More stories

  • in

    Are the Democrats Dead or Alive?

    In the immediate aftermath of the 2024 election, polls and focus groups suggested that the Democratic Party had suffered more than an election defeat. It looked as though key blocs of voters had irrevocably turned their backs on Democrats as triumphalist Republicans boasted about becoming the party of the working class.In the six months since President Trump took back the Oval Office, his favorability ratings, including on immigration, have fallen, but his decline has not been accompanied by a revival of support for the Democratic Party. The party continues to suffer severe reputational damage, which may not be reparable until 2028, when the Democratic presidential nominee will have a chance to redefine the party’s image as only a party leader can.Before exploring the dark side for Democrats, let’s first acknowledge three bright spots.One, prospective Democrats who are jockeying for early position and recognition in the party’s presidential nomination contest are moving toward the center. As Adam Wren and Elena Schneider report in “The Great Un-Awokening,” a June 6 piece in Politico, “Searching for a path out of the political wilderness, potential 2028 candidates, especially those hailing from blue states, are attempting to ratchet back a leftward lurch on social issues that some in the party say cost them the November election.”Wren and Schneider cite Gov. Gavin Newsom’s break with progressive orthodoxy when he declared that allowing transgender athletes to participate in female college sports was “unfair.” They also cite Gov. Wes Moore’s veto of “a bill that took steps toward reparations.”Two, there has been a burst of activity, including the formation of groups on the center left seeking a more moderate Democratic agenda, including Searchlight, led by Adam Jentleson, a former aide to Senator John Fetterman of Pennsylvania, and Harry Reid, a former Senate majority leader. In addition, there is growing interest in Welcome PAC, a centrist Democratic group founded in 2021 that has contributed to moderate House Democrats like Jared Golden, Mary Peltola and Marie Gluesenkamp Perez.Three, Democratic voters are far more enthusiastic heading into the 2026 election than Republicans are. A July 10-13 CNN poll found that 74 percent of Democrats described themselves as “extremely motivated” to vote next year, compared with 54 percent of Republicans, as are 75 percent of liberals compared with 52 percent of conservatives.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

  • in

    There Is Hope for Democrats. Look to Kansas.

    Two Opinion writers on the Democratic governors who might just save the party.David Leonhardt, an editorial director for Opinion, talks to the Opinion correspondent Michelle Cottle about her recent reporting trip to Kansas. Cottle argues that Democrats should look to moderate governors like Laura Kelly of Kansas for a playbook.There Is Hope for Democrats. Look to Kansas.Two Opinion writers on the Democratic governors who might just save the party.Below is a transcript of an episode of “The Opinions.” We recommend listening to it in its original form for the full effect. You can do so using the player above or on the NYT Audio app, Apple, Spotify, Amazon Music, YouTube, iHeartRadio or wherever you get your podcasts.The transcript has been lightly edited for length and clarity.David Leonhardt: Democrats are spending a lot of time these days agonizing about what the future of their party should look like. Today we’re going to talk about one potential answer. The party’s current crop of governors: politicians who have a proven ability to win elections, including some really tough elections, and to govern as well.My colleague Michelle Cottle recently traveled to Kansas to talk with one of the country’s most impressive governors. Laura Kelly is a moderate Democrat in her second term. Kansas is so Republican that it hasn’t elected a Democratic senator since 1932. It’s so Republican that there is a famous book, “What’s the Matter With Kansas?” lamenting the failure of Democrats there. Yet Governor Kelly is now in her second term.Michelle and I are going to talk about what lessons she offers for her party. Thanks for being here.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

  • in

    Texas Republicans Look to Jam Democrats With Vote on Redistricting

    By taking up new congressional maps pushed by President Trump first, Republicans hope to discourage Democrats from walking out of a special session before they vote on flood relief.Republicans in the Texas Legislature are planning to hold off on voting on measures to address the state’s deadly July 4 flooding until after they approve a partisan redistricting of Texas’ U.S. House boundaries, hoping to thwart Democrats’ efforts to block new House maps, according to two people briefed on the discussions.Republican leaders gaveled in the special legislative session on Monday, called by Gov. Greg Abbott, a Republican with an ambitious list of demands for the session. The biggest by far are flood response, driven by a disaster that killed at least 135 people, and redistricting, driven by President Trump.Public hearings on the floods start on Wednesday in Austin and in hard-hit Kerrville next week. Hearings on redistricting will span the next two weeks in Austin, Houston and the Dallas area.Texas Republicans had been working quietly for several months to take up Mr. Trump’s call for an aggressive redrawing of the state’s congressional maps, aiming to gain five additional Republican seats in the U.S. House and help the party keep control of the chamber after the 2026 midterms.Then the floods hit on July 4 and prompted calls for state leaders to improve warning systems and provide disaster relief.Now those two imperatives — one a natural disaster, the other overtly political — could create an incendiary atmosphere as the legislative session builds steam, with just 30 days to accomplish both.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

