Republican Party

Subterms

    More stories

    • 113 Shares169 Views

      in Elections

      Fearing ‘Extinction-Level Event,’ N.Y. Democrats Turn Against Each Other

      by

      Newly drawn congressional maps have led some House members to quickly lay claim to certain districts, even if it means challenging fellow incumbents.Two weeks ago, Representative Sean Patrick Maloney warned fellow Democrats in a private meeting that a ruling by New York’s highest court to invalidate a Democratic-leaning congressional map could prompt “an extinction-level event” for the party, according to people familiar with the remarks.Democratic incumbents, he feared, could either be shoehorned into more difficult districts or forced into primaries against one another.So on Monday, when the courts finally unveiled a proposed new slate of districts unwinding Democrats’ gerrymander, Mr. Maloney, the chairman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, knew precisely what to do.Just 25 minutes after the maps’ release, Mr. Maloney announced on Twitter that he would leave behind the bulk of his traditional Hudson Valley seat and run instead for a newly drawn 17th Congressional District rooted in Westchester County. Mr. Maloney lives within the new lines, which happen to offer a safer path for a Democrat than the district he currently represents.What might have seemed like an easy political decision for Mr. Maloney, however, has quickly turned into a political firestorm, replete with racial overtones, off-the-record recriminations and rare breaches of congressional decorum between staff of neighboring colleagues.Some Democrats saw the maneuver as an attempt to box out Representative Mondaire Jones, a first-term congressman who represents the vast majority of the district’s population, and force him to enter a primary against Jamaal Bowman, a fellow Black progressive, in the neighboring 16th District. Mr. Jones made no secret of his own feelings, though he has yet to say which Democrat he will challenge.“Sean Patrick Maloney did not even give me a heads-up before he went on Twitter to make that announcement,” Mr. Jones tersely told Politico on Monday. “And I think that tells you everything you need to know about Sean Patrick Maloney.”What to Know About RedistrictingRedistricting, Explained: Here are some answers to your most pressing questions about the process that is reshaping American politics.Understand Gerrymandering: Can you gerrymander your party to power? Try to draw your own districts in this imaginary state.Killing Competition: The number of competitive districts is dropping, as both parties use redistricting to draw themselves into safe seats.Deepening Divides: As political mapmakers create lopsided new district lines, the already polarized parties are being pulled even farther apart.In a rare break from Congress’s genteel protocols, Mr. Jones’s chief of staff even shared a screenshot of an exchange with Mr. Maloney’s top aide, and accused the chairman of prioritizing his personal interests “rather than working to unravel this gerrymander” by the courts.The once-a-decade congressional redistricting process is almost always an exercise in raw political power, particularly in a state like New York, which this year must shed a seat overall to account for population losses.But if New York’s redistricting cycle began this year with an attempt by Democrats to marginalize Republicans, it now appears destined to end in intense infighting among Democrats as the Aug. 23 primary approaches — thanks to a ruling last month by the state’s highest court declaring the Democrat-led Legislature’s maps unconstitutional.“Can I just go on vacation through August and wake up in September?” said Maria Slippen, the chairwoman of the Cortlandt Democratic Committee in Westchester County, lamenting a potential Democrat on Democrat fight in her district between Mr. Maloney and Mr. Jones. “When we are put in a situation where we have to fight with each other, the Republicans win,” she added.Representative Mondaire Jones said Mr. Maloney failed to give him a heads-up on his election plan.T.J. Kirkpatrick for The New York TimesThe replacement map, drawn for the court by Jonathan R. Cervas, erased outright gains that Democrats had counted on based on the Legislature’s map and made other Democratic swing seats more competitive. It also forced at least five pairs of incumbents together in the same districts from Brooklyn to Buffalo, leaving candidates to decide whether to retire, move or go head-to-head with another sitting House member.A few miles down the Hudson from Mr. Maloney, two powerful Democratic committee chairs who have served alongside each other for 30 years — Jerrold Nadler and Carolyn Maloney — were also gearing up for a potentially explosive primary fight that would pit the east and west sides of Manhattan against one another in the new 12th Congressional District.Representatives Hakeem Jeffries and Yvette Clarke, two Black Democrats drawn into a single district in Central Brooklyn, expressed fury at Mr. Cervas, but indicated they were likely to still run for separate seats.The maps, which could still be tweaked before a judge makes them final on Friday, may simply leave other candidates without a natural seat to run in and create unexpected openings for candidates who had previously decided not to run in 2022.Alessandra Biaggi, a rising Democratic star in the State Senate, had hoped to run in a new seat — stretching from her home in Westchester County to Nassau County on Long Island — created under the State Legislature’s plan. But Mr. Cervas’s map removed Westchester from the district entirely.Rana Abdelhamid, a community organizer backed by Justice Democrats, had spent more than a year campaigning against Ms. Maloney in New York City, only to see her Queens neighborhood removed from the district.Suraj Patel, another Carolyn Maloney challenger, has yet to declare his intentions but lives close to the line separating the new 12th District from the 10th, the remnants of Mr. Nadler’s old seat. He could decide to run in the 10th, where State Senator Brad Hoylman, former Mayor Bill de Blasio and Carlina Rivera, a member of the City Council, are also seriously considering runs.How U.S. Redistricting WorksCard 1 of 8What is redistricting? More

    • 75 Shares109 Views

      in Elections

      Three Questions About Today’s Consequential Primaries

      by

      How will progressive Democrats fare against moderate rivals? What signals will North Carolina Republicans send? And in Pennsylvania, will Kathy Barnette concede a loss?PHILADELPHIA — Tonight’s big races in Pennsylvania and North Carolina are sending tremors across the Republican Party, as its MAGA wing vies for dominance with other flavors of Trumpism.Democrats have held quieter primaries, but their party’s center-left establishment has battled progressive uprisings in places like the Raleigh-Durham region and Pittsburgh.New York Times reporters have fanned out across the states, and polls close in Pennsylvania at 8 p.m. Eastern and in North Carolina at 7:30 p.m. Eastern. Follow our live coverage of developments here, and view the results as they come in here. For now, we’ve got some questions about the wider implications of today’s races:Will Kathy Barnette claim the election was stolen if she loses?Barnette, a conservative commentator, has rocketed toward the top of polls in the Republican primary for Senate in Pennsylvania.She rose to prominence for embracing conspiracy theories about the 2020 election — including ones about her own failed race that year for a House seat in the Philadelphia suburbs, which she lost by nearly 20 percentage points to Representative Madeleine Dean, the Democratic incumbent. Barnette refused to concede, despite no evidence of problems with the election.The campaigns for Barnette’s top rivals, Dr. Mehmet Oz and Dave McCormick, projected confidence in conversations with senior campaign aides and surrogates today, but both are bracing for the possibility that Barnette will make similar claims if tonight’s results are especially close or uncertain.“We’re focused on running our race and we’re confident that Kathy will have a good night,” said Ryan Rhodes, a spokesman for the Barnette campaign.The McCormick campaign, which has the largest legal and communications infrastructure of all its rivals, has deployed 500 poll monitors to watch for any irregularities.Barnette’s late surge has frazzled and dismayed Republicans in Pennsylvania and beyond. They fear that her biography has not been subject to serious scrutiny, and many G.O.P. operatives in Washington would prefer Oz or McCormick, who are widely deemed better candidates for the general election.Republican strategists are weighing how to respond if the results tonight are close. Some counties are not expected to begin counting mail-in ballots until tomorrow.“If Kathy alleges fraud, I hope it will be for good reason,” said Josh Novotney, a Philadelphia-based lobbyist for SBL Strategies. “If not, it will hurt our party.”“A candidate crying election fraud against a Trump-backed candidate will probably have to be put in Webster’s as the new definition of irony,” he added.How does the progressive movement fare? Not every Democratic primary today falls neatly into the bucket of progressives versus the establishment. But there are few exceptions.One House primary in Oregon stands out because it’s not for an open seat. The incumbent, Representative Kurt Schrader, a leading moderate, has support from House Democrats’ campaign arm and an endorsement from President Biden.In Congress, progressive leaders haven’t flocked to support his challenger, Jamie McLeod-Skinner. But she has received the backing of one prominent Democrat — Senator Elizabeth Warren — as well as support from smaller left-leaning groups and several county Democratic Party organizations in Oregon that would normally be expected to back the incumbent or remain neutral.The clearest example of a left-versus-center showdown might be in Pittsburgh, where Representative Mike Doyle, a Democrat, is retiring. The top contenders to replace him are Summer Lee, a state legislator backed by progressives including Warren and Senator Bernie Sanders, and Steve Irwin, a Democrat supported by Doyle.Summer Lee, a progressive House candidate in Pennsylvania, with Mayor Ed Gainey of Pittsburgh today.Jeff Swensen/Getty Images“It’ll be a real bellwether for where the progressive movement is today,” said Aren Platt, a Democratic strategist in Pennsylvania.The United Democracy Project, a super PAC affiliated with the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, aired an ad that questioned Lee’s loyalty to Biden and the Democratic Party. The progressive group Justice Democrats has also been on air questioning whether Irwin is a “real Democrat” by trying to tie him to Republicans.Understand the 2022 Midterm ElectionsCard 1 of 6Why are these midterms so important? More

