More stories

  • in

    Debbie Mucarsel-Powell Challenges Rick Scott for Senate in Florida

    Ms. Mucarsel-Powell, the first South American immigrant elected to the House, is one of several Democrats who have entered the 2024 race.Debbie Mucarsel-Powell, a Democrat who represented Miami for one term in the House after immigrating to the United States from Ecuador, stepped forward on Tuesday to challenge the incumbent Republican, Rick Scott, for the Senate in 2024.Flipping the seat could be crucial for Democrats to keep their narrow majority in the Senate, but their path to victory in what was once a quintessential battleground state appears to be difficult, according to independent projections.Ms. Mucarsel-Powell, 52, is seeking to become only the second Latina elected to the Senate, after Senator Catherine Cortez Masto, Democrat of Nevada.In 2018, Ms. Mucarsel-Powell upset Carlos Curbelo, a two-term Republican incumbent in Florida’s 26th District. She lost the seat in 2020 to Carlos Gimenez, who was mayor of Miami-Dade County.In a campaign introduction video posted on social media, she sought to cast Mr. Scott as a hard-line opponent of women’s reproductive rights who would seek to ban abortion nationally. She also criticized his past support for cutting Social Security and Medicare as a way to balance the federal budget and rein in the national debt. He later reversed that position.“Ya no más,” she said in Spanish in the video, meaning “no more,” and later added, “I’ve already fought guys like Rick Scott, and beat them.”Noting that she was the first South American immigrant elected to Congress and that she once worked for minimum wage at a doughnut shop, Ms. Mucarsel-Powell sought to draw an economic and cultural contrast to Mr. Scott.A former associate dean at Florida International University, she is the latest prominent Democrat to join the race, which includes Alan Grayson, a former representative, and Phil Ehr, a U.S. Navy veteran who unsuccessfully challenged Representative Matt Gaetz in 2020.Mr. Scott, 70, who is one of the wealthiest members of Congress, served two terms as governor before being elected to the Senate in 2018. Last year, he was the chairman of the Senate Republican campaign arm, but his long-shot bid to dislodge Senator Mitch McConnell as the minority leader fizzled.“We’d like to welcome yet another failed congressional candidate to the crowded Democrat primary,” Priscilla Ivasco, a spokeswoman for Mr. Scott’s campaign, said in a statement.Momentum in Florida has favored Republicans, who hold the governor’s office, the Legislature and both Senate seats. And in otherwise disappointing midterm elections for the G.O.P. last year, Gov. Ron DeSantis was re-elected in a landslide that laid the groundwork for his presidential candidacy. More

  • in

    The Long-Shot Candidate Playbook: Make the Debate, Then See What Happens

    The 2024 Republican field has a number of contenders who have almost no chance to take down Donald Trump. So why do they run?Donald J. Trump holds a commanding lead over his nearest rivals for the Republican presidential nomination. One or two might make a dent in the numbers at the first debate this week. But the rest of the field, featuring little-known candidates, is unlikely to make an impact.In fact, there is almost no plausible path for them to the nomination, especially in a race with Mr. Trump as the dominant force, which raises the key question: Why do they do it?Perhaps the biggest reason is the debate stage itself: National broadcasts have the potential to provide a biotech entrepreneur, a Miami mayor and a North Dakota governor the chance to become household names and position themselves for future success in politics — or whatever field they pursue.The longer-than-long-shot candidates — some have run in almost every cycle since cable news and social media became significant drivers in elections — are willing to endure the grueling schedule, the deep loss of privacy and the frequent humiliations of a campaign because there are so many consolation prizes.Candidates can raise their profiles and polish their résumés for a future bid for office. They can land lucrative commentator gigs on any number of platforms. A presidential run can lead to a high-paying job in the private sector or, of course, a big role in someone else’s administration.“There are always people who want to make a name for themselves,” said Curtis Loftis, who as the elected treasurer of South Carolina since 2010 has seen a parade of presidential aspirants roll through his early nominating state.