Presidential Election of 2024

Subterms

    More stories

    • 150 Shares129 Views

      in Elections

      With Robinson Candidacy, North Carolina Republicans Fear Damage to Years of Gains

      by

      Explosive posts by the Republican candidate for governor, Mark Robinson, are sending waves of anxiety through a state party that has long been tactical and disciplined.The great Republican wave that swept the South starting in the late 20th Century — the very wave that Lyndon Johnson predicted after signing the Civil Rights Act in 1964 — came relatively late to North Carolina. But when it finally hit in 2013, with Republicans controlling both the legislature and the governor’s mansion for the first time since Reconstruction, it did so with breathtaking force. Led by a group of savvy, tactically skilled state lawmakers, North Carolina Republicans set out to undo decades of center-left policy enshrined by Democrats, and to remake the rules of the political game in their favor.They engaged in gerrymandering that ensured the party a near-lock on the state legislature and lopsided control of the state’s House delegation in Congress. They paved the way for a conservative state Supreme Court that upheld a strict voter ID law. And after gaining a veto-proof majority last year, they banned most abortions after 12 weeks of pregnancy.And while Republicans lost the governorship in 2016, they had harbored hope of winning full control of state government again this year, bringing North Carolina in alignment with most other Southern states.Then came Mark Robinson.Long before this week, when CNN reported that Mr. Robinson had called himself a “black NAZI!,” discussed his pornography habits and praised slavery in an adult online forum, the bellicose Republican nominee for governor (and current lieutenant governor) was polling poorly against his Democratic rival, Josh Stein.But now more than ever, Mr. Robinson, with his antisemitic and anti-gay rhetoric and performative, polarizing brand of politics, is sending waves of anxiety through the state party.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 Shares169 Views

      in Elections

      How One Man’s Vote in Nebraska Could Change the Presidential Election

      by

      A single Republican state senator appears to be holding back a push by Donald J. Trump to net a potentially pivotal electoral vote even before ballots are cast.In Eastern Nebraska, far from the presidential battleground states, a drama is playing out that could, in a perfectly plausible November scenario, have history-altering repercussions for the nation’s future and the next president — and it may all come down to one man.A single Republican state senator from Omaha, Mike McDonnell, has so far stood firm against a push by former President Donald J. Trump, national Republicans and the Nebraska G.O.P. to change Nebraska from a state that divides its electoral votes by congressional district to one that awards all of them to the statewide winner. Maine is the only other state without a winner-take-all system.If Mr. McDonnell buckles, two other Republican senators in Nebraska’s unicameral legislature who have also not yet committed to changing Nebraska’s system are likely to follow his lead, according to a number of Republicans and Democrats involved in the discussions going on at the State Capitol.The tumbling dominoes would almost certainly give the single electoral vote of Omaha and its suburbs, which Vice President Kamala Harris is favored to win, to Mr. Trump.That might not sound like much, but if Ms. Harris were to win the so-called blue wall — Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin — while losing every other battleground state, Nevada, Arizona, Georgia and North Carolina, that one electoral vote would be the difference between a 270-268 Electoral College victory for the vice president or a 269-269 tie. And in the event of a tie, the House of Representatives would determine the winner, not by raw votes of House members but by the support of each state delegation.With more delegations in Republican control, Mr. Trump would almost certainly win.As of Friday, Mr. McDonnell, who is barred by Nebraska’s term limits law from seeking re-election, had not changed his position.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

    • 125 Shares99 Views

      in Elections

      Supreme Court Won’t Restore Jill Stein to the Nevada Ballot

      by

      Democrats had argued that Ms. Stein, the Green Party’s presidential candidate, was ineligible because the party had failed to submit a required statement.The Supreme Court said on Friday that it would not restore the Green Party’s presidential candidate, Jill Stein, to the Nevada ballot in the coming election. Democrats had challenged her eligibility, saying her party had submitted flawed paperwork.The court’s brief order gave no reasons, which is typical when it acts on emergency applications. There were no noted dissents.The Nevada Supreme Court ruled this month that the Green Party’s failure to submit a sworn statement required by state regulations meant that its candidates could not appear on the ballot. The party acknowledged the lapse but said it had relied on instructions from a state election official.The party was represented in the Supreme Court by Jay Sekulow, who has served as a lawyer for former President Donald J. Trump.In response to an inquiry from the party in July, an official sent what she said were the required forms, saying “please use the documents attached to begin collecting signatures.”The party submitted the required number of signatures, and election officials placed its candidates on the ballot after they verified a sampling of the signatures. The Nevada Democratic Party sued, saying the Green Party had failed to supply a sworn statement that the signatures were believed to be from voters registered in the counties in which they lived.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 Shares169 Views

