More stories

  • in

    For Tim Scott, the Debate Was the Moment That Wasn’t

    At the G.O.P. debate, the senator often faded into the background. “He was one that I wanted to hear more from,” one voter said as he sought to regain momentum in New Hampshire.Senator Tim Scott, Republican of South Carolina, arrived in New Hampshire on Friday for the start of a six-day, three-state blitz — the most extensive campaign swing since announcing his run for the White House.But any momentum Mr. Scott had hoped to bring was as missing as he was during long stretches of the first Republican primary debate on Wednesday.During the two-hour debate in Milwaukee, Mr. Scott spoke for only 8 minutes 15 seconds, according to The New York Times’s time tracker — a full four minutes less than the leading talker, former Vice President Mike Pence. Mr. Scott flashed moments of humor but often faded entirely into the background. And he wasn’t targeted by his rivals, nor did he target them.In the race to be the leading Republican alternative to former President Donald J. Trump, Mr. Scott had entered Wednesday’s debate seemingly primed for the first real moment of consequence for his campaign. He and his allies had flooded the airwaves in Iowa with the most advertising of any Republican. He had inched upward in the polls. The candidate he was most closely chasing, Gov. Ron DeSantis of Florida, had slipped. And major donors were giving him fresh consideration.But voters on Friday at three New Hampshire events in the capital city of Concord and the town of Hooksett said he had not yet set himself apart from the pack, even as they praised the senator’s positive message and likability. Several Republicans and independents open to supporting him expressed disappointment that Mr. Scott was not even visible enough to render a judgment.“He was one that I wanted to hear more from,” said Allyson Vaschon, 57, who was at a diner in Concord where Mr. Scott shook hands and met voters on Friday afternoon. “I did like some of his answers but they were brief, and again, time just wasn’t allotted.”During the two-hour debate in Milwaukee, Mr. Scott spoke for only eight minutes and 15 seconds, according to The New York Times’s time tracker — a full four minutes less than the leading talker, former Vice President Mike Pence.Kenny Holston/The New York TimesMs. Vaschon blamed the format more than Mr. Scott, who has defended his debate performance by saying it was a “food fight” rather than a substantive conversation. He told reporters in Hooksett on Friday that his closing statement at the debate, which touched on his rise from poverty to the presidential campaign, was the most effective message of the night.The back-and-forth among his opponents on the stage “does not necessarily help anyone except for the media and Joe Biden,” Mr. Scott said.Early indicators have pointed to lagging enthusiasm for his debate performance.A Washington Post/FiveThirtyEight/Ipsos survey of Republicans after the debate showed that only 4 percent believed Mr. Scott had won, placing him toward the back of the pack. And of the eight candidates onstage, along with Mr. Trump, Mr. Scott’s name was tied for last for the share of Google searches in the week leading up to and after the debate, according to the company’s search trend data. The day after the debate, he garnered only 3 percent of the candidate searches, which can be a metric of voter interest. Atop the search list on Thursday morning was Vivek Ramaswamy, the former biotechnology executive and political newcomer who was the debate’s dominant character.Eric Levine, a New York lawyer and Republican donor who attended the debate as a guest of Mr. Scott’s campaign, said he believed the senator had won by staying above the fray. But he acknowledged that “perhaps he could have been a little more aggressive,” and said that he had heard the same from other donors.“I guess he made a little bit of a mistake in believing that rules matter,” Mr. Levine said of Mr. Scott’s decision to often wait until called upon rather than insert himself into the fracas.Mr. Scott struck a similar note at a “Politics and Pies” event in Concord on Friday evening, telling a group of more than 50 New Hampshire Republicans that he recognized that “following the rules does not give you more time.” He added, “So, lesson learned. Now, the next debate, I’m going to remember that lesson, but I’m also going to comport myself in the same fashion.” Gail Gitcho, a Republican strategist who has worked on past presidential campaigns and is unaligned in the 2024 race, said Mr. Scott’s showing amounted to a missed opportunity for a candidate whose super PAC has already reserved $40 million in advertising, the most of anyone in the primary.