Polls and Public Opinion

Subterms

    More stories

    • 125 Shares119 Views

      in Elections

      Taiwan’s Opposition Picks Hou Yu-ih, a Moderate, for Presidential Race

      by

      The Kuomintang nominated Hou Yu-ih, a popular mayor who has said little about geopolitical issues, as the party tries to appeal to voters wary of Beijing.Once a dominant political force, Taiwan’s main opposition party lost the last two presidential elections in large part because it has promoted closer ties with China. Now, faced with voters who have been alarmed by Beijing’s aggression toward the island, the Kuomintang is placing its hopes on a new type of candidate: a popular local leader with a blank slate on the thorny question of China.The Kuomintang, or Nationalist Party, on Wednesday nominated as its presidential candidate Hou Yu-ih, a 66-year-old, two-term mayor of New Taipei City and former police chief who has tried to strike a middle ground within the Kuomintang on the island’s relations with China. Mr. Hou launched his bid with a rallying call.“We must unite for victory, especially at this stage when our country is facing fierce and dangerous international circumstances,” Mr. Hou said following the announcement of his nomination. His candidacy sets the stage for a tight race next January that could chart a new course for Taiwan in the big-power standoff between China and the United States and reshape tensions around the Taiwan Strait, one of the world’s most dangerous flash points. Under the seven-year leadership of President Tsai Ing-wen of the governing Democratic Progressive Party, Taiwan has come under intensifying military and diplomatic pressure from China and pushed back by bolstering ties with the United States.Within the Kuomintang, Mr. Hou is regarded as a capable administrator with broad appeal, who “would generate the least internal party controversy, align with the general expectations of society and have the highest likelihood of winning in the presidential election,” said Huang Kwei-Bo, a professor of international relations at the National Chengchi University and a former deputy secretary-general of the Nationalist Party.Terry Gou, the founder of the iPhone and electronics manufacturer Foxconn. He was a contender to be Taiwan’s next president, but his lack of political experience lost him the Kuomintang’s nomination.Ann Wang/ReutersMr. Hou’s nomination pits him against Lai Ching-te, the governing party candidate and current vice president. A win for Mr. Lai would likely mean a continuation of China’s policies to freeze out Taiwan from any high-level engagement, as well as Taiwan’s continued closeness with the United States. A victory for Mr. Hou and the Kuomintang could reopen communication channels with China and tamp down military tensions, potentially reducing the pressure on Taiwan to strengthen ties with Washington.Mr. Hou faced tough competition from Terry Gou, the founder of the iPhone and electronics manufacturer Foxconn, who failed despite holding rallies around the island to make his case for nomination. Analysts said Mr. Gou’s lack of experience in politics and his business interests in China made him an unviable candidate for the Kuomintang.The Kuomintang in recent years has struggled to balance its China-friendly leanings with the Taiwan population’s souring sentiment toward Beijing. That juggling act has been complicated by Beijing’s crackdown on Hong Kong in 2019 and its ramped-up military drills around Taiwan. The governing D.P.P. has positioned itself as a defender of Taiwan’s sovereignty and democracy, and pointed to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine as an example of the urgent threat of authoritarian expansionism.But the Kuomintang scored big last year, prevailing in almost two-thirds of local mayoral elections contested, races in which geopolitics matter less than bread-and-butter issues. Mr. Hou handily won his re-election as mayor and has since topped multiple polls within the party for the candidacy.The chairman of the Kuomintang, Eric Chu, second from left, followed by Mr. Hou in the center, and Wayne Chiang, a Taipei mayoral candidate, at an election rally last year.Ann Wang/ReutersUnlike most politicians in Taiwan, Mr. Hou began his career as a police officer, in the 1980s. He rose through the ranks and was a key investigator into the 2004 assassination attempt against President Chen Shui-bian. In 2006, Mr. Chen’s administration promoted Mr. Hou to the position of chief of the island’s police force, the youngest officer ever to serve in the role.In his turn to politics in 2010, he joined hands with Eric Chu, who was then the mayor of New Taipei City. Mr. Hou served as the deputy mayor under Mr. Chu and succeeded Mr. Chu as mayor in 2018. Mr. Chu is now the chairman of the Kuomintang.Supporters of Mr. Hou in New Taipei City say that he takes real actions to improve the lives of residents. Jax Chen, a 28-year-old nonprofit worker, referred to Mr. Hou’s effort to transform a giant, decades-old garbage dump into green park space as one example.“In Taiwan’s political scene, it seems like everyone is just talking too much,” he said. “But if there is a person who is pragmatic with capabilities to enforce policies, I believe it would be great and everyone would be willing to accept the person.”Mr. Hou, right, in 2004, when he was the commissioner of the Criminal Investigation Bureau and a key investigator of the assassination attempt against President Chen Shui-bian.Saeed Khan/Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesLess well established are Mr. Hou’s views on major geopolitical questions such as how Taiwan should navigate its relationships with China and the United States. China claims Taiwan as its territory, to be absorbed with force if necessary, and accuses the D.P.P. of seeking formal independence. The Kuomintang has asserted that it is the party with the best chance of engaging China and avoiding war.In an apparent effort to thread the needle, Mr. Hou has said he both opposes Taiwan independence and the “one country, two systems” formulation proposed by China to absorb Taiwan. The position eschews two extremes but leaves open a huge number of possible viewpoints on the existential issue of cross-strait relations.The lack of clarity about his stance on China has already been criticized by some observers, a potential disadvantage for him on top of his lack of experience in foreign affairs, said Paul Chao-hsiang Chu, a politics professor at National Taiwan Normal University who studies party politics and voters’ behavior.At the same time, Mr. Hou’s reticence could make him more appealing to centrist voters, said Liao Da-chi, an emeritus professor of political science at the National Sun Yat-Sen University. That is in contrast to Han Kuo-yu, the Kuomintang’s presidential candidate in 2020, who made rousing speeches and pledged to restore closer relations with China but lost in a landslide to President Tsai.Despite vowing to improve relations with China, the Kuomintang’s 2020 presidential candidate, Han Kuo-yu, center, lost to President Tsai Ing-wen.Ritchie B Tongo/EPA, via ShutterstockOverall, Mr. Hou has had very few interactions with the United States, said Bonnie Glaser, a Taiwan expert and managing director of the Indo-Pacific program at the German Marshall Fund of the United States. Mr. Hou has said that he has met with officials at the American Institute in Taiwan, the de facto embassy for the United States, at least eight times. But American congressional delegations to Taiwan since its reopening have not been able to meet with him.As Beijing stokes tensions in the Taiwan Strait, the Kuomintang’s contact with China has sometimes put it in an awkward position.Earlier this year, just as President Tsai traveled to the United States, Ma Ying-jeou, a former president of Taiwan and an influential leader in the Kuomintang, headed for China on an unofficial trip. Mr. Ma was criticized in Taiwan for appearing to kowtow to China on an inappropriately timed visit. (In retaliation for Ms. Tsai’s visit to the United States, China sent record numbers of military aircraft, as well as naval ships and an aircraft carrier, near Taiwan to conduct military drills.)“To win the election, it is imperative for the Kuomintang to persuade the people that voting for them is the safer and more promising choice in achieving peace,” Dr. Chu said. “At the same time, how it would convince the Taiwanese people they will not betray Taiwan or allow China to completely swallow up Taiwan’s sovereignty presents a significant challenge for Kuomintang.”A Chinese naval vessel near Dongju Island, Taiwan, in April.Lam Yik Fei for The New York Times More

