Polls and Public Opinion

Subterms

    More stories

    • 88 Shares159 Views

      in Elections

      Prime Minister Liz Truss’s Dizzying First Week

      by

      Ms. Truss took over a British government facing an economic emergency. But those problems have been eclipsed by the queen’s death, an epochal event that has put politics on hold.LONDON — Last Tuesday, Prime Minister Liz Truss was moving into Downing Street and puzzling over how to help people pay their soaring gas bills. Two days later, she stepped out of her new home to pay tribute to a revered queen, Elizabeth II, and tell the country that Britain’s new king would henceforth be known as Charles III.Has any British leader had as head-spinning a first week on the job as Ms. Truss?Anointed by the queen in the last act of her 70-year reign, Ms. Truss took over a government facing an economic emergency. But those problems have been all but eclipsed by the queen’s death, an epochal event that has put Parliament on hold, moved the spotlight from the cost-of-living crisis to a monarch’s legacy, and handed Ms. Truss, 47, an unexpected new job as the government’s chief mourner.It’s a delicate assignment, one that could elevate Ms. Truss’s stature internationally but also trip her up at home. The crosscurrents were evident on Monday, when Downing Street walked back a news report that she would be joining King Charles on a mourning tour of the four nations of the United Kingdom.The report had raised eyebrows among some opposition lawmakers, who viewed her plans as presumptuous. A spokesman for Ms. Truss quickly clarified: The prime minister, he told The Guardian, would attend memorial services for the queen in Scotland, Northern Ireland and Wales, along with Charles, but would not be “accompanying” the king on a tour.King Charles III and Prime Minister Liz Truss last week, during their first meeting at Buckingham Palace.Pool photo by Yui Mok“I don’t know what led to anyone thinking it was a good decision for either of them that she go to the capitals of the U.K. nations with Charles,” said Alastair Campbell, who was director of communications for Tony Blair when he was prime minister, and advised him on his response to the death of Princess Diana in 1997.“It’s not as though he is a novice at these kinds of visits,” Mr. Campbell said of the 73-year-old king. “She would have been far better advised getting her feet under the table in No. 10 and beginning to focus on the enormous challenges that are going to be there when the mourning is over.”Among those challenges: double-digit inflation, a looming recession, labor unrest and deteriorating public finances. On Monday, new data showed that Britain’s growth stagnated in the three months through July. Hours before the news of the queen’s death, Ms. Truss announced a sweeping plan to freeze energy rates for millions of households for two years at a probable cost of more than $100 billion in its first year.It was a startling policy response right out of the gate, underscoring the depth of the crisis. But the round-the-clock coverage of the queen has meant the plan has barely been mentioned since. Parliament has been suspended until after the queen’s state funeral on Sept. 19. Lawmakers are scheduled to go into recess again on Sept. 22 for their parties’ conferences, putting politics on hold even longer.Fears about how the government plans to finance the aid package — with huge increased borrowing rather than by imposing a windfall profits tax on oil and gas companies — are wearing on the bond market and the pound, which has recently plumbed its lowest levels against the dollar since 1985.“It is a problem that there has effectively been no proper public scrutiny or political debate around a spending package of 5 to 6 percent of G.D.P.,” said Jonathan Portes, a professor of economics and public policy at King’s College London.Shoppers at a supermarket in London last month, when inflation rose to 10.1 percent.Frank Augstein/Associated Press“In principle, that could be remedied after the funeral,” he said. “But I do worry a bit that the government will get used to the lack of scrutiny of their proposals and will attempt to carry on the same vein.”A lack of scrutiny can provide a temporary respite, but over the long term it can be lethal: Jill Rutter, a former official in the Treasury, recalled that the government published details of a new poll tax in January 1986, hours before the Challenger space shuttle exploded in the United States. It was utterly lost in the news of that disaster, and when Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher later imposed the tax, it proved so unpopular that it triggered her downfall.There is no question that Ms. Truss’s role in the 10 days of national mourning will give her rare visibility for a new leader. She has become a dignified daily fixture on television, shaking hands with the king at an audience in Buckingham Palace, walking out of Westminster Hall after his address to Parliament on Monday and speaking at Downing Street about the dawn of a new Carolean age.She will get a big introduction on the global stage when dozens, or even hundreds, of leaders converge on London for the funeral, putting her at the center of one of the greatest such gatherings since the funeral of John F. Kennedy.Like Ms. Truss, Mr. Blair was quite new in the job when Princess Diana was killed in a car crash in Paris. His description of her as the “people’s princess” become one of the most memorable phrases of his decade in office. He also reaped credit for nudging a reticent queen into a more public display of sorrow over Diana’s death.How the World Reacted to the Queen’s DeathQueen Elizabeth II’s death elicited an array of reactions around the globe, from heartfelt tributes to anti-monarchist sentiment.In Britain: As Britons come to terms with the loss of the woman who embodied the country for 70 years, many are unsure of their nation’s identity and role in the world.In the U.S.: In few places outside Britain was the outpouring of grief so striking as in the faraway former British colony, which she never ruled and rarely visited.In Scotland: At a time of renewed mobilization for Scottish independence, respect for the queen could temporarily dampen the heated debate.In the Commonwealth: For nations with British colonial histories, the queen’s death is rekindling discussions about a more independent future.In Africa: Though the queen was revered by many on the continent, her death reignited conversations about the brutality the monarchy meted out there.But this time, the royal family does not seem to need public-relations advice. Prince William, Prince Harry, and their spouses appeared in a carefully managed walk outside Windsor Castle on Saturday. A day earlier, Charles stepped out of his vintage Rolls-Royce at Buckingham Palace to shake hands with well-wishers.The Prince and Princess of Wales, and the Duke and Duchess of Sussex paying their respects on Saturday to Queen Elizabeth outside Windsor Castle.Mary Turner for The New York Times“You could argue it helps her to be visible at these events,” Mr. Campbell said, “but in all honesty, the public are very focused on the royals and not the politicians.”For Ms. Truss, experts agree, the success of her economic policy will matter far more in the long run than her performance over the next week.“It’s almost impossible to predict the impact of the queen’s passing and the long period of mourning on Truss’s political fortunes, mainly because we’ve got little to compare it with,” said Timothy Bale, a professor of politics at Queen Mary, University of London.The last leader in this position was Winston Churchill, who was in office when Elizabeth’s father, George VI, died in 1952 and played the role of mentor to the young queen in their weekly meetings. But as Professor Bale noted, “He was already firmly entrenched in the public mind as an iconic national hero.”Based on the limited polling data available from that period, he said, the government’s approval ratings did not rise in the transition from George to Elizabeth.“Those assuming there might be some kind of rally round the flag effect for Truss and the Tories might need to think again,” Professor Bale said.Eshe Nelson More

