Politics and Government

Subterms

    More stories

    • 50 Shares149 Views

      in Elections

      ‘The View’ Has Narrowed

      by

      Illustration By The New York TimesThe ladies of “The View” were in high spirits. A piece of news they’d been hankering for had broken at last: President Biden, a revered figure around their talk show table, had kicked off his re-election campaign.The show’s hosts — known in “View” parlance as “the ladies” — had been hyping this moment for months. They’d lavished praise on President Biden for leading the country out of the pandemic and overseeing what they described as a thriving U.S. economy. They’d downplayed scandals and investigations involving Mr. Biden and his family members. They’d also taken extraordinary pains to disqualify as “ageist” questions of whether he is simply too old to run again. Mr. Biden would be 86 by the end of a second term, but when the Democratic strategist David Axelrod expressed mild concern, the comedian Joy Behar snapped that he “should keep his mouth shut.”“I’d rather have Joe Biden, drooling, than any Republican,” Ms. Behar said another day.Now the ladies agreed that Mr. Biden’s campaign announcement made them feel hopeful. They were tired of what Sunny Hostin called Republican “fearmongering,” which, in a startlingly casual aside, she noted had “led to the demise of our democracy.” If any of the ladies was perturbed by the irony of decrying scare tactics while calling U.S. democracy dead, she kept it to herself.“You get behind him,” the actress Whoopi Goldberg said of Mr. Biden, seemingly instructing the Democrats at large, “and we won’t have a problem.”This kind of unabashed cheerleading is reserved for Mr. Biden. The panel of “View” hosts has been annoyed and dismissive of other Democrats who might vie for the nomination. (“You start making inroads — maybe this person, maybe this person — we’re done for,” Ms. Goldberg said.) When compelled to discuss the Twitter-hosted presidential campaign announcement of Gov. Ron DeSantis of the Florida — a man they’d decried as “fascist,” “bigot” and “Death Santis” — the ladies used the occasion to mock the platform and its new owner, Elon Musk, for the tech failures that disrupted the event. As for Mr. Trump, forget about it: Ms. Goldberg won’t even utter his name, referring to him instead as “you know who.”The day after Mr. Biden’s announcement, the co-host Alyssa Farah Griffin, a Republican political operative who’d already been silenced by Ms. Goldberg, giggled from her end of the table. Ms. Farah Griffin has said she’d write in another candidate before voting for either Mr. Biden or Mr. Trump, but her counterpoints tend to get interrupted or dismissed by the rest of the panel.Mr. Biden “needs another four years to finish the job,” Ms. Behar said. “You can’t fight fascism in four years only. You need eight years for that.”“He has had a lot of accomplishments,” Ms. Hostin agreed.“He brought us back from the precipice,” Ms. Goldberg said. “Maybe it’s not a perfect country, but it’s better than where we were.”With that, the music came up and the audience applauded. The discussion was done.I’ve been a regular Viewer for years, starting when I was a foreign correspondent salving late-night homesickness via satellite TV. Along the way I’ve amassed an encyclopedic knowledge of the hosts’ marriages and hobbies, and a habit of analyzing the “Hot Topics” discussions as a bellwether of centrist America’s political and cultural trends. I’m hardly alone — “The View” has long inspired pieces of serious analysis that bob along like flotsam on a choppy sea of dressing room gossip, leaks and hate tweets. For me, though, it’s a solitary fixation, for none of my friends or family members have ever shared my interest in “The View.”“Ugh, I can’t watch that show,” they grimace. Or — this most of all — “Aren’t they always arguing?”Which is funny because, if you ask me, the co-hosts don’t argue nearly enough. At least, not substantively. Not anymore. The freewheeling discussions that once evoked a spectrum of American opinion on everything from reproductive rights to foreign policy — those have mostly fallen silent. “The View” has become a chorus of conformity. The title of this show I’ve loved for years used to suggest messy and fearless debate. Lately, it seems like a command.The hosts include centrist Democrats (Ms. Hostin and Ms. Behar), centrist Republicans (Ms. Farah Griffin and Ana Navarro) and one centrist independent (the TV journalist Sara Haines). But, anyway, they agree. They agree (or at least pretend to agree) that Mr. Biden is basically a good president. Even on topics notorious for splitting American opinion — the need for “common-sense gun reform,” protecting L.G.B.T.Q. rights and funding the war in Ukraine — they don’t find much to debate one another about. Even those who privately consider abortion a sin agree that access should be preserved in some cases.We, the people, are split. Our many divisions obstruct coherent governance. But “The View” continues to project a brightly lit illusion of accord.And there is no article of agreement more important — lending the show an intoxicating but oddly irreal flavor — as the ladies’ absolute disdain for Mr. Trump and, increasingly, anyone who belongs to his party.Current events haven’t always anchored “The View.” Since the program’s 1997 debut, celebrity interviews, gossip and relationship advice vied for time against news and politics. In its current iteration, though, “The View” carries itself like an earnest journalistic platform — a must-do interview for establishment politicians and a reliable midmorning destination for nuggets of news analysis. In 2019, The New York Times Magazine dubbed it “the most important political TV show in America.”Which has made its erasure of the country’s most dynamic and least understood political strains all the more frustrating.As the current season got underway last September, Ms. Hostin, a former federal prosecutor, came out with a sweeping justification for shunning Republicans — all Republicans, she specified, not just MAGA loyalists — because polls showed that the majority of Republicans regard Mr. Trump as their figurehead.“So if you are saying that he is a fascist, what are they? If you are saying that he is a white supremacist, what are they?” Ms. Hostin continued. “If you follow someone that has hate in their heart, and I believe that he does, then you are complicit in that, and you don’t have a pass.”I gathered that Ms. Hostin was enshrining the new ground rules of “The View,” updated to reflect our ever more divided age. She has become the show’s dominant voice, although I can’t tell if that’s by design or whether it’s the inevitable result of her indomitable delivery and the clear, unambiguous opinions she’s polished into repeatable bites.Either way, the idea that Republicans could be written off en masse signaled a radical departure in “View” philosophy. The panelists have traditionally taken pains to distinguish between bad politicians and the regular people who vote for them. Barbara Walters, who created the show and presided over it for years, urged the ladies to appeal to an imaginary viewer in Wyoming, according to interviews with current and former panelists for the podcast “The View: Behind the Table.” When Ms. Goldberg and Ms. Behar stormed off the set mid-interview in 2010 to protest anti-Muslim rhetoric from Bill O’Reilly (“Muslims killed us on 9/11”), Ms. Walters was outraged.