Republican Party

Subterms

    More stories

    • 100 Shares99 Views

      in Elections

      Wisconsin’s High-Stakes Supreme Court Race: What to Watch

      by

      The election for a swing seat on the court is likely to determine whether abortion remains illegal in Wisconsin, as well as the future of the state’s heavily gerrymandered political maps.WAUKESHA, Wis. — American political candidates routinely drum up support by warning voters that this election, really, is the most important of their lifetimes.It’s almost always an exaggeration, but the description might just fit for Wisconsin’s deeply polarized voters, who on Tuesday will choose a justice to fill a swing seat on the state’s Supreme Court.The winner — either Janet Protasiewicz, a liberal Milwaukee County judge, or Daniel Kelly, a conservative former State Supreme Court justice — will have the deciding vote on a host of major issues, including abortion rights, gerrymandered political maps, and voting and election cases surrounding the 2024 presidential contest.Officials on both sides have described the stakes of the officially nonpartisan race in existential terms — either they win and democracy survives, or they lose and it perishes.Wisconsin Democrats, who have been lost in the political wilderness for a dozen years, cast Judge Protasiewicz as their path to a promised land of abortion rights and fair maps. The state’s Republicans say Justice Kelly is their last hope to ward off liberal tyranny by fiat.Here are four themes animating Tuesday’s election:Wisconsin could turn sharply back to the left — or not.Wisconsin Republicans tend to talk about the election as if Judge Protasiewicz would roll onto the Supreme Court with a giant eraser to wipe out all of the legislative policies and structural advantages the G.O.P. has built for itself since Scott Walker became governor in 2011.They’re not entirely wrong.“A lot of the duly passed laws by the elected representatives of the state of Wisconsin would be deemed invalid,” Duey Stroebel, a Republican state senator from Cedarburg, said last week. “It wouldn’t be the people electing their representatives that would be making decisions, it would be her, based on her personal beliefs.”Indeed, Judge Protasiewicz has been clear about her views. She has signaled her opposition to Wisconsin’s 1849 law banning abortion in nearly all cases, which went back into effect when the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade last summer, and she has called the legislative maps Republicans drew to give themselves a durable near-supermajority in the State Legislature “rigged” and “unfair.”But the state’s Democrats sound similarly apocalyptic about the prospect of Justice Kelly, who lost a 2020 bid to retain his seat on the court, returning to deliver conservatives a majority. He is aligned with the state’s anti-abortion groups and has said there is no legal problem with the maps.He also worked as a legal adviser for the Republican National Committee and the Republican Party of Wisconsin when they sought to overturn the results of the state’s 2020 presidential election. That Republican effort to undo Joseph R. Biden Jr.’s victory in Wisconsin was only narrowly rejected by the State Supreme Court, which voted 4 to 3 to uphold the results.“Dan Kelly advised fake electors in 2020,” said Greta Neubauer, the Democratic leader in the Wisconsin State Assembly, referring to a brazen plan by former President Donald J. Trump and his allies to overturn results in several states. “I absolutely fear what he would do in 2024 if a challenge to the popular vote and the election results came in front of him.”Abortion and crime are the two main issues.From the beginning of her campaign, Judge Protasiewicz (pronounced pro-tuh-SAY-witz) has sought to make the race a referendum on abortion rights in Wisconsin. Her campaign has spent $12 million on television ads in the last six weeks reminding voters that she supports them and Justice Kelly does not.“Judge Janet Protasiewicz believes in women’s freedom to make their own decisions when it comes to abortion,” her closing television ad states.It is a bet on the power of the most potent issue for Democrats since last summer, when the U.S. Supreme Court left the issue to the states.Even Republicans acknowledge privately that if the election is about abortion, Judge Protasiewicz has the advantage. Justice Kelly has not been as explicit, but he has implied that because legislators enacted the state’s abortion ban 174 years ago, they would need to rescind the law — something the current Republican majorities are unlikely to do.Hundreds of abortion rights supporters marched to the State Capitol in Madison, Wis., in January. Nearly all abortions became illegal in Wisconsin when the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade.Jamie Kelter Davis for The New York Times“He’s running a bit of a traditional campaign talking about larger issues of judicial restraint and things of that nature,” said Mr. Walker, the former governor who appointed Justice Kelly to the State Supreme Court in 2016. “She just spelled it out, and that very well may be the case for the left and the right in the future, just people saying, ‘Here’s how I’m going to vote.’”Republicans, as usually happens in Wisconsin, have tried to make the election about crime. Outside groups backing Justice Kelly have bombarded Judge Protasiewicz with ads attacking her as soft on violent criminals.Last week, Wisconsin Manufacturers and Commerce, the state’s business lobby, removed from the television airwaves an ad claiming that Judge Protasiewicz had issued a soft sentence to a convicted rapist. The victim in that case had told The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel that the ad had caused her new trauma and that she had no problem with the length of the sentence.In another episode, the Republican Party of Wisconsin, while southern Wisconsin was under a tornado watch last week, texted to voters a replica of an emergency weather alert warning that Judge Protasiewicz was “a soft-on-crime politician with a long history of letting dangerous criminals go free.”The cash-filled contest is all over Wisconsin TV screens.All indications are that more people will vote in this Supreme Court election than any other in Wisconsin history.More people voted in the Feb. 21 primary contest than participated in the state’s primaries in August, when there were races for governor and Senate. According to data from the Wisconsin Elections Commission, the early-vote total as of Monday amounted to about a third of the total turnout of the 2019 State Supreme Court race, the last one that did not fall on the same day as a presidential primary.The record-smashing spending in the race — $39 million on television alone, according to AdImpact, a media-tracking firm — has ensured that just about every Wisconsinite is at least aware of the race, a key hurdle in typically low-turnout spring elections.The ultimate cost is expected to triple the previous high-water mark for spending on an American judicial election, which was $15 million for a 2004 Illinois Supreme Court race.Weeks ago, Wisconsin Democrats switched their strategy. Instead of sending door-to-door canvassers to visit voters who typically cast ballots in spring elections, they focused on reaching out to a broader group of people who tend to vote in November general elections.“When I was out knocking on doors a month or two months ago, people were aware that this election was coming, because they were seeing YouTube ads with their kids,” Ms. Neubauer said. “They were being bombarded with information about this election.”A key State Senate race is also unfolding.Wisconsin is also holding a special election on Tuesday for a vacant State Senate seat that covers parts of four counties in the suburbs north of Milwaukee.The district has long been held by Republicans but is trending away from the party. Mr. Trump carried it by 12 percentage points in 2016 but by only 5 in 2020. The Democratic candidate, Jodi Habush Sinykin, is contesting it with a heavy emphasis on abortion rights.Jodi Habush Sinykin, a Democrat, is running for a State Senate seat in suburbs north of Milwaukee. Morry Gash/Associated PressIf the Republican candidate, State Representative Dan Knodl, wins, his party will have a two-thirds supermajority in the State Senate, which would allow the G.O.P. to impeach and remove judges, statewide elected officials and appointees of Gov. Tony Evers, a Democrat.Mr. Knodl, in an interview with PBS Wisconsin, said the impeachment powers granted to State Senate Republicans with his election “certainly would be tested.”Mr. Stroebel, the Republican state senator from Cedarburg, called impeaching Judge Protasiewicz over expected rulings on abortion and gerrymandering unlikely “but certainly not impossible.”If Dan Knodl wins his race for State Senate, Republicans will have a two-thirds supermajority, which would allow them to impeach and remove judges, statewide elected officials and appointees of Gov. Tony Evers, a Democrat.Mark Hoffman/Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, via Associated Press“If she truly acts in terms of ignoring our laws and applying her own personal beliefs, then maybe that’s something people will talk about,” he said. “If the rulings are contrary to what our state laws and Constitution say, I think there could be an issue.”Even if Republicans do not seek to impeach Democratic officials, the mere possibility could limit Democrats’ ambitions.“Just the threat of it obviously changes the way that public officials will act,” said Kelda Roys, a Democratic state senator from Madison. “It will make agency heads and civil servants be extremely timid and feel like they can’t carry out their job responsibilities.” More