    • 138 Shares169 Views

      in Elections

      10 Republicans on President Trump’s Sway in Georgia, Ohio and Pennsylvania

      by

      The nostalgia was powerful, and came with a twist.In the latest Times Opinion focus group, 10 Republican voters in swing states wished for an America before 8 percent inflation, before high gas prices, before the Ukraine war. Wished for a leader they saw as strong, commanding, feared. Wished for a party that, in the words of one, “put America first again.”They wished, in other words, for a return of President Donald Trump.But here’s the twist: When asked if they felt it was extremely important to vote for someone this year who embraces Mr. Trump’s agenda, eight of the 10 Republicans raised their hands. A few seconds later, when asked if it was extremely important to vote for someone who has the same style and personality as Mr. Trump, no one raised a hand.Throughout the 90-minute discussion with these Republicans, from Georgia, Ohio and Pennsylvania — three states with big primaries for Senate and governor this month — Mr. Trump’s record looked only better to them in hindsight, especially without the distraction of his “mean tweets” or personal manner. One Georgia Republican who didn’t vote for Mr. Trump in 2020 even said he’d consider supporting the former president if he ran again in 2024. “I don’t like what I’m seeing, as far as the direction that the country is headed,” this Republican said.As for the influence of Mr. Trump’s endorsements in party primaries this month, it was most potent when voters didn’t already have strong attachments to candidates, as our focus group moderator, Kristen Soltis Anderson, noted. The Ohio and Pennsylvania Republicans were mostly taking their cues from Mr. Trump in their Senate primaries; by contrast, the Georgia Republicans were more inclined to buck Mr. Trump and stick with their incumbent Republican governor, Brian Kemp, whom the former president is trying to oust in next week’s primary.This is the 10th group in our series America in Focus, which seeks to hear and understand the views of cross-sections of Americans whose voices are often not heard in opinion journalism. We conducted the discussion with Ms. Anderson, who does similar work for political candidates, parties and special interest groups. (Times Opinion paid her for the work.) This transcript has been edited for length and clarity; an audio recording and a video clip of the session are also included. Participants provided their biographical details.Kristen Soltis Anderson: If you had to pick a word or phrase for what matters most to you in the upcoming elections, what would it be?Jennifer (38, white, Georgia): Inflation and gas prices. We have an R.V. that takes diesel, so it’s been really hurting at the gas pump.Raquel (29, Hispanic, Pennsylvania): Inflation. Education for our children. Just teach them math, science and reading, and we’ll do the rest at home.Kim (58, white, Ohio): Inflation and border control.Justin (38, white, Ohio): The economy.Kristen (49, white, Pennsylvania): Economy.Kristen Soltis Anderson: I want to ask you about leaders you admire. Who is an American leader during your lifetime who you admired?Robert (60, white, Ohio): Ronald Reagan. He brought about a good feeling in America after we had been through a complete disaster with Jimmy Carter. Carter’s a wonderful guy, but it was just a disaster for four years. With Reagan, it came back — the flag waving, the patriotism. People feared us once again.Brandon (32, Black, Georgia): Andrew Yang. He has an eye towards the future with A.I. and robots taking all the jobs.Kimberly (38, white, Georgia): I know Donald Trump’s pretty controversial. But I’ll take mean tweets all day when I can afford my groceries and my gas for my kids and my family.Jennifer: George W. Bush. When 9/11 happened, I was a senior in high school. He kind of brought the country back together. And I just think he’s an overall pretty cool guy, nice family man, just very respectable.10 Republican Voters in Swing States on Trump’s Hold on the PartyKristen Soltis Anderson: My next question pivots to things that you’re looking for in candidates. When you’re trying to decide what candidate to vote for, what are the characteristics, qualities, viewpoints you are most looking for?Sanjeev (48, Asian, Georgia): Transparency. And I’m getting sick and tired of these politicians who’ve been in office 40, 50 years who don’t seem like they’re doing anything.Kristen Soltis Anderson: I saw a lot of heads nod when you said that. Raquel?Raquel: Honesty. And I watched the Senate debate for Pennsylvania’s election and saw a lot of the candidates throwing shade at each other instead of really speaking up about you. Tell me what you’re going to do.Justin: I’m looking for someone more moderate, someone that’s willing to work with both sides.Robert: Somebody honest. Trustworthy. It would be nice to have somebody that isn’t a millionaire already and understands what it’s like to have to pick, scrape, somebody who understands what it’s really like to not be able to go out and buy exactly what you want when you want it. And somebody strong, who walks into the room and commands it.Casey (52, white, Pennsylvania): I just wish younger and stronger people would get involved and start accepting new ideas and collaborate with each other instead of bickering back and forth. Compromise. Get to the point and get it done. Keep America living.Patrick Healy: So all of you are voting in the Republican primary elections in Ohio, Pennsylvania and Georgia. How confident are you that the votes in the Republican primaries will be counted fairly and accurately? Raise your hand if you are confident in that.[Six raise their hands.]Patrick Healy: And how many are not confident? We’ve got Kristen and Raquel. Raquel, what’s your concern there?Raquel: With the last presidential election, I feel like there were a lot of things that happened that haven’t been brought to light just yet. I just moved to Pennsylvania from Florida, so I’m not sure what the laws are here. But we should have to bring your ID, to vote in person, because through the mail, I feel like that’s kind of iffy.Patrick Healy: Kristen, what would make you feel more confident that votes were being counted fairly and accurately?Kristen: I don’t know. I mean, I think up until the last election with Trump, I felt confident in elections. And I think the mail voting definitely had a big issue. That’s a big reason for my feelings that it’s not really secure.Kristen Soltis Anderson: All right. So, early this month there was a primary in Ohio. I want to focus on the Senate race. Who did you choose and why?Robert: I ended up voting for J.D. Vance. I was not going to. I really liked what Mike Gibbons had to say. But I ended up going with J.D. Vance primarily because President Trump endorsed him. I trust a lot of the things President Trump did. I thought, “If this man endorses J.D. Vance, even after he stood publicly and said he was a No Trumper and a Never Trumper and he couldn’t stand him, there’s got to be something there.”Kim: I also chose J.D. Vance. And it was because of President Trump.Justin: I did research. I chose Matt Dolan. He was more moderate. I voted for Trump the last two times. As a person, I don’t like him, but I do like more what he did for the economy. I want someone more moderate in office. I’m tired of extremes both ways.Kristen Soltis Anderson: In Georgia, your primary is coming up May 24. The big race is between Brian Kemp, the incumbent governor, and a variety of challengers. President Trump has had some criticisms of Governor Kemp, and he has endorsed one of the challengers, David Perdue. For those who plan to vote for Brian Kemp, tell me why.Kimberly: I did vote for him the last time, and I will vote for him again. I think he’s done a great job handling Georgia through Covid. He’s done a great job with our economy. I hate that our primary is going to be split probably between him and Perdue. I think that’s just going to hurt us in the long run. But we’ll see what happens.Brandon: Well I voted for Kemp last time. And I felt like he kept most of his