    • 113 Shares199 Views

      in Elections

      Introducing ‘The Tilt,’ a Newsletter About Elections and Polling

      by

      Ahead of the 2020 election, I wrote a daily article on the latest polls — internally, we called it my “polling diary.” To my surprise, tens of thousands of people signed up to be notified whenever we published a new diary entry. You might be one of them!This cycle, we’re taking email all the way. We’re launching The Tilt, a newsletter on elections and polling in the run-up to the November midterm elections — and beyond.You can sign up for it here.The subject matter will be no surprise to longtime followers: analysis of the latest surveys and electoral trends. This year’s fight for control of Congress will be our major focus, but longer-term electoral trends, partisan polarization, threats to American democracy, voting laws and — gulp — the 2024 presidential campaign will also be on our radar.We’ll also visit wonkier subjects, like polling methodology. Yes, it’s arcane, but after the last decade of high-profile polling misfires, it’s worth a deeper exploration of what pollsters are doing right or wrong. We hope to write accessibly enough to lure the uninitiated. If not, we’ll flag it as “wonky” — as Paul Krugman’s newsletter often does — and you can skip it whenever your eyes start to glaze over.We’ll also try to have some fun.There are a lot of newsletters nowadays, but I think electoral analysis is especially well suited to this format. We can cover a flashy new poll number that may not be worth a full article, but does deserve to be put into context. And we can be more informal in offering provisional and uncertain takes.This newsletter will also be a natural home for work that doesn’t always have a spot on the Times home screen, like announcements about our coming polls (we’re in the field now, by the way); musings about the big decisions that underlie our work; debates on where to conduct our next survey; or the findings of our autopsy into our 2020 polling. Over the years, many of you have expressed interest in the inner workings of our operation. Hopefully, we can pull back the curtain. On a personal note, I’m also hoping it’s a way to sustain a conversation with people who care deeply about elections — without the vitriol often found on Twitter. We’ll try to figure out a way to engage with serious criticism, alternative perspectives and your questions. If you already have a topic you’d like us to address, feel free to email us at dear.upshot@nytimes.com.And please sign up! With Democrats showing rare strength for the president’s party at the start of a midterm campaign, it’s bound to be a wild few months. More

    • 63 Shares129 Views

      in Elections

      Are the Polls Wrong Again?

      by

      Are Democrats again about to be disappointed by overly optimistic polling? The final polls in the 2020 presidential election overstated Joe Biden’s strength, especially in a handful of states.The polls reported that Biden had a small lead in North Carolina, but he lost the state to Donald Trump. The polls also showed Biden running comfortably ahead in Wisconsin, yet he won it by less than a percentage point. In Ohio, the polls pointed to a tight race; instead, Trump won it easily.In each of these states — and some others — pollsters failed to reach a representative sample of voters. One factor seems to be that Republican voters are more skeptical of mainstream institutions and are less willing to respond to a survey. If that’s true, polls will often understate Republican support, until pollsters figure out how to fix the problem. (I explained the problem in more depth in a 2020 article.)This possibility offers reason to wonder whether Democrats are really doing as well in the midterm elections as the conventional wisdom holds. Recent polls suggest that Democrats are favored to keep control of the Senate narrowly, while losing control of the House, also narrowly.But the Democrats’ strength in the Senate campaign depends partly on their strength in some of the same states where polls exaggerated Democratic support two years ago, including the three that I mentioned above: North Carolina, Ohio and Wisconsin.Nate Cohn, The Times’s chief political analyst, calls it “a warning sign” — for both the Democratic Party and for the polls. Nate goes into more depth in one of the first editions of a newsletter that he will be writing a couple of times a week for the rest of the midterm campaign.(If you’re fascinated by politics, I encourage you to sign up. It’s available to Times subscribers, and Nate is one of the sharpest political analysts working today. He helps oversee Times polls and has a record of noticing trends before many others do. One example was in June 2016, when he wrote: “There are more white voters than people think. That’s good news for Trump.”)Or is 2022 different?Nate is also careful to acknowledge what he doesn’t know, and he emphasizes that the polls may not be wrong this year in the same way that they were wrong in 2020. It’s even possible that pollsters are understating Democratic support this year by searching too hard for Republican voters in an effort to avoid repeating recent mistakes.The unavoidable reality is that polling is both an art and a science, requiring hard judgments about which kinds of people are more or less likely to respond to a survey and more or less likely to vote in the fall. There are still some big mysteries about the polls’ recent tendency to underestimate Republican support.The pattern has not been uniform across the country, for instance. In some states — such as Georgia, Nevada and Pennsylvania — the final polls have been pretty accurate lately. This inconsistency makes the problem harder to fix because pollsters can’t simply boost the Republican share everywhere.There is also some uncertainty about whether the problem is as big when Trump is not on the ballot — and he is obviously not running for office this year. Douglas Rivers, the chief scientist of the polling firm YouGov, told me that he thought this was the case and that there is something particular about Trump that complicates polling. Similarly, Nate noted that the polls in the 2018 midterms were fairly accurate.Finally, as Nate points out, the 2022 campaign does have two dynamics that may make it different from a normal midterm and that may help Democrats. The Supreme Court, dominated by Republican appointees, issued an unpopular decision on abortion, and Trump, unlike most defeated presidents, continues to