Polls and Public Opinion

Subterms

    More stories

    • 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

    • 100 Shares159 Views

      in Elections

      The Panic Over Joe Biden’s Age Is Manufactured

      by

      The relationship between political campaigns, the news media and the public isn’t exactly an interplay between independent actors. It’s a web of influence.This dynamic is particularly relevant when it comes to the avalanche of headlines and polls about President Biden’s age.The most recent ABC News/Washington Post poll found that 63 percent of those surveyed thought Biden didn’t have the mental sharpness to serve effectively; 43 percent said the same of Donald Trump, even though their ages are only a few years apart.Let me say up front that a candidate’s age and competency are always fair game in politics. It’s not ageist to acknowledge the scientific reality that our bodies and minds decline in capacity as we age. It’s not ageist for voters to factor that into their electoral decisions. And aging is individual: Some people appear vibrant at 80 and others worn at 50.But there are also other truths that must be considered. Headlines and polls don’t just measure and reflect public sentiment, they also influence it. The persistence of a theme elevates and validates that theme.As Jocelyn Kiley, associate director of research at Pew Research Center, told me: “As with anything in journalism, more broadly, as there’s a great deal of a spotlight on a topic, it raises the salience of that topic for the public, and people are more likely to consider things that are in the news as important.”I also think that we as citizens and consumers of media like to think that we come to our opinions and beliefs completely on our own, and we resist the notion that those opinions have been influenced or manipulated by outside forces. But there is a growing body of research that demonstrates the opposite. We are, unquestionably, influenced by the media.This brings me to the coverage of Biden’s age. It’s true that if he’s re-elected, Biden would be the oldest president we’ve ever had. But he was already the oldest president the first time he was elected. What changed?I’d argue that the biggest change wasn’t the simple passage of time, but the decision of some Republican leaders to focus like a laser on Biden’s age as the factor weighing against him. In an April interview, the former South Carolina governor, Nikki Haley, said it was unlikely Biden would “make it” through a second term. In this year’s Republican response to the State of the Union address, Gov. Sarah Huckabee Sanders of Arkansas noted that she’s half Biden’s age.Some observers contend that voting for Biden is essentially voting for Vice President Kamala Harris to be president, because Biden may not last another term. For Republicans, that notion offers the added benefit of allowing them to campaign against the trifecta of their disdain — a liberal who’s a minority and a woman.Which brings us back to the web of influence: Campaigns elevate an issue, pollsters and journalists ask whether the issue is having an effect on a race, stories are written about that effect and as a result of the coverage, the effect is often intensified. That is the chain of custody for a political attack, but far too often that connection and context isn’t made clear. It’s often presented as if these types of concerns just spring forth in voters’ minds and aren’t influenced by campaigns and news coverage.This happens all the time in politics.Before the 2018 midterm elections, Trump decided once again to whip up Americans’ xenophobia by harping on a caravan of migrants, an “invasion” he called it, heading for our southern border.Less than a month before those midterms, The Times reported, “For the last two weeks, Mr. Trump and his conservative allies have operated largely in tandem on social media and elsewhere to push alarmist, conspiratorial warnings about the migrant caravan more than 2,000 miles from the border.” The Times concluded that they had largely succeeded in animating Republican voters “around the idea of these foreign nationals posing a dire threat to the country’s security, stability and identity.”This caravan drew headlines and consumed airtime. And there was at least one poll taken about the threats people thought the caravans posed. According to Politico, Trump “seized” on the caravan issue after his team reviewed polling from congressional districts that were competitive in the 2016 election and found that border issues resonated with voters in those districts.But when the midterms were over, Trump backburnered the caravan issue and so did the media, as Quartz reported. And as the publication pointed out, “Attention from Trump and other Republicans helped drive the media coverage of the caravan, and cable news and newspapers either repeated the calls of alarm, or sought to ease concerns.”If the caravans had been entirely of organic interest to the public, more robust coverage probably would have continued. Instead, in that case, we saw how a political party weaponized a topic and the media helped deploy the weapon.This doesn’t mean that immigration and border security aren’t independently newsworthy, but rather that the media doesn’t simply cover campaigns; editorial decisions can be influenced by those campaigns and coverage can influence voters as much as it informs them.This is playing out again. The idea that voters are worried about Biden’s age and capacity has been repeated so often that it no longer requires any proof beyond polling that reflects what respondents have consumed: reports that they’re worried about Biden’s age and capacity.There’s a real chicken-egg conundrum here.And as Nate Silver, the founder of FiveThirtyEight, who generally believes media should “focus more and not less on the health and mental fitness of elected officials,” told me via email, it’s unclear how much the age issue will affect votes for Biden, anyway. As Silver put it: “In the abstract, voters raise high levels of concern but — they also did so in 2020 and he won both the primary and the general. And his approval ratings, while not great, are roughly in line with what you might expect given high polarization and high inflation.”Breathless headlines have created a sense that worry about the president’s age is common knowledge and common sense, when in fact it is, at least in part, fueled by political manipulation and media complicity.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 and Twitter (@NYTopinion), and Instagram. More

