United States Politics and Government

Subterms

    More stories

    • 175 Shares159 Views

      in Elections

      Harris lidera en el promedio de encuestas en Pensilvania y empata a nivel nacional

      by

      Aunque este escenario inesperado podría reflejar una variación usual en los resultados de las encuestas, también podría señalar una ventaja cada vez menor de Trump en el Colegio Electoral.Kamala Harris lidera por cuatro puntos en nuestro nuevo sondeo de Pensilvania.Kenny Holston/The New York Times[Estamos en WhatsApp. Empieza a seguirnos ahora]Tenemos nuestras dos primeras encuestas desde el debate presidencial de la semana pasada: una a nivel nacional y otra sobre Pensilvania.Combinadas, son un pequeño enigma.En la encuesta nacional, Kamala Harris y Donald Trump están empatados entre los votantes probables, ambos con un 47 por ciento, un ligero avance para Harris desde nuestra encuesta nacional más reciente, realizada inmediatamente antes del debate.Al mismo tiempo, Harris tenía una ventaja de cuatro puntos en una encuesta de The New York Times/Philadelphia Inquirer/Siena College de Pensilvania, 50 por ciento a 46 por ciento.Antes de entrar en detalles, empecemos por el panorama general:No ha cambiado mucho tras el debate. A pesar de su buena actuación, la vicepresidenta Harris no ganó mucho terreno en comparación con nuestras encuestas más recientes a nivel nacional y en Pensilvania. La encuesta está llena de señales de que nuestros encuestados pensaron que Harris tuvo un buen debate —y que Trump uno malo— pero no ha hecho una gran diferencia, al menos por ahora y al menos en nuestro sondeo.Pensilvania, Pensilvania, Pensilvania. Es posible que Harris no haya ganado mucho, pero su campaña seguramente estará contenta con las cifras en Pensilvania. El resultado nacional, por otra parte, es bastante favorable para Trump (esa es la parte que nos desconcierta y que estamos a punto de analizar). Pero nuestras elecciones se deciden en el Colegio Electoral, y ningún estado tiene un lugar más relevante en las matemáticas electorales que Pensilvania.Ahora vayamos a nuestro enigma: ¿una clara ventaja para Harris en Pensilvania, pero un empate a nivel nacional? Esto es inesperado. Hace cuatro años, el presidente Joe Biden ganó el voto nacional por 4,5 puntos porcentuales, pero ganó Pensilvania por solo 1,2 puntos. Del mismo modo, nuestros promedios de encuestas han mostrado que Harris obtiene mejores resultados a nivel nacional que en Pensilvania. Esta encuesta es casi lo contrario.Por lo general diría que se trata de ruido estadístico, la inevitable variación en los resultados de las encuestas que es inherente al muestreo aleatorio. Y puede que lo sea, como veremos. Pero creo que es difícil suponer que se trata simplemente de ruido, por dos razones:Es lo que hemos señalado antes. Es fácil descartar cualquier resultado de una encuesta como una casualidad estadística. Pero hemos encontrado resultados similares en nuestras dos encuestas más recientes a nivel nacional y en Pensilvania.Esto se está convirtiendo en una tendencia para los encuestadores de alta calidad. Sí, el promedio de nuestras encuestas revela que Harris obtiene mejores resultados a nivel nacional que en Pensilvania, pero la historia es un poco diferente si nos centramos solo en las encuestas de mayor calidad (a las que llamamos “encuestadoras selectas” en nuestra tabla). En el último mes, muchos de estos sondeos muestran que a Harris le va relativamente mal a nivel nacional, pero le va bien en los estados disputados del norte de Estados Unidos.Nota sobre los encuestadores “selectos”: para ser considerados selectos en nuestro promedio de encuestas, los encuestadores deben cumplir dos de los tres criterios siguientes: un historial de resultados superiores a los de otros encuestadores, una metodología transparente y el uso de un método que tenga posibilidades de llegar a la mayoría o a todos los votantes potenciales. No se trata de un enfoque perfecto (omite algunas encuestas muy buenas e incluye otras que no lo son tanto), pero incluye a la mayoría de los pesos pesados del sector y elimina gran parte de lo que no funciona. More