“You have just seen what should not happen,” Ms. Walters told the audience that day. “We should be able to have discussions without washing our hands” of one another “and screaming and walking offstage,” she said.But that was a different age. Ms. Hostin’s wholesale dismissal of Republicans comes across as a bleak but frank acknowledgment that the show had adopted the coping mechanisms of our time: Ban thoughts we don’t like and carry on as if all the reasonable people agree. It’s been particularly chilling to watch this attitude finally take hold at a mainstream women’s program that has long postured as a nonthreatening place to air whatever opinions were working their way through the land, a make-believe living room where you could disagree about politics but then bond over bratty bridal behavior and unrealistic beauty standards.There is an argument, familiar by now, that denying Mr. Trump and his supporters a platform is the only moral approach to a movement many regard as a historic evil. But trying to smother any serious consideration of his politics has the unfortunate effect of suggesting that we are afraid of letting Americans hear these ideas because — why? They might like them too much?To be fair, the animosity between “The View” and Republicans is mutual, and finding the origin point is something of a chicken-versus-egg conundrum. For example, “The View” invited Mr. DeSantis to appear this season — a fact we only know because his spokesman tweeted out the invitation, along with the governor’s refusal, which cited various slurs and insults the ladies had used to refer to Mr. DeSantis.Even beyond “The View,” many conservatives, especially those in the thrall of Mr. Trump, now avoid mainstream journalists they decry as purveyors of “fake news.”Whatever the reason, one fact is undeniable: “The View” brazened all the way through Mr. Trump’s first campaign and presidency without deigning to hire a Trump supporter.The closest the show came was Meghan McCain, who spent so much time name-checking her father and bickering peevishly that she often drowned out her own points — which amounted to tortured efforts to reconcile her disgust for Mr. Trump with a desire to speak up for his voters.This may not be a popular take on Ms. McCain (who eventually left the show amid mockery of her entitled attitude and embarrassing lapses in decorum), but she had moments of clarity. She raised valid but then-taboo questions about America’s pandemic response and, to the acute annoyance of her co-hosts, analyzed failures and weaknesses of the Democratic Party.In 2020, when the other ladies nitpicked Bernie Sanders (saying, among other things, that he was ineffective, a fake Democrat and backed by Russians), Ms. McCain calmly laid out her repugnance for the Vermont senator’s leftist policies while acknowledging that his runaway popularity could land him the nomination. It was Ms. McCain who frankly discussed the populist sentiment fueling the rise of both Mr. Trump and Mr. Sanders.Ms. McCain’s seat was filled this season by the more cordial — or perhaps more easily cowed — Ms. Farah Griffin, a former spokeswoman for the Trump administration. Ms. Farah Griffin quit her job amid Mr. Trump’s election lies and went on to testify before the House select committee investigating the insurrection of Jan. 6 — insufficient atonement, according to her new colleagues. Her early weeks on the show were full of struggle sessions in which her co-hosts (most notably Ms. Hostin and Ms. Navarro) snubbed and needled her until she coughed up, yet again, a denunciation of Mr. Trump.“I do question you … ’cause you’re a very smart woman,” Ms. Hostin said to her in a typical early exchange. “When you looked at his history … did it give you pause? As a woman who considers herself a brown woman, ‘My God, I’m working for a racist’?”Ms. Farah Griffin repeated the familiar explanation: She believed public service was a higher calling and didn’t think it was acceptable to cede the White House to “the crazies.”“I could spend the rest of my life debating if that was the right choice and, honestly, I spend a lot of time thinking about it,” she said, sounding weary. “But what I worry about is that this man could be president again.”When I first started watching “The View,” I was immersed in the violence and upheaval that followed Sept. 11, 2001. Peering westward through the window of the TV, I’d marvel at how unaffected the ladies seemed, how coifed and manicured, chatting about cheating husbands while the wars ground along. Sometimes I had the sense of watching anesthesia dripping into the veins of the American public.But then, like clouds parting, the ladies would say real things. Looking back now, I’m struck by how layered and blunt those conversations were — especially compared to those of today.In a 2007 episode, for example, the ladies clashed over torture, morality and America’s reputation abroad. Elisabeth Hasselbeck sneered that Khalid Shaikh Mohammed deserved to be tortured for his role in the Sept. 11 attacks. “Why don’t we give him milk and cookies at the same time,” Ms. Hasselbeck said. “And a lawyer, and let him watch ‘American Idol’?”Rosie O’Donnell countered by asking if labeling someone a terrorist nullified that person’s humanity. “They have been treating them like animals, Elisabeth, not like human beings,” she said.The U.S. government was “sanctioning torture,” Ms. O’Donnell went on, “from the president all the way down,” leading to anti-American protests around the world.Ms. Hasselbeck was unmoved. “I’d rather be safe than liked,” she said.Ms. Behar, a compulsive mood lightener with a habit of cracking jokes and steering the discussion back to daily practicalities, sided with Ms. O’Donnell, saying that she wanted to be greeted warmly on vacation in Italy.“I want them to say, ‘Hey, Americana, come,’” Ms. Behar said. “I don’t want them to not like me.”I still loathe what Ms. Hasselbeck said — suggesting torture as a punishment, mocking the right to a lawyer, prizing safety above all else. But it didn’t shock me. Those values had dominated the U.S. government since 2001, and I’d been watching them play out disastrously in Iraq, Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia and Yemen. If anything, it was cathartic to hear the arguments trotted onto TV, to see them falter and collapse under challenge.What strikes me now, though, was how that debate ended. “I think you’re wrong,” Ms. O’Donnell told Ms. Hasselbeck. “I still love you, but I think you’re wrong.”I love you, but you’re wrong. “The View” isn’t like that anymore. I think Americans are, or could be, or want to be — but we certainly don’t see it done on TV.The ladies often seem on the brink of having an honest and textured discussion — somebody will say something intriguing — but the most compelling comments tend to go untouched.I envision behind them the suited figures of the ABC network and the Walt Disney Company, which owns the network, and the companies that buy ads to sell things in the breaks, all of which benefit from predictable centrist leadership and regard eruptions of popular sentiment as an undesirable expense.Ms. Goldberg, seemingly keen to avoid any steep ideological edges, frequently shuts down conversation with a sweeping and vague speech on the uncertainty of politics or the unreliability of polls or some such.One recent morning, Ms. Haines fretted about the insurrection of Jan. 6 and the erosion of public trust.“The media is at its lowest. The Supreme Court is at its lowest,” she said, ticking off on her fingers. “People don’t trust anyone these days, so to completely ——”Ms. Behar interrupted: “They trust us,” she snapped.“Yes!” Ms. Hostin said emphatically, hands folded around her coffee mug, like a teacher’s pet who’s just called the right answer. As the audience exploded in applause, Ms. Haines stammered to regain her thought.Ms. Behar shrugged, and interrupted again. “Sure,” she said curtly.And that was that.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.