“Some people have personal ambitions that allows them, or requires them, to run for higher office,” he said. “Politics is an industry. People have to keep their name fresh. By losing, they end up on highly paid corporate boards. It’s an industry — it’s not pretty.”But this campaign, especially, highlights the mixed motives of presidential hopefuls because there is such a large field, even though Mr. Trump overshadows the race like the de facto incumbent.The trend is somewhat new. Though newcomers have always pursued unlikely campaigns, they were mostly relegated to the sidelines. Even those whose candidacies were largely aspirational relied on their experience in elected office as a reason for running.The 2012 election was perhaps the tipping point, when Herman Cain, a successful chief executive of a pizza chain, at one point led the Republican primary polls. In 2016, Mr. Trump entered the race in what was seen as a vanity campaign.Herman Cain at a primary event in 2012 in Tampa, Fla.Marcus Yam for The New York TimesThe open field for Democrats in 2020 brought plenty of elected experience, but it also garnered attention for outsiders like Andrew Yang, another entrepreneur, and Marianne Williamson, a self-help author, who is running again in 2024. Both participated in the Democratic primary debates.Strategists of both parties who have worked for candidates with slim chances said it was unheard-of for them to admit privately that their goals were less than the winning the biggest prize. Yet, their behavior often betrays them, including on a debate stage when they decline to take on the front-runner, or, in the case of many of Mr. Trump’s rivals, even to say his name.“A lot of candidates approach campaigns with an ‘opportunity maximizing’ approach — if you don’t get to the moon, you can at least land among the stars,” said Sarah Isgur, who was a top aide to the long-shot Republican candidate Carly Fiorina in 2016. “They want to make sure not to shut any doors along the way — cabinet, TV contracts, whatever. That’s why you see some of these types of candidates pull so many punches on the stump or debate stage, because they don’t know who they’ll need as friends later on.”Carly Fiorina campaigning in 2016 in in Bedford, N.H.Todd Heisler/The New York TimesLike defense lawyers who never ask if a client is guilty, paid strategists mount the best campaign possible given a candidate’s skills, message and budget.Still, strategists’ gut instincts usually tell them how their clients have inwardly set their sights. “You can tell right away if they’re really running to lead or if they have other goals in mind,” said Gail Gitcho, a strategist who has worked for several Republican presidential candidates, including Vivek Ramaswamy, the conservative commentator, before she parted ways with him this spring.“Some candidates are running for president, others are running to replace Tucker Carlson,” Ms. Gitcho said.It goes without saying that getting candidates in the heat of campaign battle to admit to ulterior motives is a fruitless quest. Invariably, they cite outsiders like Jimmy Carter, Barack Obama and Mr. Trump himself who went all the way.But the rise of the wealthy, self-funded candidates brings in a whole new factor to a campaign. Perry Johnson, a Michigan businessman hovering around one percent in polls despite crisscrossing Iowa, said that raising his profile to increase his net worth was the furthest thing from his mind.“I am a very rich man, I don’t need any extra money,” Mr. Johnson said in an interview in Cedar Rapids, Iowa. “I expect to win this presidency. I am the one guy that the country truly needs.” He is one of a handful of multimillionaires seeking the nomination. (Egos, too, are rarely in short supply for the long shots running for president.)The rise of wealthy, self-funded candidates has given hope to a new type of candidate like Perry Johnson who is hovering around zero percent in polls.Maddie McGarvey for The New York TimesEven the longest of long shots — candidates with no electoral experience and limited political charisma — believe they might catch lightning in a bottle.And if not, perhaps they can capture the attention of the front-runner. Voters who attend events in Iowa or New Hampshire with Mr. Trump’s rivals openly say they are looking to see who could be a running mate — maybe Senator Tim Scott of South Carolina, or the former U.N. ambassador Nikki Haley, or Mr. Ramaswamy.A New York Times/Siena College Poll last month showed Mr. Trump with 54 percent of the likely Republican primary vote, Mr. DeSantis with 17 percent and all others at 3 percent or less, including former Vice President Mike Pence, Mr. Scott, Ms. Haley and Mr. Ramaswamy.Gov. Doug Burgum of North Dakota, little known outside his state until recently, made it into the debate partly by offering $20 gift cards for a $1 donation, helping him clear the threshold of 40,000 individual donors to participate.“We’re running for president, and we actually think we have an excellent chance,” Mr. Burgum said in an interview, speaking in the first-person plural as if his candidacy was a movement.He dismissed Mr. Trump’s utter dominance of early polls as a reason not to run.“You wouldn’t say so-and-so is going to win the Super Bowl next February, we’re just going to cancel the season,” he said. “No, you play the game. America loves competition. America loves an underdog story, too.” More

