More stories

  • in

    Trump mantiene ventaja en Arizona y Harris en Pensilvania, según una encuesta

    Las últimas encuestas del Times/Inquirer/Siena sitúan a Donald Trump con seis puntos de ventaja en Arizona y a Kamala Harris con cuatro puntos en Pensilvania.[Estamos en WhatsApp. Empieza a seguirnos ahora]Dos de los estados más disputados del país —Pennsylvania y Arizona— ilustran las dificultades a las que se enfrentan ambas campañas para obtener una clara ventaja en la recta final de la contienda para 2024, en la que Kamala Harris mantiene una estrecha ventaja en Pensilvania, pero Donald Trump sigue manteniendo una ventaja en Arizona, según un nuevo par de encuestas del New York Times/Philadelphia Inquirer/Siena College.Las encuestas, realizadas en dos estados separados por más de 3000 kilómetros, muestran el reto al que se enfrentan ambos partidos al intentar cerrar sus campañas ante un conjunto diverso de votantes que, en ocasiones, tienen prioridades contrapuestas.Tanto en Arizona como en Pensilvania, Harris ha consolidado el apoyo entre los demócratas desde que sustituyó al presidente Biden como candidata del partido. Pero la fuerza de Trump sigue siendo la economía, el tema principal responsable de su potencia política en Arizona y otros estados disputados este año.En Pensilvania, la ventaja de Harris en las encuestas ha sido constante, aunque el estado sigue siendo reñido. Su ventaja, 50 por ciento a 47 por ciento, entra dentro del margen de error. Pero esta es la tercera encuesta Times/Siena en dos meses que muestra el apoyo a Harris de al menos la mitad del estado. (Su ventaja en la encuesta fue de cuatro puntos porcentuales si se calculan sin redondear las cifras).Lo que impulsa a Harris en el estado es su ventaja de casi 20 puntos porcentuales en lo que se refiere al aborto, su mejor tema en los estados disputados y la segunda preocupación más importante para los votantes de Pensilvania.How the polls compare More

  • in

    Trump Hits Coachella, Campaigning Once Again in a Blue State

    Both presidential campaigns agree that seven swing states are likely to determine the outcome of this year’s election. California, which has not voted for a Republican in a presidential race since 1988, is not one of them.But that did not prevent former President Donald J. Trump from heading there anyway on Saturday evening to hold a rally in Coachella, which is better known for its annual music festival with headliners like Lana Del Rey and Bad Bunny than it is for being a stop on a presidential campaign trail.It was an unusual choice 24 days before the election. In 2020, Mr. Trump lost the state by more than five million votes to President Biden. Four years earlier, Mr. Trump lost the state to Hillary Clinton, who got more than 60 percent of the vote. The last Republican to win the state was George H.W. Bush.Although Mr. Trump is not expected to be competitive in California, the rally showed that he could turn out a crowd. Throngs of people at Calhoun Ranch, where it was held, braved the desert sun and temperatures that hovered near 100 degrees, with several attendees requiring medical attention for heat-related illnesses.“I want to give a special hello to Coachella,” Mr. Trump told the crowd, before putting on a red Make America Great Again cap for protection from the desert sun.Mr. Trump then spoke for about 80 minutes in a rambling speech. He criticized California, Vice President Kamala Harris’s home state, as an incubator of failed liberal policies; disparaged the physical appearance of Representative Adam Schiff, who led the first impeachment trial of him and is now running for Senate; used a crude nickname to refer to the state’s governor, Gavin Newsom; and took a number of detours to praise the billionaire Elon Musk and to criticize President Biden.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    On the Trail, Vance Is Dogged by Questions About Trump’s Loss in 2020