  • in

    James Carville: My Fix for the Confused and Leaderless Democrats

    Constipated. Leaderless. Confused. A cracked-out clown car. Divided. These are the words I hear my fellow Democrats using to describe our party as of late. The truth is they’re not wrong: The Democratic Party is in shambles.Zohran Mamdani’s victory in New York City’s Democratic mayoral primary wasn’t an isolated event. It represents an undeniable fissure in our political soul. We are divided along generational lines: Candidates like Mr. Mamdani are impatient for an economic future that folks my age are skeptical can actually be delivered. We are divided along ideological lines: A party that is historically allegiant to the state of Israel is at odds with a growing faction that will not look past the abuses in Palestine. From Medicare for All purists to Affordable Care Act reformists, the list goes on and on.The Democratic Party is steamrolling toward a civilized civil war. It’s necessary to have it. It’s even more necessary to delay it. The only thing that can save us now is an actual savior, because a new party can be delivered only by a person — see Barack Obama in 2008 and Bill Clinton in 1992. No matter how many podcasts or influencer streams our bench of candidates go on, our new leader won’t arrive until the day after the midterms in November 2026, which marks the unofficial-yet-official beginning of the 2028 presidential primary. No new party or candidate has a chance for a breakthrough until that day.Until then, we must run unified in opposition to the Republicans to gain as many House seats as possible in the midterms, because every congressional seat we gain in 2026 means we will be more likely to bring about change in 2028. And there’s good news on that front.There’s plenty of tantalizing political scandal surrounding the president right now. But issues of moral or ethical concern are almost always more powerful when they’re self-inflicted. Let President Trump Rope-A-Dope with MAGA on the Jeffrey Epstein case, and don’t get in the way.Instead, the midterms will, like all elections, be decided largely based on issues that affect Americans’ everyday lives. This time around, we don’t have to run with a shred of nuance when it comes to kitchen table issues: Mr. Trump’s “big, beautiful” domestic policy law is a big, steaming doggy nugget of epic proportion, contemptible to a vast majority of the nation. According to a new CNN poll, over 60 percent of Americans were opposed to Mr. Trump’s bill. For context: When Mr. Trump’s first-term budget dropped in 2017, the split was closer, with 41 percent opposed and 28 percent in favor.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

  • in

    Mamdani Won Over N.Y.C. Democratic Voters. Can He Charm Washington?

    National Democrats are grappling with how much to embrace Assemblyman Zohran Mamdani, a leftist who has become the party’s standard-bearer in America’s largest city.The head of the local Democratic Party in Queens, where Assemblyman Zohran Mamdani got his political start, has never met him. The party’s longtime state chairman had not spoken to him until the day after a stunning primary night that stamped him as a rising Democratic star.And among the party’s strategists, officials and elected leaders in Washington, he’s almost entirely unknown.Now, as the Democratic nominee for mayor of New York City, Mr. Mamdani, 33, is on a crash course to change that. He is unleashing a full-scale charm offensive of private meetings, phone calls and public promises aimed at wooing top party leaders, donors and activists.On Monday, he met with Jewish elected officials in New York City. The next day, he took pointed questions about his views on Israel and tax policy from a group of 150 business leaders in the city.A day later, he headed to Capitol Hill to offer campaign advice to dozens of Democratic members of Congress at a breakfast hosted by Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York before returning to Manhattan for a private meeting with younger technology executives. And on Friday, he met with Representative Hakeem Jeffries, the House Democratic leader and a fellow New Yorker who has yet to endorse his bid.Already, some establishment Democrats have been grappling with Mr. Mamdani’s sudden standing as their party’s standard-bearer in America’s most populous city. And they want to quickly get the measure of a man who has spent much of his political life far outside of their big tent.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