campaign promises. And he didn’t let Trump bully him. He’s going to get my vote again for that reason.Sanjeev: It’s going to come down to Kemp and Perdue, but I don’t know yet. I’m going to have to think about it a lot more and do some research.Kristen Soltis Anderson: OK. Kimberly, when you mentioned the primary being really divided, tell me a little bit more about what you mean by that.Kimberly: I’m a Trump supporter. I voted for him. I like generally what he does. But I think sometimes he takes things to the extreme and sometimes he needs to just butt out of the states’ elections. I know that he’s a big Perdue fan, but I really do think that Kemp did a great job with our economy. He did not get bullied by Trump. Or he did, but he didn’t give in to him.Patrick Healy: President Trump did ask Brian Kemp and Secretary of State Raffensperger for help after the 2020 election. Kimberly, you’re a Trump supporter. How sympathetic were you to Trump in regard to asking for help from Kemp and others? Or did you think he was crossing a line?Kimberly: I think when he initially reached out, he wasn’t crossing a line. I do think as time went on and he took it more on a personal level, the name calling he does — I just want to roll my eyes. Golly, man, chill. I mean, I am a supporter of him, but let’s be honest, anybody that’s his supporter has rolled their eyes at him a time or two as well.Kristen Soltis Anderson: I had you down as a Perdue voter, Jennifer.Jennifer: Yeah. I wasn’t really sure. But the more I think about it, I’m probably going to go back with Kemp again. I voted for him to begin with. I think he’s done a pretty good job. I wasn’t a huge fan of how he handled a lot of the Covid stuff, but —Kristen Soltis Anderson: In what way?Jennifer: I understand you need to get businesses going. But I mean, there was still just a huge pandemic going. And I have family members that are immunocompromised, and it’s just like, are you really thinking about the health of others?Kristen Soltis Anderson: Pennsylvania has a Senate primary race on Tuesday. Former President Trump has endorsed Dr. Mehmet Oz. Who are you leaning towards at the moment?Kristen: I’m leaning towards Dr. Oz just because Trump endorses him. I voted for Trump twice. I don’t like him as a person, but I did like what he did when he was in office.Raquel: I’m going to vote for Kathy Barnette. She is pro-life, and that’s really important to me. That’s one of my No. 1 issues as to why I would vote for somebody. And she comes across as just the most genuine person. She’s a byproduct of rape. Her mom decided to keep her at a very young age. And it goes to show you can do it. You know what I mean? So I think it’s amazing.Casey: I’m leaning towards Oz because Trump’s backing him up.Patrick Healy: Kristen and Casey, do you think, if President Trump hadn’t endorsed Dr. Oz, that you would definitely still be voting for him?Kristen: I’m not sure. I mean, I like him on TV.Casey: I’d probably be open to more candidates.Patrick Healy: I’d love to see a show of hands of those of you who say it’s extremely important that a candidate do the following things. Raise your hand if it’s extremely important that a candidate show that they can work in a bipartisan way with Democrats.[Two raise their hands.]Patrick Healy: Next one is fight against the media — who says that’s an extremely important thing for a candidate to do?[One raises a hand.]Patrick Healy: Win over swing voters?[Five raise their hands.]Patrick Healy: Push to overturn Roe v. Wade?[Five raise their hands.]Patrick Healy: Support the same sort of agenda as Donald Trump?[Eight raise their hands.]Have the same style and personality as Donald Trump?[No one raises a hand.]Kim: I have something to say.Patrick Healy: Please.Kim: I want a strong person that is not going to take any crap. And sometimes you have to be blunt. You just have to because you have to stand up against whatever that’s not right. So I’m kind of like halfway hand for what you asked. I just wanted to explain why.Patrick Healy: Is there a candidate running who embodies Donald Trump’s agenda but not his personality?Kimberly: So Herschel Walker is running on the Republican ticket for Senate in Georgia. I think he follows really closely with Trump’s agenda. I haven’t seen the personality as much.Patrick Healy: To go back to those who said that it’s extremely important to you that the candidate support turning over Roe v. Wade, let’s talk about that.Raquel: I think life begins at conception. I used to get picked on at school, when we had debates in class, I was the odd one out for being pro-life. Even in college I used to get called names. I’m not going to repeat them, but it was really crazy how an ethics class — I’m the odd one out. So I think it’s time to stand strong in your belief. And if I’m pro-life, then that’s 100 percent.Patrick Healy: Is there anyone who has concerns about overturning Roe v. Wade?Justin: Personally I am pro-choice. And with that leak, it almost makes me want to, when the primaries come around, vote Democratic. I mean, I think it’s almost crazy that they’re going to overturn something that has been law for that long. It’s not my body. I have a mom, three sisters. I’m just pro-choice.Brandon: In my younger years, I was more pro-choice. But as I’ve gotten older, I’m more pro-life. I think it’s going to be one of those things that generations from now, you’re going to look back and it’s going to be one of those things that you can’t believe was ever legal.Kimberly: Since I was old enough to vote, a candidate’s stance on abortion has been a reason I will or will not vote for a candidate. So I’m very much pro-life. And I think that it will go back to the states, like it should.Patrick Healy: Kimberly, is that what you want to see — each state decides? Or would you ultimately like to see a national ban for all states on abortion?Kimberly: That’s a very slippery slope question. Because if I say I want there to be a ban on abortion for the entire United States, then if the Democrats have something that they want to ban, that would affect me. I choose to live in what until recently has been a very conservative state. I’m not moving to California because I know what goes on in California and I know their laws. I don’t want to be there. So I don’t want to say, “Well, they can’t have abortions in California.” Religiously, it’s a conviction of mine. I’m 100 percent pro-life. But I don’t want to say I would want to see a national ban, because it goes both ways: If we want to ban something, then we have to be OK when they want to ban something.Kristen Soltis Anderson: I want to bring the conversation back to Donald Trump. Show of hands — how many of you think it’s good that Donald Trump is making a lot of endorsements in different races right now?[Four raise their hands.]Robert: I think he’s looking for people that will support his agenda. And he knows that he is extremely popular in x number of states, Ohio being one of them. And I think J.D. Vance, he came from way behind and ended up winning. And he won pretty handily. And there’s only one thing I can attribute to it. I didn’t know Vance. I never read his book. But I thought, well, President Trump doesn’t usually put his name on anything that’s a losing battle.Kristen: All right.Robert: Trump said way back in 2016, you’re going to get tired of winning, winning, winning. We really did win, win, win with a lot of things. And I just can’t think of anything except to attribute it to him and his policies. And I’m thinking if we can just clone or mirror some of the things he did, just bit by bit, piece by piece in some of the states, maybe we can get back on the road to recovery and abolish some of this craziness, like a war on fossil fuels in Ohio.Kristen Soltis Anderson: There’s a presidential election on the horizon. A show of hands — how many of you would say Donald Trump should run for president in 2024?