receive a large amount of attention.As a result, this year’s election may feel less like a referendum on the current president and more like a choice between two parties. Biden, for his part, is making this point explicitly. “Every election’s a choice,” he said recently. “My dad used to say, ‘Don’t compare me to the Almighty, Joey. Compare me to the alternative.’”As Nate told me:Just about every election cycle, there’s an argument for why, this time, things might be different — different from the expectations set by historical trends and key factors like the state of the economy or the president’s approval rating.The arguments are often pretty plausible. After all, every cycle is different. There’s almost always something unprecedented about a given election year. There’s always a way to spin up a rationale for why old rules won’t apply.In the end, history usually prevails. That’s a good thing to keep in mind right now as Democrats show strength that seems entirely at odds with the long history of the struggles of the president’s party in midterm elections.But this cycle, there really is something different — or at the very least, there is something different about the reasons “this cycle might be different.”More on politicsPresident Biden remembering 9/11.Al Drago for The New York TimesBiden visited the Pentagon for a Sept. 11 anniversary ceremony. “I know for all those of you who lost someone, 21 years is both a lifetime and no time at all,” he said.An Atlanta prosecutor has emerged as a consequential legal threat to Trump while presiding over the justice system in Georgia’s most populous county.THE LATEST NEWSWar in UkraineThe Kharkiv region this weekend.Juan Barreto/Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesRussia acknowledged that it had lost much of Kharkiv, a military stronghold, as Ukraine’s lightning advance took back more than 1,000 square miles.Russian cruise missiles knocked out power to regions in eastern and northeastern Ukraine in apparent retaliation.Ukraine drew on U.S. intelligence to plan its counterassault. The gains in the northeast have been the most important advances of the war, American officials said.The QueenAntigua and Barbuda announced that it would hold a referendum on becoming a republic, one of several countries considering a split with the British monarchy.The queen’s beloved corgis will stay in the family.Other Big StoriesFloodwaters cover around a third of Pakistan, including its agricultural belt. The economic losses will be felt for years, officials warn.Torrential, unrelenting rains swept through Chicago, taking the city by surprise.Improved weather conditions allowed firefighters to make progress on some of California’s blazes. But the battles are far from over.A New York education board will vote on new rules to keep private schools accountable to academic standards. (Read The Times’s investigation into New York yeshivas.)Alcohol deaths rose in the pandemic. Activists in Oregon say higher taxes could save lives.OpinionsGail Collins and Bret Stephens discuss Trump and the queen.To soften its Senate candidates’ images, the G.O.P. is turning to their wives. It’s trite and insulting, Michelle Cottle writes.The killing of a Memphis kindergarten teacher is a tragedy, not a talking point, Margaret Renkl says.MORNING READSDragon Con: Redefining what nerd culture looks like.No longer taboo: For better or worse, student debt has become normalized.Still rolling: Jann Wenner, the founder of Rolling Stone, wants to reveal it all.Metropolitan Diary: The cabby and the cat food.Quiz time: The average score on our latest news quiz was 9.4. See if you can beat it.A Times classic: Don’t try to walk off a sprained ankle.Advice from Wirecutter: The best over-the-counter hearing aids.Lives Lived: Thomas Carney tended bar at Elaine’s for decades. The Times once wrote that he kept alive the traditions of saloons: “wit, tact, patience and a boundless tolerance for drunks.” He died at 82.SPORTS NEWS FROM THE ATHLETICA new era in men’s tennis: Teen phenom Carlos Alcaraz seized his first Grand Slam title in a four-set win over the Norwegian player Casper Ruud at the U.S. Open. The Spaniard’s stunning tournament might even have left tennis fans feeling optimistic about the post-Big Three future. Panic time for the Dallas Cowboys? Quarterback Dak Prescott exited yesterday’s 19-3 loss to the Tampa Bay Buccaneers with an injury to his throwing hand. He will undergo surgery and miss several weeks. Here are the other takeaways from Week 1 of the N.F.L. season.W.N.B.A. finals get underway: The typically high-scoring Las Vegas Aces narrowly edged the Connecticut Sun 67-64 at home in Game 1. It was the game the Sun wanted, but MVP A’ja Wilson lifted the Aces to a win. Game 2 is tomorrow at 9 p.m. Eastern.ARTS AND IDEAS Tasting menus for the peopleMore chefs are embracing tasting menus, while rejecting the grandiose conventions and price tags that usually accompany them, Brett Anderson writes in The Times.Tasting menus can be surprisingly thrifty. Because they tend to require reservations, with meals chosen in advance, chefs can purchase the precise amount of ingredients. That has allowed aspiring restaurateurs to branch off on their own, serving food to small groups without much overhead.At Southern Soigné in Jackson, Miss., Zacchaeus Golden offers a multicourse dinner for $95, a fraction of the cost of most lavish tasting-menu marathons. One way he keeps it affordable: The only other employee is his mother, Margie.PLAY, WATCH, EATWhat to CookRikki Snyder for The New York TimesThe trick to this chicken salad is the method for poaching chicken.AwardsThe Emmy Awards are tonight, with Kenan Thompson of “Saturday Night Live” hosting.What to WatchIn “The Fabelmans,” Steven Spielberg himself is the star. But Michelle Williams steals the show.Now Time to PlayNYTThe pangram from yesterday’s Spelling Bee was devotion. Here is today’s puzzle.Here’s today’s Mini Crossword, and a clue: Unattractive (four letters).And here’s today’s Wordle. After, use our bot to get better.Thanks for spending part of your morning with The Times. See you tomorrow. — DavidP.S. Katie Baker is joining The Times from BuzzFeed News to cover the social and cultural conflicts dividing the U.S.Here’s today’s front page.“The Daily” is about Serena Williams.Lauren Hard, Claire Moses, Ian Prasad Philbrick, Tom Wright-Piersanti and Ashley Wu contributed to The Morning. You can reach the team at themorning@nytimes.com.Sign up here to get this newsletter in your inbox. More

