Polls and Public Opinion

Subterms

    More stories

    • 75 Shares129 Views

      in Elections

      Vibes, the Economy and the Election

      by

      Recent positive news may put two theories on economic disenchantment to the test.The New York Stock Exchange on Thursday. Stocks have boomed in recent days.Angela Weiss/Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesA Federal Reserve announcement about the future of the funds rate is not the sort of news that would typically factor into analysis of public opinion and the economy. Usually, analysts look at numbers like gross domestic product and unemployment, not something as arcane as a federal funds rate.But this isn’t a normal economy, and public opinion about the economy hasn’t been normal, either.For two years, the public has said the economy is doing poorly, even though it appears healthy by many traditional measures. This has prompted a fierce debate over whether the public’s views are mostly driven by concrete economic factors like high prices or something noneconomic — like a bad “vibe” brought on by social media memes or Fox News.The Fed’s projection Wednesday that it will cut rates three times over the next year probably won’t generate TikTok memes, but it’s exactly the kind of event that may ultimately resolve this debate one way or another — with important and potentially decisive consequences for the 2024 presidential election.To cut right to the heart of the problem underlying this debate: High prices do not seem to fully explain why voters are this upset about the economy.Yes, voters are upset about high prices, and prices are indeed high. This easily and even completely explains why voters think this economy is mediocre: In the era of consumer sentiment data, inflation has never risen so high without pushing consumer sentiment below average and usually well below average. This part is not complicated.But it’s harder to argue that voters should believe the economy is outright terrible, even after accounting for inflation. Back in early 2022, I estimated that consumer confidence was running at least 10 to 15 percentage points worse than one would expect historically, after accounting for prices and real disposable income.I could run through the numbers, but just consider this instead: The low point for consumer sentiment in 2022 wasn’t just low; it was a record low for the index dating all the way to 1952. That’s right: Consumer sentiment in 2022 was worse than it was in the 1970s, when higher inflation was sustained for much longer, and worse than it was in the depths of the Great Recession.Now, other gauges of consumer confidence don’t show things quite so bad, but even the rosier measures show Americans about as down on the economy as they were 15 years ago, when mass layoffs drove a doubling of the unemployment rate to 10 percent and when household net worth fell $11.5 trillion. You don’t need fancy math to see there’s something left to be explained.The two sides of this debate disagree about why, exactly, the public is so sour on the economy.The Fed chairman, Jerome Powell, on Wednesday.Brendan Smialowski/Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesThe case for vibesOne side argues that public opinion about the economy is now being driven by noneconomic factors, and in particular vibes, or a prevailing mood that colors our perception of reality. In this view, the vibe today is so biting and dour that public opinion is no longer responsive to material economic reality: The “vibe” is bad, so voters can’t see that the economy is good.Strictly speaking, there’s no reason vibes can’t be grounded in tangible economic conditions — like stimulus checks going away — but in practice this winds up being an argument for how noneconomic factors prevent voters from appreciating the economy. Those factors could include conservative media, cynical social media, the mental health crisis, a pandemic hangover, President Biden or really anything else that might dampen the economic spirit of Americans.There might well be something to the vibes argument. There might even be a lot to it. But there’s just not much evidence to support it. This side fundamentally rests its case on a diagnosis of exclusion: If we don’t buy the economic argument, then it must be noneconomic — and if it’s noneconomic, it can really be anything. The power of vibes here is naturally indeterminate, and allowing limitless explanatory power to a theory without evidence should give any serious thinker some pause.If this side of the debate is right, the consequences for Mr. Biden are pretty bleak. In this view, the economy ought to be helping him, but instead it will presumably be a major drag. An 81-year-old white male moderate may be the worst possible Democrat to turn around the vibe on TikTok.The case for the economy explaining allThe other side of the debate argues that the explanation is fundamentally economic, but that the factors dragging down consumers aren’t neatly captured by the usual economic statistics.There are two kinds of adverse economic factors that this side of the debate has in mind. One is economic dysfunction — some basic things have become harder. It’s harder to hire. It’s harder to get a loan. It’s more expensive to buy things. At times it was impossible to buy things because of supply chain shortages. It’s harder to buy a home. It’s harder to sell a home. If you wanted to engage in these kinds of economic activities, you should have done them before the fall of 2021.It’s easy to see how these challenges could affect economic perceptions, and these problems can be missed by economic statistics. The usual data measures the extent of economic activity, not its ease. That people still have the resources to spend, hire and buy doesn’t change that voters may rationally conclude the economy is bad if it makes it harder for them to undertake economic activity.The other kind of adverse economic factor is the pessimism about future growth. A statistic like unemployment says a lot about the economy today, but little about the economy tomorrow. Expectations of future growth are an important component of consumer confidence indexes, and for good reason: The desire to turn money into more money is foundational to American capitalist culture. Here again, there have been reasons to anticipate limited economic growth or even a recession. Investors have expected it, as evidenced by the yield curve. There was even a reasonable assumption that the Fed would be so focused on slowing inflation by keeping interest rates high that a recession would be all but inevitable.In contrast to the “vibes” theory, there’s a lot of evidence for these various phenomena. They also fit into the framework of consumer confidence as a function of concrete economic conditions.But whether these nontraditional economic problems add up to explain what’s going on is much harder to say. They might explain a lot and might even explain all of it, but it’s impossible to prove empirically without any precedent for today’s economy in the era of modern consumer confidence data. There has simply never been a time when unemployment has stayed so low and prices have gone up so much, let alone with all of these additional twists like supply chain shortages and expectations of recession.What can be said is that the theory of concrete economic problems will be put to the test as soon as economic reality improves, and that time might finally be at hand.Many states now have gas prices below $3 a gallon.Adam Davis/EPA, via ShutterstockThe economy appears to be improvingAfter a few months of stubborn inflation, rising gas prices and interest rates, and a falling stock market, the last month or so has brought excellent economic news. The stock market has gone up nearly 15 percent since New York Times/Siena College polls were in the field in late October. The inflation trajectory looks good. Mortgage rates are falling. Gas prices are down. Once-skeptical economists have declared that a “soft landing” seems at hand. And now the Fed is forecasting rate cuts, which augurs growth, confidence in lower inflation and eventually a return to a more normal economy.Put it together, and the big economic barriers could be poised to fade. If they do and the material economic side of the debate is correct, consumer confidence might quickly begin to recover. And Mr. Biden’s re-election chances would begin to improve, at least to the extent that the economy and not another issue, like his age, is responsible for Donald J. Trump’s lead in the polls.While it’s too early to say, there are certainly signs that consumer confidence could rise. For one, it has already been doing so. Overall, consumer confidence is up nearly 20 points since inflation peaked in the summer of 2022. That rate of improvement is in line with prior, vigorous periods of economic expansion, like during the 1990s. The monthly pattern in consumer confidence even seems to align with the news: Last month’s strong economic data corresponded with a rebound in consumer confidence that erased the declines of the past four months, when the economic news was worse than over the summer.That’s what we would expect if real economic factors were driving consumer confidence, though it’s not enough to disprove the vibe theory. To send the vibe argument away, we would need to start to see the gap closing between expected and actual consumer confidence. If fears of a recession fade and a more normal economic environment returns, there might still be enough time for that gap to close before Mr. Biden stands for re-election. More