[Eight raise their hands.]Sanjeev: I liked his first term. Not everything he did, but for the most part, I liked him, so I’d like to vote for him again. He’s got that business world perspective that he brings.Kristen: I think people can see the difference now that he’s not in office and what’s going on. I think when he was in office, people were more focused on him not being very presidential. Now that he’s not in office and we see what is happening, you can see what he did. It’s clearer now.Kristen Soltis Anderson: I want to ask a slightly different question. If Donald Trump runs for president again and there are other Republicans who are also running for president, how many of you think you would probably choose Donald Trump over other Republicans in a primary race?[Seven raise their hands.]Kristen Soltis Anderson: It’s most of the same hands.Raquel: That’s a tough one because I am really hoping that DeSantis says he’s going to run for president. I really like him as a governor. I think it comes down to giving someone new a chance and seeing if they could work, too.Kimberly: You know Trump’s qualified. You know he can do it. Do we want to stick with somebody that we know is going to probably come in and get us back on track and help us, or do we say, “We’re going to give you a chance”? Do we gamble our future here?Justin: So I’m torn on if he should run. But I would definitely vote for him in the primary just because he’s pro-America, he’s more about the economy. I think if he would have won his election again, I don’t think Russia would have probably invaded Ukraine.Patrick Healy: Justin, a quick follow-up. You are interested in moderate politicians. You’re pro-choice. You mentioned some issues with Trump’s style. And yet you are drawn to him.Justin: So if I can explain it, I think he’s more about the economy. And that’s my No. 1 issue is the economy. Yes, I differ with a lot of people with being pro-choice, but the economy is my No. 1 thing.Kim: I would vote for him again. Like someone else said, you can see the difference with when he was president. Biden — it’s like night and day.Patrick Healy: Is there anyone in the group who did not vote for Donald Trump in 2020 but who would consider voting for him if he ran again in 2024?Brandon: Well I voted for a third party in 2020. So I think this time around, I’ve seen the things that are happening. And I don’t like what I’m seeing, as far as the direction that the country is headed. So, yes, I’m going to consider voting for him.Kristen Soltis Anderson: I want to ask about some other folks in the Republican Party who might consider running for president in 2024. I’m going to say a name. If you have heard of this person before, give me one word or phrase that comes to mind when you think about that person. We will start off with Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis.Jennifer: I just kept hearing his name in regards of Covid and Florida being a hotbed and all that stuff.Sanjeev: The same things that Jennifer just mentioned. He was keeping pretty much everything open, and Covid was having big outbreaks. And so nationally he was getting a lot of negative press.Justin: Same. I remember during Covid he didn’t want to lock down. He wanted the state to stay open.Kimberly: Disney — I think that Disney got into the political field and thought they were going to just go on and say what they wanted to say. And I think it’s potentially going to bite them in the rear because he’s like, “OK, if you want to be political, we’ll be political.”Kristen Soltis Anderson: What do you think of when you think of former vice president Mike Pence?Robert: I think he’s an honest, God-fearing man that probably would do what’s right. Although I don’t know that he’s as firm as Trump, I think he’s an honest man.Kristen: I don’t think he’s as strong as Trump.Kim: I lost a lot of respect. I do like him being a Christian man, but he isn’t strong. He doesn’t have the backbone.Kristen Soltis Anderson: Thoughts about Chris Christie?Kristen: Yeah, don’t like him. I don’t think he’s honest. I think he’s for himself, not for the people, and he’s just a fool.Justin: With Christie and Mike Pence, I think they’re both career politicians. That’s someone that I don’t want in the office. I’d rather a businessman come to the office.Robert: I think he’s a powerful guy. And I think whatever he says, he’s going to do along the lines of Trump.Raquel: I feel like they’re just part of the same old politicians.Kristen Soltis Anderson: What do folks think about Texas Senator Ted Cruz in one word?Raquel: I donated money to him. He’s pro-life. And he’s on Instagram a lot speaking up against a lot of big money people.Justin: The first thing that came to mind was when he flew to Mexico and got caught during Covid. I think he was a hypocrite.Brandon: I think he would be my second choice. I hope that it would be between him and DeSantis.Kristen Soltis Anderson: And would DeSantis be your first choice in that matchup?Brandon: Yes, because DeSantis is a little bit stronger. And I feel like we need to regain our standing in the world.Kristen Soltis Anderson: Jennifer, any of these folks seem appealing to you?Jennifer: I guess the best one out of them would be Pence, I guess. Just because he was from the Trump time. But Cruz, I would say no. A little too religious for me mixing in with politics.Kristen Soltis Anderson: So my last question then to each of you is: If you had to give the Republican Party some advice, what would that advice be?Kimberly: I would say stop cowering to the Democrats all the time. Stand up. You have so many people in this country that support you. And maybe we’re just quieter. The media don’t talk about us. But you have a huge base. So stop cowering down to them and stop being intimidated by them. And if they want to play — I don’t want to say dirty games, but — let’s play the same games they play. Stop saying we’re going to take the high road all the time. No. Give it back to them. Say the truth.Kristen Soltis Anderson: Are there particular things that you think Republicans have cowered over when it comes to —Kimberly: Trump was really one of those people that was like, “I’m not taking anybody’s crap. And I’m going to give it right back to you. Maybe I tweet about you for 15 days and how much you suck. At least I’m tweeting, at least I’m saying something.”Kristen Soltis Anderson: Kristen, what would your advice be to the Republican Party?Kristen: Just get us back on track. Get the economy back on track and just put America first again.Kristen Soltis Anderson: Justin?Justin: The economy, bringing jobs back to America. In Ohio, in Columbus, in New Albany, we’re having that Intel plant come to Ohio. So I’d like to see those kind of things happen.Raquel: I think it would be to stand strong by your beliefs and stand up for yourself. Have a voice. Be mean if you have to be mean but stand true to your beliefs. Don’t cower to others just because you’re in a room with other people that don’t believe in the same thing you do.Kim: I would say Republicans need to unite. If they are united and had the backbone, we would be in a much better place right now.Robert: It’d be, get this economy back to where we’re in the plus side instead of the minus. And let’s get a constitutional amendment on term limits in every elected office in this country. It’s long overdue. I’m tired of seeing both D’s and R’s that are 80 years old standing there, can hardly even say two words together. And they’re supposed to be representing us. That wasn’t intended to be a career job. Serve your community, then go back home and do your thing at home.Brandon: Focus on healing the country, and let’s try to get away from everything being so partisan and so far left and so far right.Casey: Don’t beat around the bush. Just get to the point and stick your ground.Sanjeev: Stop fighting with each other and work together for the party and the greater good.Kristen Soltis Anderson: OK. Jennifer, last one’s to you.Jennifer: I would say definitely put the economy first. And maybe not talk about the social stuff as much and kind of be more moderate. Because a lot of things just seem really far right or really far left and just need a happy medium. We’re missing a happy medium.Patrick Healy is the deputy Opinion editor. Adrian J. Rivera is an editorial assistant 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