    • 113 Shares179 Views

      in Elections

      Democrats Didn’t Conjure Up the Demand for MAGA Candidates

      by

      In my column this week, I tackled some of the major objections to President Biden’s Philadelphia speech on MAGA Republicans and the threat they pose to democracy, including the view that it was too divisive.Even if it was, most Americans land on Biden’s side of the argument — in a Reuters poll conducted just a few days after the speech, 58 percent of respondents, including a quarter of Republicans, said that Trump’s “Make America Great Again” movement is “threatening America’s democratic foundations.”What I didn’t address was the charge that Biden, and Democrats in general, are acting in bad faith when they condemn Trump and his allies. If Democrats truly believe that MAGA Republicans are a threat to democracy, goes the argument, why are they spending tens of millions of dollars to elevate them in Republican primaries? My colleagues Ross Douthat and Bret Stephens both made a version of this point in their respective columns this week.They are keyed into something real: that it is a bit unsavory, if not outright hypocritical, for Democrats to spend huge sums to help nominate MAGA Republicans at the expense of their more moderate, pro-democracy colleagues while condemning those same candidates, and the movement they represent, as a threat to the constitutional order.Where I part ways with my colleagues is in their conclusion that Democrats are therefore crying alligator tears when they condemn MAGA extremists. If the top priority is depriving the Republican Party of power and influence, then the most important thing for Democrats to do, right now, is win elections. And if the most Trump-aligned candidates tend to be the weakest challengers in a general election, then it is entirely consistent with the argument in Biden’s speech to want to elevate those candidates over more moderate alternatives.At the end of the day, a more moderate Republican in Congress is still a vote for Kevin McCarthy as speaker of the House or Mitch McConnell as Senate majority leader. It is still a vote, in other words, for a coalition that includes MAGA Republicans.I could leave it there, except that I think that this answer concedes too much to the premise. Implicit in the question is the factual claim that Democratic spending in Republican primaries is either responsible for — or a significant factor in — the success of MAGA candidates with Republican voters. Otherwise, why would Democrats spend the money and why would conservatives complain about the outcome?I think it is true that Democratic spending has had an effect. But I think the more significant reason that Republican voters keep nominating MAGA candidates is that Republican voters like MAGA candidates. All you have to do is look at the results of the Republican primaries in question and ask if Democratic money really mattered that much.Did Illinois Governor J.B. Pritzker, a Democrat, spend millions to give a boost to Darren Bailey, the Trumpiest candidate in the Republican gubernatorial primary? Yes. But Bailey led the Republican field before Pritzker’s intervention, swamping his opponents in an October 2021 poll. Democrats may have nudged some undecided voters into Bailey’s camp, but that alone does not explain how the hard-right Republican won more than 57 percent of the vote in a six-way primary. The more likely answer, given his early lead, is that Republican voters liked what Bailey was selling.The same goes for Doug Mastriano in Pennsylvania, the pro-insurrection Republican candidate for governor. Democrats gave him a boost as well. But he led the Republican pack for much of the race and his final tally — nearly 44 percent of the vote in an eight-way contest — reflects his very real popularity with Republican voters in the state.The other thing to consider is the actual content of Democratic ads on behalf of MAGA Republican candidates. The ad meant to support Mastriano, for example, simply stated his conservative views and emphasized his support for Trump. The ad said that Mastriano wanted to “outlaw abortion” and is “one of Donald Trump’s strongest supporters.” It also points out that Mastriano “wants to end vote by mail, and he led the fight to audit the 2020 election. If Mastriano wins, it’s a win for what Donald Trump stands for.”It is not the Democratic Party’s fault that Republicans are attracted to this message, and nothing forced Republicans in Pennsylvania or Illinois (or Michigan or Arizona) to nominate the most MAGA candidates in the field. Republicans voters like Trump and they want Trumpist candidates, and where there’s demand, supply usually follows.Which is to say that even with Democratic intervention in Republican primaries, the thrust of Biden’s story about the Republican Party still holds up. The party has been captured by extremists, and it’s up to the rest of us to ensure that it doesn’t win more power than it already has.What I WroteMy Friday column was on President Biden’s Philadelphia speech, why I think the objections to it are misguided, and what, if anything, was missing from his argument that the MAGA movement is a threat to American democracy.To divide against a radical minority that would attack and undermine democratic self-government is to divide along the most inclusive lines possible. It is to do a version of what Franklin Roosevelt did when he condemned“organized money,” “economic royalists” and the “forces of selfishness and lust for power.”And in the latest episode of my podcast with John Ganz, Unclear and Present Danger, we discussed the 1992 crime thriller “Deep Cover” with special guest Adam Serwer of The Atlantic.Now ReadingAdam Serwer on free speech for The Atlantic.Jerusalem Demsas on “Black flight” for The Atlantic.Blair McClendon on Jordan Peele’s “Nope” for Mubi.Andrew Elrod on Watergate for N+1 magazine.Rick Perlstein on the assault on public schools for The Forum.Keisha N. Blain on objectivity in history for The New Republic.Feedback If you’re enjoying what you’re reading, please consider recommending it to your friends. They can sign up here. If you want to share your thoughts on an item in this week’s newsletter or on the newsletter in general, please email me at jamelle-newsletter@nytimes.com. You can follow me on Twitter (@jbouie), Instagram and TikTok.Photo of the WeekJamelle BouieI went to a car show in nearby Culpepper, Va., and took a few photos. This was one of the better ones. I used Ilford black and white film and a Voigtlander 35mm lens.Now Eating: Farro Broccoli Bowl with Lemony TahiniI’ve been on a real grain salad kick — they’re easy to make for lunch — and this is the latest one. I have no real changes to make. I used more broccoli than the recipe called for and also added a bunch of cilantro. Personally, I would go heavy on the tahini, but I like tahini quite a bit. Your mileage may vary. Recipe comes from NYT Cooking.IngredientsKosher salt1½ cups farro, rinsed and drained4 large eggs, scrubbed under hot running water1 large head broccoli, cut into florets, tender stems sliced2 tablespoons extra-virgin olive oil1 teaspoon soy sauce, plus more for serving2 tablespoons toasted sesame oil1 tablespoon sesame seeds1 scallion, thinly slicedHot sauce or thinly sliced green chiles, for serving (optional)2½ tablespoons fresh lemon juice, plus more for serving1 garlic clove, finely grated or minced¼ teaspoon kosher salt, plus more as needed⅓ cup extra-virgin olive oil, plus more as needed3 tablespoons tahiniDirectionsBring a medium pot of salted water to a boil. Add farro and eggs. Cook eggs for 6 minutes for very runny centers and 7 minutes for medium-runny. Use a slotted spoon to transfer eggs to a bowl of cold water. Let them sit for 2 minutes, then crack and carefully peel the eggs.Continue to let the farro cook until done according to package directions, usually a total of 20 to 40 minutes. Drain farro.As farro cooks, prepare the dressing: In a medium bowl, whisk together lemon juice, garlic and ¼ teaspoon salt. Let sit for 1 minute, then whisk in oil, a few drops at a time, until emulsified. Whisk in tahini and set aside.Broil the broccoli: Position the rack underneath your broiler so that it’s at least 4 inches away from the heating element; heat the broiler.On a rimmed baking sheet, toss broccoli with olive oil and soy sauce, then spread the pieces out into an even layer. Broil until slightly charred in spots, 2 to 5 minutes, watching closely so that it doesn’t burn all over (a few burned spots are OK). Let cool slightly, then toss with sesame oil and sesame seeds and cover to keep warm. (You can also roast the broccoli at 450 degrees for 8 to 15 minutes instead of broiling.)Toss cooked farro with 5 to 6 tablespoons tahini dressing to taste, a large pinch of salt and a drizzle of olive oil. Taste, and add salt and olive oil if needed.To serve, divide farro across 4 serving bowls and drizzle with remaining dressing. Top with turnips, and sprinkle them lemon juice and salt. Add broccoli and egg to the bowl and garnish with sliced scallions and more sesame. Serve immediately, with soy sauce, hot sauce, and-or sliced chiles on the side if you like. More

