Republican Party

Subterms

    More stories

    • 138 Shares179 Views

      in Elections

      Zeldin Uses Adams as a Surprising Weapon in N.Y. Governor’s Race

      by

      Lee Zeldin and other Republicans are trying to attract swing voters by aligning themselves with Mayor Adams, a Democrat, over his law-and-order platform.In his uphill battle to become New York’s next governor, Representative Lee M. Zeldin, the Trump-supporting conservative Republican from Long Island, has turned to an unlikely weapon: Eric Adams, the mayor of New York City.In recent weeks, and despite Mr. Adams’s protestations, Mr. Zeldin has repeatedly aligned himself with Mr. Adams, a first-term Democrat, over the issue of the state’s 2019 bail reform law, which both men have argued is deeply flawed and needs to be overhauled.It is a message that some other Republicans have also begun sounding, echoing the law-and-order credo that helped Mr. Adams get elected last year and the litany that Republicans have been reciting in races across the country. Their goal appears to be to focus swing voters on crime and public safety rather than divisive social issues, like abortion, that often lead those voters to favor Democrats.Marc Molinaro, a Republican running for Congress in the newly redrawn 19th Congressional District, which now stretches from the northern Hudson Valley to the Southern Tier, said he sometimes invokes Mr. Adams’s call to tighten bail restrictions.“I will say it in town hall meetings, sort of to emphasize the logic of the reforms that we want to see, I point to Mayor Adams,” said Mr. Molinaro, who serves as the Dutchess County executive.The Republican minority leaders in the State Legislature have also cited Mr. Adams, and Nick Langworthy, the state Republican Party chair, suggested other Republicans would be wise to employ the tactic.“I do think that Mayor Adams’s position could be used” more broadly, he said. “Not because he’s collaborating, but because common sense should unite people of all party affiliations.”With less than two months until Election Day, Mr. Zeldin is generally considered an underdog against Gov. Kathy Hochul, with polls generally showing him consistently behind the incumbent. Mr. Zeldin is also badly trailing Ms. Hochul, a Democrat, in the fund-raising race, and has recently leaned on Mr. Trump for help.Mr. Zeldin’s embrace of Mr. Adams is particularly striking given Mr. Adams’s endorsement of Ms. Hochul and the outsize role that the mayor’s predecessor, Bill de Blasio, played as a boogeyman for conservative campaigns across New York State during his eight years in office. Republicans frequently deployed Mr. de Blasio as an example of liberalism run amok, often tying him to candidates with little or no actual connection to the former mayor.“I believe the story that will be written in 2023 is how well a Governor Zeldin is working with Mayor Adams to save this city and to save the state,” Mr. Zeldin said in a recent interview. History is against him: Mr. Zeldin, a four-term congressman who voted to overturn the 2020 presidential election results, is seeking to become only the second Republican to be elected governor of New York in the last 50 years.But he believes he has a path to defeating Ms. Hochul, if he can capture about 30 percent of the New York City voters, something he thinks he is capable of doing despite daunting odds. The city is overwhelmingly Democratic, with Republicans and Conservative Party members making up about 10 percent of the city’s more than five million registered voters. Voters who decline to state their affiliation — generally considered independents — make up approximately 20 percent.William F.B. O’Reilly, a Republican consultant who worked with Rob Astorino, one of Mr. Zeldin’s vanquished primary opponents, said that by parroting Mayor Adams’s rhetoric on crime, Mr. Zeldin and Republicans elsewhere can heighten their appeal to independents and some middle-of-the-road Democrats.“By aligning himself with a prominent Democrat, it suggests that he’s part of the middle,” Mr. O’Reilly said, noting that Mr. Adams’s race could also be a factor. “He’s Black, he’s a Democrat, he’s a former police officer, and I think he’s generally considered a centrist. So the closer that Zeldin can get to him the better.”Ms. Hochul’s camp scoffs at the notion that Mr. Zeldin — who opposes abortion rights, supports nearly unfettered gun rights and has been close with former President Donald J. Trump — can somehow present himself as a moderate.Mayor Eric Adams, right, largely based his campaign on a law-and-order platform.Natalie Keyssar for The New York Times“This is another pathetic attempt from Lee Zeldin to distract voters from his extreme MAGA positions,” said Jerrel Harvey, a spokesman for the Hochul campaign. “Governor Hochul and Mayor Adams have made progress on countless issues and shared Democratic priorities, from reducing gun violence to expanding child care to getting our economy back on track.” Likewise, Mr. Adams has resoundingly and repeatedly rejected any suggestion that he and Mr. Zeldin have anything in common, saying that Mr. Zeldin is a threat to public safety, not an asset. Mr. Zeldin has criticized the state’s strict gun laws and hailed a recent Supreme Court decision allowing easier use of concealed weapons.“In spite of what people are attempting to say — Lee Zeldin and I are aligned at the hip — we must have a broken hip because he clearly doesn’t get it,” Mr. Adams said in August. “He has voted against all of the responsible gun laws in Congress.”Still, the implied association between the mayor and the Republican nominee has dismayed his fellow Democrats, particularly those whose political beliefs are to the left of his.“It’s not surprising that Zeldin wants to latch on to the Democratic mayor of the state’s largest city,” said State Senator Michael Gianaris, the Queens Democrat who serves as deputy majority leader in Albany’s upper chamber. “What is surprising is the mayor is giving him the fuel to do so.”Assemblyman Ron Kim, a Queens Democrat, said that it was “inevitable” that Republicans would pick up the similarities between their rhetoric and Mr. Adams’s in an election year, even if the mayor disapproves of Mr. Zeldin.“As a Democrat, this isn’t where you want to be, especially with other gender and racial justice issues that he’s clearly not aligned with Lee Zeldin on, ” Mr. Kim said. “So it’s unfortunate that he’s giving him cover around bail when there’s other big things that Democrats want to home in on.”The disdain expressed by Mr. Gianaris and Mr. Kim is part of a larger schism in the state Democratic Party between progressives and more centrist leaders like Mr. Adams, a former police captain who was elected in part by promising robust law enforcement in a city suffering from a rise in some forms of violent crime.Mr. Zeldin has made repeated references to Mr. Adams’s stance on bail in campaign events and news releases, echoing the mayor’s call for a special legislative session devoted to the issue.In 2019, the state changed its bail law to prevent those charged with relatively minor crimes from being held on bail. Proponents of the new law argue that the issuance of bail disproportionately affects poorer people, keeping them in jail because they cannot afford to post bail.The law, which took effect the following year, has since been amended twice amid widespread opposition from law enforcement officials, who claim it has led to increased crime. No data has emerged indicating that to be the case.Zellnor Myrie, a state senator from Brooklyn who helped craft the bail reform legislation, says it is particularly rich for Mr. Zeldin to use bail reform to paint himself a law-and-order candidate, in light of his fealty to Mr. Trump.“Lee Zeldin and those around him in my mind have zero credibility on public safety,” Mr. Myrie said. “This is the same candidate who, after the former president stole nuclear secrets from the White House, instead of distancing himself from that, has only drawn closer to him.”Mr. Myrie, who is Black, also noted a racial dynamic inherent to the debate. Both Alvin Bragg, the Manhattan district attorney who is a constant Zeldin target, and Mr. Adams are Black. Mr. Zeldin and Mr. Trump are white.“I truly believe that deep down, race is driving this conversation,” he said. “That’s why to me it’s very insidious sometimes what we hear emanating from the mayor’s office or from various other city agencies, because they — they being the Republicans — are not good faith actors when it comes to this, and you have put Black men in the line of fire because of the nature and the temperature of the rhetoric around public safety.”In an interview, Mr. Zeldin said that bail wasn’t the only issue on which he agreed with Mr. Adams, noting his support for mayoral control of schools, something that Albany lawmakers agreed to in June, but only after extracting concessions on reducing class sizes.“I thought it was absurd,” said Mr. Zeldin, of the Legislature’s negotiating tactics. “He had just got into office. The correct policy is just to extend mayoral control. So just do it.”Mr. Zeldin says that he and Mr. Adams became acquainted, from opposite sides of the aisle, when both were state senators in Albany, sometimes sharing lunch amid colleagues in a conference room adjacent to the Senate floor.While in Albany in 2013, Mr. Adams also served as a chairman of the Senate Committee on Aging, the only mainstream Democrat to hold a chairmanship in that period from the chamber’s Republican leaders. Mr. Zeldin, who also served on the committee, recalled that the two “got along well, and we stayed in touch afterward.”“It’s not like he’s calling me up to be the best man at his wedding, or vice versa,” Mr. Zeldin added. “But the goal here, the objective, the motive is to work together.”Jonah Bromwich contributed reporting. More

