Presidential Election of 2024

Subterms

    More stories

    • 138 Shares119 Views

      in Elections

      Tim Walz Calls for Abolishing the Electoral College, Going Beyond Harris

      by

      Gov. Tim Walz of Minnesota on Tuesday called for abolishing the Electoral College as a means of electing American presidents, reiterating a position he has articulated in the past while he and Vice President Kamala Harris are in the heat of a campaign for the White House.Twice during campaign fund-raisers on the West Coast, Mr. Walz said he would prefer that presidential candidates did not have to focus on a few political battlegrounds and could instead focus on winning votes from across the country.“I think all of us know, the Electoral College needs to go. We need a, we need a national popular vote,” Mr. Walz told donors at the Sacramento home of Gov. Gavin Newsom of California. “So we need to win Beaver County, Pa. We need to be able to go into York, Pa., and win. We need to be in western Wisconsin and win. We need to be in Reno, Nev., and win.”Abolishing the Electoral College is generally a popular position with voters but is something that would either require a constitutional amendment or more states agreeing to award their electoral votes to the winner of the national popular vote.Mr. Walz’s support of the position — in deep-blue West Coast states no less — with less than a month before Election Day risks rocking the boat for the Harris campaign as it tries to deliver a message focused on economic concerns, abortion rights and the threat of former President Donald J. Trump.Teddy Tschann, a spokesman for Mr. Walz, said that Ms. Harris’s campaign did not support abolishing the Electoral College.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

    • 138 Shares99 Views

      in Elections

      Una nueva encuesta muestra a Harris en ascenso frente a Trump

      by

      Un sondeo nacional de Times/Siena revela que Kamala Harris aventaja ligeramente a Donald Trump. Los votantes son más propensos a verla a ella, no a Trump, como una ruptura con el statu quo.Los votantes son ahora más propensos a considerar a la vicepresidenta Kamala Harris que a Donald Trump como representante del cambio y candidata preocupada por la gente como ellos, cuando Harris lleva una ligera ventaja a nivel nacional en la contienda por la Casa Blanca, según la más reciente encuesta del New York Times/Siena College.Es la primera vez que Harris aventaja a Trump en la encuesta del Times/Siena desde julio, cuando el presidente Joe Biden abandonó la disputa y los demócratas se unieron en torno a Harris como su sustituta. Se produce cuando la contienda entra en su último mes, y las encuestas de los estados disputados consideran que las elecciones son unas de las más reñidas de la historia moderna.Aunque la encuesta del Times/Siena muestra algunas ventajas sólidas para Trump, los resultados sugieren que Harris está ganando terreno, aunque sea poco, en cuestiones como el temperamento, la confianza y el cambio, que pueden ser críticas en una carrera presidencial.El sondeo, realizado entre el 29 de septiembre y el 6 de octubre entre 3385 posibles votantes, reveló que Harris aventajaba al republicano Trump en un 49 por ciento frente a un 46 por ciento, una ligera ventaja que está dentro del margen de error del sondeo.[Times/Siena polls also found Trump leading in Texas and up by a wide margin in Florida. The Florida poll helps clarify what’s happening in the race, Nate Cohn writes.]How the Times/Siena poll compares More

    • 163 Shares139 Views

      in Elections

      Will Trump Get Jail Time? We Looked at Similar Cases to Find Out.

      by

      Donald J. Trump faces sentencing on Nov. 26. The election three weeks earlier may determine not only if he returns to the presidency, but if he ends up behind bars.In November, after voters decide whether to return Donald J. Trump to the White House, the judge who oversaw his criminal trial could send him to jail.And despite Mr. Trump’s political status, the judge has ample grounds to do so, a New York Times examination of dozens of similar cases shows.The former president’s unruly behavior at the trial, held in New York in April and May, makes him a candidate for jail time, as does his felony crime of falsifying business records: Over the past decade in Manhattan, more than a third of these convictions resulted in defendants spending time behind bars, The Times’s examination found. Across New York State, the proportion is even higher — about 42 percent of those convictions led to jail or prison time. More

