepa,” said Kerryn Baker, a researcher at the Australian National University who is an expert on parliamentary gender quotas in the region.Ms. Mata’afa has already pledged to take one significant step away from Mr. Tuilaepa, 76, the second-longest-serving prime minister in the world.On Thursday, she announced that she would cancel a $100 million wharf development backed by China, saying that her small country of 200,000 people did not need such a large infrastructure project. China is Samoa’s largest creditor, accounting for about 40 percent, or some $160 million, of its external debts.Mr. Tuilaepa has been a staunch ally of Beijing for decades. While Ms. Mata’afa said she wanted to preserve relations with China, her pledge to shelve the wharf project has raised questions about the future of those ties, Dr. Iati said.“What is Samoa’s position in relation to China, what is the Pacific’s position in relation to China?” he said. “It’s got people examining China’s role in the country and in the region as a whole.”Ms. Mata’afa has also promised to focus on sustainable development as Pacific nations suffer from the effects of climate change, and to work to ensure women’s continued participation in politics.One of Samoa’s first female members of Parliament, Ms. Mata’afa has been a fierce defender of the parliamentary gender quota. She characterizes it not as a way to increase women’s participation, but as “legislation to ensure that it does not fall below this level.”Prime Minister Tuilaepa Sailele Malielegaoi had yet to concede as of Friday.Brittainy Newman/The New York TimesSamoa’s welfare system, unlike those of more developed nations, is still largely family-based, “and therefore women still carry a lot of that responsibility and burden,” Ms. Mata’afa added. “Women have to see politics as an area where they’ve seen other women be able to achieve in it, so it’s not something that is insurmountable.”“My goal for women is that they fulfill their potential, that we remove any barriers that might be there for women, to enable them to make that contribution,” she said. But with more than 20 legal challenges to her election still pending, some worry that Ms. Mata’afa may yet be barred from assuming the top office.“The H.R.P.P. and Prime Minister Tuilaepa — they’re not done,” said Patricia O’Brien, an expert on the region at the Australian National University. “They’re going to cast doubt on the results, they’re going to cast doubt on the court cases, they’re trying to do things to muddy the waters and to disrupt an orderly transition of power.”Mr. Tuilaepa offered a hint of how he saw his place in Samoa this month as he responded to a protest of about 100 people calling on him to concede.“I am appointed by God,” he told local news media. “They should go to a church and pray instead of protesting in front of the courthouse.”Ms. Mata’afa, for her part, said she just wanted to get on with the job.“It’s a free world; he can talk about anything he likes,” she said. “I just like to spend my energy talking about things that need to be addressed.” More

  • in

    La lección de Zapatero o cómo no negociar con Maduro

    MADRID — La determinación diplomática de José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero en Venezuela es inversamente proporcional a sus logros. Tras 40 viajes y seis años de misión, el expresidente español no está más cerca de frenar la deriva autoritaria del régimen o de aliviar la situación de los venezolanos. Tampoco le queda ya crédito mediador. Llegó el momento de agradecerle los servicios prestados y pedirle que dé un paso a un lado.No hay motivo para dudar de la sinceridad de Zapatero en su propósito de recuperar la convivencia democrática en Venezuela. Pero tampoco los hay para creer que haya regresado de sus viajes con nada salvo una valiosa lección sobre cómo no negociar con el autoritarismo. Su estrategia de apaciguamiento y diplomacia cándida ha ofrecido a Nicolas Maduro legitimidad sin apenas contraprestaciones, una combinación conveniente para un líder decidido a perpetuarse en el poder.Más allá de las simpatías y rechazos que genera, Zapatero es un político tolerante que impulsó importantes derechos sociales en España y ha mantenido una respetuosa distancia con la política doméstica tras su paso por el poder. Pero su legado internacional como estadista —el nacional quedó dañado por su gestión de los primeros años de la Gran Recesión— ha sido malogrado por la falta de neutralidad en la búsqueda de soluciones. No supo ver la fina línea que separa, al tratar con un autócrata, la utilidad de ser utilizado.El último viaje del expresidente español a Venezuela, a principios de mes, tenía el propósito de fomentar el deshielo entre Maduro y el gobierno estadounidense de Joe Biden, en un intento de reducir las sanciones internacionales. El líder chavista, enfundado en el disfraz de líder conciliador, se muestra dispuesto, de un tiempo a esta parte, a dialogar con quienes declaró sus enemigos, fuera y dentro del país. Entre sus guiños se incluye la designación de un nuevo Consejo Nacional Electoral (CNE) con presencia no mayoritaria de la oposición y la medida de casa por cárcel otorgada a seis exejecutivos de Citgo —cinco de ellos ciudadanos estadounidenses—, filial de PDVSA en Estados Unidos. Todo sería más creíble si cesara el asalto a las instituciones, la perversión de las reglas democráticas y la persecución de los críticos, confirmada la semana pasada con el embargo de la sede del diario El Nacional.Frente a quienes desconfían de Maduro está la posición de Zapatero, favorable a concederle el beneficio de la duda las veces que haga falta. El político español ha legitimado en el pasado las elecciones ganadas con ventajismo autoritario por el chavismo e interpreta el conflicto desde una falsa equidistancia entre el régimen y quienes lo padecen. Entre sus logros quedan las liberaciones puntuales de presos políticos, que no detuvieron la represión ni fueron seguidas de una apertura sincera.Zapatero dinamitó en estos seis años su credibilidad ante los actores clave del conflicto venezolano, incluidos Estados Unidos, la Unión Europea y su propio país, España, cuyo gobierno se ha distanciado en varias ocasiones de lo que considera iniciativas personales. La desconfianza es aún mayor en la oposición venezolana, donde el expresidente español hace tiempo que es visto como un obstáculo para la democracia en Venezuela. “Zapatero intenta blanquear la dictadura”, decía en una entrevista reciente Juan Guaidó.El líder opositor exagera al darle esa intencionalidad a las acciones de Zapatero. Y, sin embargo, el político socialista comparte responsabilidad en que sea percibido más como el ministro de Exteriores de Maduro que como un mediador neutral. Pudo aprovechar su acceso al régimen para hacer entender a sus dirigentes que debían ganarse con hechos la creación de un escenario de diálogo internacional. No lo logró y Guaidó ha delegado ahora en mediadores noruegos, más creíbles e independientes, la interlocución con Maduro.Cualquier concesión al régimen debe condicionarse al establecimiento de una ruta democrática y verificable, cuyo primer paso sería la convocatoria de elecciones libres. El nuevo CNE, que organizará los comicios regionales y locales del 21 de noviembre, sigue teniendo una mayoría de miembros chavistas: creer en su independencia exige un incondicional acto de fe. Lo cierto es que, con las principales instituciones del país bajo control gubernamental, incluido el Tribunal Supremo de Justicia, Maduro no está en condiciones de ofrecer garantías democráticas. La única alternativa viable es poner el sistema electoral venezolano, de forma temporal, en manos de un organismo internacional independiente.Varias entidades de las Naciones Unidas ofrecen esa posibilidad a los Estados donde los adversarios políticos son incapaces de reconocer un resultado. En 1999, asistí en Timor Oriental a una de esas votaciones, que tienen la ventaja de ofrecer resultados vinculantes e indisputables. Ante la incapacidad de Indonesia de organizar un referéndum por la independencia con las mínimas garantías, funcionarios de la ONU se hicieron cargo de todos los pasos, desde la impresión de las papeletas al recuento.Maduro podría ofrecer una oportunidad a la ONU para hacer creíble su promesa de respetar la voluntad popular. Es pronto para saber si la nueva actitud conciliadora del líder chavista es una trampa o un intento sincero de cambio. Lo seguro es que la segunda opción pasa irremediablemente por una acción diplomática coordinada, coherente y decidida de la comunidad internacional, con Estados Unidos y la Unión Europea al frente. En ese nuevo escenario, y una vez aprendidas las lecciones de los últimos años, Zapatero debería aceptar que su etapa venezolana se agotó. La mejor ayuda que podría prestar es hacerse a un lado.David Jiménez (@DavidJimenezTW) es escritor y periodista de España. Su libro más reciente es El director. More