    • 163 Shares189 Views

      in Elections

      Harris advierte de deportaciones masivas y campos de detención si Trump es elegido

      by

      La vicepresidenta Kamala Harris intenta conseguir apoyo entre los votantes latinos, ya que las encuestas muestran que los estadounidenses confían en el expresidente Donald Trump por encima de los demócratas en la frontera.La vicepresidenta Kamala Harris advirtió sobre deportaciones masivas y “campos de detención masivos” si Donald Trump regresaba al poder, y dijo en una audiencia de líderes hispanos en Washington que la agenda migratoria del expresidente era un peligro para el país.“Todos recordamos lo que hicieron para separar a las familias”, dijo Harris el miércoles en un evento del Caucus Hispano del Congreso, que forma parte de un esfuerzo para aumentar el apoyo entre los votantes latinos. “Y ahora han prometido llevar a cabo la mayor deportación, una deportación masiva, en la historia de Estados Unidos”.La multitud pasó de la jovialidad al silencio cuando la vicepresidenta les pidió que profundizaran en las propuestas de Trump, que incluyen planes para acorralar a los indocumentados a escala masiva y detenerlos en campamentos a la espera de su deportación.“Imaginen cómo se vería eso y cómo sería”, dijo Harris. “¿Cómo va a ocurrir? ¿Redadas masivas? ¿Campos de detención masivos? ¿De qué están hablando?”.Harris combinó el ataque a la agenda de Trump con promesas de priorizar la seguridad en la frontera y proporcionar un “camino ganado a la ciudadanía”. La vicepresidenta ha buscado un acto de equilibrio ya que las encuestas han demostrado que algunos votantes latinos confían en Trump más que en los demócratas en cuanto a la frontera.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 Shares169 Views

      in Elections

      After Trump Assassination Attempts, Congress Debates Secret Service Funding

      by

      Virtually everyone on Capitol Hill agrees that the Secret Service needs to do a better job. But Democrats and Republicans are at odds over whether to increase the agency’s budget.After the second assassination attempt against former President Donald J. Trump in two months, a fevered debate has broken out in Congress over whether the Secret Service needs more money.Because the dispute is unfolding on Capitol Hill and comes little more than six weeks before a presidential election, the question has, perhaps predictably, become mired in politics. And given that there are only 11 days before Congress’s deadline for extending federal spending, it is threatening to complicate already contentious negotiations aimed at heading off a government shutdown on Oct. 1.Republicans have sought to pin blame on Democrats and their anti-Trump statements for the actions of Ryan W. Routh, 58, who was arrested on Sunday after hiding in the bushes with an assault rifle at Mr. Trump’s golf club in West Palm Beach, Fla., in an apparent attempt to target the former president. They have accused the administration of providing better protection for President Biden than for Mr. Trump and plan to vote on Friday on a bill that would ensure that Mr. Trump is protected at the same level as the president — something the Secret Service says is already happening.Democrats, who routinely note that Mr. Trump has long trafficked in the kind of bellicose language that can fuel political violence, have said they are all for beefing up protections for him and fixing what is broken with the Secret Service.They have even offered to increase funding for the embattled agency, including potentially through a stopgap spending bill they are negotiating to avert a government shutdown. In doing so, Democrats are effectively daring Republicans — who are bent on slashing spending, not increasing it — to be the ones to object to paying for increased protection for Mr. Trump.“If the Secret Service is in need of more resources, we are prepared to provide it for them, possibly in the upcoming funding agreement,” Senator Chuck Schumer, Democrat of New York and the majority leader, said on the floor this week.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