    • 113 Shares199 Views

      in Elections

      Gun Shoot Will Conclude Karoline Leavitt’s House Primary Race

      by

      A heated New Hampshire primary in the state’s First Congressional District is going out with a literal bang.Karoline Leavitt, 25, who served an assistant in President Donald J. Trump’s press office and turned the primary into a bitter battle over which candidate carried the mantle of Trumpism, is closing her campaign Monday night with a gun shoot at the Londonderry Fish & Game Club in Litchfield, N.H.Special guests include two Republican members of Congress, Lauren Boebert of Colorado and Byron Donalds of Florida, Freedom Caucus members who represent the hard right wing of the party that Ms. Leavitt has aligned herself with. Ms. Boebert is pairing the campaign event with a signing of her memoir, “My American Life.”The event was set to be a splashy coda for a candidate who gained traction with conservative voters by reaching for the most extreme and provocative statements and molding herself in the image of Mr. Trump.The candidate who appears to be ahead, Matt Mowers, 33, is also a former Trump administration official billing himself as an “America First” conservative. He was set to spend the final night of his campaign visiting bars and restaurants in Manchester, a campaign aide said. The two former Trump aides are vying for the chance to run against the incumbent, Representative Chris Pappas, a Democrat.The tight race between Ms. Leavitt and Mr. Mowers divided MAGA Republicans and the party’s leaders in the House. The minority leader, Representative Kevin McCarthy of California, and former Trump campaign aides like Corey Lewandowski and David Bossie endorsed Mr. Mowers. Representative Elise Stefanik of New York, who is the No. 3 House Republican, and Senator Ted Cruz of Texas were among those who endorsed Ms. Leavitt.Mr. Mowers, who won the Republican nomination for the same House seat in 2020 but lost to Mr. Pappas, entered the race a year ago as the presumed front-runner. But Ms. Leavitt mounted a strident and surprisingly fierce challenge by billing herself as the anti-establishment candidate and savaging her opponent as a creature of the political “swamp.”A recent poll by the University of New Hampshire Survey Center showed Mr. Mowers leading Ms. Leavitt by a thin margin: 26 percent to 24 percent, barely more than the 2.2 point margin of error, though 26 percent of likely voters said they remained undecided.“Karoline Leavitt has been the straw that stirred the drink,” said Dante J. Scala, a political science professor at the University of New Hampshire.In campaign mailers, Mr. Mowers touted his 2020 endorsement from the former president, who did not endorse either of his former aides in this year’s race.The Congressional Leadership Fund, a super PAC aligned with Mr. McCarthy, has spent more than $1.3 million supporting Mr. Mowers. Another super PAC that supports moderate Republicans, Defending Main Street, has spent over $1.2 million and is running an ad that describes Ms. Leavitt as a “woke Gen-Z’er” and plays a Snapchat video she once posted where she used crude language to refer to her viewers.The race will be decided Tuesday night. More