  • in

    Jim Klobuchar Dies at 93; Minnesota Newspaperman and Amy’s Father

    He rose to folk hero status with his derring-do as a journalist and came to national attention when his daughter, Senator Amy Klobuchar, spoke openly about his struggles with alcoholism.Jim Klobuchar was a renowned sportswriter and general interest columnist in Minnesota for decades.Straight out of central casting, he was celebrated for his derring-do: He once held a piece of chalk between his lips while a sharpshooter took aim at it. He was a finalist for NASA’s initiative to send a journalist into space, until the Challenger explosion in 1986 ended the program. He scaled the Matterhorn eight times and Kilimanjaro five.And he could make readers weep, as when he wrote about a 5-year-old girl with a brain tumor who loved to ride the rails: “She was cradled in her mother’s lap on the observation car of the Milwaukee Road’s Hiawatha, a tidy young lady. A dying little girl, taking her last train ride.”But he did not come to national attention until 2018, when his daughter, Senator Amy Klobuchar, Democrat of Minnesota, mentioned him during the contentious televised hearings on Judge Brett M. Kavanaugh’s nomination to the Supreme Court.During her questioning of the nominee, Ms. Klobuchar noted that her father, then 90, was a recovering alcoholic who still attended meetings of Alcoholics Anonymous. She asked Judge Kavanaugh whether he had ever drunk so much that he could not recollect events. He turned the question back on her, a breach of decorum for which he later apologized. She accepted the apology, adding, “When you have a parent that’s an alcoholic, you’re pretty careful about drinking.”By then her father had been sober for more than 25 years. When she ran for the Democratic presidential nomination in 2020, Senator Klobuchar spoke often of his successful treatment and proposed spending billions of dollars to treat substance abuse.Mr. Klobuchar in 1974 at his desk at The Minneapolis Star, where we wrote a long-running column about whatever he wanted.Star Tribune, via Getty ImagesMr. Klobuchar died on Wednesday at a care facility in Burnsville, a suburb of the Twin Cities. He was 93. Senator Klobuchar, who announced his death on Twitter, did not specify a cause but said he had had Alzheimer’s disease. He survived a bout with Covid-19 last year.Mr. Klobuchar was long popular in Minnesota, even a folk hero. In addition to his newspaper columns — 8,400 of them by the time he retired from The Minneapolis Star Tribune in 1995 — he wrote 23 books, held a football clinic for women, hosted talk shows and for almost four decades led annual “Jaunt with Jim” bicycling trips around the state, stopping at pay phones along the road to call in and dictate his column. After he and his first wife, Rose (Heuberger) Klobuchar, divorced in 1976, he and Amy began taking long-distance biking trips to bond with each other.As a young journalist for The Associated Press, he experienced an especially heady moment the day after the 1960 presidential election, when John F. Kennedy and Richard M. Nixon were still neck and neck, with three states yet to report results. Mr. Klobuchar wrote the nationwide bulletin announcing that Mr. Kennedy had won Minnesota, giving him enough electoral votes to clinch the presidency. The scoop appeared in papers across the country.James John Klobuchar was born on April 9, 1928, in Ely, a small city on the Iron Range of northern Minnesota, where he grew up. His father, Michael Klobuchar, worked in the iron ore mines. His mother, Mary (Pucel) Klobuchar, was a homemaker.From an early age, Jim read The Duluth Herald, and his mother encouraged him to pursue a career in journalism, Senator Klobuchar wrote in her 2015 memoir, “The Senator Next Door.”He graduated from Ely Junior College (now Vermilion Community College) in 1948, then enrolled at the University of Minnesota, graduating with a degree in journalism in 1950.He landed a job as wire editor at The Bismarck Daily Tribune. But six months later he was drafted into the Army and assigned to a new psychological warfare unit in Stuttgart, Germany, where he wrote anti-communist material.He returned briefly to the Bismarck paper, then was recruited by The Associated Press in Minneapolis, where he scored his election scoop. He joined The Minneapolis Tribune in 1961 as a sports reporter, focusing on the Minnesota Vikings.He left The Tribune in 1965 for the competing St. Paul Pioneer Press, but it wasn’t long before The Minneapolis Star lured him away by giving him a column to write about whatever he wanted.Mr. Klobuchar in 2015. He came to national attention when Senator Klobuchar spoke publicly of his overcoming alcohol addiction.Aaron Lavinsky/Star Tribune, via Associated PressThis was the heyday of print journalism, when newspapers sent their star writers all over the world. During the height of the Cold War, Mr. Klobuchar reported from Moscow. He covered the murder and funeral of Aldo Moro, Italy’s former prime minister, in 1978. He challenged the pool hustler Minnesota Fats to a game. He wrote about an air service that employed topless flight attendants. He played a reporter in the 1974 movie “The Wrestler,” with Ed Asner.But it was not all smooth sailing. He was suspended twice, once for writing a speech for a politician, and once for making up a quote in a story that he thought was an obvious satire.He also took his drinking too far, his daughter said in her book. For a time, heavy drinking was part of his colorful public persona. When he was charged with a couple of alcohol-related driving offenses in the mid-1970s, nothing much happened.But the public’s attitude toward drinking and driving underwent a sea change, and when he was arrested in 1993 for driving under the influence, he lost his license and was threatened with jail. He wrote a front-page apology to his readers. And in an accompanying note, the paper’s editor, Tim McGuire, said that Mr. Klobuchar had “endangered lives” and that the paper was insisting that he seek treatment.He complied. He entered an inpatient rehabilitation center, attended Alcoholics Anonymous meetings and found God. Ms. Klobuchar wrote that his readers forgave him.“It was his very flaws that made my dad so appealing to them,” she said. “His rough-and-tumble life growing up and his personal struggles had a huge influence on his writing. That’s why he was at his best when he wrote about what he called ‘the heroes among us’ — ordinary people doing extraordinary things.”In addition to Senator Klobuchar, he is survived by another daughter, Meagan; his wife, Susan Wilkes; his brother, Dick; and a granddaughter.When he decided to retire from The Star Tribune in 1995, Mr. Klobuchar told his office mates that he wanted no fuss, just to leave quietly. After he had packed up his things and was headed for the door, an editor got on the public-address system and announced: “This is Jim Klobuchar’s last day. That’s 43 years of journalism going out the door.”Everyone stood and applauded. More