  • in

    Ron DeSantis, su educación y campaña política

    El gobernador de Florida solía enfatizar su educación en Yale y Harvard, escuelas de élite. Ahora, como aspirante presidencial republicano, la utiliza para azuzar las guerras culturales. Esto halló un análisis del Times.El gobernador de Florida, Ron DeSantis, busca la nominación a la candidatura presidencial republicana y ha ido moldeando su campaña y su personaje político en torno a una guerra contra la supuesta clase dirigente del país: una élite incompetente e irresponsable de burócratas, periodistas, educadores y otros “expertos” cuya autoridad perniciosa e inmerecida ha jurado derrotar. A pesar de sus dificultades en la campaña electoral, DeSantis se ha convertido en el líder de una nueva vanguardia conservadora que ve las escuelas y universidades públicas como el principal campo de batalla de las guerras culturales y sus políticas educativas en Florida como un modelo para los estados republicanos de todo el país.Sin embargo, la clase dirigente que DeSantis critica es la misma a la que pertenece. Se educó en las escuelas de Derecho de las universidades de Yale y Harvard, pasó los primeros años de su edad adulta subiendo como la espuma en la élite estadounidense. Un análisis de The New York Times revela el modo en que DeSantis, aunque se sentía genuinamente decepcionado por su paso por las instituciones de élite, también fue muy astuto a la hora de entender cómo podía sacarles provecho. Ahora ofrece al electorado una historia revisionista de sus propios encuentros con la clase dirigente para reforzar sus argumentos a favor de desbancarla y de rehacer la educación pública misma.A continuación, las cinco conclusiones de nuestro artículo de The New York Times.Se benefició de recibir una educación de éliteDurante su campaña, DeSantis suele describir sus años en las escuelas de Derecho de Yale y Harvard como un periodo detrás de las filas enemigas y describe ambas instituciones como lugares donde los estudiantes y los profesores eran antiestadounideses. Pero su experiencia general fue más variada de lo que reconoce.En Yale, formó parte de St. Elmo, una de las “sociedades secretas” de la escuela, conocida históricamente por ser semillero de futuros senadores y presidentes. Aunque, según él, Harvard estaba dominada por los “estudios jurídicos críticos” de izquierdas, la doctrina estaba en decadencia cuando él llegó y la escuela le proporcionó acceso a los intermediarios del poder de la conservadora Sociedad Federalista.Cuando ingresó en la política, su currículo de élite lo ayudó a atraer a donantes adinerados, recaudar fondos y conseguir contactos con republicanos importantes. Como reconoció en una mesa redonda en Cambridge, Massachusetts, poco antes de presentarse por primera vez a la gobernación: “Harvard les abre muchas puertas” a los aspirantes a políticos.Sus hermanos de fraternidad recordaron rituales de novatadas y una temprana comodidad con el poderHaciendo eco del propio relato de DeSantis sobre el choque cultural en Yale, algunos antiguos compañeros de clase contaron que el futuro gobernador, procedente de Dunedin, ciudad suburbana de clase media en la costa del Golfo, quedó perplejo y muy pronto se sintió ajeno al campus de Yale, más cosmopolita y diverso que su comunidad.Encontró a su tribu en el equipo de béisbol y en la fraternidad Delta Kappa Epsilon, donde participó en los brutales rituales de novatadas del grupo, un ejemplo temprano, en opinión de algunos antiguos hermanos de fraternidad, de su comodidad con el poder y la intimidación.En una ocasión, DeSantis y otros hermanos hicieron una broma en la que había que poner en marcha una licuadora entre las piernas de un novato con los ojos vendados. Durante la “semana infernal” de la fraternidad, que se llevaba a cabo en invierno, DeSantis obligó a un aspirante a llevar un pantalón de béisbol sin la parte trasera y los muslos, dejando al descubierto nalgas y genitales, según declararon antiguos hermanos y novatos. DeSantis negó estas versiones a través de su vocero, quien las calificó de “afirmaciones ridículas y completamente falsas”.DeSantis llegó tarde a las guerras culturalesEn la actualidad, no se puede dejar de asociar a DeSantis con políticas que se enfrentan a lo que él considera ideología de izquierdas en las escuelas y universidades públicas de Florida. Estos son algunos ejemplos: su intervención en la escuela de artes liberales New College; las iniciativas que facilitan a los padres cuestionar los libros disponibles en las escuelas primarias y secundarias; una ley que prohíbe hablar en clase sobre orientación sexual e identidad de género de formas que no se consideren “adecuadas para la edad”, así como las prohibiciones contra la enseñanza de ideas como el “racismo sistémico” en las cátedras principales de las universidades públicas.Sin embargo, según averiguó el Times, su ascenso hasta ubicarse como el principal guerrero cultural de su partido no estuvo predeterminado. Durante gran parte de su carrera política, incluidos sus primeros años como gobernador de Florida, no se le identificaba como interesado en la política educativa ni en los debates sobre raza y género (cuando un legislador de Florida propuso por primera vez abolir por completo el New College, la universidad de artes liberales que ofrece una experiencia educativa de excelencia a precios de institución pública, DeSantis respondió: “¿Qué es el New College?”).Tuvo que pasar la pandemia de coronavirus (y las reacciones contra los mandatos de mascarillas, los cierres de escuelas y la difusión de planes de estudios “antirracistas” y de “equidad”) para que DeSantis se diera cuenta del poder político de los temas educativos y consolidara su desconfianza hacia los expertos académicos y científicos.Encontró una causa común con un nuevo grupo de académicos conservadoresMientras luchaba contra la teoría crítica de la raza y las élites burocráticas, DeSantis se vinculó con un movimiento creciente de académicos y activistas conservadores fuera de Florida, en particular en el Hillsdale College de Míchigan y el Claremont Institute de California.Hace poco, en un retiro de donantes, DeSantis incluyó un panel de Claremont destinado a “definir el ‘régimen’ que nos gobierna con ilegalidad” y exponer una estrategia para “hacer que los estados sean más autónomos del régimen woke al librarse de los intereses de izquierda”, según correos electrónicos de planificación obtenidos por el Times.En un informe en el que se pedía que Florida aboliera los programas de diversidad, uno de los expertos —que en 2021 argumentó en un discurso que el feminismo vuelve a las mujeres “más medicadas, entrometidas y pendencieras”— instaba a DeSantis a “ordenar investigaciones de derechos civiles en todas las unidades universitarias en las que las mujeres superen ampliamente en número a los hombres” y a erradicar “cualquier elemento en contra de los hombres del plan de estudios”.Sus políticas han cambiado de rumbo en materia de libertad de cátedraEn Florida, DeSantis se alejó por completo del compromiso que había hecho antes de mantener la libertad de cátedra. Incluso al pedir que se desmantele la ortodoxia woke, ha impuesto otra, con una prohibición radical de la enseñanza de la “política de identidad” en las clases obligatorias en los colegios y universidades públicas de Florida. En nombre de los “derechos de los padres”, las políticas respaldadas por DeSantis han dado a los floridanos conservadores un derecho de veto sobre los libros y planes de estudio favorecidos por sus vecinos más liberales.Una persona designada por DeSantis, el activista conservador Chris Rufo, ha argumentado que “el objetivo de la universidad no es la indagación libre”. En los tribunales, los abogados del gobierno de DeSantis han esgrimido que el concepto de libertad de cátedra no aplica a los maestros de las universidades públicas, cuya enseñanza es un mero “discurso gubernamental”, controlable por funcionarios debidamente electos.Nicholas Confessore es reportero político y de investigación radicado en Nueva York y miembro de la redacción del Times Magazine; cubre la intersección de la riqueza, el poder y la influencia en Washington y más allá. Se unió al Times en 2004. @nickconfessore • Facebook More