    • 138 Shares99 Views

      in Elections

      Donald Trump and New York City Brace for a Consequential Week

      by

      Donald Trump and his campaign spent the weekend making plans for his arrest, and how to capitalize on it, while officials in New York prepared for potential turmoil.Former President Donald J. Trump is preparing to walk into a Manhattan courtroom as both a defendant and a candidate, making final plans for his arrest on Tuesday while also trying to maximize his surrender for political benefit. Officials in New York, meanwhile, are bracing for the circuslike atmosphere that expected protests might bring.The Trump campaign on Sunday scheduled a prime-time news conference at Mar-a-Lago on Tuesday night, just hours after Mr. Trump is expected to turn himself in. The campaign also has been using his indictment in fund-raising appeals, and said it had raised $4 million in just 24 hours, though financial records corroborating the claim will not be available for weeks.The planning reflects Mr. Trump’s belief that the indictment will ultimately bolster his standing in his third bid for the G.O.P. presidential nomination, with Republicans who had been considering alternatives rallying to his side. His recent polling has been among the strongest of his 2024 campaign.On Sunday, some Trump critics came to his defense, suggesting that the Manhattan district attorney, Alvin L. Bragg, might have targeted him unfairly. The actual crimes Mr. Trump is accused of are not publicly known, though they are believed to be related to a hush-money payment to Stormy Daniels, a former porn star who claims she had an affair with Mr. Trump. The indictment, news of which broke on Thursday, may not be unsealed before his arraignment.Mr. Trump is expected to fly into La Guardia Airport from Florida on his private plane on Monday afternoon, and then stay the night at his apartment in Trump Tower, meeting with his lawyers while there. Aides are trying to negotiate a short visit to the courthouse in Lower Manhattan, for a midafternoon arraignment, people familiar with his plans said.The next few days could be critical for Mr. Trump, and advisers have warned him that he could easily damage his own case, according to a person involved in the discussions who requested anonymity because the talks were private. He wrote an especially incendiary post on his social media site, Truth Social, that featured a news article with a photo of Mr. Bragg on one side and Mr. Trump holding a baseball bat on the other. It was eventually taken down, after pleading by advisers. And he has already attacked the judge — comments his lawyers tried to smooth over in appearances on the morning talk shows on Sunday.Mr. Trump kept a typical schedule over the weekend.The Trump campaign on Sunday announced plans for a news conference at Mar-a-Lago on Tuesday night.Josh Ritchie for The New York TimesOn Friday night, he attended a housewarming event for an associate near Mar-a-Lago, his home in Palm Beach, Fla. He golfed on Saturday and spent time with Gary Player, the South African retired professional golfer, at the nearby Trump International Golf Club, and dined at Mar-a-Lago on Saturday night (his legal adviser, Boris Epshteyn, was spotted nearby in a three-piece suit). Mr. Trump has been relatively calm, according to people who have spoken with him, exhibiting little of the anxiety he had in the lead-up to the indictment.When he arrives in court, Mr. Trump, unlike typical defendants, will be surrounded by a phalanx of Secret Service agents, making all logistics much more complicated. He will be fingerprinted and will possibly have a police photo taken; such photos are typically not released publicly in New York, although the intense public interest in this case could change that. While it is normal for defendants charged with felonies to be handcuffed — as the former Trump Organization chief financial officer, Allen H. Weisselberg, was in 2021 — one of Mr. Trump’s lawyers, Joseph Tacopina, has said he does not expect that to occur.Before the arraignment, Mr. Trump is likely to be held in an interview room as opposed to a cell, according to the person involved in the Trump team’s discussions. He will then enter a courtroom and make his plea, which is expected to be not guilty. While there is expected to be at least one camera set up in the courthouse hallway capturing Mr. Trump’s walk to the courtroom, cameras are typically not allowed in New York courtrooms. However, news organizations have asked the judge to make an exception.Law enforcement officials were preparing for a chaotic atmosphere, with protests around Trump Tower and near the courthouse. Barricades were set up near Mr. Trump’s office tower, stretching several blocks.Police officers were warned that they might be called on for crowd control around the courthouse. And the presence of what is likely the most famous defendant the Manhattan Criminal Court has ever seen, with his own unique security needs, has led to all kinds of changes in how the courthouse will function that day.Still, despite concerns about potential for violence, particularly after the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol building by a pro-Trump mob, there were few signs that a repeat was likely..css-1v2n82w{max-width:600px;width:calc(100% – 40px);margin-top:20px;margin-bottom:25px;height:auto;margin-left:auto;margin-right:auto;font-family:nyt-franklin;color:var(–color-content-secondary,#363636);}@media only screen and (max-width:480px){.css-1v2n82w{margin-left:20px;margin-right:20px;}}@media only screen and (min-width:1024px){.css-1v2n82w{width:600px;}}.css-161d8zr{width:40px;margin-bottom:18px;text-align:left;margin-left:0;color:var(–color-content-primary,#121212);border:1px solid