      article#story div#fullBleedHeaderContent header div:nth-of-type(2) div > p:nth-of-type(1), article.nytapp-hybrid-article div#fullBleedHeaderContent header > div:nth-of-type(2) p.adjacency-label {
      text-transform: uppercase;
      font-size: 1rem;
      font-weight: 600;
      line-height: 1.5rem;
      letter-spacing: 0.05em;

      }

      h1:first-letter {
      margin-left: 0;
      }

      article#story div#fullBleedHeaderContent header div:nth-of-type(2) div > p:nth-of-type(1):after, article.nytapp-hybrid-article div#fullBleedHeaderContent header > div:nth-of-type(2) p.adjacency-label:after {
      content: “Guest Essay”;
      display: block;
      color: white;
      }

      article#story div#fullBleedHeaderContent header div:nth-of-type(2) div > p:nth-of-type(1) a:link, article#story div#fullBleedHeaderContent header div:nth-of-type(2) div > p:nth-of-type(1) a:visited, article.nytapp-hybrid-article div#fullBleedHeaderContent header > div:nth-of-type(2) p.adjacency-label {
      color: #D0021B;
      }

      @media screen and (min-width: 1024px){

      article#story div#fullBleedHeaderContent header div:nth-of-type(2) div > div:nth-of-type(2) h1:before,
      article.nytapp-hybrid-article div#fullBleedHeaderContent header > div:nth-of-type(2) h1:before{
      content: “”;
      width: 8.75rem;
      border: 1px solid rgba(255, 255, 255, 0.25);
      unicode-bidi: normal;
      display: block;
      margin: -8px auto 35px;
      }

      article#story div#fullBleedHeaderContent header div:nth-of-type(2) div > p:nth-of-type(2),
      article.nytapp-hybrid-article div#fullBleedHeaderContent header > div:nth-of-type(2) > div > div:nth-of-type(2) p {
      font-weight: 100;
      -webkit-font-smoothing: antialiased;
      letter-spacing: 0.25px;
      margin-top: 10px;
      }

      }

      @media screen and (max-width: 1024px){
      article#story div#fullBleedHeaderContent header div:nth-of-type(2) div > div:nth-of-type(2) h1,
      article.nytapp-hybrid-article div#fullBleedHeaderContent header > div:nth-of-type(2) h1{
      margin-bottom: 5px;
      }
      article#story div#fullBleedHeaderContent header div:nth-of-type(2) p:nth-of-type(1) a:link, article#story div#fullBleedHeaderContent header div:nth-of-type(2) p:nth-of-type(1) a:visited {
      color: #D0021B;
      letter-spacing: 0.07em;
      font-size: 1rem;
      }

      article#story div#fullBleedHeaderContent header div:nth-of-type(2) div > p:nth-of-type(1):after, article.nytapp-hybrid-article div#fullBleedHeaderContent header > div:nth-of-type(2) p.adjacency-label:after{
      color: #111;
      }
      } More

    • 125 Shares199 Views

      in Elections

      Senegal’s Opposition Leader Is Sentenced to 2 Years in Prison

      by

      A case involving a rape charge against Ousmane Sonko has monopolized the country’s political life and raised concerns over the prosecution of political opponents.A court in Senegal sentenced the country’s leading opposition figure to two years in prison on Thursday after finding him guilty of “corrupting youth.” The ruling, which for now bars him from running in future elections, throws the West African nation’s political future into uncertainty less than a year before its next presidential contest.The opposition leader, Ousmane Sonko, was accused of raping an employee of a massage parlor in Dakar, the capital, and issuing death threats against her. The court acquitted him of those charges, which he had denied and has denounced as an attempt by Senegal’s president, Macky Sall, to sideline him.But the conviction of “corrupting youth” — a charge relating to an accusation that Mr. Sonko had a sexual relationship with the massage parlor worker, who was under 21 at the time — renders him ineligible to run in next year’s election, a vote that is widely seen in Senegal and broader West Africa as a test of democratic values in the region.Mr. Sonko cannot appeal, because he did not appear in court for the hearings or the verdict, citing threats to his safety.Clashes erupted between protesters and security forces across Senegal and in Dakar shortly after the verdict was announced, including near the city’s main university, where several protesters erected barricades and threw stones at the police, who responded with tear gas. A few protesters were injured.Clashes broke out in Dakar on Thursday after the verdict was announced.Zohra Bensemra/ReutersSenegal, a country of 17 million people, has long been hailed as a model of political pluralism in West Africa, a region known for coups and aging leaders clinging to power. Elections have been mostly peaceful since the country became independent from France in 1960. The United States and European countries, as well as China, hold the country as one of their most reliable partners in West Africa.Yet the battle around the political future of Mr. Sonko, 48, whose fiery rhetoric has made him popular among young Senegalese, has become the president’s biggest challenge. In the coming months, it could lead to the most serious test faced by Senegalese democracy in more than a decade, analysts say.“Senegal finds itself in a thick fog, with lots of uncertainties,” said Alioune Tine, a rights expert and founder of the AfrikaJom Center, a Dakar-based research organization. “It has turned into a police state and, increasingly, an authoritarian one.”There is no public proof that Mr. Sonko’s case has been politically motivated, but some academics, human rights observers and most opponents of Mr. Sall have raised questions about the lack of concrete evidence and the harsh treatment of Mr. Sonko throughout the proceedings. They have also in recent years warned of a steady erosion of democratic norms as several political opponents have been jailed and journalists arrested.In recent months, police officers have been posted at multiple traffic circles in Dakar; temporary bans on motorcycles to prevent quick gatherings of protesters have become a regular fixture in the capital; and demonstrators have faced a heavy-handed response from security forces, with clashes at times turning deadly. Protesters have also targeted the police, attacked gas stations and this week burned the house of Mr. Sall’s chief of staff.Demonstrators faced off with riot police officers during a protest on Thursday at the Cheikh Anta Diop University campus.Leo Correa/Associated PressMr. Sonko’s fate remained unclear as of Thursday. One of his lawyers, Bamba Cissé, said in a telephone interview that Mr. Sonko would not surrender, “because we’re against a judiciary system perverted by political leaders.” He continued: “For two years, Senegal has been told that Mr. Sonko was involved in a rape affair. Today we have the proof that it was a plot.”Riot police officers positioned near Mr. Sonko’s house in Dakar were blocking access, and on Wednesday had thrown tear gas at lawmakers from the National Assembly who were trying to peacefully approach it. The police have also targeted foreign journalists covering the episode.Adama Ndiaye, a supporter of Mr. Sonko’s who unsuccessfully tried to approach his residence on Thursday, said it was a bleak day for Senegal. “The ‘corrupting youth’ charge comes out of nowhere, it’s pure injustice,” said Mr. Ndiaye, a 35-year-old car salesman who said he was on his way to a Dakar neighborhood where protests were taking place.Opponents of Mr. Sall have accused him of repeatedly sidelining key opposition leaders, including Mr. Sonko, who was barred by Senegal’s constitutional council from running in last year’s parliamentary elections. Dozens of members of his party have been jailed or placed under electronic surveillance. Current and former Dakar mayors were also prohibited from running in the 2019 presidential election because of convictions for embezzlement.At a hearing last month, Mr. Sonko’s accuser said he had assaulted her five times at a massage parlor between late 2020 and February 2021, and sent her death threats. The New York Times does not routinely name accusers in rape cases, but Mr. Sonko’s accuser, Adji Sarr, has been publicly identified and has given news interviews. She has been under police protection since 2021.Gender-based violence has been decreasing in Senegal in recent years, but it remains widespread, though rarely talked about. About 30 percent of women aged 15 to 49 have experienced physical or sexual violence, according to a demographic and health survey released in 2017, with the highest rate, 34 percent, among those ages 25 to 29. More than two-thirds never spoke about it or sought help.Some Senegalese said they considered the trial politically motivated.Leo Correa/Associated PressEven as Ms. Sarr detailed at length last week the assaults she said she had faced, Senegalese newspapers published headlines with lewd innuendos, comparing her testimony to pornography.Marième Cissé, an expert on gender issues, said Senegalese society still put the blame on victims of sexual violence. The Sonko trial, she added, gave many Senegalese the impression that a crime as serious as rape had been used for political purposes.“That instrumentalization has minimized the seriousness of the accusation,” said Ms. Cissé, a researcher with the Dakar-based Wathi research organization. “It could discourage women from talking about the abuse they may face.”Many Senegalese say they do not believe the accuser.Moussa Sané, a 46-year-old businessman who attended the court session on Thursday, said that he was not a Sonko supporter but that the verdict showed the political motive of the trial. “The government is trying its best to prevent Sonko from running in the next election,” he said.Until Thursday, Mr. Sonko had been widely regarded as Mr. Sall’s strongest challenger in next year’s election, although Mr. Sall has not said whether he will run.According to most legal experts, the Senegalese Constitution prevents Mr. Sall from running: It limits presidents to two five-year terms, and Mr. Sall is set to complete his second term in February. But he argues that a constitutional reform adopted in 2016 reset the clock to zero and gives him the right to seek another term.Mr. Tine, the rights expert, said a third term would amount to a clear violation of the Constitution. “With Sonko convicted, Macky Sall has made him a political martyr,” he said. “And with this third-term issue, he has created another problem for himself.”Mady Camara contributed reporting. More