  • in

    A Pro-Trump Community Reckons With Losing a Beloved Immigrant Neighbor

    Voters here in Oregon’s rural Yamhill County have backed Donald Trump for three presidential elections in a row, most recently by a six-point margin. His promises to crack down on immigration resonated in these working-class communities.Then last month ICE detained Moises Sotelo, a beloved but undocumented Mexican immigrant who has lived in the county for 31 years and owns a vineyard management company employing 10 people. Two of his children were born here and are American citizens, and Sotelo was a pillar of his church and won a wine industry award — yet he was detained for five weeks and on Friday was deported to Mexico, his family said.“Moises’s story just really shook our community,” Elise Yarnell Hollamon, the City Council president in Newberg, Sotelo’s hometown, told me. “Everyone knows him, and he has built a reputation within our community over the last few decades.”Christopher Valentine for The New York TimesThe result has been an outpouring of support for Sotelo, even in this conservative county (which is also my home). More than 2,200 people have donated to a GoFundMe for the family, raising more than $150,000 for legal and other expenses, and neighbors have been dropping off meals and offering vehicles and groceries.“Oh, my God, it’s been insane,” said Alondra Sotelo Garcia, his adult daughter, who was born in America. “I knew he was well known, but I didn’t know how big it would blow up to be.”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

  • in

    Democrats’ 2024 Autopsy Is Described as Avoiding the Likeliest Cause of Death

    An audit being conducted by the D.N.C. is not looking at Joe Biden’s decision to run or key decisions by Kamala Harris’s team, according to six people briefed on the report.The Democratic National Committee’s examination of what went wrong in the 2024 election is expected to mostly steer clear of the decisions made by the Biden-turned-Harris campaign and will focus more heavily instead on actions taken by allied groups, according to interviews with six people briefed on the report’s progress.The audit, which the committee is calling an “after-action review,” is expected to avoid the questions of whether former President Joseph R. Biden Jr. should have run for re-election in the first place, whether he should have exited the race earlier than he did and whether former Vice President Kamala Harris was the right choice to replace him, according to the people briefed on the process so far.Nor is the review expected to revisit key decisions by the Harris campaign — like framing the election as a choice between democracy and fascism, and refraining from hitting back after an ad by Donald J. Trump memorably attacked Ms. Harris on transgender rights by suggesting that she was for “they/them” while Mr. Trump was “for you” — that have roiled Democrats in the months since Mr. Trump took back the White House.Party officials described the draft document as focusing on the 2024 election as a whole, but not on the presidential campaign — which is something like eating at a steakhouse and then reviewing the salad.Producing a tough-minded public review of a national electoral defeat would be a politically delicate exercise under any circumstance, given the need to find fault with the work and judgment of important party leaders and strategists. It is particularly fraught for the new D.N.C. chairman, Ken Martin, who promised a post-election review from his first day on the job but whose first few months in the role have been plagued by infighting and financial strains.“We are not interested in second-guessing campaign tactics or decisions of campaign operatives,” said Jane Kleeb, the Nebraska Democratic chairwoman, who heads the association of Democratic state chairs and is a close ally of Mr. Martin. “We are interested in what voters turned out for Republicans and Democrats, and how we can fix this moving forward.”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

  • in

    Rubio Restricts U.S. Criticism of Tainted Foreign Elections

    A State Department cable telling officials to avoid comments on the “fairness or integrity” of most elections continues a U.S. turn away from promoting democratic values abroad.The State Department will sharply restrict its commentary on the legitimacy of foreign elections to “rare” occasions, according to a new directive from Secretary of State Marco Rubio that continues the Trump administration’s turn away from promoting democracy abroad.In an official cable to diplomatic and consular posts on Thursday, Mr. Rubio said that public comments on foreign elections “should be brief, focused on congratulating the winning candidate and, when appropriate, noting shared foreign policy interests.”Such messages, the agency memo added, “should avoid opining on the fairness or integrity of an electoral process, its legitimacy, or the democratic values of the country in question.” The directive applied to the department’s domestic offices and foreign posts, Mr. Rubio said.The New York Times obtained the text of the cable, which was reported earlier by The Wall Street Journal.It has long been standard practice for the U.S. government to call out foreign elections tainted by fraud, intimidation and other tactics. Doing so puts pressure on corrupt or unethical governments, encourages democratic opposition movements and bolsters America’s moral standing, diplomats say.As it had done in previous administrations, the State Department under President Joseph R. Biden Jr. criticized foreign votes frequently, including what it called a “pantomime election” in Nicaragua, “election fraud” in Belarus and “democratic backsliding” after a disputed vote in the Republic of Georgia.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