    • 138 Shares169 Views

      in Elections

      In New Hampshire, an Intraparty G.O.P. Fight for the Senate Intensifies

      by

      An intramural Republican fight over New Hampshire’s nominee for the Senate entered its final day on Monday with Gov. Chris Sununu and national Republicans working furiously to try to block a Trump-style 2020 election denier, Don Bolduc, whom they perceive as too extreme to win in November.As former President Donald J. Trump remained on the sidelines — despite private appeals from a more mainstream Republican, Chuck Morse, the president of the State Senate, for Mr. Trump to throw him his support — Mr. Bolduc appeared in strong position to get on the ballot against Senator Maggie Hassan, one of the most vulnerable Democrats in the evenly divided chamber.The contests in New Hampshire on Tuesday are some of the final primary elections of the year. Delaware and Rhode Island are also holding primaries on Tuesday, but Louisiana is technically the last on the calendar. Voters in Louisiana cast their primary ballots on Nov. 8, the same day as the general election.In addition to the Senate contest, Republicans in New Hampshire are also vying in primaries for the right to challenge Democratic incumbents for the state’s two congressional seats, including one pitting two former members of the Trump administration against each other, with insults flying over who truly embodies the Make America Great Again movement.Both House contests in the state are viewed as tossups in November and will play a role in whether Republicans take over the chamber. The stakes are just as high in the Senate race, with the winner in November helping to determine whether control of the 50-50 Senate will remain in Democratic hands or flip to Republicans, stymieing the remaining years of President Biden’s term.The Senate race has featured an extraordinary joint effort by Republican leaders and Mr. Sununu to block Mr. Bolduc, a retired Army general whom many Republican officials perceive as too extreme to win a general election in purple-hued New Hampshire.In an opinion column in The New Hampshire Union Leader on Sunday, Mr. Sununu repeated his earlier endorsement of Mr. Morse, writing that he is the “candidate who Maggie Hassan is most afraid to face.”Chuck Morse, a Republican running for Senate in New Hampshire, met with Donald Trump on Sept. 2 in Bedminster, N.J.Mary Schwalm/Associated PressEarlier, Mr. Sununu, a popular moderate, had accused Mr. Bolduc of being a “conspiracy-theory extremist” whom most voters did not take seriously.At a recent debate, Mr. Bolduc stood by the false claim that Mr. Trump won the 2020 election. He has also said he was open to abolishing the F.B.I. after agents executed a search warrant on Mr. Trump’s Florida estate in search of classified documents. And last year, he called Mr. Sununu a “communist sympathizer” whose family “supports terrorism,” statements he has since backed away from.The State of the 2022 Midterm ElectionsWith the primaries winding down, both parties are starting to shift their focus to the general election on Nov. 8.Democrats’ Dilemma: The party’s candidates have been trying to signal their independence from the White House, while not distancing themselves from President Biden’s base or agenda.Intraparty G.O.P. Fight: Ahead of New Hampshire’s primary, mainstream Republicans have been vying to stop a Trump-style 2020 election denier running for Senate.Abortion Ballot Measures: First came Kansas. Now, Michigan voters will decide whether abortion will remain legal in their state. Democrats are hoping referendums like these will drive voter turnout.Oz Sharpens Attacks: As the Pennsylvania Senate race tightens, Dr. Mehmet Oz is trying to reboot his campaign against his Democratic opponent, Lt. Gov. John Fetterman, with a pair of pointed attack lines.Mr. Bolduc, who has held some 50 town-hall-style events around the state in a two-year campaign that helped him build a strong following, said last week that when voters hear him out, they do not find him extreme.“I’ve had town halls with Republicans, independents, Democrats, libertarians, and when they meet me, they’re like, ‘This guy’s not a fascist. This guy isn’t anything that they say he is,’” Mr. Bolduc told a conservative podcast, “Ruthless.”A Trump endorsement might still influence the race, although its impact has diminished with each passing day..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-ok2gjs{font-size:17px;font-weight:300;line-height:25px;}.css-ok2gjs 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;}What we consider before using anonymous sources. Do the sources know the information? What’s their motivation for telling us? Have they proved reliable in the past? Can we corroborate the information? Even with these questions satisfied, The Times uses anonymous sources as a last resort. The reporter and at least one editor know the identity of the source.Learn more about our process.Mr. Trump was considering an endorsement of Mr. Morse, but it was unclear whether he would pull the trigger, according to Republicans who have spoken with the former president. Mr. Morse met with Mr. Trump on Sept. 2 in Bedminster, N.J., where Mr. Trump owns a golf club, and the two men spoke again by phone on Thursday, according to people familiar with the conversations.Aides to both men described the conversations as pleasant and positive. During their meetings, Mr. Trump complimented Mr. Morse’s fund-raising prowess in the state and his record of public service. After their meeting, Mr. Trump invited Mr. Morse and his team to have dinner at his club before returning home. But Mr. Trump did not join Mr. Morse for dinner that evening, and people close to the former president said Mr. Trump seemed less excited about Mr. Morse’s candidacy compared with other Senate candidates he has backed this year.In a radio interview this month, Mr. Trump sounded as if he was leaning toward an endorsement of Mr. Bolduc.“He said some great things, strong guy, tough guy,” Mr. Trump said of Mr. Bolduc, who served 10 tours of Afghanistan and reached the rank of brigadier general. “I think he’s doing very well, too. I hear he’s up, he’s up quite a bit.”In polls, Mr. Bolduc, center, has led by double digits, although as many as one in four Republican likely voters were undecided.John Tully for The New York TimesMr. Trump has made other last-minute endorsements this year, but usually he waits for a front-runner to emerge, letting him run up his win-loss record and boast of his political influence.In polls, Mr. Bolduc has led by double digits, although as many as one in four Republican likely voters were undecided. The Morse campaign hopes that a blitz of TV ads — primarily $4.5 million by an outside Republican group that wants to stop Mr. Bolduc — will move those undecided voters toward Mr. Morse.“We couldn’t be in a better position right now,’’ said David Carney, a strategist for Mr. Morse, adding, “Gen. Don Bolduc isn’t on TV, he has no radio, there’s no message, no way to reach new people — and we do.”National Democrats have also jumped into the race, portraying Mr. Morse in TV ads as “another sleazy politician.” The goal of the Democratic group behind the ads — the Senate Majority PAC, which is aligned with Senator Chuck Schumer of New York, the majority leader — is to drive voters toward Mr. Bolduc, whom Democrats would rather face in November.In all, a total of $33 million has poured into TV and radio ads for tiny New Hampshire’s Senate race since the start of the year, according to the media tracking firm AdImpact — not unusual for a competitive Senate election. The influx includes $13 million from Ms. Hassan and Democratic super PACs aimed at shoring up her image. One ad from an outside group touts Ms. Hassan for “taking on her own party” by pushing for a federal gasoline tax holiday.Senate Leadership Fund, a Republican super PAC run by allies of Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, the minority leader, has booked over $22 million for the general election in the state, although it is unclear if the commitment would hold should Mr. Bolduc become the nominee.In New Hampshire’s First Congressional District, two former members of the Trump administration are vying to be the purest embodiment of the Trump wing of the Republican Party in a contentious primary that is drawing nearly as much attention as the Senate race.Matt Mowers, 33, who is a veteran of Mr. Trump’s State Department and who has the endorsement of Representative Kevin McCarthy of California, the Republican leader, was the early front-runner. But in recent days, Karoline Leavitt, 25, has gained traction. Ms. Leavitt, who worked in the White House press office, has been mimicking the inflammatory language of Mr. Trump and appealing to his unflinching loyalists. She has the backing of hard-right Republicans in Congress, including Representatives Lauren Boebert of Colorado and Jim Jordan of Ohio.At a recent debate, when asked about impeaching Mr. Biden, Mr. Mowers said he favored hearings to weigh if charges were justified. Ms. Leavitt was unequivocal: She supported impeachment.As in the Senate primary, outside Republican money has poured in to support Mr. Mowers and attack Ms. Leavitt, in the belief that she would be a weaker opponent against the Democratic incumbent, Representative Chris Pappas. “The Establishment knows I am the greatest threat to their handpick puppet Matt Mowers,” Ms. Leavitt wrote recently on Twitter. Polls have shown the race in a statistical tie.New Hampshire’s Second Congressional District is also seen as competitive in November, although Republican challengers to the longtime Democratic incumbent, Representative Annie Kuster, have done less to raise their profiles and break out of a crowded field.In a University of New Hampshire poll of the race released late last month, nearly four in 10 voters remained undecided. More

    • 150 Shares179 Views

      in Elections

      Must We Discuss the Queen and the Donald in the Same Breath?