  • in

    Ramaswamy’s Foreign Policy Approach Offers Rivals a Line of Attack

    As Vivek Ramaswamy rises in the polls, fellow Republican presidential candidates are keying in on a number of policy pronouncements that veer far from the G.O.P. mainstream.Republican presidential rivals, looking to blunt Vivek Ramaswamy’s rise in national primary polls ahead of the first primary debate on Wednesday, have seized on the political arena where the upstart entrepreneur has strayed far afield from his party’s thinkers: foreign policy.Opponents have attacked Mr. Ramaswamy for his assertions that he would leave Taiwan to the Chinese once the United States has sufficiently expanded its domestic semiconductor industry and that he would allow Russia to keep parts of eastern Ukraine in order to entice President Vladimir V. Putin away from his military alliance with China. Most recently, he said he would curtail military aid to Israel after stabilizing the Middle East, perhaps the politically riskiest position yet.“This is part of a concerning pattern with Vivek,” Nikki Haley, the former U.S. ambassador to the United Nations now running for the Republican presidential nomination, said Monday about Mr. Ramaswamy’s Israel comments. “Between abandoning Israel, abolishing the F.B.I., and giving Taiwan to China, his foreign policy proposals have a common theme: They make America less safe.”Candidates have also looked askance at peculiar statements Mr. Ramaswamy made this month suggesting a government cover-up behind the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001; former Vice President Mike Pence said he was “deeply offended.”Mr. Ramaswamy, who has never held elected office or worked in government, expresses supreme confidence in his foreign policy views. He has cited as his models George F. Kennan, the architect of America’s Cold War global reach, and James A. Baker III, the American diplomat most credited for transitioning the world beyond the Cold War. He has vowed as president to go to Moscow the way Richard M. Nixon went to China.But in a political campaign, his positions may come off as naïve or bizarre — and easy to exploit. His tendency to answer any question posed to him has sent him down a rabbit hole of conspiratorial innuendo on Sept. 11. First, he told an interviewer, “I don’t believe the government has told us the truth” about the attacks. In a lengthy post on X, formerly known as Twitter, he subsequently explained that he was suggesting a deeper involvement in the attack by Saudi Arabia’s government.Then in an interview posted Monday in The Atlantic, he plunged deeper, asking, “how many police, how many federal agents, were on the planes that hit the Twin Towers?”His rivals’ criticisms in some cases have disregarded the broader context of Mr. Ramaswamy’s statements. His pledge to pull back military aid to Israel, made last week in an interview with the actor Russell Brand on the video platform Rumble that’s popular on the right, were part of a larger conversation on expanding Israel’s bilateral peace agreements with its neighbors that would make military aid less necessary.But caveats and context are often sacrificed on the campaign trail, and Mr. Ramaswamy said on Monday that he expected further foreign policy attacks on the debate stage Wednesday night in Milwaukee.“I personally think we should spend a lot of time on it,” he said in an interview, “instead of rehashing pre-canned lines on who is more anti-woke.”Mr. Ramaswamy on Monday framed the blowback from his critics as hostility from “a broken foreign policy establishment that is sanctimoniously steeped in the disastrous mistakes of the last four decades.”But his proposals are pushing the envelope, even for a Republican Party increasingly dominated by isolationism, and open to conspiracy theories.Among those proposals are a quid-pro-quo offer to Mr. Putin: He would promise to block Ukraine from joining NATO and freeze the battle lines in Ukraine, with Russia controlling Crimea and parts of eastern Ukraine, in exchange for a Putin break with China.Chris Christie, the former governor of New Jersey and a fellow candidate for the Republican nomination, slammed that position from Ukraine in an interview with The Washington Post this month, calling it “a false choice” and “a ridiculous statement.”Even as Mr. Ramaswamy promises to isolate China, he told the conservative broadcaster Hugh Hewitt that the United States would continue to defend Taiwan through 2028, when a Ramaswamy administration will have rebuilt the domestic semiconductor industry. After that, Mr. Ramaswamy said, the U.S. commitment to Taiwan would change.“You are saying ‘I will go to war, including attacking the Chinese mainland, if you attack before semiconductor independence. And afterward, you can have Taiwan?’” Mr. Hewitt asked incredulously.“Well, Hugh, I’m running to be the next president, and so I expect to be the president inaugurated on Jan. 20, 2025,” Mr. Ramaswamy answered. “So I’m wearing that hat when I’m choosing my words very carefully right now. And I’m being very clear: Xi Jinping should not mess with Taiwan until we have achieved semiconductor independence, until the end of my first term when I will lead us there,” he added, referring to the Chinese president.But his comments on Israel, in the hands of his rivals, could threaten his rising star, considering the centrality of Israel to many conservative voters, especially evangelical Christians. After Jewish and Israeli publications played up his comments on pulling back military aid, the conservative radio host Mark Levin responded on the social media platform X, “Not good. Awful, actually,” adding, “He threw Taiwan under the bus too.”In a lengthy response, released publicly as an open letter to the candidate, Matthew Brooks, the longtime chief executive of the Republican Jewish Coalition, said that “this is not the time for the U.S. to take an action that would be universally perceived by Israel’s enemies as a weakening of the U.S.-Israel relationship.”On Monday, Mr. Ramaswamy said he was “not surprised at the foreign policy establishment’s anaphylactic response to anyone who challenges the orthodoxy.”“Friends help friends stand on their own feet,” he said of his Israel policy.But for Republican rivals looking for a target who isn’t the front-runner, Donald J. Trump, Mr. Ramaswamy could be an inviting one. Polling averages put him in third place, and gaining on Ron DeSantis, the Florida governor who is in second. Other than Mr. Christie, Republican candidates have shied away from attacking Mr. Trump, convinced they will ultimately need the former president’s loyal followers.Foreign policy would be a safer line of attack against Mr. Ramaswamy than his domestic proposals, which align closely with Mr. Trump’s.“I’m not surprised they’re throwing the kitchen sink at me,” Mr. Ramaswamy said. “They’re threatened by my rise.” More

  • in

    What Will Chris Christie Do Without Trump at the GOP Debate?

