Subterms
In the first few months of this year, more than half of Kansans who registered to vote were men. That changed after the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade. Women as a percentage of new registered voters Sources: L2, a nonpartisan voter data provider (Alabama, Kansas, Maine, New Mexico and Oklahoma) and individual Secretaries of […] More
Conservative groups in Michigan filed challenges this week to efforts to put two constitutional amendments on the ballot in November, one that would guarantee abortion rights and the other that would expand voting access.The challenge to the abortion amendment was based on a lack of spacing between words, which gave some words the appearance of running together. They characterized the typographical errors as “gibberish,” and “incomprehensible argle-bargle.”One group argued that the Michigan Board of State Canvassers should reject the petition to put that amendment to voters, while a second group took issue with the voting petition, saying it failed to identify every current constitutional provision the amendment would override.The board of canvassers will meet on Aug. 31 to decide whether to certify the petitions.The challenge to the abortion measure comes less than three weeks after voters in Kansas overwhelmingly rejected a constitutional amendment that would have let state legislators ban or severely restrict abortion. That vote underscored abortion rights as a salient issue capable of driving voters to the polls after the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade, and it raised advocates’ hopes that Michiganders would vote similarly.Supporters of the petition for the Michigan abortion amendment said they had submitted more than 730,000 signatures, surpassing the roughly 425,000 required, though the board of canvassers needs to verify them.Read More on Abortion Issues in AmericaAn Uneasy Champion: President Biden, a practicing Catholic, is being called to lead a fight for abortion rights that he has sidestepped for decades. Advocates wonder if he’s up to the task.Safe Havens: After Roe, conservatives are seeking to expand ways that allow women to give up newborns, such as baby drop boxes. But for many experts in adoption and women’s health, they are hardly a solution.In Mississippi: The state that spurred the overturning of abortion rights, is among 17 that have rejected an option to extend new mothers’ Medicaid coverage.A Rare Prosecution: A teenager used pills to terminate her pregnancy at home with the aid of her mother. Their Facebook messages are now key evidence in a rare prosecution over abortion.Darci McConnell, a spokeswoman for Reproductive Freedom for All, the group promoting the abortion amendment, said that the organization was “confident that we’re in compliance with all legal requirements for ballot proposals” and that hundreds of thousands of voters had “read, understood and signed the petition in support of reproductive freedom for all.”The petition includes the text of the proposed amendment, which would ensure abortion rights broadly until fetal viability and in cases where “the life or physical or mental health of the pregnant individual” was in danger after viability. On some lines, the text is squeezed tightly. In a 152-page challenge, Citizens to Support MI Women and Children, a group that opposes the amendment, argued that the lack of spacing was unacceptable.For instance, in a section that reads, “Every individual has a fundamental right to reproductive freedom, which entails the right to make and effectuate decisions about all matters relating to pregnancy,” the challengers said the formatting created “nonexistent words” such as “decisionsaboutallmattersrelatingtopregnancy.”They described this and other examples as “nonsensical groupings of letters that are found in no dictionary and are incapable of having any meaning.”The text at issue in a Reproductive Freedom for All petition.State of Michigan“Because the petition fails to use actual words in the full text in its proposed amendment, how can the people know what they are voting for or against?” it said, adding that even if the board of canvassers concluded that these were merely typos, Michigan law did not allow supporters of the amendment to fix such errors at this point in the process. Citizens to Support MI Women and Children directed a request for comment to Genevieve Marnon, the legislative director for Right to Life of Michigan, an anti-abortion group. Ms. Marnon, who filed an affidavit in support of the challenge, said that petitions were “routinely disqualified for technical errors,” saying that state officials had rejected signatures on a 2019 anti-abortion proposal “for small tears in the petition and for return address stickers’ covering a few words of the ‘essential elements’ of the petition.” (Signatures for that campaign, which extended into 2020, were also challenged on substantive grounds, including claims that some were duplicates.)Ms. Marnon attached to her email a mocking word-search puzzle whose answer list consisted of words from the petition — all of them separated in the correct places.Reproductive Freedom for All will file a formal rebuttal by Tuesday, according to Mark Brewer, a lawyer working with the group, who called the complaint a “frivolous Hail Mary challenge.” After that, he said, nonpartisan staff in the Michigan secretary of state’s office will make a recommendation to the board of canvassers on whether the challenge should be upheld.If the board of canvassers — two Democrats and two Republicans — deadlocks at its meeting on Aug. 31, the next step will be the courts. Under the Michigan Constitution, amendments for the November ballot must be finalized by Sept. 9.The challenge to the voting rights amendment was filed on behalf of a group called Defend Your Vote. The proposal it objected to would amend the Michigan Constitution to, among other things, require nine days of early in-person voting and expand access to absentee ballots. It would also bar any law or conduct that “has the intent or effect of denying, abridging, interfering with or unreasonably burdening the fundamental right to vote.”Supporters said they had submitted about 670,000 signatures.In their challenge, lawyers for Defend Your Vote argued that the amendment petition did not specify all of the current constitutional provisions it would modify.One provision they said was improperly omitted designates the “first Tuesday after the first Monday of November” as Election Day. By mandating an early-voting period, the challengers argued, the amendment would render that provision “inoperative.”Micheal Davis Jr., the executive director of Promote the Vote, the group supporting the voting amendment, called the complaint “bogus, baseless and meritless.”The challenge to the voting amendment will be adjudicated through the same process as the challenge to the abortion amendment. A spokeswoman for Promote the Vote said the group had not filed its formal rebuttal yet. More