var(–color-content-primary,#121212);}@media only screen and (max-width:480px){.css-161d8zr{width:30px;margin-bottom:15px;}}.css-tjtq43{line-height:25px;}@media only screen and (max-width:480px){.css-tjtq43{line-height:24px;}}.css-x1k33h{font-family:nyt-cheltenham;font-size:19px;font-weight:700;line-height:25px;}.css-1hvpcve{font-size:17px;font-weight:300;line-height:25px;}.css-1hvpcve em{font-style:italic;}.css-1hvpcve strong{font-weight:bold;}.css-1hvpcve a{font-weight:500;color:var(–color-content-secondary,#363636);}.css-1c013uz{margin-top:18px;margin-bottom:22px;}@media only screen and (max-width:480px){.css-1c013uz{font-size:14px;margin-top:15px;margin-bottom:20px;}}.css-1c013uz a{color:var(–color-signal-editorial,#326891);-webkit-text-decoration:underline;text-decoration:underline;font-weight:500;font-size:16px;}@media only screen and (max-width:480px){.css-1c013uz a{font-size:13px;}}.css-1c013uz a:hover{-webkit-text-decoration:none;text-decoration:none;}How Times reporters cover politics. We rely on our journalists to be independent observers. So while Times staff members may vote, they are not allowed to endorse or campaign for candidates or political causes. This includes participating in marches or rallies in support of a movement or giving money to, or raising money for, any political candidate or election cause.Learn more about our process.Mr. Trump’s advisers have been trying to impress upon him the need to avoid rousing his supporters in a way that leads to violence, people close to the former president have said.On Sunday, Mr. Tacopina and another of Mr. Trump’s lawyers, Jim Trusty, appeared on television programs and tried to tamp down any inflammation their client might have caused on social media, particularly through his attacks on the judge in the case, Juan M. Merchan, an acting New York Supreme Court justice. Mr. Trump has claimed Justice Merchan, who also presided over the trial of the Trump Organization last year, was “hand picked” by prosecutors. And last week, Mr. Trump declared on Truth Social that Justice Merchan “hates me.”“I have no issue with this judge whatsoever,” Mr. Tacopina said on CNN’s “State of the Union.” “He has a very good reputation.”Mr. Tacopina has otherwise aggressively defended Mr. Trump on television, and some of Mr. Trump’s advisers have privately complained that the lawyer is not helping his client’s cause. Mr. Trump, whose legal team is in flux, has told several people he thinks Mr. Tacopina is a “fighter.”As he heads into this consequential week, Mr. Trump finds himself in the unusual position of receiving support from nearly all factions of the Republican Party; even officials he considers enemies have condemned Mr. Bragg’s pursuit of Mr. Trump.“This seems to be more about the person than about the crime,” Senator Bill Cassidy, Republican of Louisiana, said on “Fox News Sunday.” Mr. Cassidy voted to convict Mr. Trump for his role instigating the Jan. 6 attack.Another surprising defender emerged in William P. Barr, the former attorney general who fell out bitterly with Mr. Trump because Mr. Barr refused to go along with his efforts to overturn the 2020 election. In a “Fox News Sunday” interview, Mr. Barr sharply criticized Mr. Bragg’s indictment and predicted it would set off a wave of politically motivated prosecutions.“I do think that this is a watershed moment, and I don’t think it’s going to end up good for the country,” he added.Mr. Barr did, however, offer some tongue-in-cheek advice for his former boss, who faces multiple investigations that may result in charges: It would be a “particularly bad idea” for Mr. Trump to appear on the stand.“He lacks all self-control,” Mr. Barr said. “And it would be very difficult to prepare him and keep him testifying in a prudent fashion.”William P. Barr with Mr. Trump in 2020. The two had a falling out after Mr. Barr would not support the former president’s plans to overturn his 2020 election loss.Anna Moneymaker for The New York TimesTo that end, Cyrus Vance Jr., the Manhattan district attorney who preceded Mr. Bragg and whose office led most of the investigation into the practices of Mr. Trump’s business, told NBC’s “Meet the Press” that he was “disturbed” that Mr. Trump had been attacking not just Mr. Bragg but also the judge in the case.Mr. Vance said, “I think if I were his lawyer — and believe me, no one has called up to ask for my advice — I would be mindful of not committing some other criminal offense like obstruction of governmental administration, which is interfering, by threat or otherwise, with the operation of government.”Mr. Bragg has said little publicly about the investigation or the criticisms leveled at him by Republicans. Last week, his office, in a letter to congressional Republicans who have threatened to investigate the actions of the district attorney’s office, said accusations that the investigation was politically motivated were “unfounded.” The letter, signed by the office’s general counsel, Leslie B. Dubeck, said that the charges against Mr. Trump “were brought by citizens of New York, doing their civic duty as members of a grand jury.”Knowing that Mr. Bragg is expected to hold a news conference at some point on Tuesday, Mr. Trump has scheduled his own for that evening, when he plans to be back at Mar-a-Lago. He is also expected to deliver remarks to supporters at his club, similar to his event last November announcing his third run for president.Some Trump allies have made clear they want any protests in New York to remain civil, particularly because Mr. Trump has called for his supporters to protest. His longest-serving adviser, Roger J. Stone Jr., urged supporters to be “peaceful” and “legal” if they showed up for a planned rally outside Trump Tower late Monday morning.Reporting was contributed by More