    • 88 Shares99 Views

      in Elections

      4 Takeaways from Turkey’s Nail-Biting Presidential Election

      by

      Recep Tayyip Erdogan is headed for his — and his country’s — first presidential runoff vote. But the first round showed the longtime leader’s continued strength.Turkey’s nail-biter election will go to a runoff, election officials announced on Monday, extending a pivotal vote that has demonstrated that the incumbent, President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, is still a formidable political force, despite his failure to secure a first-round victory.Turkey’s Supreme Election Council said the runoff would be held May 28 after official preliminary results showed that Mr. Erdogan had won 49.5 percent of votes and his main challenger, Kemal Kilicdaroglu, 44.9 percent, with nearly all ballots counted. Mr. Erdogan, who has led Turkey for 20 years, appeared to be in a strong position to emerge with another five-year term.After a tumultuous night during which the rival camps each accused the other of rushing to declare results in advance of official tallies, both sides said early on Monday that they would accept a runoff — and predicted they would prevail.President Recep Tayyip Erdogan of Turkey failed to win a majority of the vote, setting the stage for a runoff against Kemal Kilicdaroglu, the main opposition candidate.Sergey Ponomarev for The New York TimesSunday’s voting was closely watched around the world for how it could shape the course of Turkey, an important NATO ally with a wide array of diplomatic and economic ties across continents. Of particular interest was the fate of Mr. Erdogan, who has often flummoxed and frustrated his Western partners, including the United States, and faced growing discontent amid high inflation and the destruction wrought by earthquakes in February that killed more than 50,000 in southern Turkey.Before the vote, most polls suggested a slight lead for Mr. Kilicdaroglu, the joint candidate of a newly formed alliance of six opposition parties. But the results showed Mr. Erdogan’s enduring appeal and influence.Here are some key takeaways:Turkey’s first runoffThis is the first election in Turkey’s history in which no presidential candidate secured a majority in the first round. It opens up a complicated two-week window during which the candidates will go all-out to pull more voters into their camps.Voting in Istanbul on Sunday. Turnout across the country exceeded 88 percent, according to the state-run news agency.Sergey Ponomarev for The New York TimesSunday’s election was the country’s second since a 2017 referendum supported by Mr. Erdogan that changed Turkey from a parliamentary to a presidential system. Mr. Erdogan won the last two presidential contests, in 2014 and 2018, outright and by significant margins.His inability to do so this time makes clear that he has lost some support.Erdogan has the edgeMr. Erdogan appears to have the edge with his lead over Mr. Kilicdaroglu, just shy of an outright majority. The elimination of a third candidate, Sinan Ogan, leaves the 5.7 percent of voters who chose him, many of them from the right, up for grabs. Most, if they participate in a runoff, are likely to opt for Mr. Erdogan.In the run-up to the election, Mr. Erdogan freely tapped state resources to improve his chances, raising civil servant salaries and the national minimum wage and unleashing other government spending in an effort to insulate people from the immediate effects of high inflation. He could deploy more such measures between now and the runoff.Also helping Mr. Erdogan make his case is his party’s strong showing in Sunday’s parliamentary vote, which took place at the same time.Supporters of President Recep Tayyip Erdogan outside his campaign headquarters as he spoke there on Monday.Necati Savas/EPA, via ShutterstockPreliminary results suggested that Mr. Erdogan’s Justice and Development Party and its allies would keep their majority in the 600-seat Parliament. That would allow Mr. Erdogan to argue that he should win to avoid a divided government that could hamper the efficient functioning of the state.For his part, Mr. Kilicdaroglu has predicted that he would prevail in a runoff, telling supporters early Monday: “We will definitely win and bring democracy to this country.”Turks’ faith in elections remains highThe election council said that turnout on Sunday surpassed 88.9 percent of the 64 million eligible voters in Turkey and overseas. Some endured long lines and returned to quake-destroyed neighborhoods to exercise what many see as a national duty.The turnout figure is far greater than the 66.6 percent turnout in the 2020 presidential election in the United States. But such high numbers are not unusual in Turkey.Some voters endured long lines to exercise what many see as a national duty.Sergey Ponomarev for The New York TimesIn the last presidential and parliamentary elections, in 2018, around 85 percent of voters cast ballots. And since 1983, turnout in any election — including for mayors and city councils — has never fallen below 74 percent.Many political scientists don’t consider Turkey a pure democracy, largely because of the tremendous power exercised by the president and his ability to shape the political playing field before the vote.But Turks still take elections very seriously. That includes Mr. Erdogan, who told supporters early Monday that he was prepared to face a runoff.“In my political life, I’ve always respected your decision,” he said. “I expect the same democratic maturity from everyone.”Nationalism appeared to prevailTurkish voters may not prioritize foreign policy at the ballot box, but Mr. Erdogan’s decision to step up nationalist rhetoric during the campaign appears to have paid off, both for him and for his conservative parliamentary alliance.During the campaign, Mr. Erdogan had a warship dock in central Istanbul for voters to visit. He escalated his criticism of the United States, even claiming on the eve of the elections that President Biden was seeking to topple him.Mr. Erdogan and members of his party also openly accused the opposition of cooperating with terrorists because they received the support of Turkey’s main pro-Kurdish party. Turkish nationalists often accuse Kurdish politicians of supporting or cooperating with Kurdish militants who have been at war with the Turkish state for decades.Mr. Ogan, the candidate in third place, also spoke about prioritizing ways to send home the millions of Syrian refugees in Turkey and criticized the opposition coalition over its Kurdish support. In a runoff, the candidate who more effectively espouses nationalist positions could pick up more of Mr. Ogan’s supporters. More