    • 138 Shares99 Views

      in Elections

      Redrawn New York Map Nullifies Democrats’ Gamble to Gain House Seats

      by

      The court-drawn lines would increase competition for seats in Congress, and pit longtime Democratic incumbents against one another.Earlier this year, Democratic leaders in New York made a brazen gamble: With the national party’s blessing, they created a congressional map that promised its candidates as many as three additional House seats.On Monday, three weeks after the state’s highest court declared the Democrats’ map unconstitutional, it became clear just how spectacularly the party’s gambit had backfired.A new slate of new congressional districts unveiled by the courts on Monday could pave the way for Republicans to make gains in this year’s critical midterm elections, a disastrous reversal for Democrats in a state where they control every lever of power.The proposed maps, drawn by Jonathan R. Cervas, the court-appointed special master, would unwind changes that Democrats had hoped to use to unseat Representative Nicole Malliotakis, a Staten Island Republican; flip other Republican-held swing districts; and secure their own tenuous seats in the Hudson Valley region.The new lines even cast the future of several long-tenured, powerful Democratic incumbents in doubt, forcing several to potentially run against one another.The most striking example came from New York City, where Mr. Cervas’s proposal pushed Representatives Jerrold Nadler, a stalwart Upper West Side liberal, and Carolyn Maloney of the Upper East Side into the same district, setting up a potentially explosive primary fight in the heart of Manhattan. Both lawmakers are in their 70s, have been in Congress for close to 30 years and lead powerful House committees.Representative Hakeem Jeffries, the chairman of the House Democratic Caucus and a favorite to become the party’s next leader, was one of a handful of incumbent lawmakers who, under the new map, would no longer reside in the districts they represent. In one case, the new lines put Representative Brian Higgins mere steps outside his greater Buffalo district.Taken together, the proposed changes have broad national implications, effectively handing Republicans the upper hand in a national fight for control of the House, and rattling the top echelons of House Democratic leadership.“This is a huge swing against Democrats from the plan that was struck down,” said Dave Wasserman, a national elections analyst with the Cook Political Report. “Democrats could lose a lot of ground this fall and that could drive a stake through their hopes of keeping the House majority.”The final results promised to make New York an anomaly in a nation composed of increasingly gerrymandered states. Numerous states used redistricting this year to reinforce the dominance of one party or the other, yet New York — one of the largest Democratic-led states — is now expected to preserve and potentially even add competitive seats.What to Know About RedistrictingRedistricting, Explained: Here are some answers to your most pressing questions about the process that is reshaping American politics.Understand Gerrymandering: Can you gerrymander your party to power? Try to draw your own districts in this imaginary state.Killing Competition: The number of competitive districts is dropping, as both parties use redistricting to draw themselves into safe seats.Deepening Divides: As political mapmakers create lopsided new district lines, the already polarized parties are being pulled even farther apart.By Mr. Cervas’s own account, the new map would create eight competitive congressional seats, a figure closer to New York’s current decade-old map than the three that he estimated the Democrats’ map would have yielded.Mr. Wasserman put the handicapping at 15 safely Democratic seats, five safely Republican seats and a half-dozen tossups in a state where roughly 60 percent of voters supported President Biden.The map approved by the State Legislature, where Democrats control both houses, this year would have given their party a clear advantage in 22 of 26 districts. Democrats hold 19 seats on the existing map, which was also drawn by a court-appointed special master a decade ago.The final lines may yet still be revised to account for feedback from both parties. The state court judge in upstate Steuben County who is overseeing the case, Patrick F. McAllister, has set a Friday deadline for approving the congressional lines and a separate proposal for State Senate districts.Mr. Cervas, who declined to comment on the maps, removed one House seat from upstate New York altogether, shrinking the state’s delegation from 27 members to 26. New York was required to shed the seat after its population failed to keep pace with growth in other states in the 2020 census, continuing a decades-long trend.In making other changes, outside redistricting analysts said, it appeared that Mr. Cervas had sought to make the districts as competitive and compact as possible.The effect was evident on Long Island, where Mr. Cervas created one safe Republican seat, one safe Democratic seat and two swing seats. In the Hudson Valley, he drew districts that were more competitive than the ones approved by Democrats. And he returned Ms. Malliotakis’s district to its more conservative contours, after the Legislature tried to fuse Brooklyn’s ultraliberal Park Slope neighborhood onto Staten Island.Mr. Cervas showed less regard for protecting incumbents from changes, though, in many instances sharply redrawing lines that the previous special master laid out a decade ago.Two upstate Republicans, Representatives Claudia Tenney and Chris Jacobs, were left scrambling to lay a stake in rearranged rural seats in central and western New York. A third Republican congressional candidate, the Dutchess County executive, Marc Molinaro, saw the territory he had competed in for months reconfigured.The situation was more dire for Democrats, though. No fewer than five were drawn out of their districts: Mr. Jeffries; Mr. Higgins; Paul Tonko, who represents the Albany area; Grace Meng, who represents a heavily Asian American swath of Queens; and Nydia Velázquez, who represents a Latino-heavy district in Brooklyn.Representatives are not required to reside in their districts, but the changes could create yet another layer of uncertainty for incumbents and challengers alike.Each could still run to represent the core of the district they currently hold, but they would be forced to choose between moving their homes or explaining to voters why they do not live inside the lines they are seeking to represent in Washington.Representatives Mondaire Jones and Jamaal Bowman, two Black progressive Democrats in their first term, may face more difficult choices after Mr. Cervas’s map drew them into a single Westchester County district.In a blistering statement, Mr. Jeffries accused the court of ignoring the input of communities of color, diluting the power of Black voters and pitting Black incumbents against each other in “a tactic that would make Jim Crow blush.”“The draft map released by a judicial overseer in Steuben County and unelected, out-of-town special master, both of whom happen to be white men, is part of a vicious national pattern targeting districts represented by members of the Congressional Black Caucus,” Mr. Jeffries wrote.How U.S. Redistricting WorksCard 1 of 8What is redistricting? More

