Presidential Election of 2024

Subterms

    More stories

    • 150 Shares199 Views

      in Elections

      Trump y el equipo de Harris aún discuten las reglas del debate

      by

      Los dos han estado discutiendo sobre si los micrófonos serán silenciados cuando un candidato no está hablando durante el debate, que está programado para el 10 de septiembre.[Estamos en WhatsApp. Empieza a seguirnos ahora]Donald Trump anunció por segunda vez que participaría en un debate presidencial con la vicepresidenta Kamala Harris organizado por ABC News e insinuó que se había resuelto el tema de si los micrófonos se silenciarán cuando un candidato no esté hablando.Pero una persona informada sobre la postura de la campaña de Harris dijo que el tema de si los micrófonos serán silenciados —algo que el equipo de Trump favorece y el equipo de Harris no— sigue siendo una discusión abierta. Un portavoz de ABC declinó hacer comentarios.Trump escribió en su red social que las reglas del debate “serán las mismas que en el último debate de CNN, que pareció funcionar bien para todos excepto, quizás”, para el presidente Joe Biden.El debate organizado por CNN, que se celebró en Atlanta el 27 de junio, fue calamitoso para Biden, precipitando su decisión del 21 de julio cuando finalizó su campaña de reelección. Durante ese debate, los micrófonos de los candidatos se silenciaron cuando no estaban hablando, una medida impulsada por el equipo de Biden.En última instancia, los asesores de Trump lo consideraron beneficioso para él, ya que evitó que el expresidente tuviera el tipo de arrebatos frecuentes y dañinos a los que es propenso. En su lugar, la atención se centró en Biden y sus luchas para articular sus pensamientos.Politico informó el lunes que el equipo de Harris y Trump habían llegado a un punto muerto sobre si los micrófonos se silenciarán para el debate del 10 de septiembre, que tendrá lugar en Filadelfia.El equipo de Trump acusó al equipo de Harris de engaño. Sin embargo, el propio Trump, en una comparecencia el lunes en Virginia, dijo que personalmente no le importaba.“No me importa”, dijo. “Creo que preferiría tenerlo encendido. Pero el acuerdo era que sería igual que la última vez”.Ammar Moussa, vocero de Harris, dijo en un comunicado que “ambos candidatos han dejado clara su voluntad de debatir con micrófonos no silenciados durante todo el debate para permitir intercambios sustantivos entre los candidatos, pero parece que Donald Trump está dejando que sus manipuladores lo anulen. Es triste”.El debate del 10 de septiembre se acordó por primera vez cuando Biden aún estaba en la contienda. El equipo de Harris planeó mantenerlo, pero Trump vaciló, y luego anunció en una conferencia de prensa hace unas tres semanas que estaría allí. Luego, el domingo, planteó la posibilidad de no asistir después de todo, alegando que ABC estaba sesgada en su contra. El equipo de Harris insistió públicamente el lunes en el tema de los micrófonos.Maggie Haberman es corresponsal política sénior que cubre la campaña presidencial de 2024, desde las contiendas electorales en todo el país hasta las investigaciones sobre el expresidente Donald Trump. Más de Maggie HabermanJohn Koblin reporta sobre la industria televisiva. Es coautor de It’s Not TV: The Spectacular Rise, Revolution, and Future of HBO.” Más de John Koblin More

    • 100 Shares129 Views

      in Elections

      The Big Border Change Harris Isn’t Talking About

      by

      A Biden administration border policy that has had a dramatic impact isn’t getting campaign play.Good evening. Tonight, my colleague Hamed Aleaziz, who covers immigration, looks at why the sharp drop in border crossings isn’t playing a bigger role in the presidential campaign. Plus, I want to hear about your favorite books about politics. — Jess BidgoodThe situation at the southern border looks very different these days.Gone are the headlines about surging border crossings crushing border communities and cities like New York struggling to fund housing for migrants who recently came to the country.The reality is that the numbers at the southern border have dropped to levels not seen before in the Biden administration — and lower than they were during parts of the Trump administration.The dramatic drop in border crossings came after a Biden administration policy seen by White House officials as a major success for an administration that has spent three years fighting Republican attacks over its handling of surging border crossings.Vice President Kamala Harris, however, has not focused on the dramatic change at the southern border in her presidential campaign. Tonight, I’ll explain what’s happening at the border, and offer some theories about why Harris isn’t talking it up.A border shutdown that workedThe border had seen a steady drop in crossings all year, but things took a dramatic turn in June. That’s when the Biden administration took a hallmark of the failed immigration bill from February — a measure allowing border officials to turn back migrants quickly when crossings exceed a certain level — and put a version of it into place via presidential proclamation.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 Shares119 Views