  • in

    A.O.C. Had a Catchy Logo. Now Progressives Everywhere Are Copying It.

    The slanted text in Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s logo, and its break from the traditional red, white and blue color palette, has formed a new graphical language for progressivism. Imitators abound.In her three years in the national spotlight, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez has become the undisputed face of unabashed progressivism. But there is another hidden-in-plain-sight legacy of her 2018 primary victory: Her campaign logo and poster have reshaped the visual branding of the left. More

  • in

    Candidates Clash Over Future of New York in First Mayoral Debate

    The eight Democrats competing to win the June 22 primary presented divergent views on how to lead the city in a sometimes acerbic debate.The two leading candidates in the New York City mayor’s race battled to protect their advantages in a hard-hitting Democratic debate on Thursday evening while their six rivals grasped for breakout moments, sought to redefine the stakes of the contest and put forth their own visions for the struggling city.The contenders clashed over government experience, ideology and public safety in confrontations that sometimes devolved into acrid personal attacks.They sketched out their plans on an array of city issues, taking divergent stances on policing, education and managing the city’s economic revival. Policing emerged as the most-talked about problem, with proposals ranging from reimagining plainclothes units to expanding the use of mental health professionals in traditional law enforcement situations.Andrew Yang, one of the front-runners, was the target of an onslaught of criticism, which he sought to defuse by reaching for areas of common ground rather than engaging with equal force. But the sharpest direct clashes were between the other leading candidate, Eric Adams, the Brooklyn borough president, and Maya D. Wiley, a former counsel to Mayor Bill de Blasio.Ms. Wiley sought to cast Mr. Adams as a conservative former Republican who embraced stop-and-frisk policing tactics, while Mr. Adams dismissed her criticisms as ill-informed.“Every time you raise that question, it really just shows your failure of understanding law enforcement,” Mr. Adams said after she questioned how he could be trusted to “keep us safe from police misconduct.” Mr. Adams argued that he was a “leading voice against the abuse of stop-and-frisk.”Ms. Wiley shot back that “having chaired the New York City Civilian Complaint Review Board, I certainly understand misconduct.”The debate arrived less than six weeks before the June 22 Democratic primary that is virtually certain to determine the next mayor. The contest is shaping up to be the most significant city election in decades, one that will determine how and whether New York will recover from the economic devastation of the pandemic as the city also confronts staggering challenges concerning inequality, gun violence and education.Yet the race remains volatile and muddled, complicated by sparse public polling, a distracted electorate and the first use in a New York mayoral election of ranked-choice voting, a system that will allow voters to list up to five candidates in order of preference.Spectrum News NY1 & the NYC Campaign Finance BoardSpectrum News NY1 & the NYC Campaign Finance BoardFor months, Mr. Yang, the former presidential candidate, has been portrayed by his rivals as a New York political newcomer who lacks the gravitas and knowledge of city intricacies to lead at a moment of crisis. In a reflection of his standing in the race, a number of his rivals sought to put him on the defensive over the extent of his political experience; his leadership record at Venture for America, his nonprofit; and implicitly, over his close ties to a consulting firm run by Bradley Tusk, his campaign strategist.When Mr. Yang was pressed on why he has never voted for mayor in the city that he hopes to lead, he described his deep connections to the city as a parent and noted that he is like many New Yorkers who have not always engaged at the local level.But when he noted his political activity elsewhere — in helping Democrats win two Georgia Senate runoffs, for instance — Mr. Adams ripped his efforts to claim credit as “disrespectful and appalling to Stacey Abrams and those Black women who organized on the ground.” Mr. Yang, who held elaborate mock debates in recent days, was bracing for a pummeling, his allies said. The candidate, who is running on a message of sunny optimism about the future of the city, struck a conciliatory note under pressure, emphasizing areas of agreement as his rivals pressed him.The debate, co-hosted by Spectrum News NY1 and the first of three official Democratic debates, represented the biggest test yet of Mr. Yang’s ability to sustain scrutiny from his front-runner’s perch.In a reflection of his perceived strength in the race, Mr. Adams, a former police officer who is well-funded and has shown strength in some limited polling, was targeted by the other candidates nearly as much as Mr. Yang. Mr. Adams has placed public safety at the center of his campaign pitch, declaring it the “prerequisite” to prosperity and progress. It is a message that he has pressed with new zeal in recent weeks, amid a spike in gun violence, including a shooting last Saturday in Times Square.Mr. Adams identifies as a progressive, has a record of pushing for changes from within the police force and says he was a victim of police brutality. He also briefly switched parties and became a Republican in the 1990s, and his opponents publicly signaled an eagerness to lace into his record ahead of the debate.