“Tim Scott is built for this race,” Ms. Gitcho said. “He has the resources to go the distance. He has a life story unlike anybody else. But he didn’t break through.”As Mr. DeSantis has dipped, the search for other possible Trump alternatives has intensified. In the area where Republican National Committee members were meeting in Milwaukee, one person named a wireless hot spot “Glenn Youngkin Needs to Run,” a reference to the Republican governor of Virginia.Mr. Scott had prepared for the debate, his first ever on the national stage, by bringing on one of his party’s more noted debate coaches, Mari Will, as a senior adviser. Yet with his limited time, Mr. Scott did not find the opportunity to dive fully into the personal history that has undergirded his candidacy, especially how his family went “from cotton to Congress in one lifetime,” as he put it in his 2020 convention speech.Mr. Scott was the sole Black candidate on the stage in a party where a Black Republican presidential contender has surged, at least briefly, to the top of the polls in the last two open presidential primaries. In 2012, it was the pizza magnate Herman Cain. In 2016, it was the brain surgeon Ben Carson.Both quickly faded. But Mr. Scott has a far more formidable political résumé.Ahead of the debate, Mr. Scott’s allies and aides had said his message would remain positive while being direct enough to separate himself from the crowded primary field. Days before, Mr. Scott had traded much of his upbeat stump speech for a more forceful, policy-focused address at a conservative gathering in Georgia.For months, Mr. Scott, who favors contrasting alliterations like “victory and victimhood” and “grievance and greatness,” has tried to beat back questions about his toughness. When asked about his messaging strategy at a donor retreat this spring, Mr. Scott assured supporters that he would be able to push back if challenged.Toward the end of Wednesday’s debate, moderators asked Mr. Scott a question — about a president’s role in restoring religious faith in the country — that seemed aligned with his campaign message. Yet Mr. Scott’s response was surprisingly brief. The country, he said, “was founded on the Judeo-Christian values,” and then he quoted Scripture.“Our responsibility should be to model the behavior we want others to follow,” he said. He then quickly added a point about education reform, vowing to “break the backs of the teachers’ unions.”His answer, which came during the lightning round of questions, lasted roughly 37 seconds. At other points in the debate, he often fell short of using his allotted time for answers — a contrast with many of his opponents, who at one point had to be reminded that the closing bell signified their need to stop talking. At the Concord diner on Friday, David Coffey, 79, an independent voter and a former schoolteacher, challenged Mr. Scott about his reluctance to directly criticize Mr. Trump after the senator had introduced himself. That prompted Mr. Scott to join him at his table.“You’re avoiding standing up for his past,” Mr. Coffey told Mr. Scott as a waitress set down plates of bacon, eggs and pancakes. “You don’t want to lose all his votes — I get you. But when you go to Russia, when you go to China, how are you going to stand up and say, ‘Hey, I can’t do that’?”“It’s very easy,” Mr. Scott responded, saying it would require the president to “stand toe-to-toe” with adversaries.“You’re not standing toe-to-toe with somebody who you don’t accept as president,” Mr. Coffey replied.“Do you want to have a conversation, or do you want to have a dialogue?” Mr. Scott asked Mr. Coffey. “If you want to have a dialogue, I’d love to have it.”Mr. Scott described moments when he had challenged Mr. Trump during his presidency, and explained his belief that the Department of Justice was “broken.” After Mr. Scott left the table, Mr. Coffey told reporters that he was leaning toward supporting former Gov. Chris Christie of New Jersey in the Republican primary — someone whose fire against Mr. Trump he admired.“Scott is a politician — not that Christie isn’t,” Mr. Coffey said, adding of Mr. Scott: “He avoided what I wanted to hear him say. But he’s got a nice presence to him.” More