    • 50 Shares179 Views

      in Elections

      America’s Thirst for Authoritarianism

      by

      Around the world, authoritarianism is ascendant and democracy is in decline.A 2022 report from the International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance found that “over the past six years, the number of countries moving toward authoritarianism is more than double the number moving toward democracy” and that nearly half of the 173 countries assessed were “experiencing declines” in at least one metric of democracy.The United States wasn’t impervious to this trend. The report found that America was “moderately backsliding” on its democracy.But I fear that we’re now on the precipice of fully turning away from democracy and toward a full embrace of authoritarianism. The country seems thirsty for it; many Americans appear to be inviting it.Confidence in many of our major institutions — including schools, big business, the news media — is at or near its lowest point in the past half-century, in part because of the Donald Trump-led right-wing project to depress it. Indeed, according to a July Gallup report, Republicans’ confidence in 10 of the 16 institutions measured was lower than Democrats’. Three institutions in which Republicans’ confidence exceeded Democrats’ were the Supreme Court, organized religion and the police.And as people lose faith in these institutions — many being central to maintaining the social contract that democracies offer — they can lose faith in democracy itself. People then lose their fear of a candidate like Trump — who tried to overturn the previous presidential election and recently said that if he’s elected next time, he won’t be a dictator, “except for Day 1” — when they believe democracy is already broken.In fact, some welcome the prospect of breaking it completely and starting anew with something different, possibly a version of our political system from a time when it was less democratic — before we expanded the pool of participants.In Tim Alberta’s new book, “The Kingdom, the Power and the Glory,” he explains that many evangelical Christians have developed, in the words of the rightist Southern Baptist pastor Robert Jeffress, an “under siege” mentality that has allowed them to embrace Trump, whose decadent curriculum vitae runs counter to many of their stated values. It allows them to employ Trump as muscle in their battle against a changing America.This kind of thinking gives license — or turns a blind eye — to Trump’s authoritarian impulses.And while these authoritarian inklings may be more visible on the political right, they can also sneak in on the left.You could also argue that President Biden, whose approval numbers are languishing, is being punished by some because he isn’t an authoritarian and therefore isn’t able to govern by fiat: Many of his initiatives — voter protections, police reform, student loan forgiveness — were blocked by conservatives. Could he have fought harder in some of these cases? I believe so. But in the end, legislation is the province of Congress; presidents are bound by constitutional constraints.Trump surely appeals to those who want a president who’ll simply bulldoze through that bureaucracy, or at least expresses contempt for it and is willing to threaten it.Furthermore, Trump’s chances will probably be helped by the portion of the electorate misjudging the very utility of voting. There are still too many citizens who think of a vote, particularly for president, as something to throw to a person they like rather than being cast for the candidate and party more likely to advance the policies they need.And there are too many who think that a vote should be withheld from a more preferable candidate as punishment for not delivering every single thing on their wish lists — that choosing not to vote at all is a sensible act of political protest rather than a relinquishing of control to others. Abstinence doesn’t empower; it neuters.If you want a democracy to thrive, the idea that voting is a choice is itself an illusion. Voting is about survival, and survival isn’t a choice. It’s an imperative. It’s an instinct.It’s a tool one uses for self-advancement and self-preservation. It’s an instrument you use to decrease chances of harm and increase chances of betterment. It is naïve to use it solely to cosign an individual’s character; not to say that character doesn’t count — it does — but rather that its primacy is a fallacy.Voting isn’t just an expression of your worldview but also a manifestation of your insistence on safety and security.And to top it off, as Democratic Representative Ro Khanna of California told me over the weekend, the Obama coalition that Biden will rely on in 2024 is “under a lot of stress” with the issue of the Israel-Hamas war, and that coalition can be mended by “a foreign policy that is rooted in the recognition of human rights,” which includes “taking seriously the calls for a neutral cease-fire and the end to violence.”On Tuesday, Biden warned that Israel risks losing international support because of “indiscriminate bombing,” but he has yet to endorse a cease-fire.With Republicans beaconing authoritarianism, and without an intact Obama coalition to thwart it, our democracy hangs by a thread.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, Instagram, TikTok, X and Threads. More

    • 175 Shares169 Views

      in Elections

      Trump Gains in Iowa Poll, and DeSantis Holds Off Haley for a Distant Second

      by

      Mr. Trump has a commanding lead over his rivals five weeks before the first-in-the-nation caucuses.Multiple Republicans have ended their presidential campaigns over the past two months, narrowing the field against former President Donald J. Trump — but the only person who has gained much ground in the first voting state is Mr. Trump, according to a new poll.Mr. Trump has the support of 51 percent of likely caucusgoers in a Des Moines Register/NBC News/Mediacom Iowa Poll released Monday, up from 43 percent in the last Iowa Poll from October.Gov. Ron DeSantis of Florida is in a distant second place at 19 percent, up slightly from 16 percent in October. Nikki Haley, who had surged in the October poll, has made no further progress, according to the poll: Her support is unchanged at 16 percent.The poll, conducted by J. Ann Selzer from Dec. 2 to 7, does not necessarily show that Mr. DeSantis is truly ahead of Ms. Haley; a three-percentage-point gap is not significant, given that the poll’s margin of sampling error is plus or minus 4.4 percentage points. But it indicates at a minimum that Ms. Haley is not leaping ahead of him as she tries to make the argument that she is the strongest contender against Mr. Trump and that Mr. DeSantis is fading.It also indicates that Mr. Trump’s increasingly authoritarian rhetoric on the campaign trail — including calling his opponents “vermin” last month — and radical policy proposals have not turned Republican voters against him. (An interview in which he said he wouldn’t be a dictator “other than Day 1” came while the poll was underway.) Nor has he been hurt politically by the ongoing criminal and civil cases against him.No other candidate cracks double digits in the poll. The entrepreneur and author Vivek Ramaswamy, who has campaigned fiercely in Iowa, is at 5 percent — essentially tied with former Gov. Chris Christie of New Jersey, who has all but ignored the state and sits at 4 percent. Former Gov. Asa Hutchinson of Arkansas has just 1 percent support, and Ryan Binkley, a little-known pastor, has 0 percent.Just under half of likely caucusgoers — 46 percent — said they could change their minds before the caucuses on Jan. 15. More