    The former New Jersey governor has relentlessly taunted Donald Trump, hoping for a dramatic onstage confrontation. It appears he is not going to get what he wants.After months of relentless taunting and hyping a debate clash with former President Donald J. Trump, former Gov. Chris Christie of New Jersey turned to chiding.“If you qualify for the stage, which Trump has, not showing up is completely disrespectful to the Republican Party, who made you their nominee twice, and to the Republican voters, whose support you’re asking for again,” Mr. Christie told reporters on Friday outside the famed Versailles Cuban restaurant in Miami.Mr. Christie built his entire presidential candidacy toward a marquee confrontation with Mr. Trump, relentlessly goading him and needling him as a coward in a clear effort to tempt the quick-to-anger former president into showing up to the debate on Wednesday in Milwaukee.It appears Mr. Trump will not take the bait, other than swiping back at Mr. Christie on social media and in speeches. Last week, he signaled that he planned to skip the first Republican debate and instead sit for an interview with Tucker Carlson that will be broadcast online at the same time.Mr. Trump’s absence could lead to an anticlimactic scene at the debate, with Mr. Christie forced to launch unrequited broadsides through the airwaves without the fireworks of a Trump response.Mr. Christie and his campaign say there’s upside for him if Mr. Trump does not appear onstage. John Tully for The New York Times“They have been taunting each other back and forth on Twitter and campaign town halls, so it robs Christie of a big moment that he is looking for if Trump doesn’t show up onstage,” said Ryan Williams, a Republican strategist and veteran of two presidential campaigns. “You can use the debate to get the anti-Trump message out that he’s pushing, but you’re going to lack that viral moment if the two of them aren’t looking at each other face to face.”Yet Mr. Christie and his team also see an opportunity if the pugnacious and unpredictable former president is not onstage. Mr. Christie, a confident debater and the only Trump critic in the Republican field with any kind of foothold, could shine in the vacuum, using candidates who have been far more deferential to Mr. Trump as a stand-in for him.Mr. Christie tried out that kind of approach at a town hall event in Miami on Friday, chastising Gov. Ron DeSantis of Florida over his super PAC’s disclosure of debate strategy memos, which called for him to defend Mr. Trump against Mr. Christie’s attacks onstage.If Mr. DeSantis ends up doing so, Mr. Christie said he had one piece of advice: “Get the hell out of the race.”In an interview this month during his surprise visit to Ukraine, Mr. Christie said he was not particularly bothered by the prospect of a debate without Mr. Trump.“It doesn’t change my perspective or my tactical approach,” he said. “Because if he’s not there, it just means two things. One, he’s afraid to be on the same debate stage and defend his record. And two, you know, this is a guy who, by not showing up, just gives me more time. So it’s OK. Either way, I win.”Mr. Christie and his advisers see the debate as a forum built to the former governor’s strengths. Comfortable in unscripted moments in front of cameras, Mr. Christie has a confrontational style, hewed from years in the trenches of New Jersey politics, that has served him well in past debates, and he has over a decade of experience participating in them through two campaigns for governor and his 2016 run for president.To prepare for Wednesday, he has been huddling with close advisers to go over topics at the heart of the campaign and anticipate different scenarios that may arise as he navigates the chaos of an eight-lectern stage. He has been heavily focused on the debate, bringing it up in casual conversations with both advisers and political acquaintances as he takes the temperature of the race.At the same time, his preparations have a bare-bones nature. There are no mock debates, no fake stages with podiums, no advisers suiting up for the roles of Mr. Trump or Mr. DeSantis.Mr. Christie and his advisers see the debate as a forum built to the former governor’s strengths. David Degner for The New York TimesIn part, he is informed by his experience during the 2016 presidential debates, when he notably avoided attacking Mr. Trump. (He has said on the campaign trail that he was the only candidate to go speak to Mr. Trump during commercial breaks.) Mr. Christie was quick to pounce on his other rivals, including a now-famous exchange with Senator Marco Rubio of Florida.“There it is,” Mr. Christie said, interrupting Mr. Rubio, who had pivoted to a line about former President Barack Obama during an exchange with Mr. Christie. “The memorized 25-second speech. There it is, everybody.”That dismissive riposte sent the Rubio campaign spiraling, with headlines concluding that Mr. Christie had exposed Mr. Rubio as a robotic candidate reliant on consultants and that the Florida senator had “choked.” After polling near second or third place in New Hampshire before the debate, Mr. Rubio finished fifth in the state’s primary race less than a week later.Built into the question of how Mr. Christie treats this week’s debate is just how much Republican voters want to see someone caustically rip into Mr. Trump, whether he is onstage or not.Despite his mounting legal problems, Mr. Trump remains exceptionally popular within the party. And Mr. Christie’s constant provocations, beyond endearing the former governor to some moderate Republicans, have also turned him into something of a #Resistance hero among liberals who will not be voting in a G.O.P. primary.Waiting for a flight at Kennedy International Airport in New York early this month, Mr. Christie was approached for a photo by a fellow traveler, Jessica Rutherford, who told him she appreciated his broadsides against Mr. Trump and hoped he would continue.“You’re like Obi-Wan Kenobi, you’re our only hope!” she told him.But Ms. Rutherford, an intellectual property lawyer from Wilton, Conn., and a Democrat, conceded that she was unlikely to vote for Mr. Christie in November 2024 if he were to win the Republican primary.Undaunted, Mr. Christie made his pitch. “I’ll be awake in meetings with foreign leaders,” he offered, in a jab at President Biden’s age.“Reagan wasn’t awake in meetings with foreign leaders,” Ms. Rutherford shot back.“I bet you didn’t vote for him, either,” Mr. Christie replied.Patricia Mazzei More

