Trump, Donald J

Subterms

    More stories

    • 150 Shares70 Views

      in Elections

      Senators Vying to Be G.O.P. Leader Vow to Quickly Confirm Trump Nominees

      by

      Senators Rick Scott, John Thune and John Cornyn quickly responded to President-elect Donald J. Trump’s demand on social media, the latest example of his influence over Republican lawmakers.Senators vying to become the next leader of the Republican conference pledged on Sunday to quickly push through President-elect Donald J. Trump’s appointees after he demanded on social media that they do so.Senator Rick Scott of Florida was the first to make such a vow in an attempt to curry favor with Mr. Trump. Mr. Scott quickly picked up the endorsement of one of the president-elect’s biggest backers, the billionaire Elon Musk.Not to be outdone, Senator John Thune of South Dakota, who is considered a front-runner in the race, released a statement saying that he, too, would push to swiftly staff Mr. Trump’s administration.“One thing is clear: We must act quickly and decisively to get the president’s cabinet and other nominees in place as soon as possible to start delivering on the mandate we’ve been sent to execute, and all options are on the table to make that happen, including recess appointments,” Mr. Thune said.Senator John Cornyn of Texas was not far behind.“It is unacceptable for Senate Ds to blockade President @realDonaldTrump’s cabinet appointments,” he wrote on social media on Sunday. “If they do, we will stay in session, including weekends, until they relent. Additionally, the Constitution expressly confers the power on the President to make recess appointments.”Mr. Cornyn’s staff pointed out that he had already been advocating for quick approval of Mr. Trump’s nominees.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 113 Shares81 Views

      in Elections

      There Were Two Huge Problems Harris Could Not Escape

      by

      Sarah Isgur, a longtime Republican campaign operative — and my friend and a senior editor at The Dispatch — has a brilliant sports analogy for the process of campaigning. She compares it to … curling.For those unfamiliar with the sport (which enjoys 15 minutes of fame every Winter Olympics), it involves sliding a very large, heavy “rock” toward a target on the ice. One person “throws” a 44-pound disc-shaped stone by sliding it along the ice, sweepers come in and frantically try to marginally change the speed and direction of the rock by brushing the ice with “brooms” that can melt just enough of the ice to make the rock travel farther or perhaps a little bit straighter.The sweepers are important, no doubt, but they cannot control the rock enough to save a bad throw. It’s a matter of physics. The rock simply has too much momentum.What does this have to do with politics? As Isgur writes, “The underlying dynamics of an election cycle (the economy, the popularity of the president, national events driving the news cycle) are like the 44-pound ‘stone.’ ” The candidates and the campaign team are the sweepers. They work frantically — and they can influence the stone — but they don’t control it.One of the frustrating elements of political commentary is that we spend far too much time talking about the sweeping and far too little time talking about the stone. Political hobbyists in particular (and that includes journalists!) are very interested in ad campaigns, ground games and messaging.Those things do matter, but when facing an election defeat this comprehensive, you know it was the stone that made the difference.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 88 Shares81 Views

      in Elections

      The Democratic Blind Spot That Wrecked 2024

      by

      The 2022 election went better than Democrats could have hoped. The party picked up governor’s mansions and state legislatures and expanded their Senate majority. It held down losses in the House. The promised “red wave” never crashed ashore. Perhaps it would have been better if it had.Looking back, the seeds of Democrats’ 2024 wipeout were planted in the quasi-victory of 2022. Three things happened in the aftermath. The pressure on President Biden not to run for re-election, and the possibility of a serious primary challenge if he did run, evaporated. Democrats persuaded themselves of a theory of the electorate that proved mistaken. And as a result, the Biden-Harris administration avoided the kind of hard, post-defeat pivot that both the Clinton and Obama administrations were forced to make after the midterm defeats of 1994 and 2010.In 2020, Democrats had worried over Biden’s age, but were comforted, in part, by the soft signals he sent that he would serve only one term. “Look, I view myself as a bridge, not as anything else,” he said in 2020. By mid-2022, as Biden signaled his intention to run again, the party was growing alarmed. In June of that year, The Times interviewed nearly 50 Democratic officials and found that among “nearly all the Democrats interviewed, the president’s age — 79 now, 82 by the time the winner of the 2024 election is inaugurated — is a deep concern about his political viability.”Nor was the public thrilled about the results the Biden administration was delivering. In October of 2022, amid widespread anger over inflation, the Times-Siena poll found Biden with a 38 percent job approval rating and trailing Trump in a hypothetical rematch.If Democrats had been wiped out in the midterms, the pressure on Biden to be the transitional figure he’d promised to be would have been immense. If he’d run again despite that pressure, he might have faced serious challengers. But Democrats fared far better than they had expected. The president’s saggy approval rating and the widespread anger at inflation were nowhere to be found in the election results. In their first referendum under Biden, Democrats did much better than they had under Clinton or Obama. Any pressure on Biden to step aside — and any possibility of a real primary challenge — ended.In its place, a new theory of the electorate emerged, based on the way Democrats over-performed in contested states, like Pennsylvania and Wisconsin, and underperformed in safe states, like New York and California. There were two coalitions: the MAGA coalition and the anti-MAGA coalition. The anti-MAGA coalition was bigger, but it needed to be activated by the threat of Donald Trump or the Dobbs abortion ruling. A slew of special election victories in 2023 seemed to confirm the theory. Democrats were winning elections they had no business winning, given Biden’s low approval rating and public anger over inflation. But the anti-MAGA coalition’s hatred of Trump had changed the electoral math.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 150 Shares62 Views