    • 125 Shares189 Views

      in Elections

      How Much Did Election Denial Hurt Republicans in the Midterms?

      by

      The NewsDenying the results of the 2020 election and casting doubts about the nation’s voting system cost statewide Republican candidates 2.3 to 3.7 percentage points in the midterms last year, according to a new study from States United Action, a nonpartisan group that promotes fair elections.Why It Matters: Consequential races were close.Even at the lowest end of the spectrum, 2.3 percentage points would have been enough to swing several critical midterm races that Republicans lost, including the contests for governor and attorney general in Arizona and the Senate elections in Nevada and Georgia.In each of those races, the Republican nominee had either expressed doubts about the 2020 election or outright rejected its legitimacy.And as former President Donald J. Trump illustrated at a town-hall event last week, election denialism is very much alive within the Republican Party.But spreading such conspiracy theories again could hamper Republicans as they look to take back the Senate in 2024.“The problem for a lot of Republicans right now is that the gap between what the base wants and what swing voters will tolerate has gotten very long,” said Sarah Longwell, an anti-Trump Republican strategist.Background: A series of losses for election deniersIn the midterms, a slate of election-denying candidates ran together as the America First coalition. These candidates, organized in part by Jim Marchant, the Republican nominee for secretary of state in Nevada, sought to take over critical parts of the nation’s election infrastructure by running for secretary of state, attorney general and governor in states across the country.But in every major battleground state, these candidates lost.“What we found was lying about elections isn’t just bad for our democracy, it’s bad politics,” said Joanna Lydgate, the chief executive of States United Action.The group arrived at the 2.3 to 3.7 percentage-point “penalty” number by comparing election-denying candidates in 2022 with Republicans who did not espouse similar views, and then comparing the 2022 performance to that of 2018.On the whole, 2022 was a better year for Republicans than 2018 was. As expected, in statewide races with no election denier, Republicans did much better in 2022 than in 2018 on average, but the same did not hold true for election-denying candidates.What’s Next: Big Senate races in 2024Several candidates who were a core part of the election denial movement have signaled an intent to run again in 2024, including Mr. Marchant in Nevada. Others, including Kari Lake and Doug Mastriano, who lost races for governor in Arizona and Pennsylvania, are reportedly considering bids for Senate.And as Mr. Trump continues to demand fealty to such beliefs and hold sway over Republican primaries, the issue is likely to linger in G.O.P. politics.Most battleground states are not holding contests for governor and secretary of state until 2026, but several marquee Senate races next year will determine control of the chamber.“What’s really interesting is that the results there are different from the results for congressional races and state legislative races,” Ms. Lydgate said. “We think that’s because in these statewide races for governor, state attorney general, secretary of state, voters really came to understand that those are the people who oversee voting. Those are the people who are in charge of your freedom to vote.” More