    • 125 Shares199 Views

      in Elections

      Fear Sets In Among Turkey’s L.G.B.T. Community After Erdogan’s Attacks

      by

      When Yasemin Oz, a lesbian lawyer in Istanbul, heard President Recep Tayyip Erdogan claiming victory after a runoff election on Sunday, she said she feared for the future. In his speech, he declared “family is sacred for us” and insisted that L.G.B.T.Q. people would never “infiltrate” his governing party.They were familiar themes, heard often throughout Mr. Erdogan’s campaign for re-election: He frequently attacked L.G.B.T.Q. people, referring to them as “deviants” and saying they were “spreading like the plague.” But Ms. Oz said she had hoped it was just electioneering to rally the president’s conservative base.“I was already worried about what was to come for us,” said Ms. Oz, 49. But after the speech, she thought, “it will get harsher.”The rights and freedoms of L.G.B.T.Q. citizens became a lightning-rod issue during this year’s election campaign. Mr. Erdogan, facing the greatest political threat of his two decades as the country’s dominant leader and seeking to woo conservatives, repeatedly attacked his opponents for supposedly supporting gay rights. The anti-Erdogan opposition mostly avoided the topic for fear of alienating some of its own voters.That left many L.G.B.T.Q. people fearing that the discrimination they have long faced by the government and conservative parts of society could worsen — and feeling that no one in the country had their backs.“People are scared and having dystopian thoughts like, ‘Are we going to be slashed or violently attacked in the middle of the street?’” said Ogulcan Yediveren, a coordinator at SPoD, an L.G.B.T.Q. advocacy group in Istanbul. “What will happen is that people will hide their identities, and that is bad enough.”Turkey, a predominantly Muslim society with a secular state, does not criminalize homosexuality and has laws against discrimination. But in recent conversations, more than a dozen L.G.B.T.Q. people said they often struggled to find jobs, secure housing and get quality health care as well as to be accepted by their friends, relatives, neighbors and co-workers.Supporters of President Recep Tayyip Erdogan celebrating his victory in Istanbul on Sunday.An aerial view of a mosque and an election poster for Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan in Kayseri, Turkey in April. Turkey is a predominantly Muslim society with a secular state.In recent years, they said, they have encountered new restrictions on their visibility in society. Universities have shut down L.G.B.T.Q. student clubs. And since 2014, the authorities have banned Pride parades in major cities, including in Istanbul, where crowds in the tens of thousands used to participate.That tracks with Mr. Erdogan’s vision for Turkey.Since the start of his national political career in 2003, he has increased his own power while promoting a conservative Muslim view of society. He insists that marriage can only be between a man and a woman, and encourages women to have three children to build the nation.Rights advocates say that as Mr. Erdogan has gained power, his conservative outlook has filtered down, encouraging local authorities to restrict L.G.B.T.Q. activities and pushing the security forces to crack down on gay rights activism.Anti-L.G.B.T.Q. rhetoric was more prominent during this election than in past cycles, even though there are no looming legal changes that would expand or limit rights. No political party is trying to legalize same-sex marriage or adoption, for example, or expand medical care for transgender youth.Instead, Mr. Erdogan and his allies use the issue to galvanize conservatives.“What they want to impose on society in terms of other values is full of hatred and violence toward us,” said Nazlican Dogan, 26, who is facing legal charges related to participation in pro-L.G.B.T.Q. protests at Bogazici University in Istanbul. “It was really ugly and it made us feel that we can’t exist in this country, like I should just leave.”Bambi Ceren, right, and other members of a Pride week organizing committee gather in an apartment in Istanbul.Nazlican Dogan, who is facing legal charges related to pro-L.G.B.T.Q. protests at a university, in Istanbul last week.During his campaign, Mr. Erdogan characterized L.G.B.T.Q. people as a threat to society.“If the concept of family is not strong, the destruction of the nation happens quickly,” he told young people during a televised meeting in early May. “L.G.B.T. is a poison injected into the institution of the family. It is not possible for us to accept that poison as a country whose people are 99 percent Muslim.”In April, his interior minister, Suleyman Soylu, went even further, falsely claiming that gay rights would allow humans to marry animals.SPoD, the advocacy group, asked parliamentary candidates during the campaign to sign a contract to protect L.G.B.T.Q. rights. Fifty-eight candidates signed, and 11 of them won seats in the 600-member legislature, said Mr. Yediveren, the coordinator.His group has also tried to expand legal protections for L.G.B.T.Q. people.While certain laws prohibit discrimination, they do not specifically mention sexual identity or orientation, he said. At the same time, the authorities often cite vague concepts like “general morals” and “public order” to act against activities they don’t like, such as Pride week events.“This week is very important because we don’t have physical locations we can come together as a community to support each other,” said Bambi Ceren, 34, a member of a committee planning events for this year’s Pride week, which begins on June 19.A drag performer who uses the stage name Florence Konstantina Delight at a club in Istanbul.People socialize at Ziba, a gay-friendly bar in Istanbul.Last year, the police prevented Pride events and arrested people who gathered to take part, committee members said.SPoD runs a national hotline to field queries about sexual orientation, legal protections or how to access medical care or other services. The group can solve most issues related to services, Mr. Yediveren said, but most callers’ problems are social and emotional.“People are feeling very lonely and isolated,” he said.Transgender individuals struggle to find jobs, housing and proper medication and care. And gay men and lesbians are sometimes forced into heterosexual marriages and fear coming out to their families and co-workers.Worrying about, “‘Will I be caught one day?’ causes a lot of stress for them,” Mr. Yediveren said.And the threat of violence is real.Some L.G.B.T.Q. people said they had been beaten by the security forces during protests or met with indifference from the police while being harassed on the street.A survey last year by ILGA-Europe, a rights organization, ranked Turkey second-to-last out of 49 European countries on L.G.B.T.Q. rights. Another group, Transgender Europe, said that 62 transgender people had been killed in Turkey between 2008 and 2022.Many L.G.B.T.Q. people fear that the demonization during the campaign will make that threat more acute.A queer university student from Turkey’s Kurdish minority, who grew up in a smaller city with no significant L.G.B.T.Q. presence, said she feared that bad days were ahead.Members of a Pride week organizing committee spraying graffiti in Istanbul.Berat, an openly gay architecture student, works as a hairdresser in Istanbul.People who would not normally commit violence might feel empowered to do so because the government had spread hatred for people like her, she said, claiming they were sick, dangerous or a threat to the family. She spoke on condition of anonymity for fear of being attacked.Despite the increased danger, many L.G.B.T.Q. people vowed to keep fighting for their rights and maintaining their visibility in society. To deal with the fear of random attacks, they plan to look out for each other more to ensure they are safe.In Istanbul, a 25-year-old drag performer who goes by the stage name Florence Konstantina Delight and uses gender-neutral pronouns called the new attention unsettling.“In the whole history of queer life in Turkey, we could never be that visible,” they said in an interview. “But because of the election, everyone was talking about us.”They described growing up in Turkey as “full of abuse, full of denial, full of teachers ignoring your existence and what happened to you, like your pals bullying you.”At age 16, Florence accepted their sexual identity, attended a Pride parade and set up a Facebook account with a fake name to contact L.G.B.T.Q. organizations and make friends, eventually stumbling upon someone at the same high school.They later moved to Istanbul, where they perform weekly at a rare L.G.B.T.Q.-friendly bar.Mr. Erdogan’s win on Sunday caused Florence despair.“I stared into space for a while,” they said.A woman dancing at a lesbian bar in Istanbul in front of an image of Kemal Kılıcdaroglu, who lost to Mr. Erdogan in the presidential election. More