      in Elections

      This National Guard Crowd Likes What It Hears From Trump

      by

      They knew they probably should not have been laughing.Hundreds of National Guard members sat chuckling in their camouflage uniforms as former President Donald J. Trump tore into Gov. Tim Walz of Minnesota, who served for 24 years in the National Guard. When Mr. Trump mocked him as “Tampon Tim” (a reference to a law he signed requiring schools to provide menstrual products to all students who need them) nervous laughter rippled through the crowd, then quickly dissipated.“This group is a little more low-key than the ones I’m used to speaking before,” Mr. Trump observed.It was Monday afternoon, and he was speaking at the National Guard Association’s annual conference in Detroit. There were people from all 50 states and various U.S. territories there. Those in uniform said they were prohibited from discussing politics with a reporter, but the crowd also included former service members who had gone to work for private contractors. These more casually dressed members of the defense sector were free to say what the others could not.“I think it’s phenomenal that he’s out and about, speaking with the military,” said Walt Nichols, a 58-year-old from San Antonio who said he served for 26 years in the Texas National Guard and did three tours in Iraq (he is now a sales engineer for TacMed Solutions, which manufactures high-tech manikins). “We need him back,” Mr. Nichols said of Mr. Trump.“We just found out this week that he was going to be here — we had no idea,” said Cliff Byrd, 45, a former Marine from Portsmouth, N.H., who now works for Vidarr Inc., which specializes in night vision technology. “As you can see, a lot of people came out for it.”The crowd at the National Guard Association conference included members in uniform, but also former service members who have gone to work for private defense contractors.Nick Hagen for The New York TimesWe 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 Shares189 Views

      in Elections

      Former Aides to Bush, Romney and McCain Back Harris Over Trump

      by

      More than 200 people who previously worked for President George W. Bush and Senators Mitt Romney and John McCain have signed a letter endorsing Vice President Kamala Harris.Many of the more prominent signatories, including a chief of staff, a legislative director and a deputy campaign manager for Mr. McCain, had signed a letter supporting President Biden in the 2020 election. Others work for organizations like The Bulwark and the Lincoln Project that oppose former President Donald J. Trump’s leadership of the Republican Party.But the former Republican officials’ renewed support of the Democratic ticket reflects how Mr. Trump has transformed the Republican Party under his leadership, as well as deep and persistent opposition to his candidacy from those who served Republican presidential candidates.Mr. Romney, Mr. Bush and other high-profile Republicans skipped the Republican nominating convention last month, while the Harris campaign made significant efforts to highlight the support of anti-Trump Republicans — as well as former members of Mr. Trump’s staff who no longer support him — with speaking slots at the Democratic convention last week.“We have plenty of honest, ideological disagreements with Vice President Harris and Gov. Walz,” the letter said. “That’s to be expected. The alternative, however, is simply untenable.”The signatories include Mark Salter, a former chief of staff for Mr. McCain; Joe Donoghue, the senator’s former legislative director; Reed Galen, his deputy campaign manager and a co-founder of the Lincoln Project; Mike Murphy, a former McCain campaign strategist; Jean Becker, a chief of staff for George H.W. Bush; and Jim Swift, a senior editor of The Bulwark. More

    • 75 Shares129 Views

      in Elections

      Inflation Is Fading, Statistically and Politically

      by

      Last week was full of speeches. Most of those that attracted national attention were at the Democratic National Convention, culminating in Vice President Kamala Harris’s big moment on Thursday. But there was another important speech on Friday: Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell’s talk at the Fed’s annual shindig in Jackson Hole, Wyo.Yes, Powell’s remarks were of particular interest to investors looking for clues about future monetary policy. But even though his speech was rigorously apolitical, it had important political implications. For what we’re seeing, I’d argue, is inflation fading away — not just in the data, but also as a political issue. And that, of course, is very good news for Democrats.About Powell’s speech: He noted that the inflation rate has declined a lot since it peaked in 2022 and expressed confidence that it’s on track to reach the Fed’s target of 2 percent — and why it’s getting there without the mass unemployment some economists had claimed would be necessary. Falling inflation all but guarantees that the Fed will cut interest rates at its Open Market committee meeting next month, although the size of the anticipated cut is uncertain.What has brought inflation down? Like many economists, myself included, Powell believes that inflation was largely caused by “pandemic-related distortions” and that “the unwinding of these factors took much longer than expected but ultimately played a large role in the subsequent disinflation.”Although Powell didn’t and couldn’t say so explicitly, this analysis implicitly exonerates the Biden administration. Many people, like Elon Musk — who, after demonstrating his political acumen last year by boosting Robert Kennedy Jr., has lately decided that he’s an expert on macroeconomics — attribute inflation to Biden-era government spending. Powell’s discussion suggests, however, that fiscal policy played at most a distinctly secondary role.But few voters follow Fed speeches; won’t they continue to blame Democrats for inflation?Not necessarily. Surveys suggest that the political salience of inflation and the economy in general have been fading. It’s probably too late to convince voters that Democrats have done a good job managing the economy, even though that’s objectively the case — overall, America has outperformed other wealthy nations, achieving exceptionally high growth without exceptionally high inflation. But the economy is looking less and less like the, um, trump card Republicans were counting on.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 Shares149 Views