    • 125 Shares199 Views

      in Elections

      In Blow to Junta, Thai Voters Overwhelmingly Back Opposition Parties

      by

      Thais on Sunday cast votes against their military leaders, backing instead a populist political mainstay and a progressive upstart bent on shaking up the status quo.Voters in Thailand overwhelmingly sought to end nearly a decade of military rule on Sunday, casting ballots in favor of two opposition parties that have pledged to curtail the power of the country’s powerful conservative institutions: the military and the monarchy.With 97 percent of the votes counted early Monday morning, the progressive Move Forward Party was neck and neck with the populist Pheu Thai Party. Move Forward had won 151 seats to Pheu Thai’s 141 in the 500-seat House of Representatives.In most parliamentary systems, the two parties would form a new governing coalition and choose a prime minister. But under the rules of the current Thai system, written by the military after its 2014 coup, the junta will still play kingmaker.The election had widely been seen as an easy victory for Pheu Thai, the country’s largest opposition party founded by former Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra. A billionaire tycoon, Mr. Thaksin, 73, was ousted in a coup in 2006 after accusations of corruption, but he is still fondly remembered as a populist champion for the rural poor. Polls had showed that Mr. Thaksin’s youngest daughter, Paetongtarn Shinawatra, 36, was the leading choice for prime minister.But in a surprise, the Move Forward Party, a progressive political party that called for upending old power structures and amending a law that criminalizes public criticism of the monarchy, made stunning strides, capturing young urban voters, and the capital, Bangkok.“We can frame this election as a referendum on traditional power centers in Thai politics,” said Napon Jatusripitak, a visiting fellow at the ISEAS-Yusof Ishak Institute. “People want change, and not just a change of government, they want structural reform.”Supporters of the Move Forward Party react as they watch results come in at the party headquarters in Bangkok on Sunday night.Jack Taylor/Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesThe key question that many Thais now have is whether the military establishment, which has long kept an iron grip on Thailand’s politics, will accept the result.Move Forward has targeted institutions and policies once considered sacrosanct in Thai society, including mandatory military conscription and the laws that protect the king from criticism. And having the Pheu Thai Party in government could effectively place the party’s founder and one of the military’s top rivals, Mr. Thaksin, back at the center of the country’s politics.The results were a humbling blow for Prime Minister Prayuth Chan-ocha, the general who governed Thailand for almost nine years, the longest stretch of military governance in a nation used to coups.Mr. Prayuth has presided over a lagging economy, and in 2020 waged a harsh crackdown on protesters who gathered in the streets of Bangkok to call for democratic reforms. Although Thailand is one of two formal U.S. allies in Southeast Asia, he distanced himself from Washington and leaned closer to Beijing.As of early Monday, it remained unclear who would ultimately lead the country. The junta rewrote the country’s Constitution in 2017 so that selecting the prime minister would come down to a joint vote between the 250-member military-appointed Senate and the popularly elected House of Representatives. The decision could take weeks or months.Because both Pheu Thai and Move Forward do not have enough seats to form a majority, they will need to negotiate with each other and other parties to establish a coalition. Analysts said Move Forward’s stance on changing the royal protection law might complicate negotiations for forming a coalition. Before the vote, Move Forward attempted to moderate its position on the measure, toning down its calls for reform.Pheu Thai Party’s prime ministerial candidates Paetongtarn Shinawatra, center, and Srettha Thavisin, third from left, in Bangkok on Sunday night.Manan Vatsyayana/Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesBut on Sunday, Pita Limjaroenrat, the leader of Move Forward made it clear that the amendment was still high on his party’s agenda, saying they now have enough members of Parliament to push it forward.“So it’s not conditional, it’s already absolute that we are going with it,” he said.Mr. Pita, 42, a former businessman, was fielded as Move Forward’s leader after the country’s Constitutional Court dissolved the party’s previous iteration, the Future Forward Party, in 2020, and barred the party’s senior executives from politics for 10 years. A graduate of Harvard’s Kennedy School of Government and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Mr. Pita is a charismatic speaker, who called on voters to create “a new history in Thai politics.”His background as a technocrat contrasts with the leading contender from Pheu Thai, which has sought to promote Ms. Paetongtarn, Mr. Thaksin’s youngest daughter.Ms. Paetongtarn, an executive in her family’s hotel management company with little political experience, was selected to run after her father said people “wanted to see a Shinawatra family representative as a force in the party.”She proved to be an effective campaigner, stumping even in the last weeks of her pregnancy. (She gave birth on May 1 and quickly returned to the campaign trail.) The strong showing for Move Forward was remarkable for a party that was thought to be too radical for the general population. Move Forward ran on a platform that included legalizing same-sex marriage and a $13 daily minimum wage.The election was cast as an existential struggle for the future of the country. Both Pheu Thai and Move Forward campaigned on pledges to return Thailand to the path of electoral democracy, calling on people to reject the “uncles” or the “Three Ps,” referring to the generals who have governed Thailand since the coup: Mr. Prayuth, Deputy Prime Minister General Prawit “Pom” Wongsuwan and Interior Minister General Anupong “Pok” Paochinda.United Thai Nation Party’s candidate Prayut Chan-O-Cha in Bangkok on Sunday.Lillian Suwanrumpha/Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesMove Forward was even more emphatic in saying that it would never work with military-backed parties, a stance that drew more voters to the party. Several youths who had joined the 2020 protests campaigned as first-time candidates for Move Forward in the election.The vote underscored just how politically fragmented the nation of 72 million is now. No longer is it split between the “red shirt” pro-Thaksin protesters from the rural north and the “yellow shirt” anti-Thaksin faction made up of royalists and the urban elite. Now it is divided along generational lines.On Sunday, millions of Thais lined up in roughly 100-degree heat to cast their vote.“I really hope for change,” said Saisunee Chawasirikunthon, 48, an employee at a telecommunications company. “We have lived with the same old thing for the past eight years.”During his final rally on Friday, Mr. Prayuth, the former general, urged voters to choose continuity, playing a video that showed graffiti on the Democracy Monument in Bangkok and a young girl uploading a pornographic clip of herself because she had “freedom.”“We don’t need change that flips the country,” he said.For the past century, Thailand has swung between civilian democracy and military control, with the armed forces engineering a dozen coups within that period. On Thursday, Narongpan Jitkaewthae, Thailand’s army chief, took pains to assure the public that things would be different this time.He said that the country had learned its lessons from its past, and that “politics in a democratic system must continue,” although he added that he “cannot guarantee” that another coup would not happen. More

    • 138 Shares119 Views

      in Elections

      Erdogan Amassed Power in Turkey. He Could Still Lose This Election.