  • in

    Democrats Root for a Rowdy G.O.P. Debate

    Top Democrats, suddenly feeling a bit better about 2024, would love to see Republicans talk about a national abortion ban. They’re less excited about the inevitable Hunter Biden tirades.After a year of fretting about President Biden’s political standing and their electoral chances in 2024, Democrats are at a moment of high confidence as Republicans prepare for their first presidential debate on Wednesday.They will be watching with bated breath in hopes that the Republican candidates embrace the likely-to-be-absent Donald J. Trump, defend him over his four criminal indictments, endorse national restrictions on abortion and — in the Democrats’ dream scenario — call for cuts to Social Security and Medicare.Even without Mr. Trump onstage, Democrats see the Republican White House hopefuls as avatars for what they describe as a party in thrall to its extreme elements. Nobody is rooting for the debate to go off the rails more than Democrats praying for Mr. Biden’s re-election.“All I want these people to do is say the same stuff they’ve been saying on the campaign trail on national TV,” said Jim Messina, the campaign manager for President Barack Obama’s 2012 re-election bid. “Please continue to double down on a six-week abortion ban. That would be wonderful. Thank you for doing this.”Mr. Biden probably won’t watch the debate, a spokesman said, but odds are that his compatriots will. Here’s what Democrats are looking for from the Republicans on the debate stage in Milwaukee.Will they rally around a national abortion ban?Since the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade last summer, Democrats have used the abortion issue to turbocharge their voters — particularly in red and purple states like Kansas, Wisconsin and, this month, Ohio.Nothing would make Democrats happier than to see Republicans embrace a national ban on abortion during a nationally televised debate. When Mr. Trump held a CNN town hall event in May, the moment that had Democrats doing cartwheels afterward was not his continued denial of the 2020 election results, but when he took a victory lap for the Supreme Court’s decision.“I’d like to see a huge defense of President Trump and a full-on assault on reproductive freedom and abortion,” said Gov. Phil Murphy of New Jersey, a Democrat. “To me, that would be a gift that would keep on giving.”In reality, many of the Republican candidates have tended to be more cagey about the issue.Mr. Trump, at the CNN event, declined to call for a national abortion ban, and Gov. Ron DeSantis has also treaded carefully despite signing a six-week prohibition into law in Florida this year. But avoiding the subject may be tricky given former Vice President Mike Pence’s enthusiastic support for limiting abortion rights.How much do Republicans cozy up to Trump?Mr. Trump probably won’t be at the debate, but Democrats expect nearly all of the candidates onstage to make explicit plays for his share of the Republican base — a move Democrats hope will focus attention on their own efforts to brand the entire G.O.P. as the party of MAGA.“It doesn’t matter who ‘wins’ the debate on Wednesday, the MAGA Republican presidential candidates have all chosen a losing strategy that is extreme and out of touch with the American people,” Michael Tyler, the communications director for Mr. Biden’s campaign, wrote in memo to supporters on Friday.Mr. Biden has for months been on a mission to paint all Republicans as marching in lock step with Mr. Trump’s most loyal, hard-right supporters. On Wednesday, Democrats are hoping to see Republicans engaged in stylistic efforts to attract Trump voters.“I’m a wrestling fan,” said Jaime Harrison, the chairman of the Democratic National Committee. “I’m imagining a royal rumble on the debate stage, sort of a rehash of the debates in 2016 where they’re talking about each other’s mamas and all kinds of craziness.”But one lesson that has been abundantly clear in the Trump era of politics is that no other Republican can get away with the type of outrage and public shamelessness that Mr. Trump regularly evinces.Mr. DeSantis’s efforts to be a drama-free, more competent version of Mr. Trump have flopped so far. Vivek Ramaswamy, the biotech executive who has sought to portray himself as a millennial version of Trump, has risen in early polling but remains largely unknown.Will the Trump indictments be a focus?The biggest story about Mr. Trump is the one Mr. Biden won’t talk about — the four criminal indictments the former president is facing.The problem for the Republicans running against Mr. Trump is that many of their voters agree with his belief that the cases against him are politically motivated.Democrats on the sidelines have been left waiting, to little avail, for Mr. Trump’s G.O.P. rivals to make a case to their voters that the legal problems are politically disqualifying.“Normally candidates would be more than happy to point out if their opponent has been indicted four times!” Senator Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota wrote in a text message. “They ARE running against him after all.”That plea is unlikely to get much airtime on Wednesday. Of the candidates onstage, only former Gov. Chris Christie of New Jersey — who is running an anti-Trump campaign that has won him new respect from Democrats — has made an explicit case that Mr. Trump’s indictments have merit and are bad for the party.What about Hunter Biden?One thing the Republican candidates are all but certain to do is equate Mr. Trump’s legal problems with those of Hunter Biden, the president’s son, who is facing his own special counsel investigation after a plea agreement on tax and gun charges fell apart last month.Democrats aren’t exactly popping popcorn for this scenario — it is an intensely painful episode for the president, and the prospect of a criminal trial isn’t appealing to them — but they are confident that any detour down a Hunter Biden rabbit hole will take emphasis away from issues that moderate and independent voters care about.“If Republicans want to make this election about attacks on the president’s family, it’s a losing strategy,” said Gov. J.B. Pritzker of Illinois, a Democrat. “It would be a mistake for them to make that an issue.”Democrats hope to dispel with the fiction that it won’t be Trump.Democrats widely view Mr. Trump as the easiest Republican candidate to defeat next year. Mr. Biden beat him once already, they reason, and Mr. Trump’s cascading legal problems and singular ability to repel moderate Republicans and swing voters make him the one they’d like to face.Mr. Trump’s dominance in polls of the Republican primary and the reluctance of most of his G.O.P. rivals to attack him have led most Democrats to conclude that Wednesday’s debate, along with much of the primary, are an academic exercise being held before next year’s Trump-Biden rematch.“I was just going to watch it for comic relief,” said Representative Jasmine Crockett, a Texas Democrat. “This is done. We are going to have Trump versus Biden 2.0. That’s what’s about to happen. Anyone who is kidding themselves into believing that they have a shot is just delusional.”And for the cast of candidates who barely qualified for the Republican stage, hoping that a standout debate performance would propel them to relevance — a TV show, a future cabinet post or maybe a campaign for some other office — a former presidential long shot had a piece of advice.“Learn how to count to 200,” said Representative Eric Swalwell of California, who, many people may have forgotten, ran for the Democratic presidential nomination in 2020. “Because that’s about the amount of seconds that you’re going to have to speak.” More

  • in

    These Aren’t the Darkest Years in American History, but They Are Among the Weirdest