A decisive vote to defend abortion rights in deeply conservative Kansas reverberated across the midterm campaign landscape on Wednesday, galvanizing Democrats and underscoring for Republicans the risks of overreaching on one of the most emotionally charged matters in American politics.In a state where Republicans far outnumber Democrats, Kansans delivered a clear message in the first major vote testing the potency of abortion politics since the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade: Abortion opponents are going too far.The overwhelming defeat of a measure that would have removed abortion protections from the state constitution quickly emboldened Democrats to run more assertively on abortion rights and even to reclaim some of the language long deployed by conservatives against government overreach, using it to cast abortion bans as infringing on personal freedoms. (As of Wednesday, the margin was 58.8 percent to 41.2 percent.)“The court practically dared women in this country to go to the ballot box to restore the right to choose,” President Biden said by video Wednesday, as he signed an executive order aimed at helping Americans cross state lines for abortions. “They don’t have a clue about the power of American women.”In interviews, Senator Elizabeth Warren, Democrat of Massachusetts, urged Democrats to be “full-throated” in their support of abortion access, and Representative Sean Patrick Maloney, the chairman of the House Democratic campaign arm, said the Kansas vote offered a “preview of coming attractions” for Republicans. Representative Elissa Slotkin, a Michigan Democrat in a highly competitive district, issued a statement saying that abortion access “hits at the core of preserving personal freedom, and of ensuring that women, and not the government, can decide their own fate.”Republicans said the midterm campaigns would be defined by Mr. Biden’s disastrous approval ratings and economic concerns.Supporters of the measure that was on the ballot, which would have removed abortion protections from the Kansas constitution, embraced after the outcome was called on Tuesday.Christopher (KS) Smith for The New York TimesBoth Republicans and Democrats caution against conflating the results of an up-or-down ballot question with how Americans will vote in November, when they will be weighing a long list of issues, personalities and their views of Democratic control of Washington.“Add in candidates and a much more robust conversation about lots of other issues, this single issue isn’t going to drive the full national narrative that the Democrats are hoping for,” said David Kochel, a veteran of Republican politics in nearby Iowa. Still, Mr. Kochel acknowledged the risks of Republicans’ overstepping, as social conservatives push for abortion bans with few exceptions that polls generally show to be unpopular.“The base of the G.O.P. is definitely ahead of where the voters are in wanting to restrict abortion,” he said. “That’s the main lesson of Kansas.”Read More on Abortion Issues in AmericaKansas Abortion Vote: In the first election test since Roe v. Wade was overturned, Kansas voters resoundingly decided against removing the right to abortion from the State Constitution, a major victory for the abortion rights movement in a reliably conservative state.Justice Dept. Lawsuit: The Biden administration sued Idaho over a strict state abortion law set to take effect. The suit is the first new litigation filed by the federal government to protect abortion access since the end of Roe.One Woman’s Abortion Odyssey: She was thrilled to learn that she was pregnant. But when a rare fetal defect threatened her life, she was thrust into post-Roe chaos.A National Pattern: A Times analysis shows that states with abortion bans have among the nation’s weakest social services for women and children.Polls have long shown most Americans support at least some abortion rights. But abortion opponents have been far more likely to let the issue determine their vote, leading to a passion gap between the two sides of the issue. Democrats hoped the Supreme Court decision this summer erasing the constitutional right to an abortion would change that, as Republican-led states rushed to enact new restrictions, and outright bans on the procedure took hold.The Kansas vote was the most concrete evidence yet that a broad swath of voters — including some Republicans who still support their party in November — were ready to push back. Kansans voted down the amendment in Johnson County — home to the populous, moderate suburbs outside Kansas City — rejecting the measure with about 70 percent of the vote, a sign of the power of this issue in suburban battlegrounds nationwide. But the amendment was also defeated in more conservative counties, as abortion rights support outpaced Mr. Biden’s showing in 2020 nearly everywhere.After months of struggling with their own disengaged if not demoralized base, Democratic strategists and officials hoped the results signaled a sort of awakening. They argued that abortion rights are a powerful part of the effort to cast Republicans as extremists and turn the 2022 elections into a choice between two parties, rather than a referendum just on Democrats.“The Republicans who are running for office are quite open about their support for banning abortion,” said Senator Warren. “It’s critical that Democrats make equally clear that this is a key difference, and Democrats will stand up for letting the pregnant person make the decision, not the government.”A Kansas-style referendum will be a rarity this election year, with only four other states expected to put abortion rights directly to voters in November with measures to amend their constitutions: California, Michigan, Vermont and Kentucky. However, the issue has already emerged as a defining debate in some key races, including in Michigan and Pennsylvania, where Democratic candidates for governor have cast themselves as bulwarks against far-reaching abortion restrictions or bans. On Tuesday, Michigan Republicans nominated Tudor Dixon, a former conservative commentator, for governor, who has opposed abortion in cases of rape and incest.Voting in the primary election in Topeka, Kan., on Tuesday.Katie Currid for The New York TimesAnd in Pennsylvania, Doug Mastriano, the far-right Republican nominee for governor, said, “I don’t give a way for exceptions” when asked whether he believes in exceptions for rape, incest or the life of the mother. Governor’s contests in states including Wisconsin and Georgia could also directly affect abortion rights.Other tests of the impact of abortion on races are coming sooner. North of New York City, a Democrat running in a special House election this month, Pat Ryan, has made abortion rights a centerpiece of his campaign, casting the race as another measure of the issue’s power this year.“We have to step up and make sure our core freedoms are protected and defended,” said Mr. Ryan, the Ulster County executive in New York, who had closely watched the Kansas results.Opponents of the Kansas referendum leaned into that “freedom” message, with advertising that cast the effort as nothing short of a government mandate — anathema to voters long mistrustful of too much intervention from Topeka and Washington — and sometimes without using the word “abortion” at all.Some of the messaging was aimed at moderate, often suburban voters who have toggled between the parties in recent elections. Strategists in both parties agreed that abortion rights could be salient with those voters, particularly women, in the fall. Democrats also pointed to evidence that the issue may also drive up turnout among their base voters.After the Supreme Court’s decision, Democrats registered to vote at a faster rate than Republicans in Kansas, according a memo from Tom Bonier, the chief executive of TargetSmart, a Democratic data firm. Mr. Bonier said his analysis found roughly 70 percent of Kansans who registered after the court’s decision were women.