      by

      Turkey’s president, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, has tilted the political playing field in his favor over the past two decades, concentrating power in his own hands. Still, he faces a stiff challenge in Sunday’s election.ISTANBUL, Turkey — As President Recep Tayyip Erdogan of Turkey approaches the toughest election of his career on Sunday, he has marshaled many of the resources of the state to tilt the playing field to his advantage.Mr. Erdogan, who has come to increasingly dominate the country over the past two decades, tapped the Treasury for populist spending programs and has raised the minimum wage three times in the last year and a half. His challenger barely appears on the state broadcaster while Mr. Erdogan’s speeches are aired in full. And this weekend’s vote will be overseen by an election board that, during recent votes, have made questionable calls that benefited the president.And yet, Mr. Erdogan could still lose.Recent polls show him trailing the main challenger, Kemal Kilicdaroglu, in a tight race that could go to a runoff later this month. But Mr. Erdogan’s grip on the country could also contribute to his undoing, if voters drop him because of his strongman ways and persistently high inflation that has left Turks feeling poorer.“The elections are not fair, but nonetheless they are free, and that is why there is always the prospect of political change in Turkey,” said Sinan Ulgen, director of the Istanbul-based EDAM research group. “The prospect exists, and is now palpable.”Mr. Erdogan has eroded democratic institutions, stocking the judiciary with loyalists and limiting free expression. His main challenger, Mr. Kilicdaroglu, has vowed to restore democracy if he wins.The close race speaks to Turkey’s complicated character. Political scientists say it is neither a full democracy nor a full-blown autocracy, but rather a mix of the two in which the leader has outsized power but where elections can still bring about change.Turkey has never tipped into full-on autocracy because electoral politics retain a hallowed place in the national identity, one revered by Mr. Erdogan himself. He and his governing Justice and Development Party have regularly trounced their opponents at the ballot box over the years with no indications of foul play, granting Mr. Erdogan a mandate.Turkey’s political ambiguity is also reflected in its global position.During Mr. Erdogan’s tenure, much of Turkish foreign policy has become personally associated with him as he has proved to be a necessary, but problematic — and at times puzzling — partner of the West. He condemned Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and sent aid to the Ukrainian government while not only refusing to join Western sanctions on Russia, but also expanding trade ties with, and drawing closer to, President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia.He has sparred with the United States over Syria policy and disparages Washington in his speeches. He heads a NATO member state but has hampered the alliance’s expansion, delaying Finland’s ability to join and still refusing to accept Sweden.Election posters and flags hang from buildings next to a mosque in Kayseri, Turkey, last month. Predominantly Muslim Turkey is a staunchly secular state.Sergey Ponomarev for The New York TimesAll of that, at times, has left Western leaders wondering whose side he is really on.A change of leadership in Turkey would resonate around the world, given the country’s unique position as a predominantly Muslim society with a staunchly secular state and a vast network of economic and diplomatic ties spanning Asia, Africa, Europe and the Middle East.Mr. Kilicdaroglu has promised that if he wins, he will improve relations with the West and make Turkish foreign policy less personal. But what exactly that would look like is hard to predict: He represents a coalition of six political parties with widely divergent ideologies and his record provides few clues. Before entering politics, he was a civil servant who ran Turkey’s social security administration.After Mr. Erdogan rose to the national stage as prime minister in 2003, he was widely seen as a new model of Islamist democrat, one pro-business and interested in strong ties with the West. During his first decade, Turkey’s economy boomed, lifting millions into the middle class.But more recently — after facing mass street protests against his governing style, becoming president in 2014 and surviving a failed coup attempt in 2016 — he purged his foes from the state bureaucracy, limited civil liberties and centralized power in his hands.People attend a campaign rally for the main challenger of Mr. Erdogan, opposition candidate Kemal Kilicdaroglu, in Istanbul on Saturday.Khalil Hamra/Associated PressMr. Erdogan retains a fervent following, particularly among working class, rural and more religious voters, who love his rhetoric about standing up for Turkey against an array of domestic and foreign enemies. He has pushed back against Turkey’s state secularism, expanding Islamic education and changing regulations to allow women in government jobs to wear head scarves.The political opposition says that his consolidation of power has gone too far and portrays Sunday’s vote as a make-it-or-break-it moment for Turkish democracy that could inspire other states struggling with aspiring autocrats.Mr. Erdogan’s advantages are clear, starting with the perks citizens can receive through links to his political party, including state jobs, social support or local services like new roads, analysts said.The president’s use of power for electoral gain has raised questions about how fair these elections really are.“It is more like a hybrid regime, where you have multiparty elections but where the opposition does not enjoy the same opportunities as the government to put their ideas and policies through to voters,” said Ersin Kalaycioglu, a professor of political science at Sabanci University in Istanbul.Mr. Erdogan has extended his sway over the news media. Major news networks are owned by businessmen close to Mr. Erdogan while outlets that criticize his policies are often hounded with fines and lawsuits.A recent analysis of the state-funded broadcaster TRT found that in April, Mr. Kilicdaroglu received only 32 minutes of airtime. Mr. Erdogan got 32 hours.“TRT acts like a public relations firm assigned to run the election campaign of the ruling party and its presidential candidate,” Ilhan Tasci, an opposition party member at the state broadcasting regulator, said in a statement when releasing the data.Shoppers pass election posters at a market in Kayseri, Turkey, in April. Sergey Ponomarev for The New York TimesOverseeing Sunday’s vote is the Supreme Election Council, a panel of judges. For decades, it was widely regarded as independent and trustworthy, but two recent decisions marred its reputation in the eyes of opposition supporters.In 2017, while the votes were being counted in a referendum on changing Turkey from a parliamentary to a presidential system, the board decided to override the electoral law and include ballots that lacked an official stamp proving their authenticity. The referendum passed by a slim margin, allowing Mr. Erdogan, the president at the time, to greatly expand his powers.In 2019, after an opposition candidate beat Mr. Erdogan’s candidate in the mayor’s race for Istanbul, Turkey’s largest city, the council voided the results, citing irregularities, and called for a redo. The same opposition candidate won that, too, by an even larger margin.Those decisions raised questions about the election board’s willingness to rule against Mr. Erdogan’s preferred outcome, said Hasan Sinar, an associate professor of criminal law at Altinbas University in Istanbul.“On paper, they are neutral,” he said. “But when the government stays in power so long, no one in that position can be neutral anymore.” Any doubt about the electoral board’s neutrality was detrimental to Turkey’s democracy, he added. “This is never supposed to be poisoned by doubt,” he said.In recent weeks, Mr. Erdogan has used his bully pulpit to bludgeon the opposition, warning that the country would suffer under their leadership and accusing them of conspiring with terrorists. Mr. Erdogan’s interior minister, Suleyman Soylu, who oversees the security forces, has gone further, sowing doubts about the results before the vote even begins.Political posters adorn the streets in the city of Kayseri last month.Sergey Ponomarev for The New York TimesThe election amounted to “a political coup attempt by the West,” Mr. Soylu said last month during a campaign stop. “It is a coup attempt formed by bringing together all of the preparations to purge Turkey.”A few days later, Mr. Soylu said that Mr. Kilicdaroglu’s party was “always open to cheating.”Despite the problems, Turks remain hopeful that Sunday’s poll will express the people’s will. This week, after Mr. Soylu requested that the election board share detailed data about polling places and voter registrations so his ministry could set up its own system to tabulate the vote, the election board pushed back, saying that only it was empowered to count votes.Others noted Mr. Erdogan’s long commitment to electoral politics, hoping that meant he would accept his own loss if it happened.“Turkey has a long tradition of multiparty democracy and a very strong attachment to the integrity of the vote,” said Mr. Ulgen, the director of EDAM. If a clean vote is held, it would probably be respected, even by Mr. Erdogan, he added.But trouble could arise if the results are very close, causing the candidates to contest them or question the process.If the spread is very thin, Mr. Ulgen said, “all options are on the table.”Gulsin Harman More