    Senator JD Vance of Ohio, who has faced renewed questions about the 2020 election since refusing at the vice-presidential debate this month to acknowledge that former President Donald J. Trump lost, falsely suggested on Saturday that the election had been “rigged.”“I think the election of 2020 had serious problems,” Mr. Vance said at a campaign event in Johnstown, Pa. “You want to call it rigged. Call it whatever you want to, it wasn’t OK.”Mr. Vance was asked five times in an interview with The New York Times this week whether Mr. Trump lost the 2020 election, and he declined to answer each time. Taking questions from reporters at a rally at a factory for military vehicles in Johnstown, Mr. Vance again refused to acknowledge his running mate’s defeat and downplayed the severity of the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol even as he condemned it.“Yes, there was a riot at the Capitol on Jan. 6, but there was still a peaceful transfer of power in this country,” Mr. Vance said, describing the rioters as “a few knuckleheads who went off and did something they shouldn’t do.” The rioters, hundreds of whom were convicted of crimes in connection to the attack, had interrupted the certification of Joseph R. Biden Jr.’s victory as they stormed the Capitol that day.Johnstown, which has a storied history in the Pennsylvania steel industry, is in an overwhelmingly Republican county east of Pittsburgh that Mr. Trump won by 38 points in 2020. Some members of the audience at the event, filling roughly half the seats in the venue, stood up in their chairs and booed reporters as they asked questions about the 2020 election and the Jan. 6 riot.Mr. Vance repeated his assertion that censorship by tech companies had hurt Mr. Trump in 2020. And he chided the press for asking him about that election, saying that he had not been asked one question about inflation or the economy.“I’m a hell of a lot more worried that American citizens can’t afford a good life in their country,” Vance said, “because Kamala Harris has been the vice president, and that is what I’m trying to change.” The audience of Trump supporters gave Mr. Vance a standing ovation, and broke out into chants of: “JD.”Later, after Mr. Vance departed Johnstown for a town-hall event in a packed airport hangar in Reading, Pa., Mr. Vance said that the attorney general would be the most important job in a second Trump administration. He vowed to “clean house” at the F.B.I. and the Justice Department, and to fire those people who were responsible for Mr. Trump’s first impeachment, which he characterized as “fake.”“Here’s what President Trump and I are going to do when we get in there: We’re going to fire the people responsible,” Mr. Vance said to raucous applause. More

  • in

    Letters in Song Lyrics and Poetry

    These are some of our favorites from among more than 800 submissions in response to our request for variations on traditional letters.Elections of Yore(to the tune of “Yesterday”)Yesterday, politics was just a game we’d playNow hostility is here to stayOh, I believe in yesterdaySuddenly, there’s an absence of civilityThere’s no common ground that I can seeOh, yesterday came suddenlyWhy we disagreeI don’t know, it’s hard to sayWe’re so far apartNow I long for yesterdayYesterday, bipartisan was just how we’d playNow consensus just has gone awayOh, I believe in yesterdayWhy things are so wrongI don’t know, I’m sad to sayAll my hope is goneMy heart longs for yesterdayYesterday, I looked forward to Election DayNow the discord takes my joy awayOh, I believe in yesterdayBill ArchibaldArlington, Va.Trump’s Campaign Love Song to AmericaWe are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    A Mystery Repeats: Harris Up 4 in Pennsylvania, and Trump Up 6 in Arizona

    Being uncertain about our earlier poll results but finding almost the same numbers the next time around.A recent rally for Kamala Harris in Pittsburgh. Maddie McGarvey for The New York TimesAt the end of our last wave of post-debate battleground polls, there were two state poll results that didn’t seem to fit the rest.One was Pennsylvania: Kamala Harris led by four percentage points, making it her best result in the battlegrounds. It was our only state poll conducted immediately after the debate, when her supporters might have been especially excited to respond to a poll.The other was Arizona: Donald J. Trump led by five points, making it his best result among the battlegrounds. Even stranger, it was a huge swing from our previous poll of the state, which Vice President Harris had led by five points.In both cases, it seemed possible that another New York Times/Philadelphia Inquirer/Siena College poll would yield a significantly different result. With that in mind, we decided to take an additional measure of Arizona and Pennsylvania before our final polls at the end of the month.The result? Essentially the same as our prior polls.Ms. Harris leads by four points in Pennsylvania, just as she did immediately after the final debate.Mr. Trump leads by six points in Arizona, about the same as the five-point lead he held three weeks ago.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    Where Is the Fierce Urgency of Beating Trump?

    Barack Obama got blunt in Pittsburgh on Thursday. He chided Black men who are not supporting Kamala Harris, saying that some of “the brothers” were just not “feeling the idea of having a woman as president.”That left me mulling again: Is Harris in a dead-even race against a ridiculous person because of her sex or is that just an excuse?Hillary Clinton did not lose because she was a woman. She lost because she was Hillary Clinton. She didn’t campaign hard enough, skipping Wisconsin and barely visiting Michigan. She got discombobulated about gender and whinged about sexism.I asked James Carville if Kamala’s problem is that too many Americans are still chary about voting for a woman, much less a woman of color. The Ragin’ Cajun chided me.“We’re not going to change her gender or her ethnic background between now and Election Day, so let’s not worry about it,” he said. “Time is short, really short. They need to be more aggressive. They don’t strike me as having any kind of a killer instinct. They let one fat pitch after another go by. I’m scared to death. They have to hit hard — pronto.”Her campaign, he said dryly, “is still in Wilmington.”Kamala spent a week answering questions on “60 Minutes” and “The View” and on the shows of Stephen Colbert and Howard Stern. And she didn’t move the needle.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    This Election Will Need More Heroes