    • 113 Shares149 Views

      in Elections

      To Boldly Go Where No President Has Gone Before

      by

      Bret Stephens: Hi, Gail. I have a clear memory of Democrats defending Bill Clinton tooth and nail for lying under oath in the Paula Jones case, about his affair with Monica Lewinsky. At the time, they said it was “just about sex” and that Clinton lied to protect his family and marriage.Morally speaking, is that better than, worse than or equal to the allegation that Donald Trump falsified business records to cover his alleged affair with Stormy Daniels (and possibly another paramour, too)?Gail Collins: Bret, sex scandal aficionado that I am, I’m sorta tempted to go back and revisit Clinton’s argument that he didn’t lie about Monica Lewinsky because it doesn’t count as having sex if … well, no. Guess not.Bret: To say nothing of Clinton parsing the meaning of the word “is.”Gail: Still, I’d say the Stormy Daniels episode — an ongoing, well-financed cover-up during a presidential campaign — was worse.Bret: Hmm. Trump wasn’t president at the time of the alleged affair the way Clinton was. And Daniels wasn’t a starry-eyed 22-year-old intern whose life got destroyed in the process. And lying under oath is usually a felony, unlike falsifying business records, which is usually treated as a misdemeanor.Gail: If you want to argue that Trump’s not the worst sex-scandal offender, I’m fine with it. Won’t even mention Grover Cleveland …Bret: “Ma, ma, where’s my pa?” Always liked Grover.Gail: Of all the investigations into Trump’s egregious misconduct, this strikes me as almost minor compared with, say, trying to change presidential election results, urging a crowd of supporters to march on the Capitol or illegally taking, retaining and hiding secret government documents or …OK, taking a rest.Bret: Totally agree. My fear is that the indictment will focus the media spotlight on Trump, motivate his base, paralyze his Republican opponents and ultimately help him win the G.O.P. nomination. In the first poll after the indictment, Trump’s lead over his Republican rivals jumped. Maybe that will make it easier for Democrats to hold the White House next year, but it also potentially means we could get Benito Milhous Caligula back in office.The only thing that will hurt Trump is if he’s ignored in the press and beaten at the polls. Instead, we’re contributing to the problem just by speaking about it.Gail: OK, now I’m changing subjects. It hurts my heart to talk about this, but we have to consider the terrible school shooting in Nashville — it doesn’t seem to have moved the needle one centimeter on issues like banning assault weapons or 30-round magazines. Pro-gun lawmakers, in light of the Covenant School shooting, are once again arguing that schools would be safer if the teachers could have their own pistols.Bret: I’m not opposed to an armed cop or a well-trained security guard on school campuses, who might be able to respond much faster to an emergency than the police could. Teachers? Seems like a really, really bad idea.With respect to everything else, I’m sometimes inclined to simply give up. Gun control isn’t realistic in a country with more guns than people. Even if stringent gun control were somehow enacted, it would function roughly the same way stringent drug laws work: People who wanted to obtain guns illegally could easily get them. I think we ought to repeal the Second Amendment, or at least reinterpret it to mean that anyone who wants a gun must belong to a “well-regulated militia.” But in our lifetimes that’s a political pipe dream.So we’re left in the face of tragedies like Nashville’s feeling heartbroken, furious, speechless and helpless.Gail: Your impulse to give up the fight is probably sensible, but I just can’t go there. Gotta keep pushing; we can’t cave in to folks who think it’s un-American to require loaded weapons be stored where kids can’t get at them.Bret: Another side of me wants to agree with you. Let’s ban high-capacity magazines, raise the age threshold for gun purchases and heavily fine people if they fail to properly store weapons. I just wonder if it will make much of a difference.Gail: Well, it sure as hell wouldn’t hurt.Bret: Very true.Gail: Let’s move on before I get deeply depressed. We’re slowly creeping toward an election year — close enough that people who want to run for office for real have to start mobilizing. Anybody you really love/hate out there now?Bret: Next year is going to be a tough one for Senate Democrats. They’re defending 23 of the 34 seats that are up for grabs, including in ever-redder states like Montana and West Virginia.I’d love to see a serious Democratic challenger to Ted Cruz in Texas, and by serious I mean virtually anyone other than Beto O’Rourke. And I’d love to see Kari Lake run for a Senate seat in Arizona so that she can lose again.You?Gail: Funny, I was thinking the same thing about Ted Cruz the other night. Wonderful the way that man can bring us together.Bret: He even brings me closer to Trump. “Lyin’ Ted” was priceless.Gail: Another Senate Republican I hope gets a very serious challenger is Rick Scott of Florida, who made that first big proposal to consider slashing Social Security and Medicare.Bret: Good luck with that. Florida may now be redder than Texas.Gail: You’re right about the Democrats having to focus on defense. The endangered incumbent I’m rooting hardest for is Sherrod Brown of Ohio, who’s managed to be a powerful voice for both liberal causes and my reddish home state’s practical interests.Bret: I once got a note from Brown gently reproaching me for using the term Rust Belt about Ohio. The note was so charming, personable and fair that I remember thinking: “This man can’t have a future in American politics.”Gail: And as someone who’s complained bitterly about Joe Manchin over the years, I have to admit that keeping West Virginia in the Democratic column does require very creative and sometimes deeply irritating political performances.Bret: Aha. I knew you’d come around.I don’t know if you’ve followed this, but Manchin is now complaining bitterly that the Biden administration is trying to rewrite the terms of the Inflation Reduction Act, which, with Manchin’s vote, gave the president his biggest legislative win last year. The details are complicated, but the gist is that the administration is hanging him out to dry. Oh, and he’s also skeptical of Trump’s indictment. Don’t be totally surprised if Manchin becomes a Republican in order to save his political skin.Gail: Hmm, my valuation of said skin would certainly drop . …Bret: Which raises the question: How should partisan Democrats, or partisan Republicans, feel about the least ideologically reliable member of their own parties?Gail: Depends. Did they run as freethinkers who shouldn’t be relied on by their party for a vote? Manchin got elected in the first place by promising to be a Democrat who’d “get the federal government off our backs.” But often this explosion of independence comes as a postelection surprise.Bret: Good point. There should be truth in advertising.Gail: Do they — like Kyrsten Sinema of Arizona — forget their nonpartisanship when it comes to dipping into donations from partisan fund-raisers?And probably most important — is there a better option? If Sinema had to run for re-election this year, which she doesn’t, I would be a super-enthusiastic supporter if the other choice was Lake, that dreadful former talk show host.Any thoughts on your end?Bret: In my younger, more Republican days, I used to dislike ideological mavericks — they made things too complicated. Now that I’m older, I increasingly admire politicians who make things complicated. I know there’s a fair amount of opportunism and posturing in some of their position taking. But they also model a certain independence of thought and spirit that I find healthy in our Age of Lemmings.Gail: Hoping it’s maybe just the Decade of the Lemmings.Bret: If I had to draw up a list of the Senate heroes of my lifetime, they’d be Daniel Patrick Moynihan, John McCain, Howard Baker, Bob Kerrey and Joe Lieberman. And lately I’d have to add Mitt Romney. All were willing to break with their parties when it counted. How about you?Gail: Well, you may remember that a while back I was contemplating writing a book called “How Joe Lieberman Ruined Everything.”Bret: I recall you weren’t his biggest fan.Gail: Yeah, still blaming him for failing to give Al Gore the proper support in that 2000 recount. But I’ve come around on Mitt Romney. He’s become a strong, independent voice. Of course it’s easier to be brave when you’re a senator from a state that would keep re-electing you if you took a six-year vacation in the Swiss Alps. Nevertheless, I’ve apologized for all that obsessing about his putting the dog on the car roof.Bret: I came around on him too. I was very hard on him in 2012. Either he got better or I got wiser.Gail: I was a big admirer of John McCain. Will never forget following him on his travels when he first ran for president in 2000. He spent months and months driving around New Hampshire talking about campaign finance reform. From one tiny gathering to another. Of all the ambitious pols I’ve known he was the least focused on his own fortunes.Bret: I traveled with McCain on his international junkets. He was hilarious, gregarious, generous, gossipy — a study in being unstudied. If he had won the presidency, the Republican Party wouldn’t have gone insane, American democracy wouldn’t be at risk and Sarah Palin would be just another lame ex-veep.Gail: So, gotta end this with the obvious question, Bret. Republican presidential race! You’re a fan of Nikki Haley, but her campaign doesn’t seem to be going much of anywhere, is it? I know you’ve come to detest Ron DeSantis. Other options?Bret: Biden, cryonics or some small island in the South Atlantic, like St. Helena. Not necessarily in that order.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