“Eric, you were a self-described conservative Republican when Rudy Giuliani was mayor,” Ms. Wiley said. When Mr. Adams objected to the characterization, her campaign blasted out an excerpt from a 1999 New York Daily News article.The debate unfolded as issues of crime and gun violence have become central to the mayor’s race. Mr. Adams, Mr. Yang and Raymond J. McGuire, a former Wall Street executive, rushed to Times Square after the shooting to issue stern denunciations of rising violence. Several other contenders have highlighted plans around policing or gun violence this week, including Ms. Wiley; Kathryn Garcia, the former sanitation commissioner; and the former federal housing secretary Shaun Donovan.In a sign of just how vital the question of public safety has become in the race, it was the first policy topic raised in the debate. Many of the contenders emphasized their interest in both reducing violent crime and combating police misconduct and bias.A year after the rise of the “defund the police” movement amid an outcry over racial injustice, Mr. Yang and Mr. Adams are both plainly betting that the electorate is in a more moderate mood when it comes to public safety, even as they also call for changes to ensure police accountability. Mr. Yang proactively declared that “defund the police is the wrong approach,” while Mr. Adams said that “there’s no one on this Zoom that has a greater depth of knowledge around public safety than I do.”.css-1xzcza9{list-style-type:disc;padding-inline-start:1em;}.css-3btd0c{font-family:nyt-franklin,helvetica,arial,sans-serif;font-size:1rem;line-height:1.375rem;color:#333;margin-bottom:0.78125rem;}@media (min-width:740px){.css-3btd0c{font-size:1.0625rem;line-height:1.5rem;margin-bottom:0.9375rem;}}.css-3btd0c strong{font-weight:600;}.css-3btd0c em{font-style:italic;}.css-w739ur{margin:0 auto 5px;font-family:nyt-franklin,helvetica,arial,sans-serif;font-weight:700;font-size:1.125rem;line-height:1.3125rem;color:#121212;}#NYT_BELOW_MAIN_CONTENT_REGION .css-w739ur{font-family:nyt-cheltenham,georgia,’times new roman’,times,serif;font-weight:700;font-size:1.375rem;line-height:1.625rem;}@media (min-width:740px){#NYT_BELOW_MAIN_CONTENT_REGION .css-w739ur{font-size:1.6875rem;line-height:1.875rem;}}@media (min-width:740px){.css-w739ur{font-size:1.25rem;line-height:1.4375rem;}}.css-1dg6kl4{margin-top:5px;margin-bottom:15px;}#masthead-bar-one{display:none;}#masthead-bar-one{display:none;}.css-12vbvwq{background-color:white;border:1px solid #e2e2e2;width:calc(100% – 40px);max-width:600px;margin:1.5rem auto 1.9rem;padding:15px;box-sizing:border-box;}@media (min-width:740px){.css-12vbvwq{padding:20px;width:100%;}}.css-12vbvwq:focus{outline:1px solid #e2e2e2;}#NYT_BELOW_MAIN_CONTENT_REGION .css-12vbvwq{border:none;padding:10px 0 0;border-top:2px solid #121212;}.css-12vbvwq[data-truncated] .css-rdoyk0{-webkit-transform:rotate(0deg);-ms-transform:rotate(0deg);transform:rotate(0deg);}.css-12vbvwq[data-truncated] .css-eb027h{max-height:300px;overflow:hidden;-webkit-transition:none;transition:none;}.css-12vbvwq[data-truncated] .css-5gimkt:after{content:’See more’;}.css-12vbvwq[data-truncated] .css-6mllg9{opacity:1;}.css-1rh1sk1{margin:0 auto;overflow:hidden;}.css-1rh1sk1 strong{font-weight:700;}.css-1rh1sk1 em{font-style:italic;}.css-1rh1sk1 a{color:#326891;-webkit-text-decoration:underline;text-decoration:underline;text-underline-offset:1px;-webkit-text-decoration-thickness:1px;text-decoration-thickness:1px;-webkit-text-decoration-color:#ccd9e3;text-decoration-color:#ccd9e3;}.css-1rh1sk1 a:visited{color:#333;-webkit-text-decoration-color:#ccc;text-decoration-color:#ccc;}.css-1rh1sk1 a:hover{-webkit-text-decoration:none;text-decoration:none;}A number of candidates of color discussed the issue in part through the lens of their personal experiences, whether it was Mr. McGuire describing himself as a “6-4, 200-pound Black man” who wants to have “the police protect me and not profile me,” or Ms. Wiley, who spoke of her racial identity as she called for reallocating $1 billion in New York Police Department funding “to create trauma-informed care in our schools.”“I have been Black all my life,” Ms. Wiley said. “And that means I know two things: I know what it is like to fear crime, and I know what it’s like to fear police violence, and we have to stop having this conversation, making it a false choice.”The first clear contrast of the debate emerged over the question of support for adding more police to the subways. Ms. Wiley, Dianne Morales, a former nonprofit executive, and Scott M. Stringer, the city comptroller, did not raise their hands when asked for a show of support, emphasizing that their focus would instead be on empowering more mental health professionals.The debate, like many earlier mayoral forums, was held virtually — the candidates appeared by video from their homes and other locations around the city — which made it harder to smoothly land clear standout moments and more challenging to jump in given the cacophony of several people talking over each other on camera.Throughout months of virtual forums, the candidates became familiar with each other — their policy platforms and their well-traveled lines — and developed a measure of collegiality over Zoom, with few moments of obvious tension. On Thursday, the format was similar but the stakes far higher, the audience larger and the contrasts notably sharper.In addition to the criticisms aimed at Mr. Yang and Mr. Adams, Mr. McGuire and Mr. Donovan clashed over Mr. McGuire’s tenure on Wall Street, and Mr. Stringer took an implicit shot at Mr. Donovan, who has been bolstered by a super PAC funded in part by his father.“Don’t get me involved in your daddy problems,” Mr. Stringer said.For Mr. Stringer, the debate was his most high-profile appearance following an accusation of unwanted sexual advances that has upended his campaign. Mr. Stringer has strongly denied the allegations from Jean Kim, an unpaid campaign worker on his 2001 race for public advocate, but the claims cost him the support of some of his most prominent progressive supporters, though he retains backing from key labor endorsers. He emphasized again during the debate that he rejected the allegations.Mr. Donovan, a veteran of the Obama administration, went after both of the leading candidates. He ripped into Mr. Adams for remarks he has made about carrying a gun, and used his extensive government and political experience to draw a sharp contrast with Mr. Yang.“This is the most consequential election of our lifetimes,” Mr. Donovan said. “This is not time for a rookie.”Mr. Yang was the only one of the eight who did not favor requiring citywide composting, saying his reservations were tied to implementation citywide. He sought to explain his objection with his trademark enthusiasm.“I love composting,” he said.“Just not enough,” Mr. Donovan replied. More