    • 125 Shares179 Views

      in Elections

      In Orange County, House Race Tests What Asian Americans Want

      by

      WESTMINSTER, Calif. — Dozens of Vietnamese-speaking volunteers filled a community center on a recent Wednesday to phone bank for Representative Michelle Steel, Republican of California, a Korean American lawmaker whose campaign signs and fliers in Vietnamese and English lined the walls.A few neighborhoods down, Jay Chen, a Democrat and Navy reservist of Taiwanese descent who is challenging Ms. Steel, passed out fliers outside of Zippost, a shipping business that residents often use to send packages to relatives in Vietnam. Mr. Chen, donning a Navy hat, walked around the plaza with a Vietnamese-speaking volunteer in tow helping residents register to vote.Ms. Steel and Mr. Chen are vying to appeal to the Asian American voters who dominate the electorate in this slice of Orange County, making up a quarter of the voting population. Their race — one of only a few dozen competitive ones that could determine which party controls the House — is being watched closely for clues about what may move voters in this increasingly critical bloc.“The Asian vote can really give enough votes for a candidate to win,” said Mary Anne Foo, the executive director of the nonprofit Orange County Asian and Pacific Islander Community Alliance, a nonpartisan resource center. “What’s significant now is the number of Asian Americans running for office. Having representation is exciting.”Across the country, Asian American voters, who comprised 4 percent of the electorate in 2020, are the fastest-growing population of eligible voters. The Asian American Voter Survey found in July that nearly half of Asian Americans identified as Democrats, about a third as independents and about a fifth as Republicans. About two-thirds voted for Mr. Biden over Mr. Trump, surveys show.However, an analysis by The New York Times found that immigrant communities shifted to the right as they had a surge in voters in 2020. The Asian American Voter Survey found that older Asian voters tended to identify as independent or Republican at higher rates than those in younger generations. Vietnamese Americans, who make up a large proportion of Asian residents in Orange County, also leaned more to the right.Asian American voters dominate the electorate in this Orange County district.Jenna Schoenefeld for The New York TimesBoth candidates in the race have made tackling inflation the centerpiece of their campaigns, and both have also focused on safety amid an increase in reports of hate crimes against Asian Americans — themes that are top of mind for many Asian voters, according to analysts.Karthick Ramakrishnan, the founder of AAPI Data, which helps conduct the annual Asian American Voter Survey, said the economy and crime were top issues for respondents, which could give an advantage to Republicans. But health care has also been a major issue, he said, which could boost Democrats, who recently pushed through Congress sweeping climate, health and tax legislation that would lower prescription drug costs and subsidize health insurance, among other benefits.“The ethnicity of the candidate is a bit of a wash in terms of how much it will make a difference here, so it’ll be important to see the kind of appeals each of these candidates make,” Mr. Ramakrishnan said.The State of the 2022 Midterm ElectionsWith the primaries winding down, both parties are starting to shift their focus to the general election on Nov. 8.Abrams’s Struggles: Stacey Abrams has been trailing her Republican rival, Gov. Brian Kemp, alarming those who celebrated her as the master strategist behind Georgia’s Democratic shift.Battleground Pennsylvania: Few states feature as many high-stakes, competitive races as Pennsylvania, which has emerged as the nation’s center of political gravity.The Dobbs Decision’s Effect: Since the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade, the number of women signing up to vote has surged in some states and the once-clear signs of a Republican advantage are hard to see.How a G.O.P. Haul Vanished: Last year, the campaign arm of Senate Republicans was smashing fund-raising records. Now, most of the money is gone.Still, race has hung heavily over the contest, sometimes in ugly ways.Ms. Steel, who was born in South Korea and raised in Japan, has accused Mr. Chen of mocking her accent; he said at a campaign event in April that people need “an interpreter to figure out exactly what she’s saying.” Mr. Chen said in an interview that his comments were misconstrued and that he meant he did not understand her policies.In the campaign feud, he has accused Ms. Steel of “red-baiting” by painting him as sympathetic to China’s authoritarian government. An accusation of communist sympathies may be particularly resonant to the county’s many refugees who still have bitter memories of fleeing a communist regime.Mr. Chen, the Harvard-educated son of immigrants who is a member of the board of trustees of Mt. San Antonio Community College and owns a local real estate business, said he has tried to appeal to right-leaning voters with his military experience. He served stints in the Middle East and the Korean Peninsula with the Seventh Fleet, which helped evacuate refugees after the Vietnam War.“Whenever I mention that, it really resonates,” Mr. Chen said.Jay Chen, the Harvard-educated son of immigrants who owns a real estate business, is challenging Ms. Steel.Jenna Schoenefeld for The New York TimesMs. Steel became one of the first Korean American women to serve in Congress in 2020.Jenna Schoenefeld for The New York TimesMs. Steel, a former member of the county board of supervisors and a local business owner, is fighting to hold onto her seat in a changed political environment. She narrowly defeated Representative Harley Rouda, a Democrat, in 2020 in a district along the California Coast that leaned Republican, becoming one of the first three Korean American women to serve in Congress. But she was displaced by redistricting and opted to run in a new district that tilts slightly toward Democrats.Lance Trover, the communications director for Ms. Steel’s campaign, said in a statement that she was focused on standing up to China and lowering taxes.“Michelle is the campaign’s greatest asset because AAPI voters know and trust her,” Mr. Trover said in the statement, using the abbreviation for Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders. Ms. Steel declined to be interviewed.Orange County was once described by President Ronald Reagan as a place “where the good Republicans go before they die.” Its partisan bent has since shifted as a younger, more diverse population has moved from the Los Angeles metropolitan area seeking more affordable living. Now, Democrats outnumber Republicans in voter registration, and there is a sizable no-party preference voter bloc, according to the latest statistics from the county voter registrar.The pendulum swung for the first time in 2018, when Democrats swept into the House majority by flipping four seats in the area, giving Democrats control of all seven congressional seats in the county. It swung in the other direction in 2020, when Republicans reclaimed two seats in Orange County.But the shifts reshaping the area are lasting, and they reflect similar ones underway in suburban enclaves across the country, as immigrant communities relocate out of cities, said Christine Chen, the executive director of Asian and Pacific Islander American Vote, which helps conduct the Asian American Voter Survey.As immigrant communities around the country move from cities to the suburbs, the politics of those areas are shifting.Jenna Schoenefeld for The New York TimesThe same trend is underway in Virginia, a state that has leaned toward Democrats in recent years, and in Georgia, she said. Mr. Ramakrishnan added that districts in New Jersey and the suburbs of Houston and Dallas are experiencing a similar dynamic.“The Asian American population, in all of those instances, has increased so much that, really, elected officials have no choice but to make sure they engage and develop a relationship with the Asian American voters, because they’re coming out to vote,” said Ms. Chen, who is not related to the Democratic candidate challenging Ms. Steel.Asian Americans make up over a fifth of residents of Orange County, which is known for having the largest concentration of Vietnamese people outside of Vietnam, many of whom sought refuge in the region after the Vietnam War.The district encompasses Little Saigon, a stretch of Vietnamese-owned homes and businesses in the city of Westminster, which looks like most aging suburbs in Southern California: palm trees, stucco single-family homes and sun-bleached signs. Vietnamese and occasionally Korean and Chinese characters are predominantly featured on storefronts, and the political signage clogging up street corners feature mainly candidates with Asian surnames. Both campaigns and local organizations have been investing heavily on advertisements in Vietnamese.The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee announced in July that it planned to make a seven-figure investment to reach Asian voters in California, and the Republican National Committee has opened several Asian Pacific American community centers across the county, a multimillion-dollar investment aiming to recruit volunteers for voter outreach to support Republican candidates, with one of the first in Little Saigon.John Le, 57, a Vietnamese American Microsoft engineer from Lake Forest who described himself as a traditional Republican, said that, partisan politics aside, he was proud to be in a district with two Asian American candidates. He said he planned to vote for Ms. Steel.“It’s the American dream,” Mr. Le said. “We should be proud of these people who are giving back to the community. I will look at who will represent me the most.” More