      in Elections

      Trump Ignores Mark Robinson Controversy, Hoping Gubernatorial Candidate Will Drop Out

      by

      Donald J. Trump’s advisers knew they had a problem in North Carolina. What they were frantically trying to learn was how big it would be.Word had reached the former president’s high command on Thursday that a “bad” story was coming about Lt. Gov. Mark Robinson, the Republican running for governor in the must-win state of North Carolina.Mr. Trump’s inner circle was not in possession of the full details before the story was published on CNN’s website, but they knew the bar for what would qualify as a “bad” story for Mr. Robinson was high. The candidate had already quoted a statement attributed to Adolf Hitler and mocked the teen survivors of the Parkland school shooting, and Mr. Trump’s advisers had recently started seeking distance from Mr. Robinson.The Trump team had heard the CNN story had something to do with pornographic websites and the phrase “Black Nazi,” according to two people with direct knowledge of the internal discussions, who spoke on the condition of anonymity.Former President Donald J. Trump delivered remarks on Thursday at the Israeli American Council National Summit.Kent Nishimura for The New York TimesIt didn’t help that at the same time they were waiting on the self-identifying Nazi story to come out, Mr. Trump was attending events in Washington, D.C., designed to promote his support for the state of Israel and the Jewish people. It also didn’t help that just months ago the former president had praised Mr. Robinson, who is Black, as “Martin Luther King on steroids.”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 Shares109 Views

      in Elections

      Georgia Attorney General Says Election Board Is Operating Outside Its Authority

      by

      The Georgia State Election Board is set to vote on Friday on a package of nearly a dozen rules that would change the way elections are conducted amid growing pressure from almost every level of Georgia state government advising the board that it is operating outside of its legal authority.The rules under consideration include conservative policy goals like introducing hand-counting of ballots and expanding access for partisan poll watchers. The proposals come just 45 days before the election, after poll workers have been trained and ballots have been mailed to overseas voters.On Thursday, the attorney general’s office took the rare step of weighing in on the proposed rules, saying they “very likely exceed the board’s statutory authority.”The fight comes as the election board is under increasing pressure from critics already concerned that it has been rewriting the rules of the game in a key swing state to favor former President Donald J. Trump, including potentially disrupting certification of the election if Mr. Trump loses in November. Last month, the board granted local officials new power over the election-certification process, a change that opponents say could sow chaos.Elizabeth Young, a senior assistant attorney general, characterized five specific new election proposals as either exceeding the board’s legal reach or as an unnecessary redundancy, including the hand-counting proposal.“There are thus no provisions in the statutes cited in support of these proposed rules that permit counting the number of ballots by hand at the precinct level prior to delivery to the election superintendent for tabulation,” Ms. Young wrote in a letter, which was reviewed by The New York Times. “Accordingly, these proposed rules are not tethered to any statute — and are, therefore, likely the precise type of impermissible legislation that agencies cannot do.”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

    • 213 Shares189 Views

      in Elections

      Trump Says That if He Loses, ‘the Jewish People Would Have a Lot to Do’ With It

      by

      Former President Donald J. Trump, speaking on Thursday at a campaign event in Washington centered on denouncing antisemitism in America, said that “if I don’t win this election,” then “the Jewish people would have a lot to do with a loss.”Mr. Trump repeated that assertion at a second event, this one focused on Israeli Americans, where he blamed Jews whom he described as “voting for the enemy,” for the hypothetical destruction of Israel that he insisted would happen if he lost in November.Mr. Trump on Thursday offered an extended airing of grievances against Jewish Americans who have not voted for him. He repeated his denunciation of Jews who vote for Democrats before suggesting that the Democratic Party had a “hold, or curse,” on Jewish Americans and that he should be getting “100 percent” of Jewish votes because of his policies on Israel.Jews, who make up just over 2 percent of America’s population, are considered to be one of the most consistently liberal demographics in the country, a trend that Mr. Trump has lamented repeatedly this year as he tries to chip away at their longstanding affiliation with Democrats.Much as he repeatedly spins a doomsday vision of America as he campaigns this year, Mr. Trump has pointed to Hamas’s deadly Oct. 7 massacre and to the war in Gaza as he has insisted that Israel will “cease to exist” within a few years if he does not win in November.“With all I have done for Israel, I received only 24 percent of the Jewish vote,” he said during his earlier speech on Thursday, at a campaign event where he spoke to an audience of prominent Republican Jews — including Miriam Adelson, the megadonor who is a major Trump benefactor — and lawmakers. Mr. Trump added that “I really haven’t been treated very well, but it’s the story of my life.”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