    • 113 Shares109 Views

      in Elections

      Why the Anti-Trump Republican Primary Has Yet to Emerge

      by

      The former president’s current and potential rivals have failed to gain traction as the party seems to rally around him in the face of criticism.Just a few months ago, the Republican presidential primary seemed as if it might include a frank and vigorous debate about the leadership and limitations of Donald J. Trump.But any appetite for criticism of Mr. Trump among Republicans has nearly evaporated in a very short time. Voters rallied around him after his criminal indictment in March on charges related to hush money for a porn star, and potential rivals have faltered, with few willing to take direct aim at the former president and front-runner for the nomination.In a live town hall on CNN on Wednesday, the cheers for every falsehood and insult that Mr. Trump uttered under tough questioning by a moderator showed there was little to no daylight between Mr. Trump and the Republican base. A quirky effort to disrupt the love-in by Chris Christie — a potential rival who bought Facebook ads to supply audience members with skeptical questions such as “Why are you afraid of debating?” — went nowhere.In surveys and focus groups, a fair share of Republican voters say that they would prefer a less polarizing, more electable nominee. But a near taboo against criticizing Mr. Trump has made it hard for rivals, apart from Mr. Christie and one or two others near the bottom of polls, to stand out.In what looks like a rerun of the 2016 Republican primary, almost none of Mr. Trump’s competitors have openly gone after him, despite his glaring vulnerabilities. Instead, they are hoping — now as then — that he will somehow self-destruct, leaving them to inherit his voters.After a jury found Mr. Trump liable for sexual abuse and defamation of the writer E. Jean Carroll on Tuesday, Mike Pence, the former vice president, who is weighing a 2024 campaign, declined to criticize Mr. Trump. In an interview with NBC News, Mr. Pence said it was “just one more story focusing on my former running mate that I know is a great fascination to members of the national media, but I just don’t think it’s where the American people are focused.”Other 2024 candidates either defended Mr. Trump, such as the entrepreneur Vivek Ramaswamy, or played down the verdict, including Nikki Haley, the former South Carolina governor. Ms. Haley, who announced her candidacy in February, even defended Mr. Trump this week for threatening to skip Republican primary debates. “With the numbers he has now, why would he go get on a debate stage and risk that?” she said.Only two 2024 hopefuls found the verdict in the Carroll case to be disqualifying for a would-be president: Mr. Christie and Asa Hutchinson, the former Arkansas governor. Mr. Hutchinson criticized Mr. Trump’s “contempt for the rule of law.”Several months ago, polling had suggested Mr. Trump could be a potentially weak candidate, with only 25 to 35 percent support from Republican voters in high-quality surveys. The Republican National Committee promised an autopsy of the 2022 midterms that was expected to address Mr. Trump’s role in the party’s surprising losses.But today, the lane in the Republican primary for a candidate who is openly critical of Mr. Trump seems to be closing.Mr. Hutchinson’s long-shot campaign has failed to gain notice. Mr. Christie, the former governor of New Jersey, who has promised a decision this month on whether he will run, also has yet to generate much interest. Even the occasionally critical Mr. Pence, who mildly suggested Mr. Trump would be “accountable” to history for the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol, is struggling for affirmation from the Republican base.And the R.N.C. autopsy of the midterms? A draft reportedly did not mention Mr. Trump at all.Mr. Trump in Waco, Texas, in March.Christopher Lee for The New York TimesDavid Kochel, a Republican strategist who advised Jeb Bush when he ran against Mr. Trump in 2016, said there was no opportunity for a candidate openly critical of Mr. Trump in the 2024 primary.“Voters have seen Trump as the most attacked president of their lifetimes, and they have an allergic reaction to one of their own doing it,” Mr. Kochel said. “He’s built up these incredible antibodies, in part stemming from how the base perceives he has been treated.”A CBS News poll released this month found that among likely Republican primary voters, only an insignificant handful, 7 percent, wanted a candidate who “criticizes Trump.”The three candidates whom voters are the least open to considering, the survey found, are those who have criticized Mr. Trump to varying degrees: Mr. Christie, Mr. Hutchinson and Mr. Pence.David Carney, a Republican strategist in New Hampshire, said he had expected the race to be more competitive by now, but a turning point occurred in March with Mr. Trump’s indictment in New York.“It fell into the president’s narrative of the past five years,” Mr. Carney said, referring to Mr. Trump’s portrayal of himself as a victim of a criminal justice system out to get him. Mr. Carney described what he called a “boomerang” effect on Republican primary polls. “They’re beating up your guy — there’s a rallying around the flag.”Mr. Trump’s rivals could still see a surge in support between now and next year’s first primary contests, but for the time being he is dominating all challengers. A polling average shows him with a 30-point lead over his closest rival, Gov. Ron DeSantis of Florida, who has yet to formally announce his run. All other candidates, declared and potential, are distant afterthoughts in the race, for now.The former president is insulated from criticism, strategists said, because of the intense and dug-in partisanship of the Republican base, and because many of those voters get information only from right-wing sources, which have minimized the Jan. 6 attack and obscured Mr. Trump’s 2020 loss.“They barely have access to the truth,” said Sarah Longwell, an anti-Trump Republican strategist. Ms. Longwell, who hosts a podcast about Republican voters called “The Focus Group,” said a sizable share of primary voters wanted to move on from Mr. Trump.Supporters in Mar-a-Lago showed support for Mr. Trump when he returned to Florida after turning himself over to Manhattan Criminal Court.Hilary Swift for The New York TimesBut according to polling, a majority of Republican voters don’t believe Mr. Trump really lost in 2020. “Every politician on their team, everyone they know and all the media they consume — all tells them that the election was stolen,” Ms. Longwell said.Mr. Christie, the most sharply critical 2024 hopeful of Mr. Trump, recently attacked the former president, calling him “a child” for denying the 2020 election results and cowardly for suggesting he might duck Republican debates.But when Mr. Christie tested the electoral waters during visits to New Hampshire the past two months, including at the same college where Mr. Trump’s town hall took place on Wednesday, his crowds seemed tilted toward independents and even Democrats, including those who knew him as the house conservative on ABC News.One element that may factor in Mr. Christie’s calculus: The New Hampshire primary next year could favor an anti-Trump Republican because of an influx of independent voters. Because Democrats chose South Carolina as their first nominating state — and because President Biden may not appear on the New Hampshire ballot or campaign in the state — up to 100,000 independents are expected to cast ballots in the Republican race, where they could tilt the results.“Independents are open to voting for a Republican candidate,” said Matt Mowers, who served as Mr. Christie’s New Hampshire state director in 2016, “but they aren’t open to voting for a crazy Republican.” More