    • 113 Shares199 Views

      in Elections

      Las elecciones presidenciales de Turquía en cinco puntos clave

      by

      Las crisis, incluidos los terremotos y la inflación, no impidieron la reelección de Recep Tayyip Erdogan. La votación se consideró libre, pero no justa, ya que Erdogan utilizó su poder para inclinar la balanza.ESTAMBUL — La reelección del presidente Recep Tayyip Erdogan le ha otorgado cinco años más para profundizar su impronta conservadora en la sociedad turca y hacer realidad su ambición de aumentar el poder económico y geopolítico del país.El Consejo Supremo Electoral de Turquía nombró a Erdogan vencedor después de una segunda vuelta electoral el domingo 28 de mayo. Ganó el 52,1 por ciento de los votos contra el candidato de la oposición, Kemal Kilicdaroglu, quien obtuvo el 47,9 por ciento con casi todos los votos escrutados, dijo el consejo.Las elecciones fueron seguidas de cerca por los aliados de Turquía en la OTAN, incluido Estados Unidos, que a menudo ha visto a Erdogan como un socio frustrante debido a su retórica antioccidental y sus estrechos vínculos con el presidente de Rusia, Vladimir Putin, los cuales han crecido desde la invasión rusa a Ucrania.Erdogan no ha dado indicios de que planee cambiar su política exterior, en la que ha buscado utilizar la ubicación de Turquía en la confluencia de Europa, Asia y Medio Oriente para expandir su influencia, o a nivel nacional, donde ha consolidado el poder en sus manos y respondió a una crisis inflacionaria con medidas poco convencionales que, según los economistas, exacerbaron el problema.En las elecciones lo desafió una oposición recientemente unida que calificó la votación como un momento decisivo para la democracia turca. El candidato de la oposición, Kilicdaroglu, se postuló como una figura anti-Erdogan y prometió restaurar las libertades civiles y mejorar los vínculos con Occidente. Se presentó a sí mismo como un candidato más en contacto con las luchas del ciudadano común.A continuación, algunas conclusiones:Las crisis perjudicaron, pero no abatieron a ErdoganEl candidato de la oposición, Kemal Kilicdaroglu, a la derecha en esta pancarta en Estambul, se presentó como una figura anti-Erdogan.Sergey Ponomarev para The New York TimesEstas fueron las elecciones más desafiantes de los 20 años de Erdogan como el político más prominente de Turquía, como primer ministro desde 2003 y como presidente desde 2014. Antes de la votación, la mayoría de las encuestas apuntaban a una contienda reñida con Kilicdaroglu a la cabeza.Los analistas citaron varias razones por las que Erdogan podría tener problemas. La indignación por una dolorosa crisis del costo de vida puso a algunos votantes en su contra. Los fuertes terremotos de febrero acabaron con la vida de más de 50.000 personas y dañaron cientos de edificios en el sur de Turquía. Muchos sobrevivientes del terremoto se quejaron de la lenta respuesta inicial del gobierno, mientras que la destrucción planteó dudas sobre si la prisa de Erdogan por desarrollar el país había fomentado una construcción insegura.La oposición históricamente dividida de Turquía dejó de lado sus diferencias para unirse en apoyo a Kilicdaroglu y alegó que se requería un cambio para detener la caída del país hacia la autocracia.Pero Erdogan prevaleció, gracias al ferviente apoyo de una parte importante de la población y sus habilidades como político en campaña. Los conservadores religiosos que aprecian su expansión del papel del islam en la vida pública lo apoyaron e incluso muchos de los turcos indignados por la inflación afirmaron que no creían que la oposición pudiera gobernar mejor.El terremoto no tuvo un gran impacto sobre las eleccionesPersonas haciendo fila para la distribución de suministros tras los terremotos que sacudieron la ciudad de Antioquía, en febrero. La participación en las elecciones en las zonas afectadas por el sismo fue sorprendentemente alta.Sergey Ponomarev para The New York TimesErdogan llegó al poder hace 20 años en medio de la indignación por la desastrosa respuesta del gobierno a un terremoto cerca de Estambul en 1999 en el que murieron más de 17.000 personas. Es por eso que muchos esperaban que el terremoto de este año también perjudicara sus posibilidades.Pero hay pocos indicios de que eso haya sucedido.Erdogan salió victorioso en ocho de las 11 provincias afectadas por el terremoto de febrero. A su partido, el gobernante Partido de la Justicia y el Desarrollo, y a sus aliados políticos les fue incluso mejor, pues ganaron la mayoría de los votos en las elecciones parlamentarias simultáneas en todas menos una de las provincias afectadas por el terremoto.La participación en la zona del terremoto también fue alta, a pesar de las preocupaciones de que muchos votantes desplazados por la destrucción tendrían dificultades para regresar a casa, como se requería, para emitir sus votos. Aunque la participación en las 11 provincias afectadas por el terremoto fue inferior al 88,9 por ciento de los votantes aptos que emitieron su voto a nivel nacional, en ninguna de esas provincias la participación fue menor del 80 por ciento.Entrevistas con sobrevivientes del terremoto indicaron muchas razones por las que el desastre no había cambiado su perspectiva política. Algunos describieron el terremoto como un acto de Dios al que cualquier gobierno habría tenido problemas para responder. Otros cuyas casas fueron destruidas dijeron que tenían más fe en Erdogan para reconstruir las zonas afectadas que en su rival.Las advertencias sobre el terrorismo resonaron en los votantesSimpatizantes de Erdogan en Estambul el domingo. Erdogan hizo de la oposición a los militantes kurdos un tema clave de su campañaSergey Ponomarev para The New York TimesErdogan socavó a la oposición al retratar a sus líderes como débiles e incompetentes, pero una línea de ataque resultó ser especialmente potente: las acusaciones de que serían blandos con el terrorismo.El mandatario planteó esta idea a los votantes en diversas ocasiones, argumentando que la oposición había recibido el apoyo del principal partido prokurdo de Turquía. A menudo, el gobierno acusa a ese partido de colaborar con militantes de la minoría kurda de Turquía, quienes, buscando autonomía, han estado en guerra con el Estado turco por décadas.Erdogan llegó incluso a transmitir videos manipulados en sus mítines para mostrar a los líderes militantes cantando la canción de campaña de Kilicdaroglu. Muchos votantes le creyeron y dijeron en entrevistas que no confiaban en la oposición para mantener la seguridad del país.El voto fue libre pero no justoRecuento de votos en Estambul el domingo. El contrincante de la oposición no impugnó el recuento, pero dijo que la elección en general fue injusta.Sergey Ponomarev para The New York TimesLos observadores internacionales no reportaron problemas a gran escala con el proceso de recolección y conteo de votos, considerando el proceso libre.Sin embargo, señalaron las enormes ventajas que tenía Erdogan antes de que comenzara la votación, incluida su capacidad para liberar miles de millones de dólares en gastos estatales para tratar de compensar los efectos negativos de la inflación y otras tensiones económicas y la cobertura mediática abundante y positiva que recibió del canal financiado por el Estado.En las últimas horas del domingo, Kilicdaroglu no cuestionó el recuento de votos, pero les dijo a sus seguidores que las elecciones en general habían sido “uno de los procesos electorales más injustos de los últimos años”.Muchos en la oposición temen que la contienda reñida impulse a Erdogan a tomar medidas más agresivas contra sus oponentes políticos para evitar un reto así de difícil en el futuro.Erdogan ahora debe abordar los problemas económicosTurquía ha recurrido a sus reservas de divisas extranjeras mientras intenta estabilizar su propia moneda.Sergey Ponomarev para The New York TimesLos economistas advirtieron que Erdogan recurrió a tácticas costosas a corto plazo para aislar a los votantes de la inflación y evitar que el valor de la moneda nacional se hundiera aún más. Pero no puede seguir haciendo eso para siempre.Las reservas de divisas extranjeras han disminuido drásticamente, lo que significa que el país podría perder su capacidad para pagarles a los acreedores extranjeros. Y, debido a que gran parte de ese dinero se ha gastado para mantener estable la moneda turca, su valor podría desplomarse cuando se detenga ese gasto.Erdogan no dio indicios durante su campaña de que planeara modificar sus políticas económicas, a pesar de una inflación obstinadamente alta de dos dígitos que, según los economistas, se ha visto exacerbada por su insistencia en bajar las tasas de interés en lugar de incrementarlas para combatir la inflación, como recomienda la economía ortodoxa.Es por eso que, independientemente de las medidas que a Erdogan le gustaría priorizar al comienzo de su nuevo mandato, es probable que los riesgos de una crisis monetaria o una recesión exijan su atención.Gulsin Harman More