    • 125 Shares189 Views

      in Elections

      Trump Sees Antisemitism in Only One Direction: On the Left

      by

      Former President Donald J. Trump on Monday blamed Democrats for antisemitism at an event commemorating the Oct. 7 Hamas terrorist attack on Israel, then claimed there was no antisemitism in the ranks of the Republican Party, even as his own endorsed candidate for governor in North Carolina is at the center of a scandal involving antisemitic remarks.Mr. Trump’s comments, delivered to more than 100 invited guests at his private resort in Doral, Fla., were softer than past speeches addressing the conflict in the Middle East. He shied away from direct attacks against his political opponents or from insulting Jews who support them, instead taking swipes at the Biden administration in an address that veered between solemn memorial and political rally.Before Mr. Trump’s remarks, a rabbi led a ceremony in which a number of Jewish leaders and elected officials lit memorial candles and delivered remarks to honor the more than 1,200 people killed when Hamas attacked Israel last year. Event organizers left a section of chairs empty on either side of the stage with photos of hostages who remain in Gaza, a statement about their continued captivity.But the energy changed with Mr. Trump’s arrival. He stood basking in applause and gave a small shuffling dance as “God Bless the U.S.A.,” his typical entrance music, played. He opened his remarks by talking about the hurricane approaching Florida, then indirectly criticized the Biden administration’s response to Hurricane Helene.Mr. Trump then decried the Oct. 7 attack. He vowed to back Israel’s right to defend itself, once again insisting that Israel had to finish its war quickly, and he called for the United States to play a stronger role in bringing about the end of conflict in the Middle East. “You have no idea the role that the United States has to play in order to get that ball over the goal line,” he said.Mr. Trump did not blame the Biden administration for the Mideast conflict. But as he blamed “the leadership of this country” for a rise in antisemitism — ignoring the rise in reported antisemitic acts during his presidency — someone in the crowd called out “what leadership?”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

    • 88 Shares99 Views

      in Elections

      Kamala Harris’s ’60 Minutes’ Interview: Seven Takeaways

      by

      Vice President Kamala Harris sat for an interview with “60 Minutes” that was broadcast on Monday night and, in a departure from some of her recent appearances on cable news and podcasts, she was repeatedly pressed on questions she did not initially answer.During a sit-down with the show’s correspondent Bill Whitaker, Ms. Harris did not reveal new domestic policy proposals or share how she would pay for some of those she has already put forward. But she did expound on her views about two foreign leaders causing enormous headaches for President Biden’s administration: Benjamin Netanyahu, the Israeli prime minister, and Vladimir V. Putin, the Russian president.Less than a month before Election Day, Ms. Harris’s interview with CBS’s “60 Minutes” — the longstanding most-watched news program on television — came at a moment of increased exposure and pressure. She is set to appear on three major shows on Tuesday and at a Univision town-hall event on Thursday that is aimed at Spanish-speaking viewers.Here are seven takeaways from Ms. Harris’s appearance on “60 Minutes,” which also interviewed her running mate, Gov. Tim Walz of Minnesota.Harris was in control of her message, but avoided repeated pushback.From the opening seconds, Ms. Harris seemed calm and in command of the points she wanted to make — and she did not stray from them despite repeated follow-up questions. She avoided pushback when asked to detail how to end the yearlong war between Israel and Hamas in Gaza. And she declined repeatedly to say whether the Biden-Harris administration should have acted earlier to restrict illegal immigration into the United States.When Mr. Whitaker asked her if the administration had lost all sway over Mr. Netanyahu, Ms. Harris said, “The work that we do diplomatically with the leadership of Israel is an ongoing pursuit around making clear our principles.”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

    • 100 Shares119 Views

      in Elections

      Athens Democracy Forum: Where Is Global Politics Headed?

      by

      Voters have more opportunities than ever in 2024 to shape history in their countries, but war, technology and other forces pose a powerful threat, experts said.This article is from a special report on the Athens Democracy Forum, which gathered experts last week in the Greek capital to discuss global issues.Jordan Bardella, the 29-year-old far-right leader who nearly became France’s prime minister last summer, warned last week that his country’s existence was imperiled by Muslim migrants who shared the same militant Islamist ideology as the Hamas-led assailants who committed deadly attacks in Israel on Oct. 7, 2023.“We have this Islamist ideology that is appearing in France,” he said. “The people behind it want to impose on French society something that is totally alien to our country, to our values.“I do not want my country to disappear,” he said. “I want France to be proud of itself.”The politician — whose party, the National Rally, finished first in the initial round of parliamentary elections in June, before being defeated by a broad multiparty coalition in the second and final round — spoke in an onstage conversation at the Athens Democracy Forum, an annual gathering of policymakers, business leaders, academics and activists organized in association with The New York Times.The defeat of Mr. Bardella and his party by a broad anti-far-right coalition were a sign of the endurance of liberal democratic values in the West. Yet his rapid rise as a political figure in France also comes as a warning that the basic tenets of liberal democracy are constantly being tested — and like never before in the postwar period.The year 2024 has been the year of elections: More of them were held than ever before in history. Some four billion people — more than half of humankind — have been, or will be, called to the ballot box in dozens of elections around the world. They include the 161 million U.S. voters heading to the polls on Nov. 5.Elections are the unquestionable cornerstone of democracy: the process by which voters choose the leaders and lawmakers who will rule over them. Voters’ ability to make an informed choice rests on their access to accurate and verified news and information about the candidates and their parties.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