    • 138 Shares119 Views

      in Elections

      Two Schools of Polling Are Converging: Reflecting on a Tumultuous Decade

      by

      Should polling change or stay the same? It doesn’t seem a hard call.Old methods just aren’t enough anymore. Joshua Bright for The New York TimesIt’s been nearly a decade since I first attended the annual conference of pollsters, known as AAPOR.Back then, it was a very different place. It was dominated by traditional pollsters who knew change was inevitable but who appeared uncomfortable with the sacrifices required to accommodate new people, methods and ideas.At the time, that gathering reminded me of the Republican Party, which was then grappling with how to deal with demographic change and Hispanic voters in the wake of Barack Obama’s re-election. There are obvious differences, but the AAPOR crowd’s talk about reaching out to new groups and ideas was animated by similar senses of threat that the Republicans were facing then — the concern posed by long-term trends, the status threat from newcomers, and the sense that traditional values would be threatened by accommodating new ideas.But if Donald J. Trump showed that Republicans didn’t have to support immigration reform to win, he most certainly showed pollsters they would have to innovate. A decade and two historically significant poor cycles later, AAPOR is a very different place. The old guard is still around, but presentation after presentation employs methods that would have been scorned a decade ago. This year’s Innovators Award went to someone who referred to AAPOR as an association of “Buggy-Whip Manufacturers” back in 2014, the year I first attended.The innovative turn in the polling community is very real, including in public political polling. Today, virtually no pollsters are using the methods they did a decade ago. The ABC/Post poll is perhaps the only major exception, with its live-interview, random-digit-dialing telephone surveys. But to this point, innovation and change hasn’t been enough to solve the problems facing the industry. It has been enough only to keep it afloat, if still struggling to keep its head above water.Heading into 2024, pollsters still don’t know if they can successfully reach Trump voters. They still struggle with rising costs. And they really did lose something they had a decade ago: the belief that a well-designed survey would yield a representative sample. Today, a well-designed survey isn’t enough: The most theoretically sound surveys tended to produce the worst results of 2020.To this point, innovation in polling has occurred on two parallel tracks: one to find new ways of sampling voters in an era of low response rates; another intended to improve unrepresentative samples through statistical adjustments. If there’s an underlying theory of the Times/Siena poll, it’s to try to get the best of both worlds: high-quality sampling with sophisticated statistical adjustment. There are surprisingly few public polls that can make a similar case: There’s bad sampling with fancy statistical modeling, and there’s some good sampling with simple demographic adjustment, but not much of both.Because of the pandemic, it has been a few years since I’ve attended AAPOR in person. But from my vantage point, this was the first time that these two parallel tracks looked as if they were getting closer to merging. They haven’t merged — the old guard remains reluctant to make some of the sacrifices needed to improve its methods of adjustment; costs will prevent the upstarts from matching the old guard’s expensive sampling. But they’re getting closer, as researchers on either track realize their own efforts are insufficient and dabble a bit more in the ideas of the other side.One early theme, for instance, was a recognition that even the most sophisticated survey designs still struggle to reach less engaged voters, who tend to be less educated and perhaps likelier to back Mr. Trump as well. This problem may never be perfectly addressed, and so it benefits from both the best of traditional and nontraditional methods.For our part, I promise we’ll have more on our Wisconsin experiment — which had parallel telephone and high-incentive mail surveys ahead of the 2022 election — in the weeks ahead. In the last week or so, we received the final data necessary to begin this analysis, and I’ve started to dig in over the last two days. It’s early in the analysis, but there’s some interesting stuff. Stay tuned. More