    • 125 Shares99 Views

      in Elections

      Super PAC Backing DeSantis Says It Has Raised $30 Million

      by

      Fund-raising is predicted to be a strength for Ron DeSantis, who is expected to announce his bid for the Republican presidential nomination in the coming months.The super PAC that is likely to serve as the main vehicle supporting Gov. Ron DeSantis of Florida in a Republican presidential primary has raised $30 million since March 9, a senior official with the group said on Sunday night.The sums raised for the super PAC, named Never Back Down, show the financial might that would back a DeSantis campaign, should he enter the presidential race, as expected, after the Florida legislative session ends in early May.The fund-raising was described by an official with the group, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss internal operations. The official did not disclose any names of donors.None of the money raised was transferred from another committee, the official said. Mr. DeSantis’s state political committee had more than $82 million as of last month, which could eventually be transferred to another entity supporting him.Because Never Back Down is a federal super PAC, it can raise unlimited sums from donors. Over half the money was donated from people outside Florida, the official said.The group is raising funds online, sending money into a “Draft Ron” entity that could be transferred to an eventual presidential race.Fund-raising is expected to be a strength for Mr. DeSantis in a presidential contest, as a number of major Republican donors have expressed interest in him as a formidable challenger to the front-runner, former President Donald J. Trump.Mr. Trump, who was never the favorite of most major donors but who had most of their support while he was president, has not mustered the same type of backing for his 2024 presidential campaign. (He is scheduled to be arraigned on Tuesday in Manhattan in a case related to hush-money payments to a porn actress.)By contrast, Mr. DeSantis is expected to have tens of millions of dollars in commitments of support from donors, according to one Republican fund-raiser familiar with his operation. Money, this Republican said, will not be a problem for Mr. DeSantis.Never Back Down is being led by Kenneth T. Cuccinelli II, who served as acting deputy secretary of homeland security under Mr. Trump. Mr. Cuccinelli has been traveling the country to drum up support for a DeSantis candidacy.The super PAC recently hired Jeff Roe, a Republican strategist who has played key roles in advising Senator Ted Cruz of Texas and Gov. Glenn Youngkin of Virginia, among others. And the team has hired several other national campaign veterans, including some who worked for Mr. Trump.For the 2024 Republican nomination, Mr. Trump has consistently led in national public polling of primary voters, and Mr. DeSantis has been his closest competitor in a still-growing field. On Sunday, former Gov. Asa Hutchinson of Arkansas announced his campaign, joining a fellow former Republican governor, Nikki Haley of South Carolina, looking to challenge Mr. Trump.Mr. Trump also has a super PAC, Make America Great Again PAC, which recently began running ads attacking Mr. DeSantis. The group has not released fund-raising numbers. More