  • in

    Here's How Disinformation Drives Voting Laws

    After former President Donald J. Trump undermined public confidence in elections, Republican lawmakers are defending voting restrictions by citing a lack of public confidence.When State Representative Bobby Kaufmann of Iowa spoke in February in support of a restrictive voting bill he was sponsoring, he made what might once have been a startling acknowledgment: He could not point to any problems with November’s election that demonstrated a need for new rules.But many Iowans believed there had been problems, he said. And that was reason enough to allow less early voting, shorten Election Day polling hours, put new limits on absentee balloting and forbid counties to have more than one ballot drop box.“The ultimate voter suppression is a very large swath of the electorate not having faith in our election systems,” Mr. Kaufmann, a Republican, said in defense of his bill, which was signed into law in March. “And for whatever reason, political or not, there are thousands upon thousands of Iowans that do not have faith in our election systems.”State Representative Bobby Kaufmann of Iowa said new voting restrictions were needed because many voters believed the 2020 election had been insecure.Charlie Neibergall/Associated PressFormer President Donald J. Trump’s monthslong campaign to delegitimize the 2020 election didn’t overturn the results. But his unfounded claims gutted his supporters’ trust in the electoral system, laying the foundation for numerous Republican-led bills pushing more restrictive voter rules.The bills demonstrate how disinformation can take on a life of its own, forming a feedback loop that shapes policy for years to come. When promoted with sufficient intensity, falsehoods — whether about election security or the coronavirus or other topics — can shape voters’ attitudes toward policies, and lawmakers can cite those attitudes as the basis for major changes.The embrace of the falsehoods also showcases the continuing power of Mr. Trump inside the Republican Party, which has widely adopted and weaponized his election claims. Many Republicans, eager to gain his support, have raced to champion the new voting laws. Those who have stood up to his falsehoods have paid the price. Representative Liz Cheney was ousted from her House leadership post on Wednesday after repudiating what she called the “big lie.”Lawmakers in at least 33 states have cited low public confidence in election integrity in their public comments as a justification for bills to restrict voting, according to a tally by The New York Times. In several states — including Arizona, Florida, Georgia and Iowa — the bills have already been signed into law, and legislation in Texas is very close to passage.Voter fraud is extremely rare in the United States, and officials in every state and at the federal level affirmed that the 2020 election was secure.Supporters of President Donald J. Trump in December, protesting what they claimed was a stolen election.Stefani Reynolds for The New York Times“It’s like a perpetual motion machine — you create the fear of fraud out of vapors and then cut down on people’s votes because of the fog you’ve created,” said Michael Waldman, the president of the Brennan Center for Justice at New York University. “Politicians, for partisan purposes, lied to supporters about widespread fraud. The supporters believe the lies, and then that belief creates this rationale for the politicians to say, ‘Well, I know it’s not really true, but look how worried everybody is.’”Calls to change election laws because of public perceptions are not new: Reports in 2001, 2005 and 2008, for example, warned of the potential repercussions of voter distrust. In 2008, the Supreme Court upheld Indiana’s voter ID law based partly on the argument that it would increase confidence in the state’s elections. And confidence tends to fall at least somewhat after every election among voters in the losing party, according to Charles Stewart III, a director of the Election Data and Science Lab at M.I.T.But there are some key differences this year, voting rights and disinformation experts say. First, the scale of the legislative efforts — as measured both by the number of bills introduced and the extent of the restrictions they propose — is greater than in past election cycles. Second, the falling confidence in the electoral system is directly traceable to a disinformation campaign. And the drop in confidence among Republicans is far steeper than anything seen in past cycles.Robin Vos, the Republican speaker of the Wisconsin State Assembly, told reporters in January, “We have to improve the process when literally hundreds of thousands of people in Wisconsin doubt that the election was held in a way that didn’t have substantial charges of fraud.” State Senator Judy Ward of Pennsylvania, a Republican, wrote in a memo that a bill she had introduced would free elections “from the shadow of doubt that has been cast over the democratic process.” State Senator Ralph Hise of North Carolina, also a Republican, said in March, “Even if there is no cause for that suspicion, perception impacts trust, and that’s something to take seriously.”In an email to The Times, Mr. Hise said it would be wrong to suggest “that Republicans are ‘evolving’ their arguments in bad faith to try to suppress votes.”“Lack of voter confidence is real; the rhetoric surrounding the 2020 election certainly contributes to that, but it existed for many years before 2020 and impacts voters from both parties,” he said. “Elected officials have a responsibility to respond to declining voter confidence, and failure to do so is dangerous to the health of our republic.”Ms. Ward, when asked whether she considered low voter confidence a sufficient basis for new laws, said, “We must work in a bipartisan way to restore confidence in our elections or, I fear, many people will walk away from the process because they no longer believe in the integrity of our election system.”A spokesman for Mr. Vos did not respond to a request for comment. Neither did Mr. Kaufmann, the Iowa representative.Democrats from the Georgia House protested a restrictive voting law outside the State Capitol in March.Nicole Craine for The New York TimesArguments about the public’s flagging confidence in elections have made their way into the official text of bills, including in Georgia, which enacted a sweeping law limiting drop boxes and provisional balloting, requiring identification for absentee voting and making it illegal to give food or water to people waiting in line to vote, among other changes.The legislation, 98 pages long, was an opening salvo in a Republican effort that has resulted in new restrictions in several swing states and is still continuing. It put Georgia at the