      by

      Gail Collins: Bret, I guess we should begin with the queen. Hey, that’s a change of pace, right?Bret Stephens: I’m trying to process the fact that I found myself tearing up while listening to the story of her life put together for the paper by Alan Cowell.Gail: Alan’s piece was perfect, but I have to admit I haven’t been tempted to break into tears over the queen’s passing. Possibly because my household has Irish roots. You can appreciate what she achieved without romanticizing the whole British Empire thing.Bret: At the risk of digital defenestration, I will say that I tend to think the British Empire wasn’t an entirely bad thing for the world.Gail: [Here Gail bops Bret on the head, hard, with a bottle of Jameson.]Bret: Ouch, Gail! OK, before I get into even deeper trouble with some of our readers, she did preside gracefully over said empire’s demise and, as Maureen Dowd pointed out in her lovely column over the weekend, won over quite a few Irish hearts.The queen also made you realize that there is nothing as compelling as something that is supposed to be anachronistic — because it endures against fashion, resistance, indifference, decay, contradiction and time. Just like Joe Biden, apparently.Gail: Heh. Let’s let domestic politics sit for a minute and stay on the queen. I love the way you put that compelling-anachronism line, but my response is that things tend to get anachronistic because they’re just out of date.Bret: Well, true.Gail: But as I said, it’s easy to appreciate the queen’s achievement in just chugging on and smiling at strangers for so very, very long. Guess one of the messages of the moment is that nobody lives forever.Bret: The Atlantic magazine sent its subscribers an email on the day she died with the accidentally funny headline, “Queen Elizabeth’s Unthinkable Death.”Gail: We’ll see what happens next with the royal family. Will tourists still be clustering around to get a glimpse of that golden coach if the person waving from inside is Charles? Who, by the way, has always seemed like a dork.Bret: I feel for him, and not just because he’s lost both his parents in less than two years. Christopher Hitchens once had a memorable take on the royals, saying the love the British have for them “takes the macabre form of demanding a regular human sacrifice whereby unexceptional people are condemned to lead wholly artificial and strained existences, and then punished or humiliated when they crack up.”Gail: Do the unexceptional people include their actual elected officials?Bret: Many of them are exceptional, although some are just exceptionally bad.Gail: I always did think the queen could have retired early so Charles would have had a chance to be the sovereign before he hit his 70s. But so it goes.On the home front, I’m getting sort of fascinated by the big Senate races coming into the homestretch. Any favorites for you?Bret: I’m trying to wrap my head around the possibility of Senator Herschel Walker, who would be to Georgia what, er, Marjorie Taylor Greene is to Georgia.The Arizona Senate race between Mark Kelly and Blake Masters is a little too close for comfort, given that every week seems to bring a new disclosure about Masters’ deep unsuitability for high office — most recently his “9/11 Truther-curious” stand in college. I try not to hold people accountable for whatever they believed in college, but I’d make an exception in this case.How about you? What races are you looking at?Gail: Well, as an Ohio native I have to be riveted by the battle between Tim Ryan, a perfectly rational Democratic congressman, and the Republican candidate, J.D. Vance, who sorta peaked when he wrote “Hillbilly Elegy.”Bret: And when he was a fervent Never-Trumper.Gail: And then there’s Wisconsin, where Mandela Barnes, the Democratic lieutenant governor, is running a very strong race against Senator Ron Johnson. A campaign high point came when Johnson told conservatives he’d only taken a moderate position on same-sex marriage to get the media “off my back.”Bret: That’s the worst of both worlds, isn’t it? His principles are lousy, and he’s not a man of principle.Gail: I have to commend you on rising above partisanship and refusing to support truly terrible Republican candidates in places like Georgia and Arizona. Would you hold firm to that even if it meant a difference in which party controlled the Senate?Bret: In some pre-2016 universe, I’d be rooting for a Republican sweep. And I’d be rooting for Republicans to take at least one chamber in this election, except that so many of the Republicans on the ballot are so unmitigatedly awful that, as the kids say, “I can’t even.”Gail: Yippee!Bret: On the other hand, I think it’s pretty hypocritical that pro-Democratic groups are spending tens of millions of dollars helping MAGA types win Republican nominations, on the theory that they’ll be easier to beat in the general election. That’s what’s happening with the G.O.P. Senate primary in New Hampshire, where the Democrats are none too subtly helping a conspiracy theorist named Don Bolduc against his more mainstream rival, Chuck Morse.I guess I’d find it a lot less loathsome if it were just a cynical electoral strategy. But it’s pretty rich coming from a party that is otherwise attacking “MAGA Republicans” as an existential threat to democracy.Gail: Totally agree about those political action committees that were plotting to get the worst possible Republicans nominated just to increase Democratic chances.But there’s a difference between that kind of scheme and simply criticizing the most likely Republican nominee just to get a start on the final campaign.Bret: In some of these cases, they aren’t the likeliest nominees. And the lesson of 2016 is: Sometimes the bad guy wins.Gail: Speaking of MAGA Republicans, you wrote a very powerful piece attacking Joe Biden for his anti-MAGA address in Philadelphia. Let’s revisit.Bret: Well, here is where I trot out that old French quote about something being “worse than a crime, a mistake.” If Biden had wanted to denounce “election-denying Republicans” or “Jan. 6 Republicans” that would have been fine by me. But calling out “MAGA Republicans” is painting with way too broad a brush, especially when he suggested that anyone who was anti-abortion or opposed to gay marriage automatically belonged in that group. The whole speech reminded me of Hillary Clinton’s deadly “basket of deplorables” remark, which might have cost her the 2016 election: It did more to alienate a lot of voters than it did to persuade them.What’s your take?Gail: We’re talking about a Joe Biden speech, and I suspect that some of the responsible citizens who tuned in because they want to keep up on current events nodded off or switched to a “Simpsons” rerun before he wandered off into the Democratic agenda.Bret: One day I’ll give you my theory on why “The Simpsons,” “South Park” and “Family Guy” represent the last best hope of mankind. Sorry …Gail: But the Democratic agenda is a winner, even when Biden’s selling it. Middle-of-the-road voters are eager to hear about ways they might get more help with medical bills, especially for drugs.And abortion! Don’t know if I’m amused or angry about all the Republican candidates who’ve suddenly scrubbed all mention of the subject off their websites.Both, I guess.Bret: It’s good to see voters energized to defend abortion rights at the state level. Not sure how winning the Democratic agenda is, except among Democrats themselves or their media allies who seem to think that inflation has been bested and the student-loan forgiveness plan is universally popular.I know Democrats are now feeling confident about the midterms, at least when it comes to holding the Senate. But if I were on your team I’d curb the enthusiasm.Gail: I do love the way you sneak references to TV shows into your comments. Tell me — just to stop talking about politics for a minute — what are your all-time favorite shows?Bret: I probably should say “Seinfeld” or “Curb Your Enthusiasm,” but I really do love my cartoons. My all-time favorite South Park episode is the one about the underpants gnomes, who go around stealing people’s underwear in the middle of the night in order to bring it to their underground lair. They have a three-phased approach to making money: Phase One, collect underpants. Phase Two, ? Phase Three, Profit.That pretty much explains most government policies, plus a big part of the start-up economy. And you?Gail: Hey, haven’t watched “South Park” for years. You’re inspiring me.My all-time favorite is “The Sopranos,” the greatest series ever made. We’ve been watching it every night lately. When it’s over I’m ready for a comedy, and my No. 1 pick is “30 Rock.” Tina Fey is a genius. And despite not being a sports enthusiast, I have a strong attachment to “Friday Night Lights.”I so hope our politics evolves again into something people want to gab about. Definitely worrisome that even at the most liberal dinner parties in town, people always wind up back at Donald Trump.Except us, of course, Bret.Bret: Us? Trump? Who?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