    True political courage — the principled stand, the elevation of country over party pressure, the willingness to sacrifice a career to protect the common good — has become painfully rare in a polarized world. It deserves to be celebrated and nurtured whenever it appears, especially in defense of fundamental American institutions like our election system. The sad truth, too, is the country will probably need a lot more of it in the coming months.In state after state, Republicans have systematically made it harder for citizens to vote, and harder for the election workers who count those votes to do so. They are challenging thousands of voter registrations in Democratic areas, forcing administrators to manually restore perfectly legitimate voters to the rolls. They are aggressively threatening election officials who defended the 2020 election against manipulation. They are trying to invalidate mail-in ballots that arrive after Election Day, even if they meet the legal requirements of a postmark before the deadline. They are making it more difficult to certify election results, and even trying to change how states apportion their electors, in hopes of making it easier for Donald Trump to win or even help him overturn an election loss.Though many of these moves happened behind closed doors, this campaign is hardly secret. And last month, Mr. Trump directly threatened to prosecute and imprison election officials around the country who disagree with his lies.Against this kind of systematic assault on the institutions and processes that undergird American democracy, the single most important backstop are the public servants, elected and volunteer, who continue to do their jobs.Consider Mike McDonnell, a Republican state senator from Nebraska, who showed how it’s done when he announced last month that he would not bow to an intense, last-minute pressure campaign by his party’s national leaders, including former President Trump, to help slip an additional electoral vote into Mr. Trump’s column.Currently, Nebraska awards most of its electors by congressional district, and while most of the state is safely conservative, polling shows Vice President Kamala Harris poised to win the elector from the Second Congressional District, which includes the state’s biggest city, Omaha. In the razor-thin margins of the 2024 election, this could be the vote that determines the outcome. That was the intent of Republican lawmakers in Nebraska, who waited until it was too late for Democrats in Maine, which has a similar system, to change the state’s rules to prevent one congressional district from choosing a Republican elector.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    What if Trump Wins Like This?

    If Donald Trump wins, the people who voted for him would have a range of reasons for putting him in office. There are a lot of potential Trump voters who don’t like him that much, or who really like only parts of his personality or platform and tolerate the rest.There are probably also those who have their own understanding of what they’re getting, possibly rooted in the way they felt about the Trump administration or feel about the Biden one. Some of this could be summarized by how Brian Kemp, the Georgia governor, pitched it recently: “Look, you may not like Donald Trump personally, but you’ll like his policies a lot better than Kamala Harris’s. It’s a business decision.”But how Mr. Trump understands that decision could be different. If he wins like this, how it’s been, how grim he’s taken things across the last two years but especially lately, his explanation for the victory — and the consequences of that reasoning — might be different and darker than even many of the people who voted for him wanted.The way he’s talked about towns like Springfield, Ohio, and the Haitians who officials have said are there legally to work resembles deeply the rhythms of the 2016 campaign: grim conflation of real and fake problems, real people caught up in the gears of awful scrutiny and abuse, the building pressure on politicians and people often in very normal and modest circumstances, and Mr. Trump weaving everything into a fable to prove that he was right.In his campaign speeches, intermixed with the jokes and riffs, Mr. Trump often talks about political retribution, the threat of World War III, the ruin that the country’s become. In just one speech, he talked about how he would “liberate” Wisconsin from an “invasion of murderers, rapists, hoodlums, drug dealers, thugs and vicious gang members,” and about how immigrant gangs had “occupied” “hundreds” of towns and cities across the Midwest, leaving law enforcement “petrified.”Mr. Trump seems to have twisted the reason that programs like Temporary Protected Status and humanitarian parole exist — for instance, Haiti has been deemed too unstable and dangerous to return to — into a reason for the programs not to exist. “So we have travel warnings,” he said. “‘Don’t go here, don’t go there, don’t go to the various countries’ and yet she’s taking in the worst of those people, the killers, the jailbirds, all of the worst of the people, she’s taking them in.”We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More