  • in

    Candidates Look to Cash In on First G.O.P. Debate — Especially Haley and Pence

    Campaigns saw the nationally televised event, the first of the 2024 campaign, not just as a way to reach voters, but also as an appeal to donors big and small.Eric J. Tanenblatt, a top fund-raiser for former Gov. Nikki Haley of South Carolina, woke up Thursday morning in his Milwaukee hotel room to dozens of enthusiastic text messages and emails from donors expressing admiration for Ms. Haley’s performance, particularly her command of foreign policy and handling of questions about abortion.“Donors who have been sitting on the sidelines are now taking another look,” said Mr. Tanenblatt, an Atlanta businessman who has known Ms. Haley since she was a state legislator and attended the debate Wednesday night. “Obviously I am somewhat biased, but I think last night was a really good night for Nikki Haley.”Mr. Tanenblatt was not alone in his assessment. In conversations with more than a dozen Republican donors — including undecided backers and some who support other candidates — Ms. Haley was singled out as the night’s standout. The question now becomes whether her debate performance will translate into dollars.For years, the Republican money class has been seeking an alternative — any alternative — to former President Donald J. Trump. In some ways, donors were the most consequential audience for Wednesday night’s debate, and many of them, including those who have not yet backed a candidate this cycle, were in Milwaukee.While the official fund-raising totals won’t be known until October, when campaign quarterly filings are due, there were signs within hours of the debate — flurries of text messages, requests for introductions to campaigns and reports of fresh contributions — that the candidates’ performances, even if they might not change hearts and minds, could move piles of cash.A spokeswoman for Ms. Haley declined to release detailed numbers, but said the campaign had raised more money online in the 24 hours after the debate than it had on any day since the campaign started. “The response to Nikki’s debate performance has been overwhelming,” said the spokeswoman, Nachama Soloveichik.Former Vice President Mike Pence, whom the donors also identified as having a good night onstage, also saw an uptick, according to his campaign. Marc Short, a top adviser to Mr. Pence, said it had taken in at least 1,000 new contributions overnight. While most were smaller donors — valuable because they can sustain a campaign in the long term — “the bigger breakthrough last night was the major donors,” he said, including some who had funded other candidates but held back on Mr. Pence.“I think there’s been a large number of supporters who have been on the sidelines but have been looking for some of that spark,” Mr. Short said. “I think many of them saw that last night.”The immediate feedback reflected the traditional sympathies of major Republican donors. They favored candidates who they felt came off as authoritative but not obnoxious, with established résumés and hawkish foreign policy views. They also, naturally, tended to see their preferred candidates’ performances through hopeful eyes.These tendencies have proved to be blind spots before, especially in the face of the unwavering support of the small donor base that remains fiercely loyal to Mr. Trump. Several major donors downplayed the significance of the immediate returns, saying that no debate-dollar bump could surmount Mr. Trump’s popularity. Some who attended the debate described it as something of a social occasion or a sideshow.Unsurprisingly, the candidate who most defended — and sounded like — Mr. Trump on Wednesday night, Vivek Ramaswamy, was also the candidate who most rankled the high-dollar donors. Several of them said they thought Mr. Ramaswamy, an entrepreneur and author, had overplayed his hand, citing his bombast and confrontational style.