    • 88 Shares119 Views

      in Elections

      The Future of Election Skepticism Is Arizona

      by

      Mark Finchem, the Republican nominee for Arizona secretary of state, talks a lot about tracking: procedures, processes, audits, the path a ballot takes from voter to tabulator.He’s a member of the Arizona state House of Representatives, and has a formal way of speaking, full of numerical legislation titles and terminology, but also talks about things seen and unseen. Like a number of other Republican nominees for secretary of state this year, Mr. Finchem claims the last election was fraudulent.“Here’s why we know it didn’t happen,” he told an interviewer who had just suggested Arizona may have actually voted for Joe Biden in 2020. “It’s nonsense intuitively. Leading up to the election, this would be August, September, October. It first started off that you’d see a Trump train of maybe a dozen cars, and this is in my community. It’s one community, but I think it’s fairly representative of Arizona. You’d see a Trump train of maybe a dozen cars.” The hosts start cracking jokes about Biden trains behind gas stations these days, but in the interview, Mr. Finchem remains undeterred and unlaughing: First it was 12 cars, then 24, then 48, culminating in a three-mile Trump train. This is the kind of thing Mr. Finchem will abruptly say amid talk of election procedure.In November 2020, Mr. Finchem was part of a hearing in Arizona where Rudy Giuliani aired claims of election fraud; Mr. Finchem went to Washington on Jan. 6. He wants to decertify the 2020 election and for Arizona to withdraw from the Electronic Registration Information Center, a nonpartisan organization funded by participating states that helps them to find potential voters and determine duplicate active registrations. He also could win in Arizona this year; the state has been decidedly close the last several elections.His public comments tend to be both premised on the possibility of rampant voter fraud — which, in actuality, takes place rarely — and reflect a kind of individualism that’s a part of the tech and society we already have, where individuals routinely arbitrate and police disputes online.Mr. Finchem has called himself “probably an evangelist” for a 2013 book by Matthew Trewhella called “The Doctrine of the Lesser Magistrates.” A favorite of some extreme anti-abortion activists, the book argues that officials have an obligation to stop enforcement of laws that violate, in the author’s view, God’s wishes, specifically laws that legalize abortion or acceptance of homosexuality.The author praises the former Alabama Supreme Court judge Roy Moore in his efforts to defy court rulings about placing the Ten Commandments on government property. “Some of the most important and necessary actions down through history were done without a majority,” Mr. Trewhella writes. “In fact, human nature is such that the majority usually only have an interest in their own well-being and livelihood. In truth, the lesser magistrate does not need any support from the people in order to act.”After his primary victory this summer, in one interview Mr. Finchem brought up an app where people can submit perceived voting irregularities and observed, “We’ve basically turned the entire polity — the entire citizen pool in Arizona — into witnesses, and that’s even more robust than having poll watchers.”In April, a podcast interviewer asked Mr. Finchem if he’d discovered anything “determinative” to Arizona’s close election, which Mr. Biden won by about 10,000 votes. Even the audit of Maricopa, the state’s largest county — which was supported by Arizona Republicans like Mr. Finchem and criticized by elected officials — found Mr. Biden won the county. Mr. Finchem replied, “So yeah, part of that was a Psyop [psychological operation]; they worked very, very hard to convince the American people that, ‘Oh it’s going to be a close race.’ No, it wasn’t; it was a blowout.”How much doubt can the system take on? I really wonder how we get out of a situation where some segment of the population believes people rigged the vote against Mr. Trump, and some other segment believes, maybe a little hazily, that something must have been amiss, given all the noise from Mr. Trump and people like Mr. Finchem. Doubt can be difficult to overcome once it’s in the air.How would you talk someone out of this? Pull out a bunch of maps and charts and show how Donald Trump improved his share with voters in some cities and places like the border, but it was no match for Joe Biden’s performance in the suburbs in enough states, the kind of demographic pattern that you can see in states both won and lost by Mr. Trump? Ask them to get involved and see the process themselves? Hope this just fades, if Mr. Trump fades?If Mr. Trump’s endless refusal to concede has vastly expanded and sustained the universe of fraud believers and election skeptics, the sentiment has begun to detach from his personal fortunes.Kansas officials recently had to perform a recount of the blowout referendum to keep abortion legal in the state; candidates who’ve won primaries this year have suggested there might be fraud inherent in the process; one Texas county election staffer who quit his job recently told The Associated Press, “That’s the one thing we can’t understand. Their candidate won, heavily. But there’s fraud here?” In a town hall this summer, after detailing how Utah’s elections work and its security measures, Republican Gov. Spencer Cox called unsubstantiated fraud claims “dangerous” and “not healthy.” Mr. Cox added, “Making people prove a negative — something that doesn’t exist — is virtually impossible.”One of Mr. Finchem’s big plans as Arizona’s would-be secretary of state hinges on the idea that there’s space for fraud in the unseen. He wants to end Arizona’s early voting program, which the state first implemented in the 1990s and many, many voters in both parties regularly use. He claims that to end fraud, you must end early voting. “Here’s what happened: You received a ballot in the mail,” he told an interviewer this year. “You fill that ballot out. And then you put it in the mail. You have just broken [the] chain of custody. You have just put somebody in between you and the county official who’s supposed to be counting your ballot.”Instead, as a federal judge outlined recently in his dismissal of a lawsuit Mr. Finchem and the gubernatorial nominee Kari Lake filed, Mr. Finchem envisions ballots counted by hand, at the precinct level, “one at a time, by three independent counters” in “full view of multiple, recording, streaming cameras,” with a serial number known to the voter but no other personal identification on each ballot.This is just one thing Mr. Finchem has said, but it’s worth lingering on and considering. In the end, this is a really big country with a secret-ballot system: each vote cast must eventually go someplace to be counted, on your faith and trust. A machine counts the ballot — or sometimes, human hands do, if there’s a recount — and that input gets piled up with all the other inputs and then reported to the public, somewhere beyond each voter’s vision. This would still be true under Mr. Finchem’s livestreamed hand-count system — the secret moment would just be flipped to the front end, where some authority would distribute serial numbers to each voter.But it’s striking where this kind of thinking can lead you and leave you. If you follow this broken-chain-of-custody logic, you could not trust the mail carrier or the guy who picks up the ballot dropbox, even if your own mail shows up every day. If you really commit, you might not be able to trust the mechanism that counts the votes, whether that’s a person or a machine or the official feeding the machine, since it’s easy to imagine how this idea of an individual’s subversion could carry from one civic process to the next, once someone pushes that kind of doubt into the system. If you follow the logic all the way, this kind of thinking could leave you, ultimately, alone vs. everything, surrounded by the eternal possibility of subversion.Katherine Miller is a staff writer and editor in Opinion.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