    • 88 Shares119 Views

      in Elections

      Turkey’s Election Is a Warning About Trump

      by

      “The totalitarian phenomenon,” the French philosopher Jean-François Revel once noted, “is not to be understood without making an allowance for the thesis that some important part of every society consists of people who actively want tyranny: either to exercise it themselves or — much more mysteriously — to submit to it.”It’s an observation that should help guide our thinking about the re-election this week of Recep Tayyip Erdogan in Turkey. And it should serve as a warning about other places — including the Republican Party — where autocratic leaders, seemingly incompetent in many respects, are returning to power through democratic means.That’s not quite the way Erdogan’s close-but-comfortable victory in Sunday’s runoff over the former civil servant Kemal Kilicdaroglu is being described in many analyses. The president, they say, has spent 20 years in power tilting every conceivable scale in his favor.Erdogan has used regulatory means and abused the criminal-justice system to effectively control the news media. He has exercised his presidential power to deliver subsidies, tax cuts, cheap loans and other handouts to favored constituencies. He has sought to criminalize an opposition party on specious grounds of links to terrorist groups. In December, a Turkish court effectively barred Erdogan’s most serious prospective rival, Mayor Ekrem Imamoglu of Istanbul, from politics by sentencing him to prison on charges of insulting public officials.Then, too, Kilicdaroglu was widely seen as a colorless and inept politician, promising a return to a status quo ante that many Turks remember, with no fondness, as a time of regular economic crises and a kind of repressive secularism.All of this is true, as far as it goes, and it helps underscore the worldwide phenomenon of what Fareed Zakaria aptly calls “free and unfair elections.” But it doesn’t go far enough.Turkey under Erdogan is in a dreadful state and has been for a long time. Inflation last year hit 85 percent and is still running north of 40 percent, thanks to Erdogan’s insistence on cutting interest rates in the teeth of rising prices. He has used a series of show trials — some based in fact, others pure fantasy — to eviscerate civil freedoms. February’s earthquakes, which took an estimated 50,000 lives and injured twice as many, were badly handled by the government and exposed the corruption of a system that cared more for patronage networks than for well-built buildings.Under normal political expectations, Erdogan should have paid the political price with a crushing electoral defeat. Not only did he survive, he increased his vote share in some of the towns worst hit by, and most neglected after, the earthquakes. “We love him,” explained a resident quoted in The Economist. “For the call to prayer, for our homes, for our headscarves.”That last line is telling, and not just because it gets to the importance of Erdogan’s Islamism as the secret of his success. It’s a rebuke to James Carville’s parochially American slogan, “It’s the economy, stupid.” Actually, no: It’s also God, tradition, values, identity, culture and the resentments that go with each. Only a denuded secular imagination fails to notice that there are things people care about more than their paychecks.There is also the matter of power. The classically liberal political tradition is based on the suspicion of power. The illiberal tradition is based on the exaltation of it. Erdogan, as the tribune of the Turkish Everyman, built himself an aesthetically grotesque, 1,100-room presidential palace for $615 million. Far from scandalizing his supporters, it seems to have delighted them. In it, they see not a sign of extravagance or waste, but the importance of the man and the movement to which they attach themselves and submit.All this is a reminder that political signals are often transmitted at frequencies that liberal ears have trouble hearing, much less decoding. To wonder how Erdogan could possibly be re-elected after so thoroughly wrecking his country’s economy and its institutions is akin to wondering how Vladimir Putin appears to retain considerable domestic support in the wake of his Ukraine debacle. Maybe what some critical mass of ordinary Russians want, at least at some subconscious level, isn’t an easy victory. It’s a unifying ordeal.Which brings us to another would-be strongman in his palace in Palm Beach. In November, I was sure that Donald Trump was, as I wrote, “finally finished.” How could any but his most slavish followers continue to support him after he had once again cost Republicans the Senate? Wouldn’t this latest proof of losing be the last straw for devotees who had been promised “so much winning”?Silly me. The Trump movement isn’t built on the prospect of winning. It’s built on a sense of belonging: of being heard and seen; of being a thorn in the side to those you sense despise you and whom you despise in turn; of submission for the sake of representation. All the rest — victory or defeat, prosperity or misery — is details.Erdogan defied expectation because he understood this. He won’t be the last populist leader to do so.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 Shares99 Views

      in Elections

      What is Behind the Rising Tensions Between Kosovo and Serbia?

      by