    • 113 Shares129 Views

      in Elections

      4 Types of Voters We’re Watching in the Midterms

      by

      For our podcast The Run-Up, Astead Herndon and his team are talking with voters of all stripes. For many of them, frustration with politics is tied to their worries about democracy.Today’s newsletter is a guest piece from Astead Herndon, a reporter for The New York Times who is hosting our political podcast The Run-Up, which returned this week. Listen to the first episode here. You can follow The Run-Up on platforms including Apple, Spotify, Google, Stitcher and Amazon Music.Voters in both parties think the United States is heading in the wrong direction, public opinion surveys show — and, more alarming, large majorities of Americans believe democracy is in danger of collapse.The Run-Up, a political podcast that I host, explores how Democratic and Republican voters came to agree on that worry and how these midterm elections might break from the historical mold.For our first episode, we called dozens of voters who had participated in New York Times polling to talk about their concerns in greater detail. The conversations made clear that for many people, frustration with politics is tied to worries about democracy.Photo illustration: The New York Times; Photo: Samuel Corum for The New York TimesHere are four types of voters who could be pivotal in the midterms and from whom we’ll be hearing more on The Run-Up as November approaches:The skeptical Trump voter“The voting system is not secure, and I’m just having doubts as to whether or not it’ll make a difference if I vote at all.” — Belinda SchoendorfIn several nonpresidential elections since the 2020 contest between Joe Biden and President Donald Trump, a dip in enthusiasm from Trump’s voters has hurt Republican candidates. Most notably, in the two Senate elections that took place in Georgia before Biden’s inauguration, Republican voters failed to turn out in large numbers for their party’s candidates.Worries about election integrity, stoked by the false conspiracy theories Trump and his allies have embraced, have discouraged some of the most energized conservative voters from casting ballots or supporting candidates who do not reflect Trump’s wild claims. The result is a Republican quandary: a midterm landscape with candidates who reflect Trump’s grievances but have not motivated his voters to the same degree that he did.In this year’s midterm elections so far, Democratic energy has surged — in what appears to be a result of the Supreme Court’s decision to overturn Roe v. Wade. If Republicans are to turn their hopes around, they will need their most passionate voters to match Democrats’ newfound enthusiasm, even though Trump won’t be on the 2022 ballot himself.The court’s decision has scrambled the typical midterm circumstances, in which the party out of power enjoys the benefits of an energized voting base.The State of the 2022 Midterm ElectionsWith the primaries winding down, both parties are starting to shift their focus to the general election on Nov. 8.Battleground Pennsylvania: Few states feature as many high-stakes, competitive races as Pennsylvania, which has emerged as the nation’s center of political gravity.The Dobbs Decision’s Effect: Since the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade, the number of women signing up to vote has surged in some states and the once-clear signs of a Republican advantage are hard to see.How a G.O.P. Haul Vanished: Last year, the campaign arm of Senate Republicans was smashing fund-raising records. Now, most of the money is gone.Digital Pivot: At least 10 G.O.P. candidates in competitive races have updated their websites to minimize their ties to former President Donald J. Trump or to adjust their stances on abortion.The young voterBiden “isn’t taking the action that needs to be taken on things like health care, climate change, etc. And I don’t feel like he’s using the tools he could use if he wanted to, you know, make good on his campaign promises.” — Lucy Ackerman, 23Biden’s approval rating hit rock bottom this summer, to the point where even many Democratic voters expressed frustration with his administration.But in the past month, he has improved his historically low standing among voters by appearing to win back some of these same Democrats — those who believed that the president and his administration should do more for those who elevated him to power.This comes after the White House has notched a series of legislative victories in recent weeks — most notably a sweeping climate, tax and drug-pricing package that followed through on several campaign promises. Biden also moved to cancel billions of dollars in student debt for borrowers.However, the constituencies among whom student debt relief polls the best — particularly young people — do not always turn out in big numbers during midterm elections. Democrats are hoping that changes in November.Lucy Ackerman, 23, a recent college graduate, said she felt young people weren’t receiving an adequate return on their vote for Biden. The reasons extended beyond policy to a fear that Democrats weren’t doing enough to address problems she believed were distorting democracy, including gerrymandering, the Senate filibuster and the Electoral College.Will young voters reward Democrats for Biden’s major move on student debt? Or will it not be enough to change their traditional behavior, considering that the president, who served in Congress for nearly half a century, represents the political establishment to many of these voters?President Biden’s approval ratings have risen lately after dropping into the 30s.Erin Schaff/The New York TimesThe disillusioned Democrat“I think democracy is much more fragile than I thought.” — Ramiro MartinezIf Biden’s actions on student debt could energize young people, other policies would be more relevant to moderate Democrats.Beyond the climate and tax bill, Democratic candidates are promoting the party’s legislative accomplishments on gun control, infrastructure and coronavirus relief. The party has taken to promoting its ability to “deliver” in advertisements across the country, an acknowledgment that the midterms could be a judgment on their policy agenda.However, voter decisions aren’t made only on policy grounds. Ramiro Martinez, a Democrat who lives in Massachusetts, said that he appreciated Biden’s focus on Trump in the Democratic primary but that he had been disillusioned by the country’s direction since Biden’s inauguration. Recent Supreme Court decisions have rocked his faith in electoral politics, and he has also been frustrated with some cultural changes he sees in the Democratic Party.In fact, Ramiro framed his voting decision in those terms, balancing the threats to democracy he believes Republicans pose with frustrations he has with a Democratic Party that has — in his words — become “woke,” embracing ideas on race and social justice that he felt were rigid and uncompromising.Still, Ramiro said he expected to back Democratic candidates, particularly after watching the Jan. 6 committee hearings in the House of Representatives. Democrats are hoping that moderate liberals across the country make a similar calculation.The non-MAGA Republican“I tended to support Trump for a long time. But he’s just, he has gone too far negative.” — Clair CowdenThe most important demographic in the midterms could be the moderate Republican voter.Although Trump has continued to dominate the Republican Party, whose base reflects his interests and grievances, some G.O.P. voters have tired of his constant headlines. Need proof? Trump’s favorability rating has dipped among Republicans — and potential rivals for the 2024 Republican presidential nomination, notably Gov. Ron DeSantis of Florida, have started to emerge.Clair Cowden, who once voted for Trump, said she had been turned off by what she learned during the Jan. 6 committee hearings about his actions.Biden and other Democrats have bet their electoral hopes in part on moderate attrition from the Republican Party. In races for Senate and governor — particularly in states with Trump-like candidates on the ballot, such as Arizona, Ohio and Wisconsin — Democrats have asked moderate Republicans to put ideological differences aside in the name of preserving democracy.However, as issues like inflation and the economy continue to dominate voters’ lists of concerns, the question for Democrats is one of urgency. Will voters see protecting democracy to be as pressing a political challenge as Biden does? Or will other issues — where Democrats poll worse — take greater precedence?We’ll be listening to their answers. For today’s, tune in here.What to readIn one of the nation’s most prominent governor’s races, Democrats in Georgia are increasingly worried about Stacey Abrams’s chances of beating Gov. Brian Kemp as she consistently trails him in polls. Maya King and Reid Epstein dove in.A review by The New York Times of about 400 voting-fraud charges filed nationwide since 2017 underscores that actual prosecutions are exceedingly rare, and that penalties can be wildly inconsistent and are often harsher for poor and Black people. Michael Wines has the details.Election officials are beefing up security for themselves, their employees, polling places and even drop boxes as violent language from the right intensifies. Neil Vigdor surveys the protective steps.Thank you for reading On Politics, and for being a subscriber to The New York Times. — BlakeRead past editions of the newsletter here.If you’re enjoying what you’re reading, please consider recommending it to others. They can sign up here. Browse all of our subscriber-only newsletters here.Have feedback? Ideas for coverage? We’d love to hear from you. Email us at onpolitics@nytimes.com. More