“Vivek made a complete jackass out of himself,” said Andy Sabin, a major donor to Senator Tim Scott of South Carolina. “He is so clueless about what’s going on in this country.”But his performance appeared to have appeal for some small-dollar donors. A spokeswoman for Mr. Ramaswamy, Tricia McLaughlin, said the campaign raised $625,000 in the 24 hours after the start of the debate — the biggest single fund-raising day of the campaign, with an average donation size of $38.“Unlike some donor-favorite candidates onstage,” Ms. McLaughlin said, “Vivek is not worried about what the donor class has to say about his politics and performance, which is why he is unconstrained in speaking the truth.”Mr. Sabin said he thought Mr. Scott had “done what he was supposed to do,” but the crowded, fast-paced format, in which candidates frequently talked over the moderators, made it hard for Mr. Scott to stand out. Money is less of a concern for Mr. Scott than for Mr. Pence or Ms. Haley: His campaign had $21 million on hand at the end of June, and groups supporting him have spent tens of millions of dollars on advertising in the early states.“Tim stayed out of trouble and out of the fray, had good answers,” Mr. Sabin said. “He probably should have been more involved in this, but I don’t think that had anything to do with him.”A major donor to Senator Tim Scott said the debate’s crowded, fast-paced format made it hard for the candidate to stand out.Kenny Holston/The New York TimesGov. Ron DeSantis of Florida, who went into the debate with the highest poll numbers of any candidate on the stage, was also quieter than many had expected.Some unaffiliated donors said it was a missed opportunity for Mr. DeSantis. Among the backers of other candidates, Bill Bean, an Indiana businessman and longtime supporter of Mr. Pence, said Mr. DeSantis “did not have that moment where he just separated himself from the whole field that I think some people were looking for.”The days after the debate kicked off a major slate of campaign travel and new ads for Mr. DeSantis, according to Jay Zeidman, a major DeSantis fund-raiser. “We view this as the turn of a new chapter,” he said — a reference, in part, to the turbulence of the governor’s campaign in recent months, as his poll numbers have lagged. Mr. DeSantis’s super PAC, Never Back Down, confirmed that it would spend $25 million on ads in Iowa and New Hampshire in the next two months, a buy that was first reported by The Washington Post.Mr. Pence, who has struggled to gain traction in the race and still lags far behind his rivals in fund-raising, spoke the most of any candidate on the stage last night, and many donors took notice.“There was a lot of energy there,” said Mr. Tanenblatt, the Haley donor. “I think that surprised people.”Several bundlers and donors — some of whom spoke on the condition of anonymity because they still plan to support Mr. Trump — suggested that Mr. Pence’s performance and steadfast appeal to evangelicals were likely to help him in Iowa, which is crucial to his campaign.Before Wednesday’s debate, Mr. Bean, who has given $100,000 to a super PAC supporting Mr. Pence, hoped that Mr. Pence would have the opportunity to “show the American people who he really is.”That objective was largely met, Mr. Bean said, although he felt the debate format was too fast-paced and chaotic to give any candidate enough time to cover significant topics.“The biggest thing that was accomplished last night,” Mr. Bean said, was that Mr. Pence “moved past the Jan. 6 issue, which I thought was probably the biggest single thing out there that he had to do.” More