      in Elections

      50,000 Russian and North Korean Troops Mass Ahead of Attack, U.S. Says

      by

      Ukrainian officials expect a counteroffensive in western Russia to begin in the coming days as North Korea’s troops train with Russian forces.The Russian military has assembled a force of 50,000 soldiers, including North Korean troops, as it prepares to begin an assault aimed at reclaiming territory seized by Ukraine in the Kursk region of Russia, according to U.S. and Ukrainian officials.A new U.S. assessment concludes that Russia has massed the force without having to pull soldiers out of Ukraine’s east — its main battlefield priority — allowing Moscow to press on multiple fronts simultaneously.Russian troops have been clawing back some of the territory that Ukraine captured in Kursk this year. They have been attacking Ukrainian positions with missile strikes and artillery fire, but they have not yet begun a major assault there, U.S. officials said.Ukrainian officials say they expect such an attack involving the North Korean troops in the coming days.For now, the North Koreans are training with Russian forces in the far western part of Kursk.The Russian-North Korean offensive looms as President-elect Donald J. Trump prepares to re-enter office with a stated goal of ending the war quickly. Mr. Trump has said little about how he would settle the conflict, but Vice President-elect JD Vance has outlined a plan that would allow Russia to keep the territory it has seized in Ukraine.Some U.S. military and intelligence officials have grown more pessimistic about Ukraine’s overall prospects, noting that Russia has steadily gained ground, both in Kursk and in eastern Ukraine. Officials say the setbacks are partly a result of Ukraine’s failure to solve critical shortfalls in troop strength.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 150 Shares106 Views

      in Elections

      Netflix’s Martha Stewart Documentary Says She Was the Original Influencer. Was She?

      by

      The new Netflix documentary “Martha” examines the homemaking diva’s illustrious, and complicated, career and personal life.“Martha,” a new documentary now on Netflix, offers a candid portrait of the rise and fall (and rebirth?) of the homemaker extraordinaire, who last year, at 81, appeared on the cover of Sports Illustrated.The film, by R.J. Cutler, touches on Ms. Stewart’s troubled childhood, troubled marriage, time on Wall Street and where everything really began: the idyllic Connecticut countryside where she renovated a farmhouse. It looks at how a high-end catering business made her a media mogul with her own magazine, television show and brand of Kmart sheets. And it digs into her highly publicized trial, conviction and prison time.In an edited conversation, members of the Styles staff — Vanessa Friedman, Madison Malone Kircher and Jacob Gallagher — and James B. Stewart, a business reporter and columnist whose book “Tangled Webs” examined the insider trading probe that incriminated Ms. Stewart, discussed the documentary and the life of a woman who built a man’s empire on being the ultimate homemaker.MADISON MALONE KIRCHER: I realized how little I actually knew about a woman who was basically a canonized saint in my house growing up. Which is to say I was hooked!JAMES STEWART: I liked the film a lot. Her body language and expressions were so revealing. She looked very uncomfortable most of the time. But it was very kind to her.VANESSA FRIEDMAN: I found watching the film especially interesting in the context of the election, and the complicated feelings around women — particularly, powerful, successful women. Because it did reveal very complicated feelings about Martha.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 113 Shares62 Views

      in Elections

      Donald Trump Wins Arizona, Reversing the State’s Blue Trend

      by

      The victory added to the list of battleground states that Mr. Trump lost in 2020 and flipped back four years later.President-elect Donald J. Trump has won Arizona and its 11 electoral votes, The Associated Press said on Saturday night, flipping yet another swing state and bringing his final Electoral College tally to 312. With his victory in Arizona, Mr. Trump has now won all seven of this year’s battleground states.Mr. Trump’s victory over Vice President Kamala Harris in Arizona is a reversion to the state’s traditionally conservative status: It has voted for a Democrat only twice since the 1940s, including in 2020, when Joseph R. Biden Jr. eked out a win over Mr. Trump by just over 10,000 votes.But this year, Democrats appeared to be fighting an uphill battle from the start in Arizona, a border state where voters expressed fury over the migrant crisis and deep economic concerns over the cost of housing and the high prices of everyday goods, like groceries and gasoline.Near a polling location in Guadalupe, Ariz., on Tuesday.Adriana Zehbrauskas for The New York TimesRepublicans outnumber Democrats in the state, so Ms. Harris needed to persuade the significant number of Arizona independents and moderate Republicans to vote for her. And there were signs she might have been able to do so: Independents, especially white women in the Phoenix suburbs, had been drifting left, and Democrats hoped they would be motivated by protecting reproductive rights and denying Mr. Trump another term.Instead, it was Mr. Trump who put together a winning coalition, keeping enough of the state’s Republicans in line while also securing the votes of enough independents. Polls had also long suggested he was cutting into the Latino vote, a fast-growing and crucial voting bloc in Arizona that Democrats had been relying on as part of their coalition.Ms. Harris appeared to have the superior ground game in Arizona, with her campaign and allied groups, like unions, working efficiently to knock on doors and turn out voters. Mr. Trump’s operation, meanwhile, relied heavily on outside committees to do that work, an untested strategy for Republicans.Still, conservative groups like Turning Point seemed well-prepared, knocking on doors throughout the summer and fall and urging lower-propensity conservative voters to return their ballots early — a shift from 2020, when Mr. Trump was more adamant in maligning early voting. Republicans were encouraged by the early vote numbers in Arizona this year, hoping they would be enough to forestall a late surge from Democrats. More