    • 100 Shares149 Views

      in Elections

      This Economy Has Bigger Problems Than ‘Bad Vibes’

      by

      The economy is growing. Wages are up. Unemployment is low. Income inequality is narrowing. The fearmongering about inflation proved to be, well, wrong. According to many economy-watchers, Americans should be sending the Biden administration a gift basket full of positive vibes — and votes.Instead, consumer confidence polling paints a different picture. A recent Times/Siena poll found that only 2 percent of registered voters said economic conditions are “excellent,” and only a further 16 percent said they were “good.” While economic indicators suggest that the economy is healthy and growing, the American public doesn’t feel that way. Why the perception gap?One popular theory is that media narratives have duped Americans into believing that they’re having a rough time, when, in fact, they’re doing fine. Kyla Scanlon coined “vibe-cession” last year to describe this gap between perception and economic indicators. Since then, a story has emerged about consumer confidence: that poor perception and political polarization are mostly to blame. Brian Beutler, who writes the newsletter “Off Message,” calls out social media and misinformation for reinforcing the “bad economy” belief. Claudia Sahm, a former Federal Reserve economist, wrote that a “toxic brew” of human bias for negative information and the attention economy leads to consumer pessimism.The Biden administration’s messaging about the strength of the economy will shape President Biden’s presidential campaign. If Americans’ negative vibes about the economy persist, Donald Trump will surely bludgeon Biden with a line of attack that he relishes delivering. One of Trump’s favorite claims is that he is a successful businessman who ran a strong economy as president. Too few people believe that Trump, the G.O.P.’s favored candidate, will go to jail between now and the 2024 election. And so it should worry Biden that, according to that Times/Siena poll, a majority of likely voters trust Trump more than Biden on the economy.Why aren’t more voters giving President Biden credit for his strong economy?The bad vibes explanation is sound on the indicators, but that story doesn’t think too highly of Americans. It does not acknowledge voters’ dissatisfaction. It also does not offer a way forward. What do you do about bad vibes, exactly? Hire an exorcist?Looking at the economy through more than macroeconomic indicators could tell us a more compelling, empowering story. What if people are not being manipulated by the media, confused about the fundamentals or biased against Democrats? What we know about historical changes to how the economy works and for whom it works might tell a different story with more potential for the future.One such story considers what we consume and how much harder (and expensive) it is to procure it. A lot of our consumption is about meeting our basic needs. Housing, food, and energy come to mind. The economic fundamentals on these may be trending positively, but the bad vibes narrative undersells how miserable that part of the economy can feel.People are struggling with mortgage interest rates, housing shortages and pricey grocery bills. They’re also consuming to make their lives work: on expensive, hard-to-manage child care, health care and convenience spending — things like restaurants, travel, delivery services, and on-demand help — which are necessary for balancing work and life demands. Even when those services are affordable, they are full of friction. That is a nice way of saying the consumer experience sucks. It is hard to schedule things, hard to get customer service, hard to judge the quality of what you are buying, and hard to get amends when an experience goes bad. There is a reason industry analysts have reported that customer brand loyalty is low and customer rage is high.In 2021, the American Rescue Plan created a temporary social safety net for millions of Americans that may have changed how they feel about their spending. For younger Americans, massive stimulus was a taste of the Great Society investment that benefited their grandparents and great-grandparents. Child care subsidies, direct cash transfers, food supplements, eviction moratoriums, and flexible work from home arrangements temporarily lifted many low-income people out of poverty. Those provisions also exposed many working and middle class workers to the difference that economic policy could make — for the better — in their lives.Then, fearing inflationary pressures on the economy, Congress let the American Rescue Plan’s most powerful investments, and therefore the most substantial government support for social reproduction in a generation, end. But social reproduction — the caretaking of people, relationships and systems that make our society work — still had to be done. Reallocating your spending from child care to student loan payments, for example, might be feasible, but it is not particularly enjoyable. That assumes one can find accessible child care or an in-network doctor or apartment. When stimulus funding ended, a lot of services people rely on became harder to find and afford.When people talk about the work that makes the economy possible, they often think first and most about child care. There is a good reason for that. Child care is necessary work. It is often unpaid work (when done by mothers) or