      in Elections

      Harris and Trump Squabble Over Debate Rules as ABC Matchup Looms

      by

      At the weigh-in before a big bout, prizefighters often taunt their opponents in an effort to try to psych them out.So it goes with the presidential pugilists set to meet next month in the city of Rocky Balboa.The Harris and Trump campaigns squabbled on Monday over the ground rules of their coming ABC News debate in Philadelphia, with each side trying to score political points off the other.The tussle began on Sunday when former President Donald J. Trump blasted ABC in a social media post, suggesting that the network’s anchors and executives were biased against him and threatening, not for the first time, to pull out of the event. “I ask, why would I do the Debate against Kamala Harris on that network?” Mr. Trump wrote.Then, on Monday, Ms. Harris’s campaign went public with an effort to change one of the agreed-upon conditions for the debate: that each candidate’s microphone be muted when it isn’t their turn to speak.“We have told ABC and other networks seeking to host a possible October debate that we believe both candidates’ mics should be live throughout the full broadcast,” Brian Fallon, a spokesman for the Harris campaign, told Politico.He added a dig for good measure: “Our understanding is that Trump’s handlers prefer the muted microphone because they don’t think their candidate can act presidential for 90 minutes on his own.”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

    • 63 Shares189 Views

      in Elections

      The Benefits of Shorter Campaigns

      by

      Presidential campaigns are marathons. Not this year. Presidential campaigns are marathons: They start years before Election Day and proceed through door-knocking, living room meetings, candidate debates, newspaper interviews, leafleting, primaries, caucuses and nominating conventions. It’s not unusual, just a few months after a new president is sworn in, to see a contender stake out a state that holds an early primary or caucus.Not this year. The late entry of Kamala Harris means her campaign against Donald Trump will last for less than four months, from July 21, when President Biden dropped out of the race, until November 5.Why, some voters and analysts now wonder, can’t we do it like this every cycle?In today’s newsletter, let’s consider the benefits of this relatively short contest — and why we might not miss the bloated campaigns of recent decades.The long campaignJimmy Carter, a little-known former governor from Georgia, turned up in Iowa in early 1975 to campaign for the 1976 caucuses. The Democratic National Committee had recently changed the rules after the chaotic 1968 convention, shifting nominating power from party bosses to states like Iowa. Carter’s “presidential aspirations have been considered laughable,” as The Times put it in a story in October 1975. But he won, his first step to capturing the presidency, and created a model for long campaigns that both parties embraced.Jimmy Carter in 1976. Associated Press PhotoThere are good things about a long campaign. It gives voters a chance to see candidates up close instead of only in slick political ads. In 2007, I watched Barack Obama linger in a small hall to answer questions until after the last television crew left.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

    • 75 Shares99 Views

      in Elections

      Trump vs. Harris on the Economy

      by

      Diana NguyenNina FeldmanSydney Harper and Marion LozanoDiane Wong and Listen and follow ‘The Daily’Apple Podcasts | Spotify | Amazon Music | YouTube | iHeartRadioAs the 2024 presidential race enters the homestretch, former President Donald J. Trump and Vice President Kamala Harris are putting economic policy at the center of their pitches to voters.Jim Tankersley, who covers economic policy for The New York Times, evaluates both of their plans.On today’s episodeJim Tankersley, an economic policy reporter for The New York Times.Vice President Kamala Harris and former President Donald J. Trump have outlined contrasting economic approaches.Haiyun Jiang for The New York Times, Ruth Fremson, via The New York TimesBackground readingAnalysis: Both candidates embrace expansions of government power to steer economic outcomes — but in vastly different areas.Analysis: Harris’s price-gouging ban plan does not appear to amount to government price controls. It also might not bring down grocery bills anytime soon.There are a lot of ways to listen to The Daily. Here’s how.We aim to make transcripts available the next workday after an episode’s publication. You can find them at the top of the page.The Daily is made by Rachel Quester, Lynsea Garrison, Clare Toeniskoetter, Paige Cowett, Michael Simon Johnson, Brad Fisher, Chris Wood, Jessica Cheung, Stella Tan, Alexandra Leigh Young, Lisa Chow, Eric Krupke, Marc Georges, Luke Vander Ploeg, M.J. Davis Lin, Dan Powell, Sydney Harper, Michael Benoist, Liz O. Baylen, Asthaa Chaturvedi, Rachelle Bonja, Diana Nguyen, Marion Lozano, Corey Schreppel, Rob Szypko, Elisheba Ittoop, Mooj Zadie, Patricia Willens, Rowan Niemisto, Jody Becker, Rikki Novetsky, Nina Feldman, Will Reid, Carlos Prieto, Ben Calhoun, Susan Lee, Lexie Diao, Mary Wilson, Alex Stern, Sophia Lanman, Shannon Lin, Diane Wong, Devon Taylor, Alyssa Moxley, Olivia Natt, Daniel Ramirez and Brendan Klinkenberg.Our theme music is by Jim Brunberg and Ben Landsverk of Wonderly. Special thanks to Sam Dolnick, Paula Szuchman, Lisa Tobin, Larissa Anderson, Julia Simon, Sofia Milan, Mahima Chablani, Elizabeth Davis-Moorer, Jeffrey Miranda, Maddy Masiello, Isabella Anderson, Nina Lassam and Nick Pitman. More