    • 125 Shares119 Views

      in Elections

      Ted Budd Thrives in G.O.P. Senate Race in North Carolina

      by

      HENDERSONVILLE, N.C. — Rick Griswold, a 74-year-old lifelong Republican, doesn’t know much about Ted Budd, the congressman he plans to support on Tuesday in the party’s Senate primary election. But he knows exactly why he’ll cast his ballot for Mr. Budd.“Trump endorsed him,” Mr. Griswold, an Army veteran, said as he collected tools at his part-time job at O’Reilly Auto Parts. “I like Trump.”The former president’s branded “complete and total endorsement” doesn’t guarantee victory in a Republican primary. However, operatives working in Senate campaigns this year said that playing up Donald J. Trump’s imprimatur is the single most effective message in intraparty battles.In North Carolina, Mr. Budd is proving the potency of pairing the former president’s endorsement with another from one of Mr. Trump’s on-again, off-again allies: the Club for Growth, an influential anti-tax group that has spent $32 million on federal races this year.That amount is twice as much as that by any other outside group — and much of that spending has been against candidates Mr. Trump has endorsed, according to campaign finance data compiled by Open Secrets.Mr. Trump has been furious about the Club for Growth’s campaigning against his picks. During a heated battle in the Ohio Senate primary, the group aired a TV spot of Mr. Trump’s choice in that race, J.D. Vance, criticizing the former president. Mr. Trump ordered an aide to text the group’s president, David McIntosh, telling him off in a vulgar message.“I thought that was very hostile,” Mr. Trump said in an interview about the club’s ad buy in Ohio. He added that the group’s endorsement record would improve if it stopped opposing some of his picks.Understand the Pennsylvania Primary ElectionThe crucial swing state will hold its primary on May 17, with key races for a U.S. Senate seat and the governorship.Hard-Liners Gain: Republican voters appear to be rallying behind far-right candidates in two pivotal races, worrying both parties about what that could mean in November.G.O.P. Senate Race: Kathy Barnette, a conservative commentator, is making a surprise late surge against big-spending rivals, Dr. Mehmet Oz and David McCormick.Democratic Senate Race: Representative Conor Lamb had all the makings of a front-runner, but John Fetterman, the state’s shorts-wearing lieutenant governor, is resonating with voters.Abortion Battleground: Pennsylvania is one of a handful of states where abortion access hangs in the balance with midterm elections this year.Electability Concerns: Starting with Pennsylvania, the coming weeks will offer a window into the mood of Democratic voters who are deeply worried about a challenging midterm campaign environment.Mr. McIntosh, meanwhile, has said privately that he hoped the group’s recent endorsement of Kathy Barnette in Pennsylvania would help exact some revenge on Mr. Trump, according to people with knowledge of the conversations.Joe Kildea, a Club for Growth spokesman, said that “David has never expressed these sentiments.” “The only reason Club for Growth PAC endorsed is because Barnette is the only real conservative in the race,” Mr. Kildea said.But in North Carolina, Mr. Budd was battling former Gov. Pat McCrory and former Representative Mark Walker after Mr. Trump announced his endorsement in June. Mr. Budd appeared to separate from the pack, helped by an $11 million advertising campaign from the Club for Growth mostly revolving around the former president’s endorsement. The group’s most-watched TV spot of the race was footage of Mr. Trump’s announcement of his endorsement of Mr. Budd.Last week, Mr. Budd was 27 percentage points ahead of the rest of the field, according to a poll from Emerson College, The Hill and WNCN-TV, the CBS affiliate in the Research Triangle of North Carolina. The Club for Growth has also curtailed its spending on the race, signaling its calculation that Mr. Budd is safely ahead.The winner of the state’s Republican Senate primary will head into the November general election with a distinct advantage over the Democratic nominee, who polls indicate will be Cheri Beasley, a former State Supreme Court justice. Republicans have won the last four North Carolina Senate races and the past three presidential contests in the state.Doug Heye, a Republican who has worked on three North Carolina Senate campaigns, said Mr. Budd was a strong but relatively unknown candidate across the state. His rise, Mr. Heye noted, showed the power of a well-funded, Trump-endorsed primary campaign.“It’s not surprising Budd is emerging,” he said. “But these margins look pretty big, especially considering he’s running against a former governor and a former congressman.”Mr. McCrory disputed the polling and criticized the Club for Growth, a 23-year-old conservative outfit he described as a political gun-for-hire that had strayed from its original mission of promoting low-tax, limited-government policy.“The Club for Growth is trying to buy the North Carolina Senate race,” Mr. McCrory said. “And we’re trying to do everything we can to stop them.”Mr. Budd, 50, promoted himself as a gun shop owner during his first congressional campaign in 2016. He had been involved in several businesses after divesting in 2003 from the Budd Group, a company started by his father that provides janitorial, landscaping and other corporate facility maintenance, a spokesman said.This year, Mr. Budd has mostly kept his head down. He has visited all 100 counties during the campaign, which his team said was a factor behind Mr. Budd’s skipping all four Republican primary debates.“We’ve been focused on the fundamentals, like getting organized in all 100 counties,” said Jonathan Felts, a senior adviser to Mr. Budd.Understand the 2022 Midterm ElectionsCard 1 of 6Why are these midterms so important? More