center of a national storm, with Major League Baseball moving the All-Star Game and big employers like Delta Air Lines and Coca-Cola denouncing the restrictions under public pressure. And its supporters’ stated rationale, as outlined in a lengthy introduction to the bill, was almost entirely about voter confidence..css-1xzcza9{list-style-type:disc;padding-inline-start:1em;}.css-3btd0c{font-family:nyt-franklin,helvetica,arial,sans-serif;font-size:1rem;line-height:1.375rem;color:#333;margin-bottom:0.78125rem;}@media (min-width:740px){.css-3btd0c{font-size:1.0625rem;line-height:1.5rem;margin-bottom:0.9375rem;}}.css-3btd0c strong{font-weight:600;}.css-3btd0c em{font-style:italic;}.css-w739ur{margin:0 auto 5px;font-family:nyt-franklin,helvetica,arial,sans-serif;font-weight:700;font-size:1.125rem;line-height:1.3125rem;color:#121212;}#NYT_BELOW_MAIN_CONTENT_REGION .css-w739ur{font-family:nyt-cheltenham,georgia,’times new roman’,times,serif;font-weight:700;font-size:1.375rem;line-height:1.625rem;}@media (min-width:740px){#NYT_BELOW_MAIN_CONTENT_REGION .css-w739ur{font-size:1.6875rem;line-height:1.875rem;}}@media (min-width:740px){.css-w739ur{font-size:1.25rem;line-height:1.4375rem;}}.css-9s9ecg{margin-bottom:15px;}.css-16ed7iq{width:100%;display:-webkit-box;display:-webkit-flex;display:-ms-flexbox;display:flex;-webkit-align-items:center;-webkit-box-align:center;-ms-flex-align:center;align-items:center;-webkit-box-pack:center;-webkit-justify-content:center;-ms-flex-pack:center;justify-content:center;padding:10px 0;background-color:white;}.css-pmm6ed{display:-webkit-box;display:-webkit-flex;display:-ms-flexbox;display:flex;-webkit-align-items:center;-webkit-box-align:center;-ms-flex-align:center;align-items:center;}.css-pmm6ed > :not(:first-child){margin-left:5px;}.css-5gimkt{font-family:nyt-franklin,helvetica,arial,sans-serif;font-size:0.8125rem;font-weight:700;-webkit-letter-spacing:0.03em;-moz-letter-spacing:0.03em;-ms-letter-spacing:0.03em;letter-spacing:0.03em;text-transform:uppercase;color:#333;}.css-5gimkt:after{content:’Collapse’;}.css-rdoyk0{-webkit-transition:all 0.5s ease;transition:all 0.5s ease;-webkit-transform:rotate(180deg);-ms-transform:rotate(180deg);transform:rotate(180deg);}.css-eb027h{max-height:5000px;-webkit-transition:max-height 0.5s ease;transition:max-height 0.5s ease;}.css-6mllg9{-webkit-transition:all 0.5s ease;transition:all 0.5s ease;position:relative;opacity:0;}.css-6mllg9:before{content:”;background-image:linear-gradient(180deg,transparent,#ffffff);background-image:-webkit-linear-gradient(270deg,rgba(255,255,255,0),#ffffff);height:80px;width:100%;position:absolute;bottom:0px;pointer-events:none;}.css-1jiwgt1{display:-webkit-box;display:-webkit-flex;display:-ms-flexbox;display:flex;-webkit-box-pack:justify;-webkit-justify-content:space-between;-ms-flex-pack:justify;justify-content:space-between;margin-bottom:1.25rem;}.css-8o2i8v{display:-webkit-box;display:-webkit-flex;display:-ms-flexbox;display:flex;-webkit-flex-direction:column;-ms-flex-direction:column;flex-direction:column;-webkit-align-self:flex-end;-ms-flex-item-align:end;align-self:flex-end;}.css-8o2i8v p{margin-bottom:0;}.css-12vbvwq{background-color:white;border:1px solid #e2e2e2;width:calc(100% – 40px);max-width:600px;margin:1.5rem auto 1.9rem;padding:15px;box-sizing:border-box;}@media (min-width:740px){.css-12vbvwq{padding:20px;width:100%;}}.css-12vbvwq:focus{outline:1px solid #e2e2e2;}#NYT_BELOW_MAIN_CONTENT_REGION .css-12vbvwq{border:none;padding:10px 0 0;border-top:2px solid #121212;}.css-12vbvwq[data-truncated] .css-rdoyk0{-webkit-transform:rotate(0deg);-ms-transform:rotate(0deg);transform:rotate(0deg);}.css-12vbvwq[data-truncated] .css-eb027h{max-height:300px;overflow:hidden;-webkit-transition:none;transition:none;}.css-12vbvwq[data-truncated] .css-5gimkt:after{content:’See more’;}.css-12vbvwq[data-truncated] .css-6mllg9{opacity:1;}.css-1rh1sk1{margin:0 auto;overflow:hidden;}.css-1rh1sk1 strong{font-weight:700;}.css-1rh1sk1 em{font-style:italic;}.css-1rh1sk1 a{color:#326891;-webkit-text-decoration:underline;text-decoration:underline;text-underline-offset:1px;-webkit-text-decoration-thickness:1px;text-decoration-thickness:1px;-webkit-text-decoration-color:#ccd9e3;text-decoration-color:#ccd9e3;}.css-1rh1sk1 a:visited{color:#333;-webkit-text-decoration-color:#ccc;text-decoration-color:#ccc;}.css-1rh1sk1 a:hover{-webkit-text-decoration:none;text-decoration:none;}“Following the 2018 and 2020 elections, there was a significant lack of confidence in Georgia election systems, with many electors concerned about allegations of rampant voter suppression and many electors concerned about allegations of rampant voter fraud,” the bill said. “The changes made in this legislation in 2021 are designed to address the lack of elector confidence in the election system on all sides of the political spectrum, to reduce the burden on election officials, and to streamline the process of conducting elections in Georgia by promoting uniformity in voting.”The “all sides” framing belied the fact that the bill was supported only by Republican lawmakers and that, while it contained some provisions expanding voting access, it was geared mostly toward mollifying those who believed “allegations of rampant voter fraud” — without ever saying those allegations, which are false — were true.These sorts of arguments are unsurprising after a disinformation campaign like Mr. Trump’s, experts said, and they tend to insulate legislative efforts from challenges based on the facts of how rare fraud is.“We are not going to fact-check our way out of problems of trust,” said Renée DiResta, a disinformation researcher at the Stanford Internet Observatory. “People believe these claims because they trust the people who are making these claims, and they’ve also been conditioned to believe that anyone not making these claims and anyone on the other side is inherently untrustworthy.”Disinformation experts said improving voter confidence in elections was a sensible legislative goal. But they denounced the circularity of the current push and the extent to which it was premised on disinformation.“It is absolutely legitimate to be concerned about election integrity,” said David J. Becker, the executive director of the Center for Election Innovation & Research. “Even though fraud isn’t widespread, it’s good for voters to know there are protections in place against it. What’s not OK is to invent fake threats and to ignore the evidence and to act in a way that’s clearly designed to result in a partisan outcome.”The best way to combat a lack of voter confidence is “not to manufacture a false narrative and then prescribe a solution that would presumably fix the false narrative,” but “to correct the false narrative,” Mr. Becker said. “Say out loud, ‘The 2020 election was secure.’” More