  • in

    G.O.P. Chair Says Candidates Must Talk About Abortion to Win in 2024

    Republican rivals spent more time talking about abortion than any other single issue during the first debate, exposing divisions around a federal ban.Even as Republicans’ efforts to restrict abortion rights appear to have hurt candidates in key races over the last year, the party’s chairwoman said on Thursday morning that she welcomed the protracted — and at times, contentious — discussion of the topic in the first Republican presidential debate on Wednesday night.“I was very pleased to see them talk about abortion,” Ronna McDaniel, the chair of the Republican National Committee, said on “Fox & Friends.”According to an analysis by The New York Times, abortion was the most-discussed topic among the eight candidates, outlasting discussion of former President Donald J. Trump, the Republican front-runner, by more than a minute.Ms. McDaniel noted that Democrats had successfully campaigned on the issue of abortion rights in last year’s midterm elections and were likely to do so again in 2024. Democrats have sought to harness a backlash to the Supreme Court’s decision last year to overturn Roe v. Wade, eliminating the constitutional right to an abortion. The issue appears to have helped motivate voter turnout for Democrats and has become politically risky for Republicans. Many have sought to play down the subject.“If our candidates aren’t able to find a response and put out a response, we’re not going to win,” Ms. McDaniel said.But if Ms. McDaniel welcomed the discussion Wednesday night, so, too, did some Democrats and abortion rights activists, who were eager to remind voters that most Republicans — including those on the debate stage — are far to the right of public opinion.“Someone tell her they’re also not going to win if they do talk about abortion,” a leading abortion rights group, Naral Pro-Choice America, responded on X, formerly known as Twitter.This month, Ohio voters rebuffed a Republican-backed ballot measure that would have made it more difficult to amend the state’s constitution, an effort by Republicans to make it harder for voters to preserve abortion rights through an amendment. Though abortion was not technically on the ballot, discussion of the issue dominated the conversation.While a 2024 candidate’s fierce opposition to abortion may help draw voters in a Republican primary, that stance could hurt them with moderate or independent voters in a general election.A New York Times/Siena College poll from July found significant opposition to abortion among likely Republican voters, with 56 percent saying abortion should be mostly or always illegal, and 58 percent saying they backed a 15-week federal abortion ban.But the federal ban had significantly less support among a broader pool of voters, with 53 percent saying they would oppose it, and 61 percent saying abortion should be mostly or always legal.The exchange at Wednesday night’s debate laid bare this tension, exposing divisions within the Republican Party and those seeking to be its standard-bearer. While all eight candidates have voiced support for the Supreme Court’s decision, they disagree on whether to enact a federal abortion ban or leave those measures to the states.Former Vice President Mike Pence and Senator Tim Scott of South Carolina both backed a 15-week national ban, a policy that Mr. Pence has challenged everyone in the field to embrace. Mr. Pence sparred over the issue with Nikki Haley, the former South Carolina governor, who argued that a federal abortion ban was politically impractical and urged Republicans “to stop demonizing this issue.”Gov. Ron DeSantis of Florida — who signed a six-week abortion ban into law in his state — hedged, saying he would support “the side of life” while also acknowledging that “Wisconsin is going to do it different than Texas.”But in her appearance on Fox News, Ms. McDaniel sought to highlight the party’s unity, saying that all eight candidates had successfully painted their political opponents as extreme on the issue. Mr. Scott, for example, claimed falsely that New York, California and Illinois allowed abortions without limits up until birth.Mr. Trump, who opted to skip the debate, has been less clear about his views on an abortion ban. His appointments to the Supreme Court cleared the way for its decision on abortion. But Mr. Trump has not yet backed a federal ban, and his campaign has suggested that he wants to leave abortion policy up to individual states. During his presidency, he at one point supported a ban after 20 weeks’ gestation. More