    • 188 Shares159 Views

      in Elections

      Is the Democratic Midterm Surge Overrated? Why Republicans Can Still Win the House and Senate.

      by

      Ross Douthat, a Times Opinion columnist, hosted an online conversation with Kristen Soltis Anderson, a Republican pollster, and the conservative writer and radio host Erick Erickson, to discuss whether Republicans are blowing the fall campaign — or whether a red wave is still possible.Ross Douthat: Kristen, Erick, thanks so much for joining me. Let’s start with the big picture. From early 2022 through the middle of the summer, Republicans consistently led the generic ballot for Congress, by around two and a half points. Today, the same generic ballot is either tied or gives Democrats a slight edge. Kristen, what changed?Kristen Soltis Anderson: The biggest thing that I’ve seen shift is enthusiasm on the Democratic side. During the winter and spring, Republicans had an advantage when voters were asked how motivated they were to vote. Key parts of the Democratic coalition were just not as tuned in or interested in participating.That’s a relatively normal dynamic in a midterm year, but the last two or three months have seen Democrats close that enthusiasm gap.Erick Erickson: I underappreciated how much the Dobbs decision would play a role in that.But the RealClearPolitics polling averages go back about two decades. For midterm elections where Republicans have done well, at this time of year, the polling has narrowed. Tom Bevan of RealClearPolitics had a good piece on it last week. I actually told my radio listeners that we should expect a tying of the generic ballot in August, and here it is. I would wait to really assess the direction of the race until late September.Douthat: If we assume Dobbs has boosted Democratic enthusiasm, Kristen, how heavily should we weight that effect relative to, say, falling gas prices?Anderson: The Dobbs decision was the big turning point. It has been less about changing voters’ minds from Republican to Democratic and more about activating voters who might have been tuned out and less engaged. It has also given Democrats a message to run on that changes the topic from inflation and gas prices. I still see the economy as a huge driver of this midterm, which is why I still think at this point Republicans are in an OK position. But there’s a reason Democratic candidates have been running ads about abortion.Douthat: Erick, you just said you might have underestimated the Dobbs effect. Do you think G.O.P. politicians were actually prepared to have abortion back in democratic debate?Erickson: I have been more than a bit perplexed at the G.O.P.’s surprise over the Dobbs decision, considering it leaked weeks before it was official. They had time to prepare for it and find some common ground and never seemed to get on the same page. By not being prepared, they allowed more aggressive voices on the issue to spook voters. When you have loud voices in the G.O.P. start talking about making abortion a criminal offense after Dobbs, that tends to spook people.Still, I do continue to think the economy is going to be disproportionately at play in the election. As Kristen said, more Democrats will turn out than otherwise would have pre-Dobbs, but the G.O.P. should be OK if the party focuses on the economy and inflation.Douthat: Well, unless inflation continues to diminish, right? It seems like Republicans have pushed a lot of chips onto that issue. Do you both think the G.O.P. needs a highly inflationary economy or a potential recession to win Congress this fall?Anderson: I’m certainly not rooting for a bad economy. But there is typically a link between people’s perceptions of the economy and their willingness to stick with the party in power. It is worth noting that inflation and rising gas prices were an issue where even Democrats were expressing concerns before Dobbs. Republicans rightly saw it as an issue on which their party had two key things going for them: Independents thought it was a top issue, and voters trusted Republicans more on it.Erickson: We are not going to see deflation, so reduced inflation is still inflation.Anderson: It’s also worth noting that even though the chatter in Washington seems to be that inflation is fading fast as an issue for voters, I’m not necessarily buying that that’s the case.Erickson: Yeah, as a dad who does a lot of the grocery shopping and cooking, milk and meat are still expensive, even if not as expensive as they were a few months ago, and wage increases for Americans have not offset the costs of many consumer goods.Douthat: Have Republicans focused too much on the economy at the expense of other issues that might have worked for them — crime, immigration, even education?Anderson: Crime and immigration are areas where Republicans have an advantage with voters, but those issues just haven’t been as salient with them.Erickson: Republicans have a comprehensive story to tell about the deterioration of the quality of life in America.Douthat: Let’s talk about the candidates who are trying to tell that story. Erick, you’re in Georgia, where Herschel Walker is the G.O.P. nominee for Senate and not exactly impressing on the campaign trail. Popular Republican governors in swing states passed up Senate races, presumably because they didn’t want to deal with the demands of Trumpism, and now you’ve got G.O.P. candidates trailing in the polls everywhere from Arizona to Pennsylvania to Wisconsin.How bad is the candidate problem, and can a Walker or a Dr. Oz still win?Erickson: I’ll take the last part first. The G.O.P. has managed to nominate some clunkers of candidates. But yes, Republicans can still win. This is actually why I am a bit hesitant now to embrace the national narrative of this election.Walker is a flawed candidate, but the national narrative has the race worse than it actually is. Walker has actually been ahead in some recent polls. The Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee chair recently mentioned races he expected to do well in, and Georgia was not on the list. On the ground in Georgia, Walker has retooled his campaign, brought in new people, and the crowds are growing as his air war likely intensifies.Oz and Blake Masters are not great. But the political environment can get some of these flawed candidates elected. Remember, in 1980, a bunch of Republicans got elected as “accidental” senators; they were swept into office by Ronald Reagan’s landslide victory and because the national mood was so dour. Also, it is worth noting that in 2020, the G.O.P. exceeded expectations, and pollsters still do not have good answers for why they missed that. We could be experiencing part of that again.Douthat: Let me pitch that point to you, Kristen: Not only Republicans but a lot of liberals are very hesitant to trust polls showing big Democratic advantages in Senate races, especially in Midwestern states, given the record Erick mentions. How doubtful should we be about polling in this cycle?Anderson: I’m far from a poll truther or unskewer or what have you. But I am keenly aware of the ways in which public polling can miss the mark. And it is notable that in some of the last few election cycles, we’ve had public polls that told a very rosy story about Democratic Senate candidates that did not pan out and lost to incumbent Republicans. Lindsey Graham and Susan Collins, anyone? I’m also thinking of 2018, where states like Indiana and Missouri were considered tossup or close races in a blue-wave year and yet Republicans won.At the same time, those 2018 examples show that it is possible for candidates to outperform expectations even in the face of a wave that is supposed to be crashing the other direction.Douthat: Do you think the polling industry has substantially adjusted since 2020? Are the polls we’re seeing of, say, Pennsylvania or Wisconsin more trustworthy than past polling, in