    • 100 Shares179 Views

      in Elections

      Donald Trump to Appear on CNN Town Hall

      by

      Wednesday’s town hall has already proved divisive — and it could be an unsettling preview for the TV news industry as it prepares to cover a presidential contest that is likely to feature Mr. Trump.Should a leading presidential contender be given the opportunity to speak to voters on live television?What if that contender is former President Donald J. Trump?Mr. Trump is set to appear on CNN on Wednesday night for a town hall in New Hampshire — his first live appearance on a major TV news network (besides those controlled by Rupert Murdoch) since 2020 — and a torrid media debate is swirling.Joy Reid, an anchor on rival MSNBC, derided the event as “a pretty open attempt by CNN to push itself to the right and make itself attractive and show its belly to MAGA.” Her colleague Chris Hayes called the town hall “very hard to defend.” Critics asked why CNN would provide a live platform to someone who defended rioters at the United States Capitol and still insists the 2020 election was rigged.Those objections intensified on Tuesday after Mr. Trump was found liable for the sexual abuse and defamation of the writer E. Jean Carroll. “Is @CNN still going to do a town hall with the sexual predator twice impeached insurrectionist?” Alexander S. Vindman, the Army colonel who was a witness in Mr. Trump’s first impeachment trial, wrote on Twitter.Mr. Trump is also, at the moment, the highest-polling Republican candidate in the 2024 presidential campaign and the de facto leader of his party. Some veteran TV journalists wonder: What’s the alternative?“So no more live political events, because politicians can be nasty? Because politicians can tell lies?” Ted Koppel, the former “Nightline” anchor, said in an interview. “I’m not sure that news organizations should necessarily be in the business of making ideological judgments. Is he a legitimate object of news attention? You bet.”Wednesday’s town hall, where Mr. Trump will field questions from Republican and undecided voters, is in some ways a stress test — and an unsettling preview — for the television news industry as it prepares to cover a presidential contest that is likely, in its early stages at least, to prominently include Mr. Trump.Any telecast featuring the former president is bound to be divisive. Were anchors too harsh? Too lenient? How quickly did they react to false claims? And foes of Mr. Trump will cringe at seeing him on air at all.But Bob Schieffer, the longtime CBS anchor, said that interviews of important political figures were necessary. “There’s no question he might well get the nomination,” he said of Mr. Trump. “We’re in the business of telling people who’s running for what and what they stand for.”CNN faced criticism in 2016 for granting Mr. Trump hours of unfettered airtime during the Republican primary. Jeff Zucker, the network’s president at the time, later acknowledged he had overdone it.Mr. Trump then spent years vilifying the network, leading chants of “CNN sucks” and barring its correspondent Jim Acosta from the White House. A YouGov poll last month found that CNN was the country’s most polarizing major media source, with the widest gap between the portion of Democrats who trust it and the portion of Republicans who don’t.Mr. Trump last appeared on CNN in 2016, and since then much has changed. CNN was acquired by Warner Bros. Discovery, and Mr. Zucker was replaced; his successor, Chris Licht, pledged to broaden the network’s appeal. He is backed by David Zaslav, the Warner chief executive, who has batted away objections to Wednesday’s Trump town hall.