    • 113 Shares159 Views

      in Elections

      Harris Has a Glock, She Says on ’60 Minutes’

      by

      Vice President Kamala Harris has a Glock. And she has taken it to the shooting range.In a wide-ranging interview that ran on Monday night during a “60 Minutes” election special on CBS News, Ms. Harris revealed more details about her firearm, which she had teased last month in an interview with Oprah Winfrey.“I have a Glock, and I’ve had it for quite some time,” she told her “60 Minutes” interviewer, Bill Whitaker. “Look, Bill, my background is in law enforcement, so there you go.” When he asked if she had fired it, Ms. Harris laughed. “Of course I have,” she said. “At a shooting range. Yes, of course I have.”In her September chat with Ms. Winfrey, Ms. Harris said, “If somebody breaks in my house, they’re getting shot,” which elicited laughter from the host and the crowd.Ms. Harris has been talking about guns in a new way for a Democrat, with a focus on “freedom,” while also saying she supports red-flag laws and universal background checks, policies she has long backed.And she has changed her stance on other gun issues. In 2019, she said she supported a rule that assault-weapons owners sell their guns to the government. At the time, she was among five Democratic candidates in the 2020 race who supported mandatory buybacks. In July, her campaign said this was no longer Ms. Harris’s position. She supports a ban on assault weapons but does not demand buybacks.Gov. Tim Walz of Minnesota, Ms. Harris’s running mate, is also an avid shooter and has said he uses a shotgun to hunt pheasants.Before he joined the ticket, Mr. Walz previously received an A rating from the National Rifle Association, which once endorsed him, but that plummeted to an F after he began supporting tighter gun restrictions as governor.“I know guns. I’m a veteran. I’m a hunter. I was a better shot than most Republicans in Congress, and I have the trophies to prove it,” Mr. Walz said in his speech at the Democratic convention in August. “I believe in the Second Amendment, but I also believe that our first responsibility is to keep our kids safe.” More

    • 125 Shares159 Views

      in Elections

      Oct. 7: For Jews in America, a Time of Reflection

      by

      More from our inbox:Republicans’ Plans to Challenge the VoteVanderbilt’s Leader: Why the College Rankings Are Flawed Mark Peterson/ReduxTo the Editor:Re “The Year American Jews Woke Up,” by Bret Stephens (column, Oct. 6):Mr. Stephens paints a disconcerting portrait of life for Jews in America, one that rings true for my family, as well as for those whom my organization works to serve. He does us a great service, and spurs us to find solutions to the problem and antidotes for the poison.To that end, the American Jewish Congress is about to launch a nationwide competition — a solutions challenge — that invites young American Jews to offer their views on how their country can best grapple with the increasingly rampant antisemitism in our midst.We hope this exercise will also demonstrate to the collective American conscience how deserving of support our Jewish citizens are. Has America forgotten the brave role played by Jews in the country’s defiant civil rights movement?Antisemitism existed before Oct. 7 and will, alas, exist in some quarters till the end of time. What is incumbent upon the Jewish community now is to quickly adapt to an ugly new reality and reimagine how Jewish identity and life in America can continue to flourish in conditions of adversity.This challenge will define the future not just of our Jewish compatriots, but also of America’s democracy.Daniel RosenNew YorkThe writer is president of the American Jewish Congress.To the Editor:Bret Stephens claims that the line between anti-Zionism and antisemitism has been blurred. As a proud Jew who is highly critical of today’s Israel and supportive of the Palestinian struggle, I see no blur; I see a bright red line.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