underpaid work (when done by child care workers). The American Rescue Plan sent $39 billion to states, with the aim of stabilizing child care centers. After some of that funding expired in September, the problems typical of our country’s child care shortage re-emerged. Depending on where one lives, child care centers’ capacity may not have returned to prepandemic levels, producing a lot of anxiety and wait-lists for families. As one of my colleagues recently put it, anyone who thinks he just has bad vibes hasn’t tried to find summer day care for young children.Then there is the rest of the hidden labor that has to happen so people can go to work, that is so often invisible and has historically been the domain of women: caring for a household and aging relatives, receiving the plumber or delivery truck and, of course, having the time (and money) to make meals, manage doctors appointments, chauffeur kids to after-school activities and clean the house.For the most part, the industries that support that kind of invisible labor are more difficult to find, harder to obtain and more expensive to buy than they were four years ago. Those industries also gained a lot of not-so-enjoyable friction. Industry surveys suggest that customer service has gotten worse and consumers are angry about it. That coarsening of consumerism affects millions, but women, in particular, pay a price due to the outsize role they play in managing hidden labor.Jessica Calarco, a sociologist at the University of Wisconsin, calls the way our society relies on families to independently support social reproduction a “D.I.Y. society.” Research demonstrates repeatedly that women, especially, are sacrificing to balance paid work with all that D.I.Y. labor. Healthy economic indicators, like low unemployment, also put the squeeze on women by raising the price and increasing the difficulty of hiring a little help.The bad vibes story emphasizes that lower-income workers have benefited the most from the growing economy. It is true. Over the past four years, at the macro level, workers at the bottom of the income distribution made greater gains than those at the top. That wage compression means some good things, for example: People without college degrees are benefiting from a strong labor market. The female-dominated child care field is a good example. Acknowledging that child care is skilled labor empowers the workers to demand better working conditions.However, those positives also present a challenge. Using child care workers as an example again, as their wages stagnated and their skills upgraded, many of them left for better paying jobs. That is the case for a lot of the jobs that do the vital social reproduction work in our economy. There are now fewer people to do the low-paid, low status work than there was before the Covid-19 pandemic. Illness pushed some workers out. Others left for better economic opportunities. The social reproduction work needs to be done but there are fewer workers able or willing to do it.Low unemployment means more Americans are working. It also means more people are experiencing our social reproduction crisis firsthand. This has long been a reality for female workers. Our crisis of who is supposed to do all the undervalued labor that underpins economic life has pushed many women out of the work force, reduced their participation, and generally made work more stressful. Men now take on moderately more responsibility for household tasks. With that shift, the problem of balancing care work and paid work has become urgent for both men and women. Even as millions of Americans are earning more, they face stiff competition from high-income earners for a smaller pool of services — including schools, health care, home maintenance and retail services — to make it all work.In short, people may have more money. But it has become harder to buy the services they need and more expensive to buy the goods that they want. The very wealthy can spend their way out of that bind, simply by paying more for housekeeping and grocery delivery and nannies. But everyone else needs some sort of partnership with the government to make the act of working not just affordable, but accessible. The Biden administration has not solved that bigger crisis (neither did the Trump administration). Whether Americans are blaming the right administration for their woes, their economic lives legitimately feel tougher even as they work more and earn more money.Bad economic storytelling tells millions of Americans in an election year that they only think that they are struggling financially. Good economic storytelling would figure out how to account for their experiences and imagine a better future. People need child care, and dentists, and affordable housing, and safe transportation, and accessible education. Telling them that to instead enjoy the fact that they can buy a Tesla is a fundamental misunderstanding of what economic policy is supposed to do, which is to make people’s lives better.Tressie McMillan Cottom (@tressiemcphd) became a New York Times Opinion columnist in 2022. She is an associate professor at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill School of Information and Library Science, the author of “Thick: And Other Essays” and a 2020 MacArthur fellow.Source images by Ivan Bajic and kutaytanir/Getty ImagesThe 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, Instagram, TikTok, X and Threads. More