“It is malpractice to not continue to center this issue for the remainder of this election season — and beyond,” said Tracy Sefl, a Democratic strategist. “What Democrats should say is that for Americans your bedroom is on the ballot this November.”Inside the Democratic Party, there has been a fierce debate since Roe was overturned over how much to talk about abortion rights at a time of rising prices and a rocky economy — and that is likely to intensify. There is always the risk, some longtime strategists warn, of getting distracted from the issues that polls show are still driving most Americans.Senator Brian Schatz, Democrat of Hawaii, said he understood the hesitancy from party stalwarts.“The energy is on the side of abortion rights,” he said. “For decades that hasn’t been true so it’s difficult for some people who have been through lots of tough battles and lots of tough states to recognize that the ground has shifted under them. But it has.”He urged Democrats to ignore polling that showed abortion was not a top-tier issue, adding that “voters take their cues from leaders” and Democrats need to discuss abortion access more. “When your pollster or your strategist says, ‘Take an abortion question and pivot away from it’ you should probably resist,” he said.A Kaiser Family Foundation poll released this week showed that the issue of abortion access had become more salient for women 18 to 49 years old, with a 14-percentage-point jump since February for those who say it will be very important to their vote in midterm elections, up to 73 percent.That is roughly equal to the share of voters overall who said inflation would be very important this fall — and a sign of how animating abortion has become for many women.Still, Republicans said they would not let their focus veer from the issues they have been hammering for months.“This fall, voters will consider abortion alongside of inflation, education, crime, national security and a feeling that no one in Democrat-controlled Washington listens to them or cares about them,” said Kellyanne Conway, the Republican pollster and former senior Trump White House adviser.Michael McAdams, the communications director for the National Republican Congressional Committee, said that if Democrats focused the fall campaign on abortion they would be ignoring the economy and record-high prices: “the No. 1 issue in every competitive district.”One of the most endangered Democrats in the House, Representative Tom Malinowski of New Jersey, agreed that “the economy is the defining issue for people.”“But there is a relationship here, because voters want leaders to be focused on fighting inflation, not banning abortion,” he said. Mr. Malinowski, who said he was planning to advertise on abortion rights, said the results in Kansas had affirmed for him the significance of abortion and the public’s desire to keep government out of such personal decisions.“There is enormous energy among voters and potential voters this fall to make that point,” he said.Peter Baker More
One side effect of Roe v. Wade was that it allowed the anti-abortion movement to pretend to be on the side of democracy. True, the decision was popular, and majorities since the 1970s have wanted to see abortion legal in at least some circumstances. But Roe prevented duly elected state governments from passing abortion restrictions that were in some cases also popular with their constituents. The goal of the anti-abortion movement was and remains national prohibition. Its language called for returning the matter to the state voters.The stunning result in an abortion referendum in Kansas on Tuesday, however, shows that even in a very red state, bans cannot necessarily survive contact with democracy. Kansas has its own version of Roe, a 2019 State Supreme Court decision holding that the state Constitution protects “a woman’s right to make decisions about her body, including the decision whether to continue her pregnancy.” The referendum, the first statewide test of electoral sentiment about abortion post-Roe, asked voters whether they wanted to change the Constitution so the Republican-controlled Legislature could ban abortions. They did not.When I spoke to pro-choice organizers last month, they were cautiously optimistic that the vote would be close, though they worried about its timing. Rather than scheduling the referendum for the general election, Republicans put it on the primary ballot, when conservative turnout is typically higher. The pro-choice side needed to get people to show up on a day when they weren’t used to voting. As far as I can tell, no one expected the 18-point landslide in a state that voted for Donald Trump by 15 points.Then again, maybe we should have. It’s not uncommon for abortion bans to fail in state referendums. In 2006, South Dakota voters overturned a strict abortion ban, a direct challenge to Roe, by 11 points. In 2011, Mississippi voters rejected a constitutional amendment defining a fertilized egg as a person by 17 percentage points. Even in the most conservative parts of the country, many people recoil from strict abortion bans.I hope Kansas sends a message to other red states that have passed draconian abortion prohibitions or are weighing them. I’m not sure it will, because those bans are often an expression not of democratic wishes, but of lawmakers’ insulation from democratic accountability. An extreme example is Wisconsin, a purple state with a Democratic governor that voted for Joe Biden in the last election. When Roe was overturned, there was widespread confusion about whether an 1849 abortion ban had gone back into effect, and as a result, abortion services have been halted.There is little reason to think that this is what the people of Wisconsin want, but it’s not clear if they can pass a law to change it, because state legislative maps are drawn in a way that gives Republicans an overwhelming advantage. According to a University of Wisconsin Law School analysis, if Democrats and Republicans got the same number of votes, Republicans would win 64.8 percent of State Senate seats, and Democrats around 35.2 percent.Obviously, this doesn’t mean that the backlash to the Supreme Court decision jettisoning Roe won’t have important electoral implications. Since it came down, polls show a shift toward Democrats in the midterm congressional vote. Some politicians, like Nicole Malliotakis, the only Republican member of Congress from New York City, will likely be damaged by their opposition to legal abortion.Still, votes for abortion rights don’t automatically translate into votes for Democrats, because partisan identification is often more powerful than issue preference. In 2020, Missouri voters approved a constitutional amendment expanding Medicaid eligibility, but the state has continued to favor Republicans overwhelmingly. The same year, Florida’s voters opted to raise the minimum wage to $15 an hour even as they gave a majority to Trump.Clearly, however, there are substantial numbers of voters outraged by abortion bans and ready to express their anger at the ballot box. Kansas’s secretary of state predicted that turnout on Tuesday would be 36 percent. It ended up being closer to 50 percent, almost as high as in the 2018 general election.The anti-abortion movement has already been aided by minority rule. Roe’s end was made possible because a president who lost the popular vote was able to put three judges on the Supreme Court. The filibuster means that even with the support of the pro-choice Republican senators Susan Collins and Lisa Murkowski, the Senate can’t codify any of Roe’s protections.As time goes on, and the harrowing consequences of abortion bans pile up, abortion opponents will need ever greater limits on popular sovereignty in order to impose their regime on an unwilling nation. The cause of “life,” as abortion opponents define it, will likely merge with the broader Republican campaign to disenfranchise those it defines as outside the blessed circle of real Americanness.In a recent New York Times Magazine cover story, Charles Homans described how the “Stop the Steal” movement transcended Donald Trump. “The hole he punched in American democracy, out of sheer self-interest, had allowed his followers to glimpse a vision of the country restored to its divinely ordained promise that lay beyond that democracy — but also beyond him,” wrote Homans. The Kansas referendum demonstrated that democracy in America can still work, and why the forces of religious authoritarianism are so set on destroying it.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