    • 113 Shares179 Views

      in Elections

      Democrats Didn’t Conjure Up the Demand for MAGA Candidates

      by

      In my column this week, I tackled some of the major objections to President Biden’s Philadelphia speech on MAGA Republicans and the threat they pose to democracy, including the view that it was too divisive.Even if it was, most Americans land on Biden’s side of the argument — in a Reuters poll conducted just a few days after the speech, 58 percent of respondents, including a quarter of Republicans, said that Trump’s “Make America Great Again” movement is “threatening America’s democratic foundations.”What I didn’t address was the charge that Biden, and Democrats in general, are acting in bad faith when they condemn Trump and his allies. If Democrats truly believe that MAGA Republicans are a threat to democracy, goes the argument, why are they spending tens of millions of dollars to elevate them in Republican primaries? My colleagues Ross Douthat and Bret Stephens both made a version of this point in their respective columns this week.They are keyed into something real: that it is a bit unsavory, if not outright hypocritical, for Democrats to spend huge sums to help nominate MAGA Republicans at the expense of their more moderate, pro-democracy colleagues while condemning those same candidates, and the movement they represent, as a threat to the constitutional order.Where I part ways with my colleagues is in their conclusion that Democrats are therefore crying alligator tears when they condemn MAGA extremists. If the top priority is depriving the Republican Party of power and influence, then the most important thing for Democrats to do, right now, is win elections. And if the most Trump-aligned candidates tend to be the weakest challengers in a general election, then it is entirely consistent with the argument in Biden’s speech to want to elevate those candidates over more moderate alternatives.At the end of the day, a more moderate Republican in Congress is still a vote for Kevin McCarthy as speaker of the House or Mitch McConnell as Senate majority leader. It is still a vote, in other words, for a coalition that includes MAGA Republicans.I could leave it there, except that I think that this answer concedes too much to the premise. Implicit in the question is the factual claim that Democratic spending in Republican primaries is either responsible for — or a significant factor in — the success of MAGA candidates with Republican voters. Otherwise, why would Democrats spend the money and why would conservatives complain about the outcome?I think it is true that Democratic spending has had an effect. But I think the more significant reason that Republican voters keep nominating MAGA candidates is that Republican voters like MAGA candidates. All you have to do is look at the results of the Republican primaries in question and ask if Democratic money really mattered that much.Did Illinois Governor J.B. Pritzker, a Democrat, spend millions to give a boost to Darren Bailey, the Trumpiest candidate in the Republican gubernatorial primary? Yes. But Bailey led the Republican field before Pritzker’s intervention, swamping his opponents in an October 2021 poll. Democrats may have nudged some undecided voters into Bailey’s camp, but that alone does not explain how the hard-right Republican won more than 57 percent of the vote in a six-way primary. The more likely answer, given his early lead, is that Republican voters liked what Bailey was selling.The same goes for Doug Mastriano in Pennsylvania, the pro-insurrection Republican candidate for governor. Democrats gave him a boost as well. But he led the Republican pack for much of the race and his final tally — nearly 44 percent of the vote in an eight-way contest — reflects his very real popularity with Republican voters in the state.The other thing to consider is the actual content of Democratic ads on behalf of MAGA Republican candidates. The ad meant to support Mastriano, for example, simply stated his conservative views and emphasized his support for Trump. The ad said that Mastriano wanted to “outlaw abortion” and is “one of Donald Trump’s strongest supporters.” It also points out that Mastriano “wants to end vote by mail, and he led the fight to audit the 2020 election. If Mastriano wins, it’s a win for what Donald Trump stands for.”It is not the Democratic Party’s fault that Republicans are attracted to this message, and nothing forced Republicans in Pennsylvania or Illinois (or Michigan or Arizona) to nominate the most MAGA candidates in the field. Republicans voters like Trump and they want Trumpist candidates, and where there’s demand, supply usually follows.Which is to say that even with Democratic intervention in Republican primaries, the thrust of Biden’s story about the Republican Party still holds up. The party has been captured by extremists, and it’s up to the rest of us to ensure that it doesn’t win more power than it already has.What I WroteMy Friday column was on President Biden’s Philadelphia speech, why I think the objections to it are misguided, and what, if anything, was missing from his argument that the MAGA movement is a threat to American democracy.To divide against a radical minority that would attack and undermine democratic self-government is to divide along the most inclusive lines possible. It is to do a version of what Franklin Roosevelt did when he condemned“organized money,” “economic royalists” and the “forces of selfishness and lust for power.”And in the latest episode of my podcast with John Ganz, Unclear and Present Danger, we discussed the 1992 crime thriller “Deep Cover” with special guest Adam Serwer of The Atlantic.Now ReadingAdam Serwer on free speech for The Atlantic.Jerusalem Demsas on “Black flight” for The Atlantic.Blair McClendon on Jordan Peele’s “Nope” for Mubi.Andrew Elrod on Watergate for N+1 magazine.Rick Perlstein on the assault on public schools for The Forum.Keisha N. Blain on objectivity in history for The New Republic.Feedback If you’re enjoying what you’re reading, please consider recommending it to your friends. They can sign up here. If you want to share your thoughts on an item in this week’s newsletter or on the newsletter in general, please email me at jamelle-newsletter@nytimes.com. You can follow me on Twitter (@jbouie), Instagram and TikTok.Photo of the WeekJamelle BouieI went to a car show in nearby Culpepper, Va., and took a few photos. This was one of the better ones. I used Ilford black and white film and a Voigtlander 35mm lens.Now Eating: Farro Broccoli Bowl with Lemony TahiniI’ve been on a real grain salad kick — they’re easy to make for lunch — and this is the latest one. I have no real changes to make. I used more broccoli than the recipe called for and also added a bunch of cilantro. Personally, I would go heavy on the tahini, but I like tahini quite a bit. Your mileage may vary. Recipe comes from NYT Cooking.IngredientsKosher salt1½ cups farro, rinsed and drained4 large eggs, scrubbed under hot running water1 large head broccoli, cut into florets, tender stems sliced2 tablespoons extra-virgin olive oil1 teaspoon soy sauce, plus more for serving2 tablespoons toasted sesame oil1 tablespoon sesame seeds1 scallion, thinly slicedHot sauce or thinly sliced green chiles, for serving (optional)2½ tablespoons fresh lemon juice, plus more for serving1 garlic clove, finely grated or minced¼ teaspoon kosher salt, plus more as needed⅓ cup extra-virgin olive oil, plus more as needed3 tablespoons tahiniDirectionsBring a medium pot of salted water to a boil. Add farro and eggs. Cook eggs for 6 minutes for very runny centers and 7 minutes for medium-runny. Use a slotted spoon to transfer eggs to a bowl of cold water. Let them sit for 2 minutes, then crack and carefully peel the eggs.Continue to let the farro cook until done according to package directions, usually a total of 20 to 40 minutes. Drain farro.As farro cooks, prepare the dressing: In a medium bowl, whisk together lemon juice, garlic and ¼ teaspoon salt. Let sit for 1 minute, then whisk in oil, a few drops at a time, until emulsified. Whisk in tahini and set aside.Broil the broccoli: Position the rack underneath your broiler so that it’s at least 4 inches away from the heating element; heat the broiler.On a rimmed baking sheet, toss broccoli with olive oil and soy sauce, then spread the pieces out into an even layer. Broil until slightly charred in spots, 2 to 5 minutes, watching closely so that it doesn’t burn all over (a few burned spots are OK). Let cool slightly, then toss with sesame oil and sesame seeds and cover to keep warm. (You can also roast the broccoli at 450 degrees for 8 to 15 minutes instead of broiling.)Toss cooked farro with 5 to 6 tablespoons tahini dressing to taste, a large pinch of salt and a drizzle of olive oil. Taste, and add salt and olive oil if needed.To serve, divide farro across 4 serving bowls and drizzle with remaining dressing. Top with turnips, and sprinkle them lemon juice and salt. Add broccoli and egg to the bowl and garnish with sliced scallions and more sesame. Serve immediately, with soy sauce, hot sauce, and-or sliced chiles on the side if you like. More