      Clashes in northern Kosovo that injured dozens of ethnic Serbs and NATO soldiers are the latest flare up in a long-running standoff between Kosovo and Serbia.Dozens of NATO peacekeepers were injured this week in northern Kosovo when they clashed with ethnic Serbs, raising fears of a larger escalation between Serbia and Kosovo.The violence came after Kosovo’s ethnic Albanian leadership sent heavily armed security forces to take control of town municipal buildings, the latest turn in a dispute that has roots going back to the Balkan conflicts of the 1990s. Kosovo, where a majority of the population is ethnic Albanian and Muslim, declared its independence from Serbia in 2008, almost a decade after NATO’s bombing campaign that drove Serb forces, responsible for years of brutal mistreatment of ethnic Albanians, from Kosovo.Since then, the two countries have clashed over Kosovo’s treatment of its minority ethnic Serb population.The fighting in recent days — mostly skirmishes, but also some shooting — began when the Kosovan government deployed its security forces in several towns to install the ethnic Albanian mayors who had won in local elections last month. Local Serbs had mostly boycotted those votes.Each side has blamed the other for the fighting. NATO’s secretary general, Jens Stoltenberg, called the recent clashes “unacceptable” on Tuesday and said that 700 reserve troops had been deployed to help the peacekeeping mission there, which included 3,800 troops before the conflict. In response to the violence, Serbia’s president, Aleksandar Vucic, said in a statement released by his office that he had put the army on the highest level alert.Here is what we know.How did the violence start?The recent clashes were centered on four northern municipalities bordering Serbia that are home to much of Kosovo’s Serb minority.Serbian nationalists living in Kosovo, many of whom still regard the Serbian capital, Belgrade, as their true capital, have staged protests throughout the past decade to resist integrating with Kosovo.The boycott of local elections last month was prompted by a Serbian political party in Kosovo. In a statement posted to Facebook days before the election, the group dismissed the process as “undemocratic” and urged Serbs to stay home on voting day.“Serbs should watch with contempt all those who go out to participate in this illegal and illegitimate process that is against the interest of the Serbian people,” the post said.To ensure that the ethnic Albanians who won recent mayoral elections could take their posts, Kosovo’s central government last week sent in armed security forces to the area, a move that was condemned in unusually strong terms by the United States, Kosovo’s main international backer. Secretary of State Antony J. Blinken on Friday accused Kosovo’s ethnic Albanian leadership of “escalating tensions in the north and increasing instability.”Over the weekend, Serb protesters gathered outside municipal buildings in a number of Serbian-majority towns, facing off with Kosovo security forces and troops from a NATO-led peacekeeping mission called KFOR.A total of 30 NATO peacekeepers, including 19 Italians and 11 Hungarians, suffered injuries in the clashes. More than 50 Serbs were treated for injuries, Mr. Vucic said.The NATO mission’s commander, Maj. Gen. Angelo Michele Ristuccia, in a statement urged both sides to “take full responsibility for what happened and prevent any further escalation.”A total of 30 NATO peacekeepers, including 19 Italians and 11 Hungarians, suffered injuries in the clashes.Georgi Licovski/EPA, via ShutterstockTensions in the region had been building since the elections last month.In a televised statement early Tuesday, Mr. Vucic blamed Kosovo’s prime minister, Albin Kurti, for fueling hostilities. He also criticized NATO’s peacekeeping mission, saying it had failed to protect the Serbian population and was enabling the “illegal and forceful takeover” of the majority-Serbian municipalities by the Kosovan government.Mr. Kurti, Kosovo’s prime minister, applauded the NATO forces, saying they had been trying to curb the “violent extremism” in the streets. “In a democracy there is no place for fascist violence,” he said in a statement on Twitter. “Citizens of all ethnicities have a right to full & unencumbered service of their elected officials,” he added.What’s behind the conflict?The latest escalation is part of a dispute over the status of Kosovo, which declared its independence 15 years ago, almost a decade after NATO’s 78-day bombing campaign in 1999 that drove Serb forces, then engaged in brutal mistreatment of ethnic Albanians, from Kosovo.While an independent Kosovo has been recognized by the United States and many European countries, Serbia — as well as its key allies, Russia and China — still refuses to recognize Kosovo’s independence. It has called the split a violation of U.N. resolution 1244 that dates back to 1999 and the end of the Kosovo war.President Vucic and other Serbian leaders claim Kosovo as being the “heart” of their country, in part, because it houses many revered Orthodox Christian sites. Mr. Vucic has ruled out recognizing Kosovo and vowed to “protect” ethnic Serbs.Troops from the NATO-led peacekeeping mission secure an area near Zvecan, on Tuesday. Armend Nimani/Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesSerbian nationalists in Kosovo have been joined by more moderate Serbs in demanding the implementation of a 2013 deal brokered by the European Union that calls for a measure of self-rule for Serb-dominated municipalities in the north, a provision Kosovo has reneged on.In February, leaders of Kosovo and Serbia tentatively accepted a peace deal, which was mediated by the European Union and rejected by nationalists on both sides. It has not been formally signed.What is the regional backdrop to the tensions?Tensions between the two ethnic communities have flared regularly over the past decade, making the region a hub of unpredictable violence.Clashes erupted last July in response to a new law that would require ethnic Serbs living in Kosovo to switch from Serbian license plates to Kosovar ones. The recent escalation of hostilities comes as Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has absorbed the attention of Kosovo’s important allies, the United States and the European Union.Serbia, a candidate to join the European Union, has been a close partner with Moscow for centuries. While it voted in favor of a U.N. resolution condemning the Russian invasion of Ukraine, Serbia has refused to join sanctions imposed on Moscow by Western countries.“Serbs are fighting for their rights in northern Kosovo,” Foreign Minister Sergey V. Lavrov of Russia said on Monday during a visit to Kenya. “A big explosion is looming in the heart of Europe,” he said.Joe Orovic More