OVERLAND PARK, Kan. — Kansas voters resoundingly decided against removing the right to abortion from the State Constitution, according to The Associated Press, a major victory for the abortion rights movement in one of America’s reliably conservative states.The defeat of the ballot referendum was the most tangible demonstration yet of a political backlash against the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision to overturn Roe v. Wade, the landmark decision that had protected abortion rights throughout the country. The decisive margin came as a surprise, and after frenzied campaigns with both sides pouring millions into advertising and knocking on doors throughout a sweltering final campaign stretch.“The voters in Kansas have spoken loud and clear: We will not tolerate extreme bans on abortion,” said Rachel Sweet, the campaign manager for Kansans for Constitutional Freedom, which led the effort to defeat the amendment.told supporters that a willingness to work across partisan lines and ideological differences helped their side win.“The voters in Kansas have spoken loud and clear: We will not tolerate extreme bans on abortion,” Ms. Sweet said.At a campaign watch party in suburban Overland Park, abortion rights supporters yelled with joy when MSNBC showed their side with a commanding lead.“We’re watching the votes come in, we’re seeing the changes of some of the counties where Donald Trump had a huge percentage of the vote, and we’re seeing that just decimated,” said Jo Dee Adelung, 63, a Democrat from Merriam, Kan., who knocked on doors and called voters in recent weeks.She said she hoped the result sent a message that voters are “really taking a look at all of the issues and doing what’s right for Kansas and not just going down party lines.”The vote in Kansas, three months before the midterm elections, was the first time American voters weighed in directly on the issue of abortion since the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade this summer. The referendum, watched closely by national figures on both sides of the abortion debate, took on added importance because of Kansas’ location, abutting states where abortion is already banned in nearly all cases. More than $12 million has been spent on advertising, split about evenly between the two camps. The amendment, had it passed, would have removed abortion protections from the State Constitution and paved the way for legislators to ban or restrict abortions.“We’ve been saying that after a decision is made in Washington, that the spotlight would shift to Kansas,” said David Langford, a retired engineer from Leawood, Kan., who wants the amendment to pass, and who reached out to Protestant pastors to rally support.The push for an amendment was rooted in a 2019 ruling by the Kansas Supreme Court that struck down some abortion restrictions and found that the right to an abortion was guaranteed by the State Constitution. That decision infuriated Republicans, who had spent years passing abortion restrictions and campaigning on the issue. They used their supermajorities in the Legislature last year to place the issue on the 2022 ballot.That state-level fight over abortion limits took on far greater meaning after the nation’s top court overturned Roe, opening the door in June for states to go beyond restrictions and outlaw abortions entirely. The Roman Catholic Church and other religious and conservative groups spent heavily to back the amendment, while national supporters of abortion rights poured millions of dollars into the race to oppose it.Canvassers supporting Amendment 2 left literature at a resident’s door last week in Olathe, Kan.Chase Castor for The New York TimesSupporters of the amendment have said repeatedly that the amendment itself would not ban abortion, and Republican lawmakers have been careful to avoid telegraphing what their legislative plans would be if it passed.“Voting yes doesn’t mean that abortion won’t be allowed, it means we’re going to allow our legislators to determine the scope of abortion,” said Mary Jane Muchow of Overland Park, Kan., who supported the amendment. “I think abortion should be legal, but I think there should be limitations on it.”If the amendment had passed, though, the question was not whether Republicans would try to wield their commanding legislative majorities to pass new restrictions, but how far they would go in doing so. Many Kansans who support abortion rights said they feared that a total or near-total abortion ban would be passed within monthsAbortion is now legal in Kansas up to 22 weeks of pregnancy.“I don’t want to become another state that bans all abortion for any reason,” said Barbara Grigar of Overland Park, Kan., who identified herself as a moderate and said she was voting against the amendment. “Choice is every woman’s choice, and not the government’s.”A Pew Research Center survey published last month found that a majority of Americans said abortion should be legal in all or most cases, and that more than half of adults disapproved of the Supreme Court’s decision to overturn Roe.Kansas has been a focal point of the national abortion debate at least since 1991, when protesters from across the country gathered in Wichita and blocked access to clinics during weeks of heated demonstrations that they called the Summer of Mercy.At times, the state has seen violence over the issue. In 1986, a Wichita abortion clinic was attacked with a pipe bomb. In 1993, a woman who opposed abortion shot and injured Dr. George Tiller, one of only a few American physicians who performed late-term abortions. In 2009, another anti-abortion activist shot and killed Dr. Tiller at his Wichita church.In recent years, and especially in the weeks since Roe fell, Kansas has become a haven of abortion access in a region where that is increasingly rare.Even before the Supreme Court’s action, nearly half of the abortions performed in Kansas involved out-of-state residents. Now Oklahoma and Missouri have banned the procedure in almost all cases, Nebraska may further restrict abortion in the next few months, and women from Arkansas and Texas, where new bans are in place, are traveling well beyond their states’ borders.Kansas is reliably Republican in presidential elections, and its voters are generally conservative on many issues, but polling before the referendum suggested a close race and nuanced public opinions on abortion. The state is not a political monolith: Besides its Democratic governor, a majority of Kansas Supreme Court justices were appointed by Democrats, and Representative Sharice Davids, a Democrat, represents the Kansas City suburbs in Congress.Representative Sharice Davids speaks at an election watch party hosted by Kansans for Constitutional Freedom in Overland Park, Kansas.Arin Yoon for The New York TimesMs. Davids’s district was once a moderate Republican stronghold, but it has been trending toward Democrats in recent years. Her re-election contest in November in a redrawn district may be one of the most competitive House races in the country, and party strategists expect the abortion debate to play an important role in districts like hers that include swaths of upscale suburbs.Political strategists have been particularly attuned to turnout in the Kansas City suburbs, and are seeking to gauge how galvanizing abortion is, especially for swing voters and Democrats in a post-Roe environment.