    • 138 Shares119 Views

      in Elections

      Erdogan’s Election Prospects Take a Hit as a Challenger Drops Out

      by

      With Turks going to the polls on Sunday, President Recep Tayyip Erdogan had hoped for a swift victory. But the departure of one challenger is likely to benefit his main competitor.Three days before Turks vote in crucial presidential elections, President Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s chances of securing a swift victory took a hit on Thursday when one of his challengers left the race, a move likely to benefit Mr. Erdogan’s main competitor.The withdrawal of one of the race’s four contenders also increased the possibility that the main opposition candidate, Kemal Kilicdaroglu, could obtain a simple majority of votes on Sunday, a win that would suddenly end Mr. Erdogan’s 20-year streak as Turkey’s most prominent politician.The simultaneous presidential and parliamentary elections will set the future course for Turkey, a major economy at the intersection of Europe, Asia and the Middle East, and a NATO ally of the United States.Opponents of Mr. Erdogan also view the elections as a make or break moment for Turkish democracy. A win for Mr. Erdogan, they say, would enable a leader who has extended his control over much of the state to gain even more power, whereas a loss could allow for a more democratic future.“That is the real choice we seem to be facing now: going down the road to authoritarianism or switching track and going back to democracy,” said Ersin Kalaycioglu, a professor of political science at Sabanci University in Istanbul.The election could also alter Turkey’s foreign affairs. Under Mr. Erdogan, Turkey has pursued a nonaligned foreign policy that has unnerved its NATO allies. While Turkey condemned the Russian invasion of Ukraine and has sent aid to the Ukrainian military, Mr. Erdogan has pursued a closer relationship with President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia.Mr. Erdogan has also hobbled efforts to expand NATO. Although Turkey eventually voted to allow Finland to join the alliance, greatly lengthening its border with Russia, Mr. Erdogan has so far refused to do the same for Sweden. Turkey has accused the Swedes of harboring Turkish terrorists. European officials have countered that Mr. Erdogan appears to be leveraging Turkey’s position in the alliance to settle political scores.Supporters of Kemal Kilicdaroglu and his party during a rally in Kayseri, last month.Sergey Ponomarev for The New York TimesAt home, Mr. Erdogan’s standing has sunk, primarily because of extremely high inflation that has eaten into family budgets. Many economists attribute the inflation, which exceeded 80 percent last year, to Mr. Erdogan’s ill-advised financial policies.Seeking to unseat Mr. Erdogan is a coalition of six opposition parties that have backed a joint presidential candidate, Kemal Kilicdaroglu, a former civil servant. Mr. Kilicdaroglu has vowed that if he wins he will undo Mr. Erdogan’s legacy by restoring the independence of state institutions like the central bank in the Foreign Ministry, releasing political prisoners and strengthening democratic norms.Recent polls have suggested a slight lead for Mr. Kilicdaroglu, which would likely receive a lift from the withdrawal of one of the other candidates on Thursday.That candidate, Muharrem Ince, was predicted to win votes in the single digits, but even that could have been enough to deprive any other candidate of winning a majority, prompting a runoff between the top two vote-getters on May 28.Mr. Ince announced on Thursday that he was withdrawing from the race after sex tapes that supposedly showed him in compromising positions surfaced on social media. Mr. Ince dismissed them as fakes, but withdrew from the race nevertheless. He did not endorse another candidate, but pollsters said voters who would have voted for him were more likely to choose Mr. Kilicdaroglu over Mr. Erdogan.Since the ballots have already been printed, Mr. Ince’s name will still appear at the polls.Muharrem Ince, who dropped out of the election this week, with his supporters in Ankara, in April.Cagla Gurdogan/ReutersAnother candidate, Sinan Ogan, is also in the race, but his support is thought to be negligible.Analysts caution that many Turkish polls have proven unreliable in the past, and that how this one plays out could be surprising. Mr. Erdogan remains popular among a significant share of Turks, who like his nationalist rhetoric, credit him with developing the country or simply have a hard time imagining anyone else in power.Mr. Erdogan has also tapped state resources to increase his chances. In recent months, he has raised the minimum wage, increased civil servant salaries, changed regulations to allow millions of Turks to receive government pensions early and expanded assistance programs for the poor.Marketing himself as a leader who has increased Turkey’s stature on the world stage, he had a Turkish-built warship parked in central Istanbul, became the first owner of Turkey’s first domestically produced electric car and observed, via video link, the first fuel delivery to a Russian-built nuclear plant near the Mediterranean.He and his ministers have attacked the opposition as incompetent, backed by foreign powers and out to undermine family values by expanding L.G.B.T. rights.The opposition has tried to sell voters on the prospect of a brighter future if they win, vowing to tame inflation, restore political rights and move Turkey away from what they consider one-man rule.“This election is very important, and we have to end this autocratic, crazy system,” said Bilge Yilmaz, an economist who oversees economic policy for one of the six opposition parties. “The country deserves better, needs to do better.” More