“The U.S. has a divided government; we need to hear both voices,” Mr. Zaslav said last week on CNBC, where he was questioned repeatedly about the decision to host Mr. Trump. “When we do politics, we need to represent both sides. I think it’s important for America.”Mr. Trump, meanwhile, has soured on Fox News, irked by Mr. Murdoch’s support for a potential Republican rival, Gov. Ron DeSantis of Florida. And he has taken notice of Mr. DeSantis’s aversion to appearing on mainstream outlets like CNN.Mr. Trump and CNN are not exactly reconciled. There is the awkward fact that Mr. Trump still has a pending $475 million defamation lawsuit against the network. And in a missive on Truth Social on Tuesday, the former president told fans that CNN was “rightfully desperate to get those fantastic (TRUMP!) ratings once again.” He added: “Could be the beginning of a New & Vibrant CNN, with no more Fake News, or it could turn into a disaster for all, including me. Let’s see what happens?”As olive branches go, it felt a bit spindly. But David Chalian, CNN’s political director, shrugged it off. “We never stopped covering him as president despite everything he said about us,” Mr. Chalian said in an interview. “We never stopped doing our jobs.”CNN executives will air Mr. Trump’s remarks live, without any time delay. That means if Mr. Trump makes a false claim, it will be up to the moderator, Kaitlan Collins, or an onscreen graphic to correct him in real time. Mr. Trump’s last three interviews on Fox News were prerecorded. (Fox recently paid $787.5 million to settle a defamation case brought by Dominion Voting Systems, after several of its anchors amplified Mr. Trump’s falsehoods about the company.)In the interview, Mr. Chalian said that CNN was “in the business of live news events — that’s what we do.” He added, “I obviously can’t control what Donald Trump says, but what we can control is our journalism.”CNN did not agree to preconditions for the town hall, Mr. Chalian said — “No question is off the table” — and Ms. Collins has spent several days preparing for the broadcast. Selecting Ms. Collins to moderate is in keeping with Mr. Licht’s emphasis on reporting over punditry; Ms. Collins is best known for day-to-day White House coverage and previously worked at The Daily Caller, a conservative outlet.Mr. Koppel, in the interview, said Ms. Collins was a “tough and able” journalist who could handle Mr. Trump in a live setting. He said CNN had many reasons to go forward with the event.“Has Trump pushed the boundaries of honesty, good taste, decency, humanity, to such a degree that we should not put him on the air at all, unless we’ve had the chance to sanitize what he has to say?” Mr. Koppel said. “I can understand that’s a reasonable question to ask. But it puts a very heavy burden on the shoulders of the people who run our networks. Because it means we are going to let them decide who gets on the air, and who doesn’t.” More