    • 138 Shares129 Views

      in Elections

      First Kansas, Next Michigan and Beyond as Abortion Ballot Measures Spread

      by

      The inclusion of an abortion-rights referendum on Michigan’s November ballot has given Democrats hope for a wave of enthusiastic voter turnout on Election Day as the movement to allow voters to decide the issue directly sweeps outward from the first state that did so, Kansas.Democrats in Michigan say the referendum will supercharge activism among a broad swath of voters determined to keep abortion legal in the state, just as another referendum did in August, when 59 percent of voters in reliably Republican Kansas voted to maintain abortion access in the state. That could help Democrats up and down the ballot, including Gov. Gretchen Whitmer, Attorney General Dana Nessel, lawmakers in at least three closely watched House races and Democrats hoping to grab control of the State Legislature.“The country stood up and listened when Kansas had its vote,” said Representative Elissa Slotkin, who is locked in a difficult re-election campaign in Central Michigan. “Those who were ready got it on the ballot for 2022. We’re going to see a lot more in 2024.”Beyond Michigan, the measure provides a test run for a political strategy gradually taking hold in the wake of the Supreme Court’s Dobbs decision, which overturned Roe v. Wade. With little time to gather signatures, just four other states will vote on abortion referendums in November: Montana and Kentucky on Republican measures to restrict abortion, and California and Vermont on cementing abortion access. But many abortion rights advocates already are looking past November to 2024, considering possible ballot measures in Missouri, Oklahoma, Iowa and, money and political muscle permitted, the presidential battlegrounds of Florida and Arizona.Such measures would be designed to secure policy changes in states where Republican legislatures are in opposition. But they also could have political ramifications not seen since Republicans successfully used ballot initiatives on gay marriage to energize Christian conservatives during President George W. Bush’s re-election run in 2004.Republicans may also revive that playbook, particularly in battlegrounds with active anti-abortion groups. But, for now, Democrats appear most eager to push the issue amid early signs that abortion is motivating their voters.Polls show that a majority of Americans overall — and a slightly larger share of women — disapprove of the court’s decision. A Pew Research poll in July found that 57 percent of adults disapproved of the decision, 43 percent of them strongly. A Marquette Law School poll later that month found that approval ratings for the Supreme Court itself were on a steep downward slide, to 38 percent from 44 percent in May.In the month after the decision, 55 percent of newly registered voters in 10 states analyzed by The Times were women, up from just under 50 percent before the decision was leaked in early May. In Kansas, more than 70 percent of newly registered voters were women.Democrats have performed well in a string of special House elections since federal constitutional protection of abortion ended, including Democratic victories in Alaska and the Hudson Valley in New York.Abortion opponents outside a Michigan Board of Canvassers hearing in Lansing in August. The anti-abortion side says its voters are energized as well.Carlos Osorio/Associated PressAbortion opponents in Michigan say the state Supreme Court’s ruling on Thursday allowing the abortion rights amendment has energized their side as well. A coalition of 20 anti-abortion, social conservative and other groups calling itself Citizens to Support MI Women and Children had mobilized to block the referendum. Now, it is planning digital and television advertising, mailers and canvassing operations to paint the amendment as an “extreme” provision that would allow abortion throughout pregnancy.The abortion amendment on the ballot does not include language limiting or regulating abortion, but it does invite the State Legislature to impose restrictions in line with Supreme Court precedents before the decision that overturned Roe v. Wade. The amendment would allow the state “to prohibit abortion after fetal viability unless needed to protect a patient’s life or physical or mental health.”The State of the 2022 Midterm ElectionsWith the primaries winding down, both parties are starting to shift their focus to the general election on Nov. 8.Abrams’s Struggles: Stacey Abrams has been trailing her Republican rival, Gov. Brian Kemp, alarming those who celebrated her as the master strategist behind Georgia’s Democratic shift.Battleground Pennsylvania: Few states feature as many high-stakes, competitive races as Pennsylvania, which has emerged as the nation’s center of political gravity.The Dobbs Decision’s Effect: Since the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade, the number of women signing up to vote has surged in some states and the once-clear signs of a Republican advantage are hard to see.How a G.O.P. Haul Vanished: Last year, the campaign arm of Senate Republicans was smashing fund-raising records. Now, most of the money is gone.Christen Pollo, a spokeswoman for the coalition, conceded that the number of signatures secured to put the measure on the ballot — more than 750,000 — was impressive. But she said she did not believe that support would hold after her organization ramps up its efforts.“They may have received a record number of signatures, but I do not believe a record number of voters understand this proposal,” she said, adding that her side “has had thousands of people pouring out to get involved.”But in swing districts, Democrats are seeing something else.“The choice issue is deeply, deeply impacting the district,” said Hillary Scholten, a Democrat trying to capture a House seat around Grand Rapids. “Doctors and nurses are terrified. Women are terrified.”In one sign of momentum behind abortion-rights supporters, Tudor Dixon, the Republican challenging Ms. Whitmer for the governorship, has been trying to soften her hard-line stance against abortion. After the state Supreme Court’s decision certifying the ballot measure, Ms. Dixon wrote in a tweet, “And just like that you can vote for Gretchen Whitmer’s abortion agenda & still vote against her.”In an interview with The New York Times, Ms. Dixon said she intended to campaign on issues she hears about on the trail, such as education and crime, not abortion.“I’m going to vote no on it, but it’s up to the people,” she said, adding that if the referendum passes, she would not fight it as governor.“I’m running to be the chief executive of the state, and what that means is that I will enforce the laws that are on the books. And if this is what the people choose, then that’s my role,” Ms. Dixon said. “If I get elected, that’s my role is to make sure that I honor their wishes.”“I’m going to vote no on it, but it’s up to the people,” said Tudor Dixon, the Republican candidate for governor of Michigan, of the abortion-rights referendum.Emily Elconin for The New York TimesMichigan law on abortion is a subject of dispute. The state has had a ban on the procedure on the books since 1931. Since Roe was struck down, the courts have blocked enforcement of that state ban and abortions have continued, along with court cases.Darci McConnell, a spokeswoman for Reproductive Freedom for All, the coalition that secured the Michigan referendum, said that abortion opponents would almost certainly be well funded. The state is known for big-spending conservative donors such as the DeVos family. But the group already has offices in 10 cities, has begun visiting and calling voters, and has put up digital advertising just weeks before absentee ballots go out.“It’s a mad dash, but we’re prepared to do the work,” she said.While Democrats see ballot measures and referendums as a way to work around Republican-led legislatures, Republicans across the country have sought to limit citizen-lead ballot initiatives, a century-old facet of American democracy. Republicans in several states have sought to make it harder to put initiatives on the ballot by increasing the number of signatures required, limiting funding for initiatives and restricting the signature-gathering process.In South Dakota, for example, Republicans passed a law last year requiring a minimum font size of 14 points on ballot-initiative petitions. When combined with a requirement that all initiatives fit on a single sheet of paper, people gathering signatures are now forced to lug around bulky petitions, including some that unfold to the size of a beach towel.Liberal groups expect more legislation targeting the ballot-initiative process next year as abortion initiatives begin in multiple states.But the push from Democrats will be just as hard, especially in states with Democratic governors and Republican legislatures, or where gerrymandering has secured lopsided Republican majorities in legislatures that do not reflect the voters at large, Ms. Slotkin said.“Initiatives are profoundly important ways to make changes in states like ours where we have gridlock in the legislature, and it’s where Democrats have the advantage because of our grass roots,” she said.Mini Timmaraju, president of NARAL Pro-Choice America, said conversations about future ballot measures would gather steam after the fall elections, if, indeed, abortion proves to be a major driver in Democratic gains.“There is no place where we shouldn’t be fighting on this issue,” she said. “We think there’s no turf that’s off limits.” More