    • 113 Shares99 Views

      in Elections

      The Bloody Crossroads Where Conspiracy Theories and Guns Meet

      by

      Gail Collins: Bret, you and I live in a state that has some of the toughest gun laws in the country. But that didn’t stop a teenager with a history of making threats from getting his hands on a semiautomatic rifle and mowing down 10 people at a supermarket in a Black neighborhood in Buffalo on Saturday.Bret Stephens: It’s sickening. And part of a grotesque pattern: the racist massacre in Charleston in 2015, the antisemitic massacre in Pittsburgh in 2018, the anti-Hispanic massacre in El Paso in 2019 and so many others. There’s a bloody crossroads where easy access to weapons and increasingly commonplace conspiracy theories meet.I have diminishing faith that the usual calls for more gun control can do much good in a country with way more than 300 million guns in private hands. Please tell me I’m wrong.Gail: Sane gun control won’t solve the problem, but it’ll help turn things around — criminals and mentally ill people will have a harder time getting their hands on weapons. And the very fact that we could enact restrictions on firearm purchases would be a sign that the nation’s whole attitude was getting healthier.Bret: Wish I could share your optimism, but I’ve come to think of meaningful gun control in the United States as the ultimate Sisyphean task. Gun control at the state level doesn’t work because guns can move easily across state lines. Gun control at the federal level doesn’t work because the votes in Congress will never be there. I personally favor repealing the Second Amendment, but politically that’s another nonstarter. And the same Republican Party that opposes gun control is also winking at, if not endorsing, the sinister Great Replacement conspiracy theory — the idea that liberals/Jews/the deep state are conspiring to replace whites with nonwhite immigrants — that appears to have motivated the accused shooter in Buffalo.Bottom line: I’m heartbroken for the victims of this massacre. And I’m heartbroken for a country that seems increasingly powerless to do anything about it. And that’s just one item on our accumulating inventory of crippling problems.Gail: You know, we thought the country was going to be obsessed with nothing but inflation this election year. But instead, it’s hot-button social issues like guns, and of course we’ve spent the last few weeks reacting to the Supreme Court’s upcoming abortion decision, which probably won’t actually be out for weeks.Bret: And may not end up being what we were led to expect by the leaked draft of Justice Alito’s opinion. I’m still holding out hope — faint hope, because I fear that the leaking of the decision will make the conservative justices, including Justice Gorsuch and Chief Justice Roberts, less open to finding a compromise ruling that doesn’t overturn Roe.Gail: Is it possible things will get even more intense when it’s announced? And what’s your take on what we’ve seen so far?Bret: Much more intense and largely for the reasons you laid out in your terrific column last week: Abortion rights are about much more than abortion rights. They’re also about sex and all that goes with it: pleasure, autonomy, repression, male responsibility for the children they father and the great “who decides” questions of modern democracy. The justices will have to gird for more protests outside their homes.What do you think? And is there any chance of crafting an abortion rights bill that could get more than 50 votes in the Senate?Gail: Well, maybe if everybody hunkered down and tried to come up with something that would lure a few Republicans who say they support abortion rights like Susan Collins. Many Democrats don’t want to water down their bill and really there’s not much point in making the effort since they’d instantly run into the dreaded filibuster rule.Bret: Wouldn’t it have helped if Democrats had devised a bill that a majority could get behind, rather than one that had no chance of winning because it went well beyond Roe v. Wade by banning nearly all restrictions on abortions?Gail: Given the dispiriting reality of Senate life — 60 votes, Joe Manchin, etc., etc. — I can see why Chuck Schumer has pretty much given up the fight to change anything on that front and is just focused on drawing attention to the whole abortion issue in this year’s elections.Bret: Shortsighted. Democrats need to secure their moderate flank, including lots of voters who want to preserve abortion rights but have strong moral reservations about late-term abortions. It just makes the party seem beholden to its most progressive, least pragmatic flank, which is at the heart of the Democrats’ political problem.Gail: Now whatever happens isn’t going to directly affect folks who live in states like New York. But when I look at states that have already passed abortion bans in anticipation of a court decision, I do worry this won’t be the end of the story — that the legislatures might move further to ban at least some kinds of contraceptives, too.Am I being overly paranoid?Bret: It’s hard for me to imagine that happening, unless Republicans also intend to repeal the 19th Amendment to keep women from throwing them out of political office. Even most conservative women in America today probably don’t want to return to the fingers-crossed method of birth control.Can I go back to something we said earlier? How do you feel about the protests outside of the justices’ homes?Gail: Pretty much all in the details. The Supreme Court members have lifetime appointments and they’re immune from the normal constraints on public officials who have to run for re-election or who work for a chief executive who has to run for re-election.So I support people’s right to make their feelings known in the very few ways they have available. As long, of course, as the demonstrators are restrained and the justices and their families are provided with very good security.You?Bret: It seems like a really bad idea for a whole bunch of reasons. If the hope of the protesters is to get the justices to change their vote by making their home life unpleasant, it probably accomplishes the opposite: People generally don’t respond well to what they perceive as harassment. Those homes are also occupied by spouses and children who should have the right to remain private people. It’s also a pretty glaring temptation to some fanatic who might think that he can “save Roe” through an act of violence. And, of course, two can play the game: What happens when creepy far-right groups decide to stage protests outside the homes of Justices Kagan and Sotomayor and soon-to-be Justice Jackson?Gail: Well, I guess we’ll get to have this fight again. Meanwhile, let me switch to something even more, um, divisive. Baby formula!Bret: I wish I could joke about it, but it’s a seriously unfunny story.Gail: A plant that manufactures brands like Similac was shut down after concerns were raised about possible contamination. Things will eventually go back to normal, at least I hope they do, but in the meantime the supply dropped by about half.Lots to look into on how this happened. But it’s a reminder that parents have to rely on four companies for almost all the nation’s formula supply. Which then should remind us of the virtue of antitrust actions that break up mega-corporations.Bret: One lesson here is that when the F.D.A. decides to urge a “voluntary recall” of something as critical as baby formula, as it effectively did in February, it had better be sure of its reasons and think through the entire chain of potential consequences to public health. Another lesson is that when our regulations are so extreme that we won’t allow the formula made in Europe to be sold here commercially, something is seriously wrong with those regulations.Gail: I’ll go along with you about the imports from Europe, after noting that importation from Canada was restricted by the Trump administration.Bret: We will mark that down on the ever-expanding list of things we hate about Trump.Gail: However, recalling formula that’s given bacterial infections — some fatal — to babies doesn’t seem all that radical to me.Bret: I agree, of course, but it isn’t clear the bacteria came from the plant in question and surely there must have been a way to deal with the problem that didn’t create an even bigger problem.The broader point, I think, is that our zero-tolerance approach to many kinds of risk — whether it’s the possible contamination of formula or shutting down schools in reaction to Covid — is sometimes the riskiest approach of all. How did the most advanced capitalist country in the world become so incapable of weighing risks? Is it the ever-present fear of lawsuits or something else?Gail: Part of the problem is a general — and bipartisan — eagerness to restrict imports on stuff American companies produce.Bret: Am I hearing openness on your part to a U.S.-E.U. free trade agreement? That would solve a lot of our supply-chain problems and annoy protectionists in both parties.Gail: Yeah, but the last thing we ought to do is respond to an event like the formula shortage by saying, “Oh gosh, no more federal oversight of imports!” Really, there’s dangerous stuff out there and we need to be protected from it.Bret: Well, of course.Gail: Let’s move on to the upcoming elections. Really fascinated by that Pennsylvania Senate primary. Particularly on the Republican side, where we’re seeing a super surge from Kathy Barnette, a Black, very-very-conservative-to-reactionary activist. The other leaders are still Trump’s favorite, Mehmet Oz, and David McCormick, former head of the world’s largest hedge fund.Bret: Nice to see a genuinely competitive race.Gail: Barnette is doing very well despite — or maybe because of — her record of anti-Muslim rhetoric.A pretty appalling trio by my lights, but do you have a favorite?Bret: I’m in favor of the least crazy candidate on the ballot.Gail: Excellent standard.Bret: The problem the G.O.P. has had for some time now is that in many states and districts, not to mention the presidential contest, the candidate most likely to win a primary is least likely to win a general election. Republican primaries are like holding a heavy metal air guitar contest in order to compete for a place in a jazz ensemble, if that makes any sense.Gail: Yeah, although that particular music contest does sound sorta fascinating.Bret: Question for you, Gail: Do you really think President Biden is going to run for re-election? Truly, honestly? And can you see Kamala Harris as his successor?Gail: Well, I’m of the school that says Biden shouldn’t announce he’s not running and embrace lame duckism too early. But lately I have been wondering if he’s actually going to try to march on through another term.Which would be bad. The age thing aside, the country’s gotten past the moment when all people wanted in a chief executive was a not-crazy person to calm things down.Bret: If Biden decides to run, he’ll lose in a landslide to anyone not named Trump. Then again, if he decides to run, then he’ll also be tempting Trump to seek the Republican nomination.Gail: If Kamala Harris runs we will have to … see what the options are.Bret: I’ve always thought Harris would be a great secretary general of the United Nations. When does that job come open again?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

    • 175 Shares169 Views

      in Elections

      Kathy Barnette Says She ‘Can’t Provide a Lot of Context’ for Her Anti-Islamic Tweets

      by

      Her sudden rise in the Pennsylvania Senate primary has some Republicans worried about her prospects in November.Kathy Barnette, a Republican Senate candidate in Pennsylvania who has climbed in the polls against two big-spending rivals, on Sunday sought to downplay her past Islamophobic messages on social media, telling a Fox News host that some of them were “not even full thoughts,” nor “even full sentences” but rather, prompts intended to facilitate a conversation.The “Fox News Sunday” host, Shannon Bream, asked Ms. Barnette about specific messages she had written on Twitter. In 2014, Ms. Barnette wrote, “If you love freedom, Islam must NOT be allowed to thrive under any condition.” In 2016, Ms. Barnette wrote, “Obama is aMuslim. Doing Muslim like THINGS!”At first, Ms. Barnette blamed former President Barack Obama and the people who had fled the civil war in Syria, telling Ms. Bream, “In almost all of those tweets, when you look at the time frame we were living in at that particular time, we had the Obama administration bringing in a lot of Syrian refugees at that time.”Ms. Barnette was spreading the toxic brew of misinformation that Donald J. Trump helped popularize among Republicans before his successful presidential run in 2016, including the false claim that Mr. Obama is Muslim. He is a Christian. And despite Mr. Obama’s pledge to welcome 10,000 Syrian refugees, only a fraction of them had entered the United States when Ms. Barnette posted her message.Ms. Barnette has spread falsehoods on social media and in public speeches aimed at Muslims for years. In an NBC interview on Friday she falsely denied writing a statement that is still on her Twitter timeline from 2015: “Pedophilia is a Cornerstone of Islam.”Ms. Barnette describes herself as an author, social conservative and Christian. She has recently surged in public polling against her two rivals in the Republican Senate primary, Dr. Mehmet Oz and David McCormick. She was endorsed by the anti-tax group Club for Growth, which committed $2 million for advertising to support her. The primary is on Tuesday.Her sudden rise, and the accompanying scrutiny, have worried Republican leaders, who believe she may cost the party a chance to win an open Senate seat in the November election.Former President Donald J. Trump, who has endorsed Dr. Oz, said in a public statement last week, “Kathy Barnette will never be able to win the general election against the radical left Democrats.”On Sunday, Ms. Barnette sought to distance herself from her previous messages, saying they were incomplete thoughts and that she cannot explain them because she wrote them years ago.“At that time, I was hosting a show called ‘Truth Exchange’ and I would have all kinds of ideas and was leaning in to helping the public begin to have those conversations, and so those were some of the — that’s the context around a lot of those tweets,” Ms. Barnette said on Sunday. “The overwhelming majority of the tweets that are now being presented are not even full thoughts. They’re not even full sentences and yet people take it and they begin to build their own narrative around it.Ms. Barnette continued: “So, I can’t provide a lot of context because, again, it’s almost 10 years ago. That’s how far they have to go back to find anything on me.” More