    • 138 Shares119 Views

      in Elections

      Mayor Adams’s Swagger Is Diminished. His Foes Are Ready to Pounce

      by

      Eric Adams is facing stronger pushback from the City Council and progressives, and prominent Democrats in New York are considering running for mayor.If Mayor Eric Adams were in search of evidence that his recent spate of troubles had cost him some standing in New York, he would not need to look far.The city comptroller, Brad Lander, recently restricted the mayor’s spending powers on the migrant crisis, and has playfully alluded to the F.B.I.’s investigation of Mr. Adams’s fund-raising in his own pitch to donors.The City Council is preparing to fight the mayor over his painful budget cuts to city services and could soon override his objection to banning solitary confinement in city jails. Even his friend, former Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo, is eyeing his job.The reasons for the discontent surrounding Mr. Adams are plenty. He faces a federal investigation into his campaign fund-raising, and widespread criticism over his handling of the migrant crisis. He was named in a legal claim accusing him of sexual assault in 1993 and he made unpopular budget cuts to the police, schools and libraries.The extent of his unpopularity was quantified this week in a stunning Quinnipiac University poll: Only 28 percent of New Yorkers approve of the job Mr. Adams is doing, the lowest for any New York City mayor in a Quinnipiac poll since it began surveying the city in 1996.Mr. Adams has not been accused of wrongdoing in the F.B.I. investigation, and he is hardly the first mayor who has faced an investigation: His predecessor, Bill de Blasio, also faced an inquiry into his campaign’s finances. But the political world remains abuzz about his future, especially after the F.B.I. seized his cellphones on the street.One political consulting firm was so curious to know how far the mayor’s star had fallen that it commissioned its own poll to ask New Yorkers who they would support in a special election if Mr. Adams resigned.“We’re in a period of enormous political uncertainty,” said Evan Roth Smith, a founding partner at Slingshot Strategies. He added, “A special election is far from a certainty, but it’s clearly a possibility.”The poll found that Mr. Cuomo would be the most popular candidate at 22 percent, followed by the city’s public advocate, Jumaane Williams, at 15 percent. Kathryn Garcia, a former sanitation commissioner who finished second in the 2021 Democratic mayoral primary, came in third at 12 percent.Mr. Adams, famously known for his swagger, has appeared chastened in recent weeks, and has seemed on the defensive.His aides immediately responded to the Quinnipiac poll by calling it “misleading” and sending out a torrent of book blurb-like hosannas of the mayor — some with nearly identical wording — from loyalists like Representative Adriano Espaillat, a key Dominican American power broker, and Assemblywoman Jenifer Rajkumar.Rob Speyer, the chief executive of the real estate investment firm Tishman Speyer, praised Mr. Adams’s “hustle and successes.” Steven Rubenstein, chairman of the Association for a Better New York, called the mayor a “champion for all New Yorkers.” The mayor’s stalwarts included other business and union leaders, a signal to potential challengers that the mayor still enjoys broad support from some of the city’s most influential constituencies.At a recent town hall meeting in East Harlem, Mr. Adams addressed his weaknesses head on. He started the event by addressing “two tough issues that you have been reading about,” and told the crowd that he did not break the law by helping the Turkish Consulate and that he did not sexually assault a woman who filed a legal claim against him for an incident she said happened in 1993.Mr. Adams’s ties to Turkish interests, including the Turkish Consulate, are being examined by federal investigators.Sara Hylton for The New York Times“You know my character,” he said. “You know what I stand for.”In most mayoral election cycles in New York, Democratic incumbents are virtually untouchable. But amid Mr. Adams’s problems, more Democrats are weighing potential candidacies — either when Mr. Adams faces re-election in 2025, or in the case of a special election if he were to resign or be forced from office.One past Adams donor, Jean Shafiroff, the wife of a prominent banker, said that she was waiting to see what happens with the F.B.I. investigation and the sexual assault allegation before participating in any more fund-raisers. She said that she works on women’s rights issues and felt conflicted.