“They’re going to see how to advise their candidates to talk about the issue, they’re going to be looking at every political handicap,” said James Carville, the veteran Democratic strategist. “Every campaign consultant, everybody is watching this thing like it’s the Super Bowl.”As the election approached, and especially since the Supreme Court decision, rhetoric on the issue became more heated. Campaign signs on both sides have been vandalized, police officials and activists have said. In the Kansas City suburb of Overland Park, vandals targeted a Catholic church, defacing a building and a statue of Mary with red paint.Before the vote on Tuesday, which coincided with primary elections, Scott Schwab, the Republican secretary of state, predicted that around 36 percent of Kansas voters would participate, up slightly from the primary in 2020, a presidential election year. His office said that the constitutional amendment “has increased voter interest in the election,” a sentiment that was palpable on the ground.“I like the women’s rights,” said Norma Hamilton, a 90-year-old Republican from Lenexa, Kan. Despite her party registration, she said, she voted no. More
In Russian-occupied regions in Ukraine, local leaders are forcing civilians to accept Russian rule. Next come sham elections that would formalize Vladimir V. Putin’s claim that they are Russian territories.They have handed out Russian passports, cellphone numbers and set-top boxes for watching Russian television. They have replaced Ukrainian currency with the ruble, rerouted the internet through Russian servers and arrested hundreds who have resisted assimilation.In ways big and small, the occupying authorities on territory seized by Moscow’s forces are using fear and indoctrination to compel Ukrainians to adopt a Russian way of life. “We are one people,” blue-white-and-red billboards say. “We are with Russia.”Now comes the next act in President Vladimir V. Putin’s 21st-century version of a war of conquest: the grass-roots “referendum.”Russia-appointed administrators in towns, villages and cities like Kherson in Ukraine’s south are setting the stage for a vote as early as September that the Kremlin will present as a popular desire in the region to become part of Russia. They are recruiting pro-Russia locals for new “election commissions” and promoting to Ukrainian civilians the putative benefits of joining their country; they are even reportedly printing the ballots already.Any referendum would be totally illegitimate, Ukrainian and Western officials say, but it would carry ominous consequences. Analysts both in Moscow and Ukraine expect that it would serve as a prelude to Mr. Putin’s officially declaring the conquered area to be Russian territory, protected by Russian nuclear weapons — making future attempts by Kyiv to drive out Russian forces potentially much more costly.Annexation would also represent Europe’s biggest territorial expansion by force since World War II, affecting an area several times larger than Crimea, the Ukrainian peninsula that Mr. Putin took over in 2014.In a photograph taken during a visit organized by the Russian military, a woman applied for Russian citizenship and a Russian passport in July in Melitopol, Ukraine.Sergei Ilnitsky/EPA, via ShutterstockThe prospect of another annexation has affected the military timetable as well, putting pressure on Kyiv to try a risky counteroffensive sooner, rather than waiting for more long-range Western weapons to arrive that would raise the chances of success.“Carrying out a referendum is not hard at all,” Vladimir Konstantinov, the speaker of the Russian-imposed Crimean Parliament, said in a phone interview this week. “They will ask: ‘Take us under your guardianship, under your development, under your security.’”Mr. Konstantinov, a longtime pro-Russia politician in Crimea, sat next to Mr. Putin at the Kremlin when the Russian president signed the document annexing the peninsula to Russia. He also helped organize the Crimean “referendum” in which 97 percent voted in favor of joining Russia — a result widely rejected by the international community as a sham.Our Coverage of the Russia-Ukraine WarGrain Blockade: A breakthrough deal aims to lift a Russian blockade on Ukrainian grain shipments. But Ukrainian farmers who have been living under the risk of missile attacks are skeptical the agreement will hold.In the South: As Ukraine lays the groundwork for a counteroffensive to retake Kherson, Russia is racing to bolster its troops in the region.Economic Havoc: As food, energy and commodity prices continue to climb around the world, few countries are feeling the bite as much as Ukraine.Explosion at a Prison: A blast at a Russian-held prison in eastern Ukraine killed at least 50 captured Ukrainian fighters. With no clarity on what happened, each country is blaming the other.Now, Mr. Konstantinov said, he is in constant touch with the Russian-imposed occupying authorities in the neighboring Kherson region, which Russian troops captured early in the war. He said that the authorities had told him a few days ago that they had started printing ballots, with the aim of holding a vote in September.Kherson is one of four regions in which officials are signaling planned referendums, along with Zaporizhzhia in the south and Luhansk and Donetsk in the east. While the Kremlin claims it will be up to the area’s residents to “determine their own future,” Mr. Putin last month hinted he expected to annex the regions outright: he compared the war in Ukraine with Peter the Great’s wars of conquest in the 18th century and said that, like the Russian czar, “it has also fallen to us to return” lost Russian territory.At the same time, the Kremlin appears to be keeping its options open by offering few specifics. Aleksei Chesnakov, a Moscow political consultant who has advised the Kremlin on Ukraine policy, said Moscow viewed referendums on joining Russia as its “base scenario” — though preparations for a potential vote were not yet complete. He declined to say whether he was involved in the process himself.Ukrainian troops fired on a Russian target last month in the Donetsk region.Tyler Hicks/The New York Times“The referendum scenario looks to be realistic and the priority in the absence of signals from Kyiv about readiness for negotiations on a settlement,” Mr. Chesnakov said in a written response to questions. “The legal and political vacuum, of course, needs to be filled.”As a result, a scramble to mobilize the residents of Russian-occupied territories for a referendum is increasingly visible on the ground — portrayed as the initiative of local leaders.The Russian-appointed authorities of the Zaporizhzhia and Kherson regions, for instance, announced this week that they were forming “election commissions” to prepare for referendums, which one official said could happen on Sept. 11 — a day when local and regional elections are scheduled to be held across Russia.The announcement invited residents to apply to join the election commission by submitting a passport copy, education records and two I.D.