    • 75 Shares189 Views

      in Elections

      The 2024 Election Is Already Here

      by

      Listen and follow ‘The Run-Up’Apple Podcasts | Spotify | Stitcher | Amazon MusicPremiering April 6It may seem way too early to be thinking about next year’s presidential election — and it is too soon to ask who’s going to win. But actually, it’s the perfect time to understand what the parties took away from the last election and how that’s already shaping their plans for the next one.For the past few months, Astead W. Herndon has been reporting from inside the political establishment, where party leaders, donors and activists are already trying to influence the 2024 election — and while voters are less likely to pay attention and lines of allegiance are scrambled.“The Run-Up” returns Thursday, April 6. See you there.Your HostASTEAD W. HERNDON is a national politics reporter for The New York Times. He was an integral part of The Times’s reporting on the 2020 presidential election and 2022 midterm elections. Before joining The Times, Mr. Herndon wrote for The Boston Globe, including as a national politics reporter in the Washington office, where he covered the Trump White House.Photo Illustration by The New York Times. Photo by Bryan Anselm for The New York TimesAbout ‘The Run-Up’First launched in August 2016, three months before the election of Donald Trump, “The Run-Up” is The Times’s flagship political podcast. The host, Astead W. Herndon, grapples with the big ideas already animating the 2024 presidential election. Because it’s always about more than who wins and loses. And the next election has already started.Last season, “The Run-Up” focused on grass-roots voters and shifting attitudes among the bases of both political parties. This season, we go inside the party establishment.New episodes on Thursdays.Credits“The Run-Up” is hosted by More

    • 63 Shares149 Views

      in Elections

      Asa Hutchinson Announces Presidential Bid

      by

      The former governor of Arkansas, a prominent Trump critic within the Republican Party, has been testing the waters in Iowa.Asa Hutchinson, the former governor of Arkansas, joined the race for the Republican nomination for president on Sunday, banking that in a crowded field, enough G.O.P. voters will be searching for an outspoken critic of Donald J. Trump to lift his dark-horse candidacy.“What struck me as I was in Orange County, California, and as I was in Iowa for three days this week, was that the Trump factor really didn’t come up,” he said in an interview on Sunday, after he announced his candidacy on ABC’s “This Week.” The voters, he said, “are talking about things that matter to them, which is the economy, which is the fentanyl crisis that we have, and the relationship and leadership of America on the world stage.”“They’re asking tough questions,” he added, “but it’s not about the political dynamics of Trump.”Mr. Hutchinson has made several trips to Iowa, where he has tested out what he has called a message of “consistent conservatism” to Republican voters who have flocked to Mr. Trump in the past two elections. Recent polling has shown Mr. Trump’s lead among primary voters surging as his legal peril has grown. The former president is expected to be arraigned on Tuesday in Manhattan on charges that he falsified business records and violated New York campaign finance law to cover up hush-money payments to a pornographic film actress in the final days of the 2016 election.With several other cases pending, Mr. Hutchinson appears to be betting that external forces will trip up Mr. Trump’s third run for the White House. Other anti-Trump Republicans, such as the former Maryland governor Larry Hogan, have declined to run. And the Republicans who have jumped in or are preparing to — Nikki Haley, the former governor of South Carolina, the entrepreneur Vivek Ramaswamy, and Ron DeSantis, the Florida governor — have carefully avoided direct criticism of the front-runner.Mr. Hogan said he decided against running because he thought the voices in the party who oppose a second Trump presidency needed to rally around a single alternative. Mr. Hutchinson disagreed, saying multiple voices needed to emerge to give Republican voters a choice.“This is the most unpredictable election cycle in my lifetime for sure,” he said Sunday. “It’s unpredictable as to what develops with Donald Trump. It’s unpredictable as to what candidates get in there and whether they can be competitive.”Mr. Hutchinson is not a moderate Republican. He signed a ban on abortion that makes no exceptions for pregnancies that result from rape or incest, though he expressed some reservations. He has pressed for the repeal of the Affordable Care Act. And he led a task force convened by the National Rifle Association after the massacre of schoolchildren at Sandy Hook Elementary School in 2012 to come up with a response to blunt the push for gun control..css-1v2n82w{max-width:600px;width:calc(100% – 40px);margin-top:20px;margin-bottom:25px;height:auto;margin-left:auto;margin-right:auto;font-family:nyt-franklin;color:var(–color-content-secondary,#363636);}@media only screen and (max-width:480px){.css-1v2n82w{margin-left:20px;margin-right:20px;}}@media only screen and (min-width:1024px){.css-1v2n82w{width:600px;}}.css-161d8zr{width:40px;margin-bottom:18px;text-align:left;margin-left:0;color:var(–color-content-primary,#121212);border:1px solid var(–color-content-primary,#121212);}@media only screen and (max-width:480px){.css-161d8zr{width:30px;margin-bottom:15px;}}.css-tjtq43{line-height:25px;}@media only screen and (max-width:480px){.css-tjtq43{line-height:24px;}}.css-x1k33h{font-family:nyt-cheltenham;font-size:19px;font-weight:700;line-height:25px;}.css-1hvpcve{font-size:17px;font-weight:300;line-height:25px;}.css-1hvpcve em{font-style:italic;}.css-1hvpcve strong{font-weight:bold;}.css-1hvpcve a{font-weight:500;color:var(–color-content-secondary,#363636);}.css-1c013uz{margin-top:18px;margin-bottom:22px;}@media only screen and (max-width:480px){.css-1c013uz{font-size:14px;margin-top:15px;margin-bottom:20px;}}.css-1c013uz a{color:var(–color-signal-editorial,#326891);-webkit-text-decoration:underline;text-decoration:underline;font-weight:500;font-size:16px;}@media only screen and (max-width:480px){.css-1c013uz a{font-size:13px;}}.css-1c013uz a:hover{-webkit-text-decoration:none;text-decoration:none;}How Times reporters cover politics. We rely on our journalists to be independent observers. So while Times staff members may vote, they are not allowed to endorse or campaign for candidates or political causes. This includes participating in marches or rallies in support of a movement or giving money to, or raising money for, any political candidate or election cause.Learn more about our process.On Sunday morning, he embraced Arkansas’s abortion ban.“If that’s what they want to attack me on, then I’m proud to stand squarely on my pro-life position,” he said.But his government experience is broader than other candidates in the race. In addition to his two terms as governor, he served in the House, led the Drug Enforcement Administration and headed the Border and Transportation Security Directorate of the Department of Homeland Security when it was created after the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001.“Those experiences are central to the campaign because they address some of the greatest concerns of Americans, which is we need to secure the border,” he said.But his outspoken criticism of the former president has set him apart in a Trump-dominated party where dissent has not been tolerated. He has said Mr. Trump and those who supported his efforts to overturn the results of the 2020 election should not have positions of power. He stood against the Republican National Committee’s censure of now former-Representatives Liz Cheney of Wyoming and Adam Kinzinger of Illinois for serving as the only two Republicans on the House committee investigating the attack on the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021. And he called Mr. Trump’s election denial a “recipe for disaster” for the party.He was one of the very few Republicans to issue a statement after Mr. Trump’s indictment last week that did not dismiss the charges as political.“It is a dark day for America when a former President is indicted on criminal charges,” he wrote on Thursday. “While the grand jury found credible facts to support the charges, it is important that the presumption of innocence follows Mr. Trump. We need to wait on the facts and for our American system of justice to work like it does for thousands of Americans every day.” More