“It’s difficult for me right now, as much as I believe the mayor is innocent,” she said in a phone interview on Friday from Miami where she was attending the Art Basel art event.Mr. Cuomo has spoken to people about potentially running for mayor under the right circumstances, according to three people who have spoken to him and who were granted anonymity to discuss a sensitive matter.Mr. Cuomo’s allies have insisted that the former governor, who resigned in 2021 after facing a series of sexual harassment allegations, would consider running for mayor only if Mr. Adams was no longer in the race.“He is not going to run against the mayor,” Charlie King, a Democratic strategist who is close to Mr. Cuomo, said in an interview.Matt Wing, a former adviser to Ms. Garcia, signaled that she might be open to running, saying in a statement: “In the chaos of a special election, New York City will need stability over political spectacle. And there’s only one leader in the potential field ready to meet the moment with competence, character and deep-rooted city management experience, which is perhaps why Kathryn stands out.”Scott Stringer, a former city comptroller whose bid for mayor in 2021 was derailed by sexual misconduct allegations, has had conversations with former staffers about moving quickly to run in a special election, according to a person who was familiar with the matter.When Mr. Adams took office two years ago, he was heralded as a national Democratic star and a moderate who made a compelling case for improving public safety. He called himself the “Biden of Brooklyn.”President Biden, who once counted the mayor as a trusted ally, has not spoken to Mr. Adams in months, and his aides and allies now view the mayor as a grandstanding opportunist because he publicly criticized the White House for not providing enough help to the city to deal with the migrant crisis.Now, as the mayor faces questions about his management ability, even his agenda seems more uncertain.On Monday, City Council leaders will hold an oversight hearing to scrutinize the mayor’s cuts to the Police Department, schools and libraries. They are hoping to reverse some of the cuts and to find ways to raise additional revenue.Progressive leaders say that the mayor’s low approval rating shows that his budget cuts are unpopular, and they are hoping to capitalize on his weakened political position by pushing to raise taxes on the wealthy.“What we hear from this poll is that New Yorkers are asking elected officials to invest in a progressive agenda — affordable housing, schools, sanitation, libraries,” said Ana María Archila, a state director of the Working Families Party, which has had conversations with left-leaning candidates about running against Mr. Adams.Later this month, the mayor may face a battle with the City Council over solitary confinement in city jails. Mr. Adams has threatened to veto a ban, arguing that it would put correction officers in harm’s way. But Mr. Williams and City Council leaders have pushed forward with a bill, saying that the practice is torture.The City Council may vote on the ban at its Dec. 20 meeting, and likely has enough votes to override a veto, should the mayor choose to do so. Mr. Adams’s first major veto in June — aimed to stop a housing bill that expanded a rental voucher program — was overridden by the Council.That rental voucher expansion is nearing a Jan. 9 deadline for implementation, and leaders in the City Council are contemplating suing the Adams administration because they believe it is intentionally not moving forward with the plan, according to Council officials.Diana Ayala, the deputy speaker of the City Council who is considering running for mayor, said that Mr. Adams had undermined the Council and refused to work with leadership to address the city’s many crises.“He’s arrogant, and that arrogance is not helpful,” she said.Shahana Hanif, a chair of the Council’s progressive caucus, said that Council members were becoming more comfortable challenging the mayor given his issues.“These incidents are emboldening our colleagues to feel like this is a mayor who doesn’t have his campaign, personal life, nor the city’s best interests at heart,” Ms. Hanif said. “He is a mess.”Perhaps the most telling sign of Mr. Adams’s diminished stature can be seen in the recent responses of Mr. Lander, the city comptroller and another possible mayoral candidate. He recently curtailed Mr. Adams’s ability to quickly spend hundreds of millions of dollars on the migrant crisis.Earlier this year, Mr. Adams openly mocked Mr. Lander’s voice and his left-leaning politics at news conferences. Now Mr. Lander has returned the favor in a recent fund-raising email, chiding the mayor for his campaign’s ties to the Turkish government.“Turkey should have a special place on your Thanksgiving table,” Mr. Lander’s fund-raising email said. “And that’s the only kind of special treatment that Turkey should have in New York City.”Nicholas Fandos More