  • in

    Our Writers Pick the Winners, Losers and ‘the Star of the Evening’ From the First Republican Debate

    Welcome to Opinion’s commentary for the first Republican presidential primary candidate debate, held in Milwaukee on Wednesday night. In this special feature, Times Opinion writers and contributors rank the candidates on a scale of 0 to 10: 0 means the candidate probably didn’t belong on the stage and should have dropped out before the debate […] More

  • in

    When Is the Second Debate, and Who Will Be There?

    The Republican National Committee will hold its second primary debate on Sept. 27 at the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library in California.Eight Republicans clawed their way onto the stage on Wednesday for the first presidential primary debate, with some using gimmicks and giveaways to meet the party’s criteria.That may not cut it next time.To qualify for the second debate, which will be held on Sept. 27 at the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library in Simi Valley, Calif., candidates must register at least 3 percent support in a minimum of two national polls accepted by the Republican National Committee, according to a person familiar with the party’s criteria. That is up from the 1 percent threshold for Wednesday’s debate.Organizers will also recognize a combination of one national poll and polls from at least two of the following early nominating states: Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada and South Carolina. The R.N.C. is also lifting its fund-raising benchmarks. Only candidates who have received financial support from 50,000 donors will make the debate stage, which is 10,000 more than they needed for the first debate. They must also have at least 200 donors in 20 or more states or territories.Candidates will still be required to sign a loyalty pledge promising to support the eventual Republican nominee, something that former President Donald J. Trump refused to do before skipping Wednesday’s debate. He has suggested that he is not likely to participate in the next one either.As of Wednesday, seven Republicans were averaging at least 3 percent support in national polls, according to FiveThirtyEight, a polling aggregation site.That list included Mr. Trump, who is leading Gov. Ron DeSantis of Florida by an average of more than 30 percentage points; the multimillionaire entrepreneur Vivek Ramaswamy; former Vice President Mike Pence; Senator Tim Scott of South Carolina; Nikki Haley, the former South Carolina governor and Mr. Trump’s United Nations ambassador; and former Gov. Chris Christie of New Jersey.Based on the R.N.C.’s polling requirements, Gov. Doug Burgum of North Dakota and Asa Hutchinson, the former Arkansas governor, are in jeopardy of not qualifying for the second debate, which will be televised by Fox Business.Both candidates resorted to unusual tactics to qualify for the first one.Mr. Burgum, a wealthy former software executive, offered $20 gift cards to anyone who gave at least $1 to his campaign, while Politico reported that Mr. Hutchinson had paid college students for each person they could persuade to contribute to his campaign. More