    Bret Stephens: Before we get to Donald Trump’s indictment in Georgia or the upcoming G.O.P. debate, I want to take note of the appalling tragedy in Hawaii. The images from Maui are just heartbreaking. But I also get a sense that heartbreak will soon turn to outrage as we learn more about the cascade of policy failures that led to the disaster.Gail Collins: Maui is going to be hard for any of us to forget. Or, in some cases, forgive. There are certainly a heck of a lot of serious questions about whether the folks who were supposed to be responsible did their jobs.Bret: There’s a story in The Wall Street Journal that made me want to scream. It seems Hawaiian Electric knew four years ago that it needed to do more to keep power lines from emitting sparks, but it invested only $245,000 to try to do something about it. The state and private owners let old dams fall into disrepair and then allowed for them to be destroyed rather than restoring them, leading to less stored water and more dry land. And then there was the emergency chief who decided not to sound warning sirens. At least he had the good sense to resign.Gail: But let’s look at the way bigger issue, Bret. The weather’s been awful in all sorts of scary ways this summer, all around the planet. Pretty clear it’s because of global warming. You ready to rally around a big push toward environmental revolution?Bret: I’m opposed on principle to all big revolutions, Gail, beginning with the French. But I am in favor of 10,000 evolutions to deal with the climate. In Maui’s case, a push for more solar power plus reforestation of grasslands could have made a difference in managing the fire. I also think simple solutions can do a lot to help — like getting the federal government to finance states and utilities to cover the costs of burying power lines.Gail: Yep. Plus some more effortful projects to address climate change, like President Biden’s crusade to promote electric cars and an evolution away from coal and oil for heat.Bret: The more I read about the vast mineral inputs for electric cars — about 900 pounds of nickel, aluminum, cobalt and other minerals per car battery — the more I wonder about their wisdom. If you don’t believe me, just read Mr. Bean! (Or at least Rowan Atkinson, who studied electrical engineering at Oxford before his career took a … turn.) He made a solid environmental case in The Guardian for keeping your old gas-burning car instead of switching to electric.But I’m a big believer in adopting next-gen nuclear power to produce a larger share of our electric power needs. And I’m with you on moving away from coal.Gail: Hey, if we’ve found a point of consensus, let’s grab it and move on. After all, we’re on the cusp of a Republican presidential debate.Bret: With Trump as the apparent no-show. As a raw political calculation, I guess this makes sense given his commanding lead in the Republican primary polls, a lead that only seems to grow with each successive indictment.Gail: Yeah, I have to admit that there doesn’t seem to be a lot of possible gain for him in debating people who are way, way behind him in the polls and give them a chance to point out all his multitudinous defects.And I believe I speak for at least 90 percent of the population when I say posting a prerecorded interview with Tucker Carlson is not an acceptable substitute.Bret: I’m still going to watch the debate out of lurid fascination. I’m guessing this will devolve mainly into an argument between Chris Christie and Vivek Ramaswamy, with Ron DeSantis spending the time darting between them like a cornered lizard that doesn’t know where to turn. Christie will make the case for why Republicans need to turn against Trump, and Ramaswamy will make the case for why they need to favor him. That’s by way of Ramaswamy ultimately becoming Trump’s veep pick.Gail: You think so? Would that be a good idea? Strategically speaking that is — I can’t imagine you think Ramaswamy would lift the quality of the ticket.Bret: I met Ramaswamy a couple of years ago, when he was pitching a book on corporations going “woke.” He came to my house for lunch, where I made him a credible ratatouille. At the time, I was sympathetic to his message and impressed by his smarts. I’ve become a lot less sympathetic as he’s essentially promised to give Vladimir Putin what he wants in Ukraine, consider Robert F. Kennedy Jr. as a potential running mate and reopen the investigation into 9/11. That said, his youth, wealth, verbal acuity, anti-woke message and minority background kinda makes him perfect for Donald, no?Gail: Nah, I don’t think our former president wants anybody that … interesting. Remember, this is the man who made Mike Pence his No. 2 back when he actually needed more attention.Bret: You may be right. In that case, it’s Tim Scott for veep.Gail: By the way, I like your prediction about DeSantis looking like a cornered lizard in this debate. Seems he’s the one who’s got the most to lose — he really does need to show potential Republican backers that he isn’t a dope. That’d be a challenge under any circumstances, but especially when he’s up against someone as capable of crushing the opposition as Christie.Bret: Our news-side colleagues Jonathan Swan, Shane Goldmacher and Maggie Haberman had a great scoop last week about memos from a pro-DeSantis PAC urging their man to “take a sledgehammer” to Ramaswamy and “defend Donald Trump” in response to Christie’s attacks. It’s terrible advice, since attacking Ramaswamy will only help elevate him as a serious contender while further diminishing DeSantis’s claim to be the best and most viable alternative to Trump.Gail: My dream scenario, by the way, is for Christie to take the debate crown, then go on to campaign in New Hampshire. If it looks like he could actually win there, sooner or later Trump is going to have to pay him some more attention, right? Just out of pure ego?Bret: Presumably by harping on his weight, as if Trump is a poster boy for SlimFast. I think Christie probably enjoys those attacks, because he parries them so skillfully and it consolidates his position as the only real Republican alternative to Trump. Something that might come in handy on the slight chance that Trump goes to prison.Gail: Amazing we’ve gotten this far without mentioning that the man we all regard as the very, very likely Republican nominee for president is facing multitudinous criminal indictments in Georgia, New York, Florida and at the federal level.Bret: Ninety-one counts in all. You could almost take ’em down and pass ’em around like bottles of beer on the wall.Gail: So far, many of his supporters seem pretty eager to accept his claims that everything is just an anti-Trump political conspiracy. Can that last? It’s still about a year until the Republican presidential nominating convention in Milwaukee. I can’t help feeling that something will come up that even his fans will find impossible to ignore.Bret: Gail, the truest thing Trump ever said is that he could shoot someone on Fifth Avenue and his base would stick with him. The proper way to understand his appeal isn’t by studying normal voter behavior. It’s by studying cults. In a cult, the leader is always, simultaneously, a savior of his people and a victim of a vast and shadowy conspiracy. Unfortunately, all of these prosecutions, however merited, do more to reinforce than undermine the thinking of his followers.The only thing that can truly defeat Trump is a thumping electoral defeat. My biggest worry about President Biden is that he is so much more vulnerable politically than many Democrats seem to realize.Gail: Bret, it’s sort of inspiring that you’re the one of us most worried about getting Biden re-elected. Presuming his health holds up, I’m pretty confident. Here’s a man whose biggest political drawback is being boring. Which doesn’t look all that bad when he’s compared with a guy whose biggest defects go beyond the 91 counts arrayed against him. Biden’s been a much, much better president than Trump was. I wish he wasn’t running again, because of the age issue. But as we’ve discussed, Trump is only three years younger and seems to be in much worse physical shape.Bret: I wish I were as sanguine, but my forebears inclined me to fret.Gail: Just for diversion, make believe that Trump drops out of the race. For any of a million reasonable reasons. The other options in his party look pretty appalling to me. Do you think you’d still wind up voting for Joe Biden or would you feel free to go back to your Republican roots?Bret: The only Republicans in the current field I could definitely vote for are Christie and Nikki Haley. Otherwise, I’ll be pulling the lever for Joe and lighting votive candles every night for his health.Gail: OK, one more quick “What if?” Suppose Biden dropped out of the race right now. Who would you vote for, Trump or Kamala Harris?Bret: Gail, I would never, ever vote for Trump. Then again, if that winds up being the choice, God help us.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