    • 125 Shares119 Views

      in Elections

      Should Biden Really Run Again? He Prolongs an Awkward Conversation.

      by

      The president and his team have waved away Democrats’ worries about his bid for another term. But this week, he has drawn new attention to the question of what is best for the party.President Biden has a way of explaining away his gaffes that can let him defuse the situation without causing himself long-term political damage.“No one ever doubts I mean what I say,” he often says. The problem, he admits, is that “sometimes I say all that I mean.”So it went this week when Mr. Biden told donors on Tuesday night near Boston that “I’m not sure I’d be running” if former President Donald J. Trump were not trying to reclaim the Oval Office.It was a forehead-slapping moment for a president whose drooping approval ratings have forced him to turn his re-election campaign into a referendum on his predecessor, and a reminder that the political forecast for the next 11 months suggests America will be inundated with two candidates most of the country doesn’t want.Within hours, Mr. Biden walked back the sentiment. After returning to the White House, he approached reporters and said he wouldn’t drop out of the race even if Mr. Trump did so.Then came Wednesday.After delivering a speech urging Congress to pass a multibillion-dollar aid package for Ukraine, Mr. Biden walked away and reporters shouted questions at him.One grabbed his attention: Could any other Democrat defeat Mr. Trump?The president could have left and closed the door. The chatter about his 2024 decision would have been put to bed, at least for this week. But he could not resist. Once again, he reminded America why Democratic allies, and not Mr. Biden himself, are often viewed as his best messengers.“Probably 50” Democrats could beat Mr. Trump, he said. Then, seeming to laugh off his remark with a wry smile, he added, “I’m not the only one who could defeat him, but I will defeat him.”Whether Mr. Biden was joking, or again accidentally saying all that he meant, is for him to know. But his perhaps-too-candid moments, combined with many voters’ dissatisfaction about his performance, have worked to undercut his rationale for running — that he is the indispensable Democrat best positioned to keep Mr. Trump out of the White House, protect democracy and retain the “soul of America.”If he’s not indispensable, it opens the door to an uncomfortable question from skeptics in his party: Why not let some other Democrat have a chance to run for president?The reasons Mr. Biden is running again are fairly obvious. He considered a presidential bid in 1984, mounted his first White House campaign four years later, served for eight years as Barack Obama’s vice president, wanted to run in 2016 and finally won the nation’s top office in 2020.People who think about running for president for 36 years tend not to give up the White House without a fight. No president since Rutherford B. Hayes has served the four full years of his first term and then declined to run again.Mr. Biden had left some Democratic voters under the impression that he might gracefully step aside: During his 2020 campaign, he stood on a Detroit stage with three next-generation Democrats — Senator Kamala Harris of California, Senator Cory Booker of New Jersey and Gov. Gretchen Whitmer of Michigan — and said, “I view myself as a bridge, not as anything else.”But his own ambition and the enormous political advantage of incumbency always suggested he would seek to remain president into his mid-80s.Former Senator Barbara Boxer of California, a devoted Biden supporter who has known him since the early 1980s, said voters she heard from in Southern California were far more interested in stopping Mr. Trump from returning to power than they were worried about Mr. Biden’s age or competence.“They say, ‘We’ve got to win this,’” Ms. Boxer said. “They don’t talk so much about Joe. They say our democracy is on the line. They just assume it will be Joe.”Ron Klain, Mr. Biden’s first chief of staff, allowed in an interview on Thursday that “it is possible that there are other Democrats in America who could beat Trump.” But because Mr. Biden is the only one to have actually done it, Mr. Klain said, he has the best chance to do so again. Mr. Klain said he did not know who the 50 Democrats mentioned by Mr. Biden were.“This is a life-or-death moment for democracy, and we need someone who has beaten Trump before,” Mr. Klain said.Kevin Munoz, a Biden campaign spokesman, dismissed any close reading of Mr. Biden’s latest comments. The campaign, Mr. Munoz said, would not be “distracted by the same Beltway narratives that President Biden has proven wrong for years.”And Mr. Biden’s latest verbal adventures didn’t exactly prompt a reckoning in Democratic politics. Most simply rolled their eyes at his struggle to keep the political conversation on favorable terrain — especially during a week in which Mr. Trump pledged not to be a dictator “except for Day 1.”“He’s one of the most honest people you’re ever going to meet in terms of expressing what he is feeling at the moment,” former Senator Tom Daschle of South Dakota said of Mr. Biden, with whom he served for 18 years in the Senate. “There isn’t a politician alive that hasn’t wanted to reframe things. We all do it.”Mr. Trump, at age 77, has not exactly been a smooth operator himself. He has long strayed off message, and has his own growing record of verbal slips. He has confused Mr. Biden with Mr. Obama, suggested America is on the verge of entering World War II, praised Hezbollah, the Iranian-backed militant group, and told supporters not to worry about voting.David Axelrod, the Democratic strategist who helped choose Mr. Biden to be Mr. Obama’s running mate in 2008, said it was understood at the time that Mr. Biden’s occasional deviation from the prescribed political script was part of the package.He said Mr. Biden’s gaffes gave him an authenticity in the minds of voters that other veteran Washington politicians lacked, even if they caused a few headaches for Mr. Obama and his aides.“Joe Biden has been a guy who has spoken his mind for 50 years in politics,” said Mr. Axelrod, who has repeatedly suggested that the president’s age will be a top concern for voters in 2024. “Sometimes that’s gotten him into some hot water, but it’s also part of a whole package of a guy who is authentic and willing to say exactly what he’s thinking.” More