    • 88 Shares199 Views

      in Elections

      Alberta’s Conservatives Retain Power Behind Hard-Right Leader

      by

      But the United Conservative Party will hold substantially fewer seats in the legislature, in an apparent rebuff of the politics of its outspoken leader.Voters in Alberta, the oil-rich western province that is a bastion of conservatism in Canada, kept its conservative government in power on Monday but substantially reduced the number of seats it holds in the legislature, data from Canada’s national broadcaster indicated.The result, while a win for conservatives, is likely to be seen as a rebuff of the politics of Danielle Smith, the hard-right leader of the United Conservative Party who has been Alberta’s premier for seven months. Ms. Smith came to power after the party effectively rejected a more moderate conservative, Jason Kenney, as premier over his refusal to end pandemic restrictions and vaccine mandates.That revolt, led by a socially conservative wing of the party, reflected the anger in Canada that also led to the formation of a truckers’ convoy that paralyzed Ottawa, the national capital, for nearly a month.The views of Ms. Smith, a former radio talk show host and newspaper columnist who previously led another conservative party, are firmly aligned with that faction. She has declared that the unvaccinated were the “most discriminated-against group” she’d seen in her lifetime and suggested that police officers who enforced pandemic measures had committed crimes. In May, a video surfaced of her likening people who chose to be vaccinated to Germans who came to support Hitler.She has previously stated that politicians on the right in the United States were her political models and floated ideas, like fees for services in public health care, that enjoy little support across the political spectrum.United Conservative Party supporters at an election night party in Calgary, Alberta, on Monday.Todd Korol/ReutersThe Canadian Broadcasting Corporation projected early Tuesday morning that Ms. Smith and the United Conservatives would be returned to power. But the broadcaster’s data also showed that the party was leading or had been elected in just 52 electoral constituencies, down from the 63 it held before the vote. Unless the final number of seats turns out to be substantially higher, it will be the slimmest margin of victory in Alberta’s history.Many political analysts said before election night that the conservatives would have won overwhelmingly under Mr. Kenney or another more moderate leader.In a victory speech, Ms. Smith said her first act when the legislature reconvenes would be to introduce a law requiring that any future personal or business tax increases be approved by voters in a referendum, suggesting that it would make the province more attractive to investors.“We are throwing our doors wide open for businesses, large and small,” she said.She went on to reject planned federal limits on the energy industry’s carbon emissions, saying that they would not be “inflicted” on the province.As anticipated, the United Conservatives were strongest in rural areas. The New Democratic Party, led by Rachel Notley, a lawyer and former premier, had a strong showing in Edmonton, the provincial capital and one of the most left-leaning parts of the province, as well as Calgary, the largest city, which generally supports the conservatives.Rachel Notley, the New Democratic Party leader, said that despite her party’s campaign shortcomings, she would continue to lead it.Amber Bracken/ReutersAs of early Tuesday, the New Democrats, a left-of-center party co-founded by organized labor, had been elected or were leading in 35 electoral districts, a gain of 11 seats.Ms. Smith’s victory will be a challenge for Prime Minister Justin Trudeau. One of her first acts as premier was to introduce legislation that she said would allow the province to refuse to enforce federal laws, a measure that many legal experts believe to be unconstitutional.Under the United Conservatives, the future of the province’s carbon tax, which is deeply unpopular with the right, and other climate change measures may be in jeopardy. When the New Democrats held power in Alberta from 2015 to 2019, after an unprecedented victory that resulted from a fracturing of the conservatives into two parties, Ms. Notley agreed to introduce carbon taxes in exchange for Mr. Trudeau’s government purchasing an oil pipeline to the Pacific Coast to ensure its expansion.Canada’s oil and gas production, which is largely based in Alberta, accounts for 28 percent of the country’s carbon emissions.Mr. Trudeau has said that the federal government will enact caps on the sector’s emissions. Ms. Smith, on Tuesday morning, called the plan a “de facto cap on production” and promised to block the measure.The trucker protest in Ottawa last year. The views of Ms. Smith are aligned with the socially conservative wing of her party that sympathized with the protest.Brett Gundlock for The New York TimesThe New Democratic Party’s win in 2015 broke a string of conservative governments in Alberta dating to the Great Depression. But Ms. Notley’s victory coincided with a collapse in oil prices that cratered the province’s economy, sending the party’s approval ratings spiraling.On Tuesday morning, Ms. Notley said she accepted responsibility for the party’s campaign shortcomings but said that she would continue as its leader.“Although we did not achieve the result we wanted, we did achieve a major step toward it,” she told supporters. More