  • in

    Gov. Chris Sununu: This Is How to Beat Trump

    This week, Republican primary candidates for president will have a chance to make their case before a national audience — with or without Donald Trump on the debate stage. To win, they must break free of Mr. Trump’s drama, step out of his shadow, go on offense, attack, and present their case. Then they need to see if they can catch fire this fall — and if they can’t, they need to step aside, because winnowing down the field of candidates is the single best chance to stop Mr. Trump. Too much is at stake for us to have wishful candidacies. While the other Republican candidates are running to save America, Mr. Trump is running to save himself.Candidates on the debate stage should not be afraid to attack Donald Trump. While it’s true that Mr. Trump has an iron grip on more than 30 percent of the electorate, the other 60 percent or so is open to moving forward with a new nominee. Mr. Trump’s shortcomings hardly need reciting. Tim Scott, Ron DeSantis, and Vivek Ramaswamy — candidates with compelling stories, records and polling — must show voters they are willing to take on Mr. Trump, show a spark, and not just defend him in absentia. Chris Christie, who has done great work exposing Mr. Trump’s weaknesses, must broaden his message and show voters that he is more than the anti-Trump candidate.If Mr. Trump is the Republican nominee for president in 2024, Republicans will lose up and down the ballot. According to a recent Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research poll, nearly two-thirds of Americans say they would likely not support Mr. Trump in 2024 — not even Jimmy Carter had re-election numbers that bleak. Every candidate with an (R) next to their name, from school board to the statehouse, will be left to answer for the electoral albatross at the top of the ticket. Instead of going on offense and offering an alternative to Joe Biden’s failing leadership, Republicans will continue to be consumed with responding to Mr. Trump’s constant grievances and lies, turning off every independent suburban voter in America. And Mr. Trump, ever the narcissist, will spend the entire campaign whining about his legal troubles and bilking his supporters of their retirement savings to pay for his lawyers.Donald Trump is beatable, and it starts in Iowa and New Hampshire. Ignore the national polls that show he is leading — they are meaningless. It’s a reflection of the national conversation, name ID, and who is top of mind — not where the momentum is headed.The best indicator of Mr. Trump’s strength is looking to where the voters are paying attention: in states where candidates are campaigning, television ads are running, and there is a wide range of media attention on every candidate.In Iowa and New Hampshire, the first two states that will vote in the 2024 Republican primaries, Mr. Trump is struggling. In both Iowa and New Hampshire, he is consistently polling in the low 40 percent range. The floor of his support may be high, but his ceiling is low.In New Hampshire, more than half of Republican primary voters — our party’s most ardent voters — want someone not named Trump. While he regularly polls above 50 percent nationally, and even closer to 60 percent many times, he has not hit over 50 percent in New Hampshire in the last five months, according to Real Clear Politics.Having won four statewide elections in New Hampshire and earning more votes in 2020 than any candidate in history (outpacing Mr. Trump’s loss by 20 percentage points that year), I know that in New Hampshire, you don’t only win on policy: You win face-to-face, person-to-person. Voters have to look you in the eye and sign off on you as a person before they can sign off on you as a candidate. Prepared remarks behind a podium do not work.Candidates who have gone on to win the New Hampshire primary, best illustrated by former Senator John McCain, become omnipresent in my state. You must listen first, talk second. Talking at voters in New Hampshire does not work. This is why Mr. Trump must face a smaller field. It is only then that his path to victory shrinks. Leaders within the Republican Party — governors, senators, donors and media influencers — have an obligation to help narrow the field.At a minimum, any candidate who does not make the stage for the first two debates must drop out.Anyone who is polling in the low single digits by Christmas must acknowledge that their efforts have fallen short.After the results from Iowa come in, it is paramount that the field must shrink, before the New Hampshire primary, to the top three or four.Candidates who have essentially been running for years, and who have seen little movement in the polls especially in the early states, are particularly in focus. This fall, if their numbers have not improved, tough conversations between donors and their candidates need to happen. Media influencers and leading voices should amplify the Republican message that the longer these candidates stay in the race, the more they are helping Joe Biden — and Kamala Harris — get four more years.Provided the field shrinks by Iowa and New Hampshire, Mr. Trump loses. He will always have his die-hard base, but the majority is up for grabs. Candidates who seize on the opportunity and present a clear contrast to the former president will earn the votes.Candidates cannot continue to let the former president dominate the media like he has for the last six months. They need to be more aggressive about seizing the opportunity to boost their national profiles. There has been positive movement from some candidates, but more needs to be done.It must be said that candidates who stay in this race when they have no viable path should be called out. They are auditioning for a Trump presidency cabinet that will simply never happen. And even if a Trump administration magically materialized, no public humiliation that great is worth the sacrifice.As governor of the first-in-the-nation primary state, I will do everything I can to help narrow the field. I plan to endorse and campaign for the best alternative to Mr. Trump. As of now, it’s anyone’s for the taking.For 20 years straight, the winner of the New Hampshire Republican presidential primary has gone on to secure the party’s nomination. Once the voters of Iowa and New Hampshire are presented a clear alternative to Mr. Trump, his path forward darkens, and the Republican Party’s future begins to take shape. The rest of the country needs to see not just that the emperor has no clothes, but that the Republican Party is able to refocus the conversation where it needs to be, on a nominee dedicated to saving America.Christopher T. Sununu is the governor of New Hampshire.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