    • 138 Shares199 Views

      in Elections

      What the Trump Indictment Means for Ron DeSantis and the G.O.P.

      by

      There is a presumption among a certain kind of analyst — rooted, I presume, in a deeply buried belief in the vengeance of Almighty God — that because Republicans morally deserve Donald Trump they will be stuck with him no matter what. That having refused so many opportunities to take a righteous stand against him, they will be condemned to halt at the edge of a post-Trump promised land, gazing pathetically across the Jordan even as they cast in their lots with the False Orange Messiah once again.That assumption informs some of the reactions to the Trump indictment and the immediate rally effect that it produced among Republicans, with the former president’s (presumptive) leading challenger, Ron DeSantis, not only condemning prosecutorial overreach but promising some kind of Floridian sanctuary should Trump choose to become a fugitive from New York justice.A certain part of the media narrative was already turning against DeSantis, or at least downgrading his chances, in part because he hasn’t yet swung back hard at any of Trump’s wild attacks. Now with the indictment bringing the Florida governor and most of the G.O.P. leadership to Trump’s defense, that narrative is likely to harden — that this is just another case study in how leading Republicans can’t ever actually turn on Trump, and they will be condemned to nominate him once again 2024.In reality, the electoral politics of the indictment are just as murky as they were when it was just a hypothetical. One can certainly imagine a world where a partisan-seeming prosecution bonds wavering conservatives to Trump and makes his path to the nomination easier. But one can equally imagine a world where the sheer mess involved in his tangle with the legal system ends up being a reason for even some Trump fans to move on to another choice. (A poll this week from Echelon Insights showing a swing toward DeSantis in the event of an indictment offers extremely tentative support for that possibility.)Either way, the response from DeSantis and others right now, their provisional defense of Trump against a Democratic prosecutor, is not what will determine how this plays out politically.I have argued this before, but there’s no reason not to state the case again: The theory that in order to beat Trump, other Republicans need to deserve to beat him, and that in order to deserve to beat him they need to attack his character with appropriate moral dudgeon, is a satisfying idea but not at all a realistic one. It isn’t credible that Republican voters who have voted for Trump multiple times over, in full knowledge of his immense defects, will finally decide to buy into the moral case just because DeSantis or any other rival hammers it in some new and exciting way.Instead the plausible line of attack against Trump in a Republican primary has always been on competence and execution, with his moral turpitude cast as a practical obstacle to getting things done. And as others have pointed out, including New York Magazine’s Jonathan Chait, nothing about defending Trump against a Democratic prosecutor makes that case any more difficult to make.You can imagine DeSantis on the debate stage: Yes, I condemn the partisan witch hunt that led to this indictment. But the pattern with my opponent is that he makes it too easy for the liberals. If you’re paying hush money to a porn star, you’re giving the other side what it wants.It was the same way all through his presidency — all the drama, all the chaos, just played into the Democrats’ hands. Into the deep state’s hands. He would attack lockdowns on social media while Dr. Fauci, his own guy, was actually making them happen. He tried to get our troops out of the Middle East, but he let the woke generals at the Pentagon disregard his orders. He didn’t finish the Wall because he was always distracted — there was a new batch of leaks from inside his White House every week. He’s got valid complaints about the 2020 election, about how the other side changed election laws on the fly during the pandemic — but he was president, he just watched them do it, he was too busy tweeting.I admire what he tried to do, he did get some big things accomplished. But the other side fights to win, they fight dirty, and you deserve a president who doesn’t go into the fight with a bunch of self-inflicted wounds.Is this argument enough? Maybe not. It certainly doesn’t have the primal appeal that Trump specializes in, where all those self-inflicted wounds are transformed into proof that he’s the man in the arena, he’s the fighter you need, because why else would he be dripping blood?But it’s the argument that DeSantis has to work with. And nothing about its logic will be altered when Trump is fingerprinted and charged.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