    • 125 Shares149 Views

      in Elections

      An Outlier Poll on Trump vs. Biden That Still Informs

      by

      A seven-point Trump lead in an ABC/Post survey is an aberration but points to some Biden weaknesses.Is Donald Trump really leading President Biden?Rebecca Noble for The New York TimesThere’s usually a simple rule of thumb for thinking about outlying poll results: Toss it in the average, and don’t think too hard about it. After all, outlying poll results are inevitable, simply by chance. When they occur, it shouldn’t be any surprise.But sometimes, that guidance gets a little hard to follow. The most recent ABC/Washington Post poll is proving to be one of those cases.In a startling finding, the poll found Donald J. Trump and Ron DeSantis each leading President Biden by seven percentage points, with Mr. Biden trailing among young people and struggling badly among nonwhite voters. After a few days of relentless media conversation, even I’ve been forced to abandon the usual rule of thumb.Make no mistake: This survey is an outlier. The Post article reporting the result acknowledged as much. But of all the cases over the last few years when an outlier has dominated the political discourse, this may be one of the more useful ones. For one, it may not be quite as much as an outlier as you might assume. Even if it is, it may nonetheless help readers internalize something that might have been hard to believe without such a stark survey result: Mr. Trump is quite competitive at the outset of the race.To the extent the usual rule of thumb would mean dismissing the poll result and returning to an assumption that Mr. Trump can’t win, the usual guidance might be counterproductive.Before I go on, I should acknowledge that I do have a few gripes with this survey. It reported the results among all adults, not registered or likely voters. The question about the presidential matchup explicitly offered respondents the option to say they’re still undecided, which could tend to disadvantage the candidate with less enthusiastic support. For good measure, the matchup was buried 16th in the questionnaire, following other questions about the debt ceiling, abortion, the presidential primary, the allegations against Mr. Trump and so on.But my various gripes probably don’t “explain” Mr. Trump’s strength. The poll actually did report a result among registered voters and still found Mr. Trump and Mr. DeSantis ahead by six. And just a few months ago, an entirely different ABC/Post survey asked about the presidential matchup among registered voters in the typical way, without offering undecided as an option. What did they find? Mr. Trump still led by three points among registered voters. Similarly, they found him leading by two last September.Interestingly, the January and September surveys showed all of the same peculiar results by subgroup — Mr. Trump’s lead among young voters (18 to 39), and the staggering Democratic weakness among nonwhite voters. And while this was not included in the most recent poll, Mr. Trump led among voters making less than $50,000 per year, historically a Democratic voting group. No other high-quality survey has consistently shown Mr. Biden performing so poorly, especially among young voters.All of this means that the ABC/Post poll isn’t quite like the usual outlier. This consistent pattern requires more than just statistical noise and random sampling. Something else is at play, whether that’s something about the ABC/Post methodology, the underlying bias in telephone response patterns nowadays, or some combination of the above. It should be noted that the ABC/Post poll is nearly the last of the traditional, live-interview, random-digit-dialing telephone surveys that dominated public polling for much of the last half-century. So it’s easy to understand why it could produce different results, even if it’s not obvious why it produces them.But if no other survey has matched the ABC/Post poll, it would probably be wrong to say that it’s entirely alone in showing a weak Biden. Yes, it’s alone in showing Mr. Trump ahead by seven (counting leaners). But even the last Times/Siena poll, in October, showed Mr. Trump ahead by one point among registered voters. So far this year, the average of all polls has shown an essentially tied race.And virtually all of the polling shows an admittedly more muted version of the same basic demographic story, especially among nonwhite voters. Even excluding ABC/Post polling altogether (in clear violation of the “toss it in the average” rule), Mr. Biden still has a mere 49-37 lead over Mr. Trump among Hispanic voters and just a 70-18 lead among Black voters. In each case, Mr. Biden is far behind usual Democratic benchmarks, and it comes on the heels of a midterm election featuring unusually low Black turnout.If the lesson from the ABC/Post poll is that Mr. Biden is vulnerable and weak among usually reliable Democratic constituencies, then perhaps the takeaway from an outlying poll isn’t necessarily a misleading one. More