  • in

    N.Y.C. Mayoral Candidates Prepare to Face Off in Debate

    The two-hour debate is unfolding in a moment of economic uncertainty for New York City, and against a backdrop of a spike in gun violence.For many months, the most consequential New York City mayor’s race in a generation has been overshadowed by a pandemic, upheaval in Washington and political burnout in the aftermath of the presidential election.Now, the mayoral candidates are racing to take advantage of what they hope will be their turn in the spotlight.On Thursday, with less than six weeks before the June 22 Democratic primary that is likely to determine the next mayor, eight Democratic contenders will have their most significant opportunity yet to introduce themselves and to capture voter attention, as they convene by video for the first of three official primary debates.The two-hour debate, co-hosted at 7 p.m. by Spectrum News NY1, is unfolding at an inflection point for a city, a period marked by both economic uncertainty and the reopening of businesses, a spike in gun violence and a surge of hope around vaccinations. The election will play a crucial role in determining whether the city retains its standing as a cultural and financial capital of the world in the pandemic’s aftermath.In many ways, the race is unsettled. Left-wing activists and voters who have been decisive in other recent New York races are divided over how to wield their influence, after the city comptroller, Scott M. Stringer — a leading progressive candidate — was accused of sexual assault. He denied the allegation, but it sapped his momentum, and many high-profile endorsers have dropped their support for him.The city comptroller, Scott Stringer, is struggling to hold onto progressive support after a sexual-abuse allegation from 20 years ago hurt his campaign.Sarah Blesener for The New York TimesSparse public polling suggests that Andrew Yang, the former presidential candidate, and Eric Adams, the Brooklyn borough president, are the top-tier contenders, with other candidates strategizing around how to cut into their leads.For the rest of the field, time is running short to break out of the pack, and the debate represents the best chance yet to communicate with voters who are just beginning to tune in.“The debate is very important because it gives voters the opportunity to really compare and contrast, to get a sense of all of us next to each other,” said Kathryn Garcia, the former city sanitation commissioner who has been one of the lower-polling candidates, but has attracted fresh interest from some Democrats following an endorsement from The New York Times editorial board.The virtual format may limit opportunities for fireworks and breakout moments, but candidates have nevertheless been preparing for this moment for weeks, poring over policy briefings, huddling with advisers over video chats and in person and doing full-on mock debates.Mr. Yang, who is experienced on the presidential debate stage but new to the front-runner’s spotlight, has participated in mock debate sessions with several high-profile stand-ins, as his team braces for an onslaught of attacks.A former mayoral rival, Carlos Menchaca, a city councilman who has endorsed Mr. Yang, has played Dianne Morales, the left-wing former nonprofit executive; Representative Ritchie Torres, a New York Democrat, has played Mr. Adams; Assemblyman Daniel Rosenthal of Queens has been a stand-in for Mr. Stringer; and Sasha Ahuja, Mr. Yang’s co-campaign manager, has played Maya D. Wiley, according to someone familiar with Mr. Yang’s debate preparations.Mr. Yang will take the virtual stage as he deals with controversy tied to a statement he made this week of unqualified support for Israel, remarks he sought to modulate on Wednesday amid an outcry on the left and pushback from some of his own volunteers and staff.For Mr. Yang, who has generally led the available polls since he entered the race in January, the debate will test his ability to weather the kind of sustained scrutiny that he never faced onstage as a low-polling presidential candidate, and his opponents have already previewed attacks on his experience and his ties to the city’s civic fabric.Eric Adams, the Brooklyn borough president, is thought to be one of two front-runners in the New York City mayor’s race.Elizabeth D. Herman for The New York TimesMr. Adams has held mock debates, too, with advisers playing the role of his opponents and the moderator. As he has risen in some polls, a number of candidates have increasingly sought to draw overt contrasts with him, a dynamic that is likely to continue onstage, reflecting his standing in the race.Raymond J. McGuire, a former Citi executive, has practiced, with the help of a team of advisers, from his Upper West Side apartment. Ms. Garcia has been peppered with questions from staff members and consultants, “timing me and being like, ‘you’re over a minute, you’re under a minute,’” she said. Shaun Donovan, the former federal housing secretary, has sought to simulate as many of the debate conditions as possible, rehearsing over video in the evenings.