    • 200 Shares159 Views

      in Elections

      If DeSantis Thinks His Competence Will Help Him Beat Trump, He May Want to Think Again

      by

      The Republican establishment thought it could have Donald Trump’s political appeal without Donald Trump himself.That’s why many of the most prominent voices in conservative politics and media have lined up behind Ron DeSantis, the governor of Florida, as the presumptive leader of the Republican Party in the 2024 presidential race. He combines traditional, elite credentials and orthodox conservative views with a pugilistic, Trumpish affect. DeSantis, goes the thinking, could hold Trump’s working-class supporters and reclaim suburban Republicans who decamped for bluer pastures in the 2020 presidential election.To be the nominee, of course, DeSantis has to win the nomination. And to win the nomination, he has to topple Trump, who remains the largest orbital body in Republican politics. Trump’s pull is so powerful — his influence is so great — that he basically compelled much of the Republican Party, including would-be rivals, to defend him in the wake of his indictment by a Manhattan jury.Besting Trump, in other words, will require a certain amount of skill, finesse and political daring.DeSantis has to find an avenue of attack on the former president and actually take the shot, knowing that he could alienate legions of Republican voters in the process. He has to somehow persuade Trump supporters that he could do a better job — more effective and less chaotic — without disparaging Trump to the point where he, DeSantis, is no longer viable. And he has to do all of this before Trump can build steam and roll over him like he did his rivals in the 2016 Republican primary.The problem for DeSantis is that it might already be too late.According to a recent Fox News poll, more than 50 percent of Republican voters support Trump for the Republican presidential nomination, compared with 24 percent for Gov. DeSantis. According to a recent Quinnipiac University poll, 51 percent of Republican voters support Trump, compared with 40 percent for DeSantis. And according to a recent Morning Consult poll, 52 percent of Republicans support Trump, compared with 26 percent for DeSantis.A lot could change between now and next year. Trump could collapse and DeSantis could pick up the pieces. But let’s consider the context of the last 13 years of Republican politics. Republican voters have always liked Trump. When asked in a 2011 NBC News poll whom they wanted to win the party nomination, 17 percent said Trump, just behind Mitt Romney and beating both Sarah Palin and Newt Gingrich. Trump was so influential even then that Romney asked for his endorsement, sharing the stage with the real estate mogul at an embarrassing Las Vegas news conference.The weakest Trump has ever been among Republican voters was in the wake of Jan. 6, when it seemed as if the entire political class, Republicans included, was ready to cut him loose. But they didn’t. Prominent Republican leaders kept him in the fold. Conservative media defended his actions. He was vulnerable, yes. But he remained the dominant figure in Republican politics.DeSantis could have struck when the former president was weak. He didn’t. And now the most likely outcome is that Trump takes the crown again, tossing his rivals aside like a collection of old dolls.What’s clear in all of this is that the Republican establishment — DeSantis included, it seems — is as clueless about its situation now as it was when Trump came down the escalator in 2015. They seem to think that they can harness Trump’s energy without submitting to Trump himself. But Republican voters want Trump, and they won’t take any substitutes.The draw of Trump is that he is an entertainer and a showman who will turn those skills against their political enemies. DeSantis might be more competent, but Republican voters don’t want a manager, they want a performer. If Trump’s opponents can outperform him, then, maybe, they have a chance. But in a fight for attention between a seasoned celebrity and a conservative apparatchik, I know where I would place my bet.What I WroteMy Tuesday column was on the slogan “parents’ rights” and what it actually means.The reality of the “parents’ rights” movement is that it is meant to empower a conservative and reactionary minority of parents to dictate education and curriculums to the rest of the community. It is, in essence, an institutionalization of the heckler’s veto, in which a single parent — or any individual, really — can remove hundreds of books or shut down lessons on the basis of the political discomfort they feel. “Parents’ rights,” in other words, is when some parents have the right to dominate all the others.And my Friday column was on the farce that is the Republican Party’s claim to want to “protect children.”When you put all of this together, the picture is clear. The Republican Party will use the law and the state to shield as many children as possible from the knowledge, cultural influences and technologies deemed divisive or controversial or subversive by the voters, activists and apparatchiks that shape and guide its priorities. When Tucker Carlson, Christopher Rufo and Moms for Liberty say jump, their only question is: How high?But when it comes to actual threats to the lives of American children — from poverty, from hunger, from sickness and from guns — then, well, the Republican Party wants us to slow down and consider the costs and consequences and even possible futility of taking any action to help.Now ReadingEdward Ongweso Jr. on venture capitalists for Slate.Adam Serwer on “wokeness” for The Atlantic.Claire Potter on gun violence in her newsletter.Simona Foltyn on the consequences of the Iraq War for Boston Review.Adolph Reed Jr. on Bayard Rustin for Nonsite.Photo of the WeekJamelle BouieI have a few more pictures I want to share from my trip to Hawaii last December. This is the Makapu‘u Point Lighthouse, which comes at the end of a nice trail with a decent amount of elevation. I took a few different pictures of this lighthouse, from a few different angles, but this was the one that I think worked best.Now Eating: Pasta and LentilsWe’re all about pasta and legumes in this house — the kids are big fans of the combination — and this recipe from New York Times Cooking is a nice variation on the theme. I usually make this vegetarian, but you can fry pancetta and cook the vegetables in the rendered fat if you prefer.Ingredients3 tablespoons extra-virgin olive oil, plus more for serving1 yellow onion, coarsely chopped8 garlic cloves, smashed and peeledkosher salt and black pepper1 cup brown or green lentils3 thyme sprigs3 fresh or dried bay leaves (optional)1 (28-ounce) can whole peeled tomatoes, crushed10 ounces tubular or ridged pasta, like penne½ cup freshly grated Parmesan, plus more for servingfresh parsley for garnishDirectionsIn a large pot or Dutch oven, heat the oil over medium-high. Add the onion and garlic, season with salt and pepper and cook, stirring occasionally, until golden brown and tender, 5 to 7 minutes. Add 5 cups of water, the lentils, the thyme and bay leaves (if using). Partially cover, bring to a boil, then reduce heat and simmer, partially covered, until the lentils are al dente, 25 to 30 minutes.Add the tomatoes and 1 teaspoon salt, and bring to a boil over high. Add the pasta and cook, stirring often to keep the pasta from sticking to the pot, until the pasta is al dente, 10 to 20 minutes. (It may take longer than the cook time on the package.) If the pot starts to look dry at any point, add more water, ¼ cup at a time.Turn off the heat, discard the thyme and bay leaves, then stir in the Parmesan. Cover and let sit for 3 minutes so the flavors meld and the sauce thickens. Season to taste with salt and pepper. Eat with more Parmesan and a drizzle of olive oil. More