  • in

    Republicans’ Debate Clashes Highlight Party’s Policy Splits

    At the first presidential debate for the 2024 race, the rivals were divided over issues including Ukraine, abortion and the economy.The Republican presidential candidates clashed on Wednesday night over military support for Ukraine, government spending, abortion policy and the behavior of former President Donald J. Trump — who declined to participate — while uniting to assail the agenda of President Biden in the first primary debate of the 2024 election cycle.The debate, which grew contentious and fiery at times, underscored the rifts within the Republican Party and the sharp policy shifts that the United States could experience if Mr. Biden is defeated by one of his Republican challengers next year. The candidates generally painted a dark picture of a United States gripped by inflation and an influx of immigrants. But fault lines emerged over how forcefully to confront Russia, how far abortion restrictions should go, the causes of climate change and the fate of Mr. Trump, who was described by one moderator as the “elephant not in the room.”Although the candidates are still refining their policy platforms, the debate offered the first glimpse at how their agendas would differ from one another and from a second Trump administration.What to do about TrumpMost of the candidates responded cautiously when asked if they would support Mr. Trump if he is convicted of any crimes but wins the party’s nomination. But the most direct clash over the issue was between Vivek Ramaswamy, the upstart businessman, and Chris Christie, the former governor of New Jersey.Mr. Ramaswamy emerged as an ardent defender of Mr. Trump, calling him the best president of the 21st century and accusing Mr. Biden of sending a police force after him. Mr. Christie, who was met with boos from the audience, responded that Mr. Trump’s efforts to overturn the 2020 election results were beneath the office of the presidency and that he would always uphold the Constitution.The debate then shifted to the question of whether Mr. Trump should be pardoned of any crimes. Mr. Ramaswamy said unequivocally that if elected, he would pardon the former president, while Mike Pence, Mr. Trump’s former vice president, suggested that he would consider it if Mr. Trump showed contrition for his actions.The line of questioning was especially tricky for Gov. Ron DeSantis of Florida, who has tried to steer clear of commenting on Mr. Trump’s legal troubles. When pressed to answer whether Mr. Pence did the correct thing when he certified the 2020 election, Mr. DeSantis eventually acknowledged that the former vice president did his duty and then quickly tried to move on.The uncertain fate of Ukraine aidThe stakes of the presidential election are particularly high for Ukraine, which is heavily reliant on U.S. support to fend off Russia’s invasion. Without offering many specifics, Mr. Trump has suggested that he would broker a deal to quickly end the war, and on Wednesday his rivals were deeply divided over whether to continue providing Ukraine with military and economic aid.The argument over Ukraine highlighted how the views within the Republican Party over foreign policy have diverged between the more anti-interventionist, “American First” wing and the camp that wants to extend American influence around the world and promote democracy.Mr. DeSantis said that additional support for Ukraine should be contingent on Europe’s providing more aid. Mr. Ramaswamy said that he would not support an increase in funding, calling the situation “disastrous” and declaring that the money should be redirected to protect the U.S. southern border.However, Mr. Pence, Mr. Christie and Nikki Haley, the former ambassador to the United Nations during the Trump administration, offered forceful cases for defending Ukraine. Mr. Christie described the atrocities that he saw during a visit to Ukraine this month, and Mr. Pence said that the United States needed to stop President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia from spreading totalitarianism around the world.Ms. Haley called Mr. Putin a murderer and said that allowing Ukraine to fall would empower other American adversaries, such as China.Putting limits on abortionAbortion continues to be a fraught topic for Republicans. They have been generally supportive of the Supreme Court’s decision to overturn Roe v. Wade last year, which eliminated the constitutional right to an abortion, but they have differing opinions about whether anti-abortion measures should be left to the states and how far they should go.Republicans are under pressure from anti-abortion activists to endorse a 15-week federal ban; however, several Republicans oppose such bans.Mr. DeSantis demurred when asked about whether he would support a six-week federal ban and criticized Democrats for backing abortions later in pregnancy. Ms. Haley described the notion of a federal ban as unrealistic, suggesting that Republicans would never have sufficient votes to pass such legislation. She also called for lawmakers to stop “demonizing” people over the issue and work toward a consensus around adoption and contraception policies.Other candidates, such as Mr. Pence, took more ardent positions on abortion. Supporting a 15-week federal ban — which he has challenged his rivals to embrace — the former vice president called curbing abortions a “moral issue” that should not be left to the states. Senator Tim Scott of South Carolina echoed that sentiment, saying that it would be “unethical” for a president to be supportive of states such as California and New York that allow abortions further along in pregnancy.Bashing ‘Bidenomics’The biggest area of agreement among the Republican candidates was on the economy, which they said was failing because of higher prices and interest rates that have made it harder to buy houses and cars.None of the candidates have released detailed economic plans, but all of them are broadly supportive of extending the 2017 tax cuts that are scheduled to expire in 2025 and rolling back regulations. Onstage, they also agreed that the national debt, which has topped $32 trillion, is a serious problem facing the economy.Republicans usually blame big-spending Democrats for the national debt, but on Wednesday night Ms. Haley pointed a finger at members of her own party. She called out Republicans for passing more than $2 trillion in pandemic spending in 2020 and said that Mr. Trump, Mr. Pence, Mr. DeSantis and Mr. Scott have all backed policies that have added to the national debt.Calling for spending cuts and an end to earmarks, Ms. Haley said it was disingenuous to point to Democrats as solely responsible for the nation’s debt burden.“The truth is that Biden did not do this to us,” Ms. Haley said. “Our Republicans did this to us, too.” More