your view?Anderson: I’ll use a recent example to highlight my concerns. In Florida we just had a big primary election, and one of the major polls that got released before the primary showed in the governor’s race, the more progressive candidate, Agriculture Commissioner Nikki Fried, ahead of the more centrist Democrat and former Republican, Charlie Crist. The poll was very transparent in its methodology, but the underlying data had a large number of college-educated voters. Even if you do the appropriate things with data weighting, that underlying data is skewing quite progressive. Crist actually defeated Fried by a wide margin.I don’t say this to criticize those pollsters, as they were transparent about their data, but if Democrats are extra fired up to vote right now, there’s a chance they’re also extra fired up to take polls.Douthat: But we do have a few actual results, from the abortion referendum in Kansas to the recent special election in New York, where liberal causes and Democratic candidates have done well in real voting, not just in polls.How much do you read into those kinds of election results?Anderson: The Kansas result was a wake-up call for Republicans. It showed Democrats making real strides in speaking to voters in the center about abortion using language those voters might use and tapping into values those centrist voters might hold. But I’m reluctant to say that special election results are transferable to other races in other states on other issues.Erickson: I’m doubtful we can really extrapolate Kansas to the rest of the nation.Douthat: Erick, let’s talk about Donald Trump, because the other big change from the summer is that the former president is back in the headlines. Assuming, as seems likely, that the classified-documents scandal is somewhat frozen from here till Election Day, how long a shadow does Trump cast over the midterms?Erickson: Democrats have said for some time they wanted Trump to be an aspect of their 2022 argument. He, of course, wants to be part of it as well. Republicans have been terrible about taking the bait and talking about Trump. To the extent the G.O.P. is willing to ignore their reflexive “stand by your man” impulse and instead focus on the economy, education, crime, etc., they can move past his shadow quickly.I’m just not optimistic Republicans can do that, given their prior behavior on the matter.Douthat: And Kristen, as Erick says, from the Democratic side and especially the Biden White House, there seems to be a clear desire to make the midterms about Trumpism. That didn’t work particularly well for Terry McAuliffe in the Virginia governor’s race last year. Is it a better strategy now?Anderson: In a midterm, the party out of power always wants it to be a referendum, while the party in power wants it to be a choice.The problem with Trump becoming more in the news is that it helps Democrats try to make it a choice. It gives them a prominent foil. But simply saying, “Don’t vote for candidate X because of Trump” isn’t foolproof.Douthat: If a bunch of Trump-picked candidates lose their Senate or governor races, does it weaken him for 2024 at all?Erickson: I have resigned myself to Trump’s core supporters insisting the G.O.P. establishment undermined those candidates in order to stop Trump and the only way to chart a better course is to double down on Trump. They will blame Mitch McConnell and others before Trump gets blame.Anderson: It is notable that when my firm asked Republican voters if they thought Trump was helping or hurting Republican candidates in the midterms, 61 percent said he was helping, and only 27 percent said hurting. This was from a survey we did in August.Even among Republicans who don’t think of themselves as “Trump first,” putting him before their party, a majority view him as helping. Granted, some of this may be Republican respondents circling the wagons in response to the question. But I doubt a poor showing in the midterms will lead to blaming Trump.Erickson: If Democrats really do want Trump to go away, they should just ignore him. Before the F.B.I. going to Mar-a-Lago, Republicans were doing their slow walk away from Trump. I somewhat suspect Democrats really want to keep Trump’s position in the G.O.P. elevated because independent voters just do not seem to care for the guy, and that gives Democrats an edge while making a 2024 Republican primary messy.The bigger issue for Trump is major donor support. Those people will see a need to move on. Trump will be less able to rely on larger dollar donors to build out 2024 than he did in 2020, though he won’t need them as much, since he can raise a lot from small-dollar donors. If they, however, consolidated behind someone else, it could cause problems for Trump.Douthat: OK, time to ask for predictions. Out of the competitive Senate races where G.O.P. candidates are seen as struggling or the race is just close — let’s say Arizona, Georgia, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin and Nevada, because I think J.D. Vance will win Ohio — which ones do you think are the most likely G.O.P. wins, and which the most likely Democratic victories?Erickson: The G.O.P. takes Georgia. The Democrats take Pennsylvania and hold Arizona. The G.O.P. takes Nevada. I continue to think Ron Johnson wins his re-election in Wisconsin, too. I agree on Vance and think the national narrative there is out of sync with Ohio voters, who’ve moved more Republican.Anderson: I have the same choices as Erick: Republicans taking Georgia and Democrats taking Pennsylvania. That’s not to say I think those are rock solid, and the Pennsylvania race is just strange in general.Douthat: And if the economy worsens and the possibility of a red wave returns, what could be the most unexpected G.O.P. pickup?Anderson: I keep hearing buzz around this Washington Senate race. Republicans are very happy with their candidate there, Tiffany Smiley, who is a former triage nurse. A female candidate with a health care background could be powerful in this cycle.Erickson: I would keep my eye on the Colorado Senate race and the Oregon gubernatorial race. Also, New Hampshire remains in play, though the G.O.P. needs to settle on a candidate.Douthat: Final predictions — give me House and Senate numbers for Republicans.Erickson: I’m going with 51 in the Senate and 235 in the House.Anderson: I’ll say 230 seats in the House and 51 in the Senate. But I would also like to note that we are two months away.Douthat: Your sensible humility is duly noted, Kristen. Thanks to you both for a terrific discussion.Ross Douthat is a Times columnist. Kristen Soltis Anderson, the author of “The Selfie Vote,” is a Republican pollster and a co-founder of the polling firm Echelon Insights. Erick Erickson, the host of the “Erick Erickson Show,” writes the newsletter Confessions of a Political Junkie.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

    • 113 Shares129 Views

      in Elections

      The Run-Up: The Stakes of the 2022 Midterm Elections

      by

      Listen and follow ‘The Run-Up’Apple Podcasts | Spotify | Stitcher | Amazon Music“I’m worried that democracy is being eroded.”“The voting system is not secure.”“It’s like the land of no more moderates.”“There’s nothing in this country here really gives me hope.”As voters are feeling a new level of political disconnect, Astead Herndon asks how we got here and lays out the stakes of the 2022 midterm elections.Photo illustration: The New York Times; Photo: Samuel Corum for The New York TimesAbout ‘The Run-Up’First launched in August 2016, three months before the election of Donald Trump, “The Run-Up” is back.Through conversations with colleagues, newsmakers and voters across the country, our host, Astead Herndon, will grapple with the big ideas animating the 2022 midterm election cycle — and explore how we got to this fraught moment in American politics.“The Run-Up” is hosted by More