    • 38 Shares149 Views

      in Elections

      Nikki Haley’s Moment

      by

      Rob Szypko, Mary Wilson and Marion Lozano, Rowan Niemisto and Listen and follow The DailyApple Podcasts | Spotify | Amazon MusicOver the last few months, Nikki Haley has gained enough in the polls to suggest she is on the verge of surpassing Ron DeSantis as the main threat to Donald J. Trump in the race to become the Republican candidate for 2024.Jazmine Ulloa, a national politics reporter for The Times; and Nate Cohn, The Times’s chief political analyst, discuss her building momentum and examine how far she might go.On today’s episodeJazmine Ulloa, a national politics reporter for The New York Times.Nate Cohn, The New York Times’s chief political analyst.Nikki Haley has gained with educated and relatively moderate Republicans and independents, but that could also be a big liability in today’s G.O.P.Maansi Srivastava/The New York TimesBackground readingNikki Haley’s path from Trump critic to defender and back.Why is Ms. Haley’s star rising among the rivals to Mr. Trump?Here are five takeaways from the Republican debate last night.There are a lot of ways to listen to The Daily. Here’s how.We aim to make transcripts available the next workday after an episode’s publication. You can find them at the top of the page.Jazmine Ulloa More

    • 113 Shares179 Views

      in Elections

      Why Our “Great” Economy Is Making Young Americans Grumpy

      by

      As a part-time commentator on things economic, I’m often asked a seemingly straightforward question: If the economy is so good, why are Americans so grumpy?By many measures — unemployment, inflation, the stock market — the economy is strong. Yet only 23 percent of Americans believe the country is headed in the right direction, a strong headwind for President Biden’s approval ratings. Meanwhile, Donald Trump’s formidable base of disgruntled voters endures.As I’ve engaged with my many interlocutors, I’ve concluded that voters have valid reasons for their negativity. In my view, blame two culprits: one immediate and impacting everybody, and another that particularly affects young people and is coming into view like a giant iceberg. Both sit atop the leaderboard of reasons for the sour national mood.While inflation has provided the proximate trigger for unhappy feelings, an understandable grimness about our broader economic prospects, particularly for younger Americans, is playing a major part. We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber?  More