-size photographs.Officials are accompanying preparations for a vote with an intensified propaganda campaign — priming both the area’s residents as well as the domestic audience in Russia for a looming annexation. A new pro-Russian newspaper in the Zaporizhzhia region titled its second issue last week with the headline: “The referendum will be!” On the marquee weekly news show on Russian state television last Sunday, a report promised that “everything is being done to ensure that Kherson returns to its historical homeland as soon as possible.”“Russia is beginning to roll out a version of what you could call an annexation playbook,” John Kirby, the spokesman for the U.S. National Security Council, said this month, comparing the referendum preparations with the Kremlin’s moves in 2014 to try to justify its annexation of Crimea. “Annexation by force will be a gross violation of the U.N. Charter and we will not allow it to go unchallenged or unpunished.”In Kyiv, Ukraine’s capital, officials say any referendum on merging with Russia or forming a Russian client state in occupied areas would be illegal, riddled with fraud and do nothing to legitimize land seizures.“Together With Russia,” a billboard proclaimed in Crimea before a 2014 referendum on joining the Russian Federation, which was widely rejected by the West as a sham.Sergey Ponomarev for The New York TimesFor Ukrainian civilians, the occupation has been accompanied by myriad hardships, including shortages of cash and medicine — a situation the Russians try to exploit to win allegiance from locals by distributing “humanitarian aid.”Those seeking a sense of normalcy are being incentivized to apply for a Russian passport, which is now required for things like registering a motor vehicle or certain types of businesses; newborns and orphans are automatically registered as Russian citizens.“There’s no money in Kherson, there’s no work in Kherson,” said Andrei, 33, who worked in the service department of a car dealership in the city before the war. He left his home in the city with his wife and small child in early July and moved to western Ukraine.“Kherson has returned to the 1990s when only vodka, beer and cigarettes were for sale,” he said.After taking control in the Kherson and Zaporizhzhia regions, Russian forces sought out pro-Kremlin Ukrainian officials and installed them in government positions.At the same time, they engaged in a continuing campaign to stifle dissent that included abducting, torturing and executing political and cultural leaders who were deemed a threat, according to witnesses interviewed by The New York Times, Western and Ukrainian officials, and independent humanitarian groups like Human Rights Watch.Russian occupiers cut off access to Ukrainian cellular service, and limited the availability of YouTube and a popular messaging app, Viber. They introduced the ruble and started changing the school curriculum to the Russian one — which increasingly seeks to indoctrinate children with Mr. Putin’s worldview.A top priority appears to have been to get locals watching Russian television: Russian state broadcasting employees in Crimea were deployed to Kherson to start a news show called “Kherson and Zaporizhzhia 24,” and set-top boxes giving access to the Russian airwaves were distributed for free — or even delivered to residents not able to pick them up in person.Ihor Kolykhaiev, the mayor of Kherson, at his office in April 2021.Brendan Hoffman for The New York TimesIn an interview late last month, Ihor Kolykhaiev, the mayor of the city of Kherson since 2020, said the Russian propaganda, coupled with the feeling of being abandoned by the government in Kyiv, was slowly succeeding in changing the perceptions of some residents who have stayed behind — mainly pensioners and people with low incomes.“I think that something is changing in relationships, probably in people’s habits,” he said, estimating that 5 to 10 percent of his constituents had changed their mind because of the propaganda.“This is an irreversible process that will happen in the future,” he added. “And that’s what I’m really worried about. Then it will be almost impossible to restore it.”Mr. Kolykhaiev spoke in a video interview from a makeshift office in Kherson. Days later, his assistant announced he had been abducted by pro-Russian occupying forces. As of Friday, he had not been heard from.Mr. Putin has referred to Kherson and other parts of Ukraine’s southeast as Novorossiya, or New Russia — the region’s name after it was conquered by Catherine the Great in the 18th century and became part of the Russian Empire. In recent years, nostalgia in the region for the Soviet past and skepticism of the pro-Western government in Kyiv still lingered among older generations, even as the region was forging a new Ukrainian identity.Ukrainian flags and a banner that reads, “Kherson is Ukraine,” during a rally in March against Russian occupation in Kherson.Olexandr Chornyi/Associated PressEarly in the occupation this spring, residents of Kherson gathered repeatedly for large, boisterous protests to challenge Russian troops even if they provoked gunfire in response. This open confrontation has largely ended, according to a 30-year-old lifelong Kherson resident, Ivan, who remains in the city and asked that his last name be withheld because of the risks of speaking out publicly.“As soon as there is a large gathering of people, soldiers appear immediately,” he said by phone. “It’s really life-threatening at this point.”But signs of resistance are evident, residents said.“Our people go out at night and paint Ukrainian flags,” said another man, Andrei. “In yellow and blue letters they paint, ‘We believe in the Ukrainian Armed Forces.’”Andrew E. Kramer More
Coming on the same night that voters in San Francisco ousted their lightning rod of a district attorney, Chesa Boudin — in what was widely interpreted as a setback for progressive ideas on criminal justice — it would have been easy to overlook what happened on Tuesday in South Dakota.But the results there are no less consequential for national politics. Voters in South Dakota sent a resounding message of their own to the state’s conservative power structure: We’re in charge here, not you.The immediate issue was a constitutional amendment requiring that certain voter-initiated referendums must pass by 60 percent, rather than a simple majority. The measure was defeated decisively, with more than two-thirds of voters rejecting the proposed new threshold.But this wasn’t just a political process story. It was the latest round in a national fight between voters and state legislatures, who have been battling for primacy on issues like marijuana legalization, gerrymandering and health care. Last year, my colleagues Reid Epstein and Nick Corasaniti took a broad look at Republican-led efforts to limit ballot initiatives, which have grown only more intense in the last 12 months.In South Dakota, the ballot question was pushed by Republican state lawmakers who are hoping to defeat a November referendum on expanding access to Medicaid. To David Daley, the author of several recent books on grass-roots democracy, it was a classic example of the power struggle playing out in state capitols across the country.“Whenever citizens effectively use the ballot initiative to make policy changes the legislature opposes, lawmakers bite back, and they bite back hard,” Daley said.Raising the threshold for ballot drives is an increasingly common tool. A new report by RepresentUs, a nonpartisan group that promotes ballot initiatives, found that since 2017, at least four states have passed laws that impose supermajority requirements and put them in front of voters as a ballot question, out of at least 64 bills proposed.And it’s not always Republican lawmakers pitted against progressive voters.