    • 113 Shares74 Views

      in Elections

      Trump Won’t Have Haley or Pompeo in New Administration

      by

      President-elect Donald J. Trump ruled out roles for Nikki Haley and Mike Pompeo, who served in his previous administration.President-elect Donald J. Trump said on Saturday that he would not invite Nikki Haley, his former ambassador to the United Nations, or Mike Pompeo, his former secretary of state, to join his incoming administration.Mr. Trump’s announcement on Truth Social, his social media platform, was an early indication of the decision-making process of the president-elect as he navigates the ideologic differences within the Republican Party.Days after his election win over Vice President Kamala Harris, Mr. Trump’s team has already started his first formal transition meetings and ramped up the process for building his new cabinet.By ruling out Mr. Pompeo and Ms. Haley, Mr. Trump was rejecting two Republicans who had backed U.S. support for Ukraine at a time when Mr. Trump and many of his allies have pushed to curtail American aid for allies and military involvement overseas.“I will not be inviting former Ambassador Nikki Haley, or former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, to join the Trump Administration, which is currently in formation,” Mr. Trump said in the post. “I very much enjoyed and appreciated working with them previously, and would like to thank them for their service to our Country.”Mr. Trump was also turning away two top officials in his first administration who in recent years had shared criticism of him.Many in Mr. Trump’s orbit, including David Sacks, a major Trump donor, viewed Mr. Pompeo as being too eager to use the military overseas. Mr. Trump also likely did not forget that, in 2023, Mr. Pompeo warned during the Conservative Political Action Conference that Republicans should not follow “celebrity leaders with their own brand of identity politics — those with fragile egos who refuse to acknowledge reality.”Days later, during an interview with Fox News, Mr. Pompeo claimed he was not talking about Mr. Trump, while also criticizing his former boss’s fiscal policy.Mr. Pompeo in 2022 also criticized Mr. Trump’s handling of classified documents after the F.B.I. raided his home in Mar-a-Lago.“No one gets to keep classified information outside of a place classified information should be. That is certainly true,” Mr. Pompeo said, while also denouncing the Justice Department for its handling of the case.Ms. Haley was also Mr. Trump’s last rival to drop out of the race for the Republican nomination. Just days before the election, Ms. Haley said the Trump campaign’s rhetoric was driving away women and minorities, citing the racist and misogynistic remarks by speakers at a Trump rally held at Madison Square Garden in October.“This bromance and this masculinity stuff, it borders on edgy to the point that it’s going to make women uncomfortable,” Ms. Haley said. Despite repeated offers to provide advice to the campaign, Mr. Trump mostly kept her at a distance during his presidential run. Mr. Trump’s gamble to mobilize men, despite them historically voting less than women, would end up paying off.Both Mr. Pompeo and Ms. Haley did eventually vocally support Mr. Trump and endorse his nomination. More

    • 150 Shares106 Views

      in Elections

      Trump Should Not Let Putin Claim Victory in Ukraine, Says NATO Official

      by

      Adm. Rob Bauer warned against any peace deal that was too favorable to Russia, arguing that it could undermine American interests.A senior NATO military official suggested on Saturday that any peace deal negotiated by President-elect Donald J. Trump that allowed President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia to claim victory in Ukraine would undermine the interests of the United States.In a wide-ranging interview on the sidelines of a European defense summit in Prague, Adm. Rob Bauer, the Dutch chairman of NATO’s Military Committee, said: “If you allow a nation like Russia to win, to come out of this as the victor, then what does it mean for other autocratic states in the world where the U.S. has also interests?”He added: “It’s important enough to talk about Ukraine on its own, but there is more at stake than just Ukraine.”Mr. Trump has said repeatedly that he could end the war in Ukraine in a day, without saying how. A settlement outlined by Vice President-elect JD Vance in September echoes what people close to the Kremlin say Mr. Putin wants: allowing Russia to keep the territory it has captured and guaranteeing that Ukraine will not join NATO.A spokeswoman for Mr. Trump’s transition team, Karoline Leavitt, said he was re-elected because the American people “trust him to lead our country and restore peace through strength around the world.”“When he returns to the White House, he will take the necessary actions to do just that,” Ms. Leavitt said on Saturday.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More