    • 113 Shares179 Views

      in Elections

      Trump Is Mainstream, Whether We Like It or Not

      by

      Hunker down, America. Here we go again.The presidential election is still a year and a half away. But on Wednesday evening, Donald Trump will elbow his way back into the campaign mainstream. At a town hall event in New Hampshire hosted by CNN, the former president will field questions from audience members and the network anchor Kaitlan Collins.The whole spectacle sounds downright chilling. The event will be live, leaving Mr. Trump more or less free to inject his lies straight into viewers’ veins. He will be coming off the E. Jean Carroll verdict, upping his odds of saying something awful about women or witch hunts and how everyone is always out to get him. And even if he dials down the crazy, his re-emergence on a major prime-time platform raises vexing questions. After everything this antidemocratic, violence-encouraging carnival barker has put America through, are we really going to treat him like a normal candidate this time? How can CNN and other media outlets justify giving him a megaphone from which to dominate and degrade the political landscape? Have we learned nothing from the past eight years?Short answer: We have in fact learned much about Mr. Trump and the threat he poses to American democracy. But trying to shut him out of the public discussion or campaign process would bring its own dangers. Not only would it play into the politics of victimhood that he peddles with such infuriating effectiveness. It risks further undermining public faith in the democratic process — making the system look too weak to deal with one aspiring autocrat — and even the process itself. As with so much about the MAGA king, there are no easy fixes.Nothing that Mr. Trump has done so far legally prevents him from pursuing, or serving, another term in the White House. Yes, many voters consider his double impeachments, his role in the Jan. 6 riot and his glut of legal troubles to be disqualifying. But many others do not. Polls consistently put the former president at the front of the current Republican presidential pack. A recent CBS News-YouGov survey gave him a whopping 36 point advantage over Gov. Ron DeSantis of Florida (58 percent to 22 percent) among likely G.O.P. primary voters. No other contender cracked double digits. As for the general election, a new ABC News-Washington Post poll showed him with a six-point edge — seven points with undecided leaners — over President Biden.While early polling has its shortcomings, it does serve as a reminder of Mr. Trump’s enduring appeal for millions of Americans. He is a serious contender for the White House — even, heaven help us, a formidable one. To treat him otherwise would be a breach of duty by the news media, democratic institutions and voters.It’s not as though Mr. Trump can be stuffed in a storage closet like a bunch of classified documents. Today’s mediascape includes a host of conservative players eager to fawn all over him in the hopes of making his fans theirs as well. Just think of the embarrassing tongue bath he received from Tucker Carlson in their April sit-down. Such slobberfests should not be the primary means by which voters assess Mr. Trump. He needs to be put through his paces, like any horse in the race.Just to be clear: No one is daft enough to think that Mr. Trump and CNN are linking arms out of a selfless, high-minded commitment to the public good. They are using each other. Under new leadership, the network is looking to rebuild its reputation, and ratings, as a less crusading, more balanced news source.As for the former president, CNN is just one piece of his grand media strategy. His team has been talking up how their guy wants to push the reset button on his relationship with the fourth estate. Journalists from mainstream outlets are being invited to travel on his campaign plane. And the campaign is negotiating with other top outlets, including NBC, for face time with the candidate.This is the least surprising move ever. Mr. Trump has always been a media creation. Without the “fake news” he so loves to bash, he’d just be another failed real estate scion hawking mediocre steaks and worthless degrees from his “university.”More specifically, Mr. Trump’s people are flogging the idea that his willingness to play with the media is proof of his bravery and manliness. “Going outside the traditional Republican ‘comfort zone’ was a key to President Trump’s success in 2016,” one toady recently told The Hill. “Some other candidates are too afraid to take this step in their quest to defeat Joe Biden and are afraid to do anything other than Fox News.”Take that, “Pudding Fingers” DeSantis.More targeted still: Mr. Trump’s canoodling with CNN twists the knife in the gut of Fox News, which of late has not been obsequious enough for his taste. This isn’t simply an issue of personal spite. Threatening/scaring/cajoling Fox News back into line is important to Mr. Trump’s 2024 fortunes. Whatever the network’s recent drama, there is no other conservative platform like it.It’s hard to know how Mr. Trump’s forays beyond his MAGA bubble will go, especially starting out. The guy was an appalling president, but he has always been a top-notch pitchman with a freaky sort of charisma. And a huge part of running for — and even being — president is compelling salesmanship. That said, he is out of practice interacting with people who aren’t there simply to lick his boots. He has spent the past couple of years largely cocooned in a fantasyland of his own creation, which can be tough to come back from.That makes these early appearances all the more important. CNN has as much on the line on Wednesday as the candidate — maybe more. This is about more than real-time fact-checking the candidate, though it must be established early and firmly that no disinformation will go unrebutted. Mr. Trump cannot be allowed to grandstand or slither away from awkward topics: He needs to face tough and skeptical questioning from the get-go.I do wish that CNN had waited a bit longer before relaunching Mr. Trump. Firing up the prime-time campaign coverage machine this early in the cycle isn’t healthy for the American psyche under normal circumstances, much less with this singularly toxic character in the mix.But now that the Trump Show is back, the media — everyone really — needs to be demanding more from this season than past ones. The former president should be expected to undergo the same vetting rituals as other candidates: debates, town halls, non-softball interviews, candidate cattle calls — the works. He cannot be left to the fuzzy realm of social media and schmoozing with Sean Hannity-style sycophants.Voters deserve the opportunity to take a clear measure of this man’s candidacy, no matter how nauseating some of us may find that process.Source photographs by Sophie Park for The New York Times and ozgurdonmaz, via Getty Images.The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. We’d like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips. And here’s our email: letters@nytimes.com.Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook, Twitter (@NYTopinion) and Instagram. More