“We’ve seen legislators attempt to threaten and limit the ballot-measure process in red, blue and purple states,” said Anh-Linh Kearney, a research analyst for RepresentUs, pointing to Democratic-controlled Colorado, which raised the requirement for passing ballot measures to 55 percent in 2016.Not-so-subtle tactics to target referendumsChris Melody Fields Figueredo, the executive director of the Ballot Initiative Strategy Center, described a “growing trend of tactical ways to make the process harder,” pointing to her group’s tally of 108 laws introduced this year in 26 states that would make technical tweaks to the rules surrounding ballot initiatives.Understand the June 7 Primary ElectionBy showing little enthusiasm for progressive and Trumpian candidates alike, voters in seven states showed the limits of the ideologies of both parties.Takeaways: For all the talk of sweeping away the old order, the primaries on June 7 largely saw the establishment striking back. Here’s what else we learned.Winners and Losers: Here is a rundown of some of the most notable wins and losses.California Races: The recall of a progressive prosecutor showed the shifting winds on criminal justice. In Los Angeles, Rick Caruso and Representative Karen Bass are heading to a runoff mayoral election.New Mexico’s Governor Race: Mark Ronchetti, a former television meteorologist, has won New Mexico’s Republican nomination for governor.Since 2017, Fields Figueredo said, the center had counted a fivefold increase in bills introduced and enacted that would make it more difficult to pass ballot measures.Sometimes those tweaks take Kafkaesque forms.In Arkansas, for instance, a drive to establish a nonpartisan redistricting commission ran into a deviously written 2015 law requiring that canvassers for the ballot initiative pass a federal background check conducted by the State Police.But there was a catch. The State Police could not do federal background checks. So the group behind the ballot drive, Arkansas Voters First, pulled what information it could from publicly available records and submitted thousands more signatures than required. The secretary of state rejected those background checks on the grounds that the canvassers had not “passed,” and threw out more than 10,000 signatures.Litigation followed. In a 2020 decision, the Arkansas Supreme Court sided with the secretary of state, ruling that the statute had mandated the background checks, whether or not the task was impossible. In a dissent, Justice Josephine Linker Hart pointed out the absurdity of the statute, noting that “the State Police do not ‘pass’ or ‘fail’ the subject of a background check” — they merely share the information from the relevant databases.“It was wild,” said Bonnie Miller, who led the Arkansas Voters First petition drive. “I’m still not over it.”A court later threw out the background-check requirement, but the cat-and-mouse game goes on: The Arkansas General Assembly passed a new law that lengthened the list of offenses that disqualify paid canvassers. And a measure similar to the one South Dakota voters just rejected, raising the threshold for successful ballot initiatives to 60 percent, is now on the ballot.Miller feels as if she’s battling for the very principle behind voter-led referendums. “This threshold, it’s just death to direct democracy in our state,” she said.‘People want the ability to make decisions for themselves’Opponents of the South Dakota amendment had a couple of factors working in their favor.There’s the state’s long history with ballot initiatives: Father Robert Haire, a radical Catholic priest, helped pioneer the concept as an activist with the Populist Party in the 1880s.Then there’s the fact that Medicaid is popular. Voter-led petitions have already powered Medicaid expansion in Idaho, Missouri, Nebraska, Oklahoma and Utah. The Kaiser Family Foundation, a nonprofit group that tracks information and trends about the country’s health care system, has found that three-quarters of Americans hold a favorable opinion of the program — including 76 percent of independents and 65 percent of Republicans.At this point, only 12 states have not expanded Medicaid under the Affordable Care Act, despite its popularity. As you can see from this interactive map, also put together by Kaiser, these states are concentrated in the Deep South, along with Kansas, South Dakota, Texas, Wisconsin and Wyoming. But when Kaiser asked people in those states whether they wanted to expand Medicaid’s coverage, 61 percent said yes.And finally, Fields Figueredo said, voters have a deep-seated aversion to having their choices limited by politicians — setting up inevitable clashes with lawmakers who “don’t like being told what to do.”“People want the ability to make decisions for themselves,” she said.What to read“We’re bleeding out, and you’re not there”: Families of the Uvalde, Texas, massacre pleaded with Congress today to enact new gun control laws.Attorney General Ken Paxton of Texas said this week that the state would investigate fake accounts on Twitter — an issue that Elon Musk, the world’s richest man, has pointed to as he appears to waver on a blockbuster deal to buy the platform. What’s in it for Paxton and Texas? David McCabe and J. David Goodman explain.The Supreme Court is expected to release some enormously important rulings in the coming weeks. David Leonhardt previews the five biggest ones.Rick Caruso will face Representative Karen Bass in the general election for Los Angeles mayor.Jenna Schoenefeld for The New York TimesAbout last night’s election results …Last night, we wrote about four candidates we were watching in Tuesday’s primaries, and 24 hours later, we have some results — but as expected, we’re still waiting for more.In one of the three Republican primary challenges we were monitoring, the incumbent is safe. In the other two, it’s too soon to say.Understand the 2022 Midterm ElectionsCard 1 of 6Why are these midterms so important? More
La votación tiene el potencial de cambiar el sistema político del país. Pero hay quienes temen que no sea más que un instrumento de propaganda.CIUDAD DE MÉXICO — Al pasear por la capital de México en estos días, sería fácil asumir que el presidente del país está en riesgo inminente de perder su trabajo.Las calles de la ciudad están llenas de carteles, volantes y vallas publicitarias que instan a los mexicanos a votar para saber si deben sacar del poder al presidente Andrés Manuel López Obrador en una elección revocatoria este domingo.Solo que no es la oposición la que le dice a la gente que vaya a las urnas. Son los leales al presidente.“Apoya al presidente López Obrador,” dice un volante. “Si NO participas, los corrupto$ nos quitarán las becas, los apoyos y las pensiones que hoy recibimos”.Durante la mayor parte de un siglo, los presidentes mexicanos han cumplido sus mandatos de seis años sin falta, hayan sido o no elegidos limpiamente, o hayan llegado a ser despreciados por gran parte de la población. La elección revocatoria, propuesta por López Obrador y la primera de este tipo en México, tiene el potencial de cambiar el sistema político del país, al dar a los ciudadanos una herramienta nueva y poderosa para hacer que sus líderes rindan cuentas.El domingo se pedirá a los votantes que digan si quieren que a López Obrador “se le revoque el mandato por pérdida de la confianza” o “siga en la presidencia de la república hasta que termine su periodo”. Para que sea vinculante, debe participar el 40 por ciento del electorado.Lo llamativo es que el promotor más entusiasta de la votación —y la persona más interesada en poner a prueba la consolidada popularidad del mandatario— ha sido el propio presidente. Los líderes de la oposición han pedido a sus seguidores que boicoteen el ejercicio, y los analistas creen que la participación podría ser demasiado baja para que los resultados cuenten.Un simpatizante del presidente en Ciudad de México da información sobre dónde y cuándo votar en el referendo revocatorio.Alejandro Cegarra for The New York TimesAsí que, aunque López Obrador ha calificado la revocatoria de mandato como “un ensayo democrático del primer orden”, muchos temen que se convierta en algo mucho menos significativo: una herramienta publicitaria destinada principalmente a reforzar la afirmación de poder del presidente.