    • 75 Shares149 Views

      in Elections

      Was Biden’s Democracy Speech Too Harsh?

      by

      More from our inbox:The Reasons Behind the Teacher ExodusThe Reusable Bag Glut Doug Mills/The New York TimesTo the Editor:Re “With Malice Toward Quite a Few,” by Bret Stephens (column, Sept. 7):While declaring Donald Trump to be the “gravest threat American democracy faces” out of one side of his mouth, out of the other Mr. Stephens decries President Biden’s harsh words for the MAGA Republicans fervently supporting Mr. Trump.He can’t have it both ways.Many Republicans in Congress to this day refuse to admit that Joe Biden won the 2020 election. Until these Republicans can bring themselves (and convince the majority of their party) to acknowledge that the presidency was not stolen from Mr. Trump, sharp words to save our democracy are warranted.Lincoln’s “malice toward none” address was given after the insurgents seeking to destroy the Union were defeated, making Mr. Biden’s identification of threats to democracy timely and vital.Carl MezoffStamford, Conn.To the Editor:Bret Stephens nailed it. The threat to democracy is not Republicans or even just MAGA Republicans. It is the sinister and buffoonish Donald Trump, plus his inner circle that pushed his lies in the aftermath of the 2020 election.Even the Jan. 6 riot was not a threat to democracy. Nor was it an insurrection. It was a violent venting that petered out on its own that same afternoon.But what caused that violent venting? Part of it was Mr. Trump’s lies. But a bigger part of it was the left’s actual attempts to steal the 2016 and 2020 elections, not by miscounting votes, but first by the claims of collusion with Russia (a hoax, as I and many others believe) and later by suppressing the Hunter Biden laptop story. In between, the Democrats and media did everything possible to evict Mr. Trump from office. If all that was “democracy,” then Watergate wasn’t a crime.Donald Trump is one of the worst sore losers of all time, totally unfit for office. But he was also endlessly pushed and goaded, just as Republicans have been pushed, goaded, demeaned and vilified for decades by the arrogant, condescending left. That’s what brought Mr. Trump to the fore to begin with.Mark GodburnNorfolk, Conn.To the Editor:While I acknowledge the validity of some of Bret Stephens’s criticism of President Biden’s speech in Philadelphia, I take issue with his conclusion: “The gravest threat American democracy faces today isn’t the Republican Party, MAGA or otherwise. It’s Trump.”This overlooks the fact that Trumpism has metastasized and infected the entire Republican Party. And getting rid of Donald Trump won’t eliminate the damage to our politics and electoral system that he leaves in his wake.John J. ConiglioEast Meadow, N.Y.To the Editor:I agree with much of what Bret Stephens says about President Biden’s speech. I was a registered Republican from 1970 to 2016. I left the party the day Donald Trump got the nomination.I think there is one simple litmus test that separates the MAGA deplorables from the regular or moderate Republicans. If you deny that Joe Biden won the election, if you insist that it had to be rigged, if you attended the Jan. 6 riot and acted violently, then yes, you are a MAGA extremist bent on the destruction of our democracy. It’s that simple.Steven SchwartzWest Orange, N.J.To the Editor:Re “Does Biden Truly Think Democracy Is in Crisis?,” by Ross Douthat (column, Sept. 5):Since democracy means that the candidate with the most votes is declared the winner, how could anyone, including Mr. Douthat, not believe that we are in a crisis of democracy, when the other major party candidate and his minions refuse to acknowledge that Joe Biden was the winner?Ross ZuckerCastine, MaineThe writer is a retired professor of political science at Touro University.To the Editor:Ross Douthat questions whether President Biden and the Democrats really believe that Donald Trump and his followers are a threat to democracy, because Republicans are not a majority party. But with the Electoral College, voting restrictions, gerrymandering, a Senate biased toward rural states and a Supreme Court tilted way to the right, our system is quite vulnerable to rule by a minority party.If that party becomes authoritarian, it can indeed be a threat to democracy. Those who don’t take such a threat seriously espouse a dangerous complacency.Chris MillerEl Cerrito, Calif.The Reasons Behind the Teacher ExodusHallsville Intermediate School in Hallsville, Mo. The superintendent of the school district there said the pool of qualified teaching applicants has all but dried up in recent years.Whitney Curtis for The New York TimesTo the Editor:Re “How Bad Is the Teacher Shortage? It Depends on Where You Live” (news article, Aug. 30):Low pay, as the article indicates, is a major reason that young people are not becoming teachers and that older, experienced teachers are leaving the profession.Consider some other reasons:Parents who harass, verbally abuse and even assault teachers in school parking lots and even outside their homes.Schools so inadequately funded that teachers often have to use their own meager paychecks to pay for classroom supplies.Schools so badly in need of repairs that they are dangerous to the health and well-being of everyone who works in them.The prospect of a gunman with an AR-15 rifle walking into a classroom, forcing teachers to put their own bodies between themselves and their students.Threats that teachers can be fired or even jailed for uttering a perfectly legitimate word or phrase that some politicians deem offensive.Politicians have done more than anyone else to create the teacher shortage — and they will have to fix it.Dennis M. ClausenEscondido, Calif.The writer is a professor of American literature and creative writing at the University of San Diego.To the Editor:Today there is a mass exodus from the classroom by many educators, and I can’t blame them. I was a teacher for 31 years. They can make more money at a different job with less stress.Some of my nonteaching friends have asked, “What can we do to support teachers so they stay in the classroom?”You can volunteer in the classroom, donate classroom supplies, speak up for better teacher pay and smaller class sizes, appreciate the demands and constraints of a teacher’s job, and speak highly of teachers in front of your children.According to the National Education Association, 55 percent of teachers are thinking of leaving the profession. We can’t let this happen.To all of the educators staying in the profession, we can’t thank you enough. Teachers can’t do this alone. They need your support. Thank you to all of the supportive, understanding parents out there. We need you.Deborah EngenSugar Land, TexasThe Reusable Bag GlutExperts calculate that a typical reusable plastic bag has to be reused 10 times to account for the additional energy and material used to make it. For cotton tote bags, it’s much higher.Jeenah Moon/ReutersTo the Editor:Re “New Jersey Bag Ban’s Unforeseen Consequence: Too Many Bags” (front page, Sept. 2):Perhaps the New Jersey supermarkets and online food delivery services could take back the previous delivery’s reusable bags — and reuse them.Marianne VaheyWoodbridge, Conn.To the Editor:I also accumulated many reusable bags while grocery shopping online during the pandemic. I’m giving mine to an organization that provides meals for the homeless. Food banks and nonprofit thrift shops can also probably use them.Betsy FeistNew YorkTo the Editor:My local C-Town supermarket packs groceries for delivery or curbside pickup in the corrugated cardboard shipping boxes that they get food in. They are very efficient in their arrangements, so I generally only need two boxes when I might need six bags.Anne BarschallTarrytown, N.Y. More