    • 175 Shares189 Views

      in Elections

      Dr. Oz, Celebrity Candidate in the Pennsylvania Senate Race. What’s Trump Not to Like?

      by

      “His show is great. He’s on that screen. He’s in the bedrooms of all those women telling them good and bad.”This was Donald Trump at a May 6 rally in Greensburg, Pa., looking to sell Republican voters on Mehmet Oz, the celebrity surgeon he has endorsed for Senate.“Dr. Oz has had an enormously successful career on TV,” reasoned Mr. Trump, “and now he’s running to save our country.”As political pitches go, this one may sound vague and vacuous and more than a tad creepy. But Mr. Trump was simply cutting to the heart of the matter. Dr. Oz’s chief political asset — arguably his singular asset in this race — is his celebrity. Beyond that, it is hard to imagine why anyone would consider him for the job, much less take him seriously.By championing the good doctor, Mr. Trump is putting his faith in the political value of celebrity to its purest test yet. Upping the drama are signs that the move could backfire. In recent days, there has been a grass-roots surge by another candidate in the Republican primary on Tuesday, Kathy Barnette, a hard-right gun-rights champion, abortion foe and Fox News commentator seen as harnessing conservative unease and annoyance over Mr. Trump’s Oz endorsement.The bomb-throwing Ms. Barnette has made the race even more chaotic and is freaking out some Republicans — including Mr. Trump. “Kathy Barnette will never be able to win the general election,” he asserted Thursday, citing “many things in her past which have not been properly explained or vetted.” Doubling down on Dr. Oz, Mr. Trump insisted that “a vote for anyone else in the primary is a vote against victory in the fall!”Kathy Barnette, who is challenging Dr. Mehmet Oz in the Republican primary.Matt Rourke/Associated PressThe decision to go all in on Dr. Oz tells you much about Mr. Trump’s view of what makes a worthy candidate — and maybe even more about his vision for the Republican Party.It is hard to overstate the importance of the Pennsylvania Senate contest. The seat being vacated by Pat Toomey, a Republican, is widely considered the Democrats’ best hope for a pickup in November, making the race crucial in the brawl for control of the Senate, now split 50-50 with Vice President Kamala Harris casting tiebreaking votes.Dr. Oz drifted into the Republican battle last fall, just over a week after Mr. Trump’s first endorsee, Sean Parnell, bowed out following accusations of abuse from his estranged wife. There were other Republican contenders happy to debase themselves in pursuit of Mr. Trump’s blessing, most notably David McCormick, a former hedge fund executive and Bush administration official. But Mr. Trump — surprise! — ultimately went with the sycophant who was also a television star. That really is his sweet spot.“You know when you’re in television for 18 years, that’s like a poll,” Mr. Trump has explained of his decision. “That means people like you.”Even after Mr. Trump’s endorsement, the race has remained tight. At the Greensburg rally, some in the crowd repeatedly booed the mention of Dr. Oz. Many had questions about his authenticity and values — or, more basically, what the heck a longtime Jersey guy is doing in their state.Anyone who takes public service and leadership seriously should be troubled by Dr. Oz’s glaring lack of experience in or knowledge of policy, government and so on. That, sadly, applies to few people in today’s Republican Party, which regards experience, expertise and science as a steaming pile of elitist hooey.Even more disturbing may be Dr. Oz’s devolution from a highly regarded, award-winning cardiothoracic surgeon to a snake-oil peddling TV huckster. Before this race, his closest involvement with the Senate was when he was called before a panel in 2014 to testify about the sketchy weight-loss products he had been hawking on his show.Then again, Republicans elected a shameless TV huckster to the presidency. This clearly isn’t a deal breaker for them.But MAGA world has its own concerns about Dr. Oz. For starters, his Turkish heritage — he holds dual citizenship and trained in the Turkish Army — has put him crosswise to the Republican Party’s ascendant nativism. His primary opponents and their supporters have suggested his Turkish ties make him a national security risk. Mike Pompeo, Mr. Trump’s former secretary of state and C.I.A. director, has said Dr. Oz owes voters a clear sense of the “scope and the depth of his relationship with the Turkish government.”The fact that Dr. Oz is a Muslim also disquiets some in the party.In combating suspicions that he is an outsider, it does not help that Dr. Oz doesn’t have deep ties to Pennsylvania. He lived in New Jersey for decades, and The Philadelphia Inquirer reported that he used his in-laws’ address to register to vote in Pennsylvania in 2020.As for his values, over the years Dr. Oz has committed numerous conservative heresies: pointing out the scientific inaccuracy of some fetal-heartbeat bills; discussing transgender kids in something other than horrified, apocalyptic terms; promoting Obamacare; acknowledging systemic racism. He has repeatedly come across as squishy on gun rights. Perhaps worst of all, he had Michelle Obama as a guest on his show. And he was nice to her! This has all made great fodder for his primary opponents.Not that such messy details matter. For Mr. Trump, Dr. Oz’s lack of political and policy chops — or even firm principles — is a feature, not a bug. The fewer established positions or values that a candidate holds, the easier it is for Mr. Trump to bend him to his will.In fact, Mr. Trump can only be delighted at the cringe-inducing desperation with which Dr. Oz has been refashioning himself into a MAGA man. The campaign ad of the candidate talking tough and playing with guns is particularly excruciating.For Mr. Trump, the perfect political candidate is one who has no strongly held views of his own. Whether candidates are in touch with the needs and values of their constituencies is of no interest — and could, in fact, be an inconvenience. Mr. Trump clearly prefers a nationalized Republican Party populated by minions willing to blindly follow orders in his unholy crusade for political restoration and vengeance.In part, Pennsylvania Republicans will be choosing between someone like Ms. Barnette, whose candidacy is focused on her (extreme and somewhat terrifying) beliefs and someone like Dr. Oz, whose candidacy is all about his personal fame — and his dependence on Mr. Trump.“When you’re a star, they let you do it,” Mr. Trump once vilely bragged of his penchant for groping women. “You can do anything.”What the former president values these days in Republican candidates are stars willing to let him do anything he wants.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