“Se supone que es un mecanismo de control cívico del poder, pero se ha convertido en un instrumento de propaganda política”, dijo Carlos Bravo Regidor, analista político y crítico del gobierno. El partido en el poder, dijo Bravo Regidor, “quiere que esto sea una demostración de fuerza, de músculo y capacidad para sacar a la gente a las calles y hacer explícito su apoyo a López Obrador”.En un cálido lunes en Ciudad de México, los voluntarios de la campaña del presidente se desplegaron por un barrio residencial armados con volantes y amplias sonrisas, anunciando alegremente los centros de votación cercanos y diciendo a cualquiera dispuesto a escuchar que fuera a votar en la revocación de mandato.Allan Pozos, uno de los líderes del grupo, dijo que esperaba que el ejercicio sentara “un precedente” para que los futuros líderes pudieran ser expulsados si fuera necesario. Esta vez, sin embargo, solo quiere que el presidente sepa que se le quiere.“Es para demostrar que Andrés Manuel tiene el fuerte apoyo del pueblo”, dijo Pozos. “Andrés muchas veces se siente solo, porque tiene que ir contra todo un sistema y no tiene apoyo”.Allan Pozos, uno de los líderes de los voluntarios que hacen campaña por el presidente en Ciudad de México.Alejandro Cegarra para The New York TimesTal muestra de apoyo no podría llegar en un mejor momento para el presidente, que ha completado la mitad de su mandato mientras enfrenta dificultades para cumplir con las promesas clave de la campaña que lo llevó al cargo en una victoria arrolladora en 2018. Prometió una “transformación” del país que iba a reducir la pobreza, poner en marcha la economía y atajar la violencia endémica de raíz.Pero después de una pandemia y una recesión mundial, las tasas de pobreza siguen siendo persistentemente altas, el crecimiento económico es anémico y los homicidios siguen rondando niveles récord.Sin embargo, López Obrador sigue siendo muy popular, ya que más de la mitad de los mexicanos aprueban su gestión, según las encuestas. Su gobierno ha tratado de mejorar la situación de los pobres, al aumentar el salario mínimo cuatro veces e incrementar el gasto en bienestar social.López Obrador también ha ganado puntos con gestos simbólicos, como convertir la residencia presidencial en un museo abierto al público, y volar en avión comercial, incluso al visitar Estados Unidos.Un cartel de apoyo a López Obrador en un autobús.Alejandro Cegarra para The New York TimesSu alta estima entre los votantes es también un tributo, según coinciden partidarios y críticos, a su implacable difusión de una narrativa oficial en la que se presenta como un guerrero solitario del pueblo, que se enfrenta a los grupos corruptos del poder tradicional.“Los resultados han estado por debajo de las expectativas del propio gobierno”, dijo Jorge Zepeda Patterson, un destacado columnista mexicano que ha apoyado al presidente, refiriéndose a los logros de López Obrador durante su mandato.“La polarización es muy rentable políticamente, sobre todo si no tienes resultados”, dijo Zepeda Patterson, y agregó: “Al menos puedes construir la narrativa de que estás luchando”.El principal riesgo de la revocatoria para el presidente es la posibilidad de que grandes sectores del país simplemente ignoren el ejercicio por completo, especialmente porque tiene lugar el Domingo de Ramos. Por ley, para que el voto se convierta en vinculante, al menos 37 millones de mexicanos necesitan participar, significativamente más que el número de personas que votaron por López Obrador en las elecciones de 2018 y que lo llevaron a la presidencia en una victoria contundente.Una manifestación en apoyo a López Obrador, en la capital mexicana el miércolesAlejandro Cegarra para The New York TimesPero López Obrador ya ha identificado un chivo expiatorio en caso de baja participación: el organismo de control electoral del país.Durante meses, el presidente ha atacado al Instituto Nacional Electoral porque considera que ha fracasado al no dedicar suficientes recursos a la publicidad y la gestión del proceso.“Desde el principio debieron promover la consulta, no actuar de manera tramposa, guardando silencio, no difundiendo la consulta para que la gente no se enterara, instalando casillas en lo más apartado”, dijo el presidente en una reciente conferencia de prensa, refiriéndose al instituto electoral. “Pura trampa y luego abiertamente en contra de nosotros, en contra mía”.El instituto pidió al gobierno federal más dinero para supervisar la contienda, con pocos resultados. Con solo aproximadamente la mitad del presupuesto que dijo necesitar, el organismo electoral instaló aproximadamente un tercio de las mesas que colocaría en una elección normal.Partidarios de López Obrador en la manifestación el miércolesAlejandro Cegarra para The New York TimesLorenzo Córdova, el presidente del instituto electoral, conocido por su acrónimo INE, dice que le están tendiendo una trampa para que fracase.“No es solo el presidente”, señaló Córdova, “hay una campaña sistemática y bien organizada para descalificar al INE”. El objetivo, dijo, es “lesionar al árbitro y eventualmente propiciar su captura política”.La Suprema Corte de Justicia de la Nación ha dicho que los partidos políticos no pueden hacer publicidad de la revocatoria, y, sin embargo, el rostro de López Obrador ha aparecido en carteles en todo el país.Córdova dice que el instituto electoral no ha determinado quién paga por todos los anuncios, pero dijo que hay al menos el doble de ellos en los estados donde el partido del presidente competirá en las elecciones para gobernador en junio.“Hay que sospechar que hay una intencionalidad política”, detrás de la campaña de mercadotecnia, dijo Córdova.La Suprema Corte de Justicia de la Nación dijo que los partidos políticos no pueden anunciar la revocación y, sin embargo, el rostro de López Obrador ha aparecido en carteles en todo el país.Alejandro Cegarra para The New York TimesHay, por supuesto, beneficios estratégicos que podrían provenir de pedir al país que opine sobre si les gusta o no el presidente en este momento particular. López Obrador fundó su partido político y tiene un interés obvio en hacer todo lo posible para asegurar la victoria en las elecciones generales para reemplazarlo en 2024.Los patrones de votación en la revocatoria de mandato le indicarán al presidente dónde están los puntos débiles de su lado, y cuál de los posibles candidatos a la presidencia es capaz de lograr que la gente acuda a las urnas.“Es una especie de experimento, un ensayo”, dijo Blanca Heredia, profesora del CIDE, un centro de investigación de Ciudad de México. “De cara al 24, para ir midiendo qué capacidad tienen sus operadores para movilizar el voto”.Pase lo que pase el domingo, para muchos en México es difícil ver cómo la primera revocatoria presidencial de la historia del país perjudicará seriamente a este presidente.“Andrés Manuel tiene esa cosa de que hasta cuando pierde, gana”, dijo Heredia. “Siempre tiene una manera de volver la derrota un triunfo”.Oscar Lopez More