    • 175 Shares159 Views

      in Elections

      Harris lidera en el promedio de encuestas en Pensilvania y empata a nivel nacional

      by

      Aunque este escenario inesperado podría reflejar una variación usual en los resultados de las encuestas, también podría señalar una ventaja cada vez menor de Trump en el Colegio Electoral.Kamala Harris lidera por cuatro puntos en nuestro nuevo sondeo de Pensilvania.Kenny Holston/The New York Times[Estamos en WhatsApp. Empieza a seguirnos ahora]Tenemos nuestras dos primeras encuestas desde el debate presidencial de la semana pasada: una a nivel nacional y otra sobre Pensilvania.Combinadas, son un pequeño enigma.En la encuesta nacional, Kamala Harris y Donald Trump están empatados entre los votantes probables, ambos con un 47 por ciento, un ligero avance para Harris desde nuestra encuesta nacional más reciente, realizada inmediatamente antes del debate.Al mismo tiempo, Harris tenía una ventaja de cuatro puntos en una encuesta de The New York Times/Philadelphia Inquirer/Siena College de Pensilvania, 50 por ciento a 46 por ciento.Antes de entrar en detalles, empecemos por el panorama general:No ha cambiado mucho tras el debate. A pesar de su buena actuación, la vicepresidenta Harris no ganó mucho terreno en comparación con nuestras encuestas más recientes a nivel nacional y en Pensilvania. La encuesta está llena de señales de que nuestros encuestados pensaron que Harris tuvo un buen debate —y que Trump uno malo— pero no ha hecho una gran diferencia, al menos por ahora y al menos en nuestro sondeo.Pensilvania, Pensilvania, Pensilvania. Es posible que Harris no haya ganado mucho, pero su campaña seguramente estará contenta con las cifras en Pensilvania. El resultado nacional, por otra parte, es bastante favorable para Trump (esa es la parte que nos desconcierta y que estamos a punto de analizar). Pero nuestras elecciones se deciden en el Colegio Electoral, y ningún estado tiene un lugar más relevante en las matemáticas electorales que Pensilvania.Ahora vayamos a nuestro enigma: ¿una clara ventaja para Harris en Pensilvania, pero un empate a nivel nacional? Esto es inesperado. Hace cuatro años, el presidente Joe Biden ganó el voto nacional por 4,5 puntos porcentuales, pero ganó Pensilvania por solo 1,2 puntos. Del mismo modo, nuestros promedios de encuestas han mostrado que Harris obtiene mejores resultados a nivel nacional que en Pensilvania. Esta encuesta es casi lo contrario.Por lo general diría que se trata de ruido estadístico, la inevitable variación en los resultados de las encuestas que es inherente al muestreo aleatorio. Y puede que lo sea, como veremos. Pero creo que es difícil suponer que se trata simplemente de ruido, por dos razones:Es lo que hemos señalado antes. Es fácil descartar cualquier resultado de una encuesta como una casualidad estadística. Pero hemos encontrado resultados similares en nuestras dos encuestas más recientes a nivel nacional y en Pensilvania.Esto se está convirtiendo en una tendencia para los encuestadores de alta calidad. Sí, el promedio de nuestras encuestas revela que Harris obtiene mejores resultados a nivel nacional que en Pensilvania, pero la historia es un poco diferente si nos centramos solo en las encuestas de mayor calidad (a las que llamamos “encuestadoras selectas” en nuestra tabla). En el último mes, muchos de estos sondeos muestran que a Harris le va relativamente mal a nivel nacional, pero le va bien en los estados disputados del norte de Estados Unidos.Nota sobre los encuestadores “selectos”: para ser considerados selectos en nuestro promedio de encuestas, los encuestadores deben cumplir dos de los tres criterios siguientes: un historial de resultados superiores a los de otros encuestadores, una metodología transparente y el uso de un método que tenga posibilidades de llegar a la mayoría o a todos los votantes potenciales. No se trata de un enfoque perfecto (omite algunas encuestas muy buenas e incluye otras que no lo son tanto), pero incluye a la mayoría de los pesos pesados del sector y elimina gran parte de lo que no funciona. More