“When the story of this campaign is written, this is going to be one of the first things regular voters ever heard about,” said Joshua Karp, a Donovan adviser who said he ran debate prep for Senator Jon Ossoff of Georgia and the Democratic National Committee chairman, Jaime Harrison, during Mr. Harrison’s South Carolina Senate bid.There is a debate planned for May 26 for the two Republican candidates, Curtis Sliwa, the founder of the Guardian Angels, and Fernando Mateo, a restaurant operator who has led or founded Hispanics Across America, the state Federation of Taxi Drivers and United Bodegas of America..css-1xzcza9{list-style-type:disc;padding-inline-start:1em;}.css-3btd0c{font-family:nyt-franklin,helvetica,arial,sans-serif;font-size:1rem;line-height:1.375rem;color:#333;margin-bottom:0.78125rem;}@media (min-width:740px){.css-3btd0c{font-size:1.0625rem;line-height:1.5rem;margin-bottom:0.9375rem;}}.css-3btd0c strong{font-weight:600;}.css-3btd0c em{font-style:italic;}.css-w739ur{margin:0 auto 5px;font-family:nyt-franklin,helvetica,arial,sans-serif;font-weight:700;font-size:1.125rem;line-height:1.3125rem;color:#121212;}#NYT_BELOW_MAIN_CONTENT_REGION .css-w739ur{font-family:nyt-cheltenham,georgia,’times new roman’,times,serif;font-weight:700;font-size:1.375rem;line-height:1.625rem;}@media (min-width:740px){#NYT_BELOW_MAIN_CONTENT_REGION .css-w739ur{font-size:1.6875rem;line-height:1.875rem;}}@media (min-width:740px){.css-w739ur{font-size:1.25rem;line-height:1.4375rem;}}.css-1dg6kl4{margin-top:5px;margin-bottom:15px;}#masthead-bar-one{display:none;}#masthead-bar-one{display:none;}.css-12vbvwq{background-color:white;border:1px solid #e2e2e2;width:calc(100% – 40px);max-width:600px;margin:1.5rem auto 1.9rem;padding:15px;box-sizing:border-box;}@media (min-width:740px){.css-12vbvwq{padding:20px;width:100%;}}.css-12vbvwq:focus{outline:1px solid #e2e2e2;}#NYT_BELOW_MAIN_CONTENT_REGION .css-12vbvwq{border:none;padding:10px 0 0;border-top:2px solid #121212;}.css-12vbvwq[data-truncated] .css-rdoyk0{-webkit-transform:rotate(0deg);-ms-transform:rotate(0deg);transform:rotate(0deg);}.css-12vbvwq[data-truncated] .css-eb027h{max-height:300px;overflow:hidden;-webkit-transition:none;transition:none;}.css-12vbvwq[data-truncated] .css-5gimkt:after{content:’See more’;}.css-12vbvwq[data-truncated] .css-6mllg9{opacity:1;}.css-1rh1sk1{margin:0 auto;overflow:hidden;}.css-1rh1sk1 strong{font-weight:700;}.css-1rh1sk1 em{font-style:italic;}.css-1rh1sk1 a{color:#326891;-webkit-text-decoration:underline;text-decoration:underline;text-underline-offset:1px;-webkit-text-decoration-thickness:1px;text-decoration-thickness:1px;-webkit-text-decoration-color:#ccd9e3;text-decoration-color:#ccd9e3;}.css-1rh1sk1 a:visited{color:#333;-webkit-text-decoration-color:#ccc;text-decoration-color:#ccc;}.css-1rh1sk1 a:hover{-webkit-text-decoration:none;text-decoration:none;}The debate among the eight Democratic candidates who met the threshold to participate will take place less than a week after a shooting in Times Square, and the contenders are almost certain to engage one another over matters of public safety and the power of the police.Mr. Adams, Mr. Yang and Mr. McGuire all rushed to Times Square in the aftermath of the shooting, speaking soberly about gun violence and crime, even as they have also stressed their support for reforming policing. Other more left-wing candidates have kept their focus more squarely on matters of police accountability. And on Tuesday, Ms. Garcia, Ms. Wiley and Mr. Donovan all held events discussing gun violence and policing.Mr. Adams, a former police officer who pushed to change Police Department policy from within the system, has made public safety a centerpiece of his campaign — the “prerequisite” to prosperity, he often says.In a sign of one possible line of interrogation to come, Mr. McGuire wrote on Twitter on Wednesday: “I guess my question for the cop-turned-career politicians is: in all that time, what have you done?”Then there is the contest for the left wing of the party.Mr. Stringer had appeared on the cusp of coalescing progressive organizations and leaders around his campaign until about two weeks ago, when Jean Kim, an unpaid worker on his 2001 public advocate race, came forward with allegations of unwanted sexual advances. Mr. Stringer has strongly denied the allegations, but the accusation threw Mr. Stringer’s campaign into turmoil. Many of his most high-profile left-wing endorsers, who had been a central part of Mr. Stringer’s pitch, abandoned him, despite seeing him as the most viable of the left-leaning contenders.The controversy surrounding Mr. Stringer has given room for other left-leaning candidates like Maya Wiley, center, and Dianne Morales.Sarah Blesener for The New York TimesThe Working Families Party, which had supported Mr. Stringer as its first choice, is now backing Ms. Morales and Ms. Wiley. Some on the left have also made joint endorsements, while others will be watching the debate closely to decide whether to do a joint endorsement, to elevate one contender over the other in a ranked-choice endorsement or to sit out the endorsement process entirely.“You have a splintering of support among the people who would otherwise maybe coalesce around a single candidate,” said Susan Kang, a steering committee member of the New York City chapter of the Democratic Socialists. “It seems, to me, very fractured.”Mr. Stringer, however, is a well-funded candidate and an experienced debater who is receiving both political backing and air cover from powerful teachers’ unions and may continue to hold onto his Upper West Side base despite losing prominent left-wing endorsers.“One of the things I think will be clear in this debate is, we cannot have a mayoralty on training wheels when we’re in our biggest challenge,” Mr. Stringer said on Wednesday.As for his debate preparations?“Top secret,” he said. More