  • in

    Preparing to Fact-Check the GOP Debate: A Look at Possible Lines

    Through stump speeches and statements on the campaign trail, the Republican presidential contenders have hinted at what they might say on the debate stage. Here’s a look at their possible lines.The top contenders in the Republican presidential primary — minus the most important one — will face off Wednesday night in the first debate of the 2024 race. The debate will provide the candidates, many who are relatively unknown to voters, an opportunity to refine their message and to test their attacks on rivals, hoping to deliver a zinger to stand out in a crowded field.Those statements may include exaggerations or outright misinformation about a host of subjects, like inflation, immigration, foreign policy and cultural issues. The candidates’ stump speeches and previous statements offer a glimpse of what the debate audience might hear.Here is a sampler of the kind of exaggerations, misleading statements and half-truths that could come up.Chris Christie“We should discuss why he promised to build a wall across the entire border and completed 52 miles of new wall in four years. At that pace, he’d need 110 more years as president to finish the wall.”This is partially true.Mr. Christie has made targeting former President Donald J. Trump — the front-runner for the Republican nomination, who is not attending this debate — central to his campaign and specifically criticized him for supposedly not fulfilling his campaign promises while in office.It is true that Mr. Trump said throughout the 2016 cycle that he would build a wall along the border and make Mexico pay for it. Mexico has not paid for any wall construction.However, Mr. Trump said he would build a 1,000-mile wall, not along the entire border as Mr. Christie has claimed. And while Mr. Christie’s 52-mile figure refers to one category of wall construction, the Trump administration built around 453 total miles of border wall starting in 2017, though most of the new barriers reinforced or replaced existing structures.Ron DeSantis“In Florida, our crime rate is at a 50-year low. You look at the top 25 cities for crime in America, Florida does not rank amongst the top 25.”This is partially true.Mr. DeSantis has played up his record as Florida’s governor and what he sees as legislative successes there throughout his presidential campaign.While Florida’s crime rate fell to a 50-year low in 2021, crime reporting was incomplete and provisional after a switch in how law enforcement agencies reported data. The crime rate that year included data from just 59 percent of agencies in Florida, leaving crime data for more than 40 percent of the state’s population unaccounted for, according to The Tampa Bay Times.Nikki Haley“Why was it last year that a third of our teenage girls seriously contemplated suicide? This is serious. We need to look at that. So let’s snap out of it. Boys go into boys bathrooms, girls go to girls bathrooms and if there’s something in between, go into a private bathroom.”This lacks evidence.Ms. Haley, the only woman in the Republican primary, has, like many candidates, leaned into issues involving gender identity and sexuality on the trail. Criticizing transgender athletes who compete in women’s sports has become one of her most reliable applause lines.There is no scientifically proven link between suicidal ideation and trans people competing in sports. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reported this year that teenage girls are facing elevated suicide rates. Medical experts have said that while there are many potential causes, no evidence points to increased awareness of L.G.B.T.Q. issues as a causal or contributing factor.Mike Pence“The fact is, today abortion law in the United States is more aligned with China and North Korea than with Western nations in Europe.”This is misleading.Mr. Pence, the staunchest abortion opponent in the race, has frequently expressed support for a national abortion ban and called on other candidates to back a 15-week ban.The majority of European countries have legalized abortion up to 10 to 15 weeks of pregnancy and allow for abortions past the gestational limit if the parent’s life is in danger. Many laws in those countries are more permissive than they appear on paper and allow for exemptions upon request.China, in contrast, allows for elective abortions without specific gestational limits, but in recent years has said that it aims to reduce the number of “medically unnecessary” abortions. And it is unclear what North Korea’s laws are, given that the World Health Organization reported no documentation after 2015 on the procedure’s legality.Vivek Ramaswamy“There’s very little evidence of people being arrested for being armed (Jan. 6). Most of the people who were armed, I assume the federal officers who were out there were armed.”This is false.Mr. Ramaswamy has remained one of Mr. Trump’s most ardent defenders through his four indictments and said throughout his campaign that “systematic and pervasive censorship,” not Mr. Trump, was to blame for the Capitol riot on Jan. 6, 2021.The Justice Department reported that 112 individuals were charged with using a “deadly or dangerous weapon or causing serious bodily injury to an officer” and 104 were charged with entering a restricted area with a dangerous or deadly weapon as of Aug. 4. There is no way to know how many of the thousands there were armed, but Secret Service officials confiscated several hundred weapons that included knives or blades, pepper spray canisters, brass knuckles and tasers.And Mr. Ramaswamy himself condemned Mr. Trump on X, formerly known as Twitter, after the attack: “What Trump did last week was wrong. Downright abhorrent. Plain and simple.”Tim Scott“There have been more illegal encounters under Biden than the previous two administrations combined.”This is false.Mr. Scott, who has campaigned as a “happy warrior” with an optimistic message, has largely directed his criticism toward the Biden administration, particularly its handling of illegal border crossings.Reporting of immigration data changed in March 2020 from tracking “apprehensions” to “encounters,” a broader range of expulsions enabled by the Title 42 border policy that allowed for quicker removals during the Covid-19 pandemic, making comparisons across administrations inconsistent.But available data from U.S. Border Patrol showed that illegal immigration levels nationwide were still lower under Mr. Biden than under the Trump and Obama administrations combined. And PolitiFact reported that the Scott campaign used inconsistent metrics to back its claim. More

  • in

    The Trump-Free Debate That’s All About Trump

    Donald Trump may not be on the stage for tonight’s Republican primary debate, but at least eight other candidates will still have to contend with his presence — and his lead in the polls.The Opinion columnist Michelle Goldberg argues that tonight is an opportunity for Trump’s opponents to convince Republican voters that they can be as dominant as the former president, but without the legal baggage. The question remains, though: Will the Republican base buy it?Illustration by The New York Times; Photographs by Joe Buglewicz for The New York Times; Scott Morgan, Jim Young, Dan Koeck, Cheney Orr/Reuters; Ben Gray, Alex Brandon/Associated Press; Megan Varner/Getty ImagesThe 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.This Opinion Short was produced by Sophia Alvarez Boyd. It was edited by Stephanie Joyce and Kaari Pitkin. Mixing by Carole Sabouraud. Original music by Pat McCusker and Carole Sabouraud. Fact-checking by Mary Marge Locker. Special thanks to Shannon Busta, Kristina Samulewski and Annie-Rose Strasser. More