    • 100 Shares129 Views

      in Elections

      Pete Buttigieg Plays Vance in Walz’s Debate Prep

      by

      Gov. Tim Walz of Minnesota is intensifying his preparations for the vice-presidential debate on Oct. 1, with Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg serving as a stand-in for his opponent, Senator JD Vance of Ohio, according to five people with direct knowledge of the preparations, who insisted on anonymity to discuss the private efforts.Mr. Buttigieg, one of the Democratic Party’s most skilled communicators and a fixture on Fox News, played a similar role for Kamala Harris in 2020, acting as Vice President Mike Pence in her mock debate sessions. Mr. Buttigieg, a former mayor of South Bend, Ind., is now trying to channel another fellow Midwesterner in Mr. Vance.Mr. Walz’s debate prep is being run by two campaign advisers, Rob Friedlander and Zayn Siddique, according to multiple people with knowledge of the process. Others who are involved include Chris Schmitter, a longtime Walz aide who has worked with the governor for nearly two decades; Liz Allen, Mr. Walz’s campaign chief of staff; and Michael Tyler, the Harris campaign’s communications director, the people said.Mr. Buttigieg has won acclaim from Democrats for his deft performances on Fox News, parrying hosts and delivering the administration’s message behind enemy lines. He had been helping Mr. Walz’s debate team via video conference, but joined the preparations in-person on Wednesday in Minneapolis. So far the sessions have been informal — no lights, stage sets or dress rehearsals — but Mr. Walz is expected to do a more intensive debate camp before the matchup in New York City.Mr. Buttigieg has clearly watched Mr. Vance closely. Asked on MSNBC in late July what he would like to debate Mr. Vance about, Mr. Buttigieg quipped, “Where do you start?”“They selected somebody who has really reminded so many Americans of why they are off-put by the turn that the Republican Party has taken in the last few years,” he said. “What I would most want to see in that debate, whoever is at the table with him, is getting into that relationship between the strange worldview and a strange set of policies.”The Washington Post earlier reported on Mr. Buttigieg’s role in the debate preparations.Mr. Walz, a Nebraska native who leans into his down-home persona on the campaign trail, has begun to set debate expectations, noting that Mr. Vance is a “Yale Law guy” whom he expects will be well-prepared.“I believe in America, I believe in the middle class and I’m making sure that I have all those facts to back that up,” Mr. Walz told Spectrum News in Wisconsin on Saturday.A representative for Mr. Vance did not immediately respond to a request for comment on the role that the Harvard-educated Mr. Buttigieg is playing, or on the debate more broadly.The officials who described Mr. Walz’s debate preparations and Mr. Buttigieg’s involvement said the transportation secretary’s assistance was coming in his personal capacity, as have so many of his appearances aiding the Democratic presidential ticket. More

    • 138 Shares119 Views

      in Elections

      Ukraine Wants Long-Range Weapons. Here’s a Look at What They Are.

      by

      Much of the public discourse about arming Ukraine has revolved around whether the United States will send “long range” weapons. But that can mean different things.There are roughly 500 miles between Kyiv and Moscow.The United States has weapons that can fly much farther than that, but it is unlikely to supply them to Ukraine for fear that an attack on the Russian capital with American weapons might spark a third world war.So within that 500-mile range the Biden administration has been pushed repeatedly to give Kyiv weapons that can hit targets as far away as possible. Discussion among Ukraine’s supporters often centers on calls for “long range” weapons — a term with no real military definition, but that has an emotional pull Ukrainian leaders have used to pressure the White House for ever more capable munitions.Over two and half years of war, “long range” has evolved in the public forum to describe a host of increasingly advanced U.S. weapons. The trend began soon after Russia’s 2022 invasion, when U.S. government officials first used the term to apply to …ArtillerySeveral 155-millimeter howitzer shells waiting to be fired in Ukraine’s Donetsk region in March.Nicole Tung for The New York TimesThe United States has sent Ukraine the longest-range artillery pieces in its arsenal: 155-millimeter howitzers, which can fire 100-pound shells at targets about 20 miles away. Each shell contains about 24 pounds of explosives.Since the beginning of the war, the United States has shipped three million M795 artillery shells to Ukraine for the weapon to fire. That model can be fitted with a guidance kit that steers the projectile to its target, though there is no evidence to suggest the Pentagon has sent those devices to Kyiv.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

    • 163 Shares129 Views

      in Elections

      From a Long Island Rally, Trump Lobs Exaggerated Attacks at New York City

      by

      On the day that he was originally set to return to his hometown and receive the sentence for his 34 felony convictions, former President Donald J. Trump found himself a few miles east, basking in the raucous adulation of a packed arena on Long Island.Standing in front of thousands at the Nassau Coliseum in Uniondale, N.Y., Mr. Trump received a local hero’s reception, as he drew an exaggerated depiction of a New York in decline, made false claims and hammered Democrats over crime, inflation and immigration.He continued to falsely maintain that Springfield, Ohio, had been over overrun by illegal immigrants, even though the Haitian community he was referring to has temporary legal status. Then, he announced he would visit both that city and Aurora, Colo., another focal point of his exaggerated claims about migrants.“I’m going to go there in the next two weeks. I’m going to Springfield, and I’m going to Aurora,” Mr. Trump said. “You may never see me again, but that’s OK. Got to do what I got to do.”As he discussed Springfield, members of the crowd began chanting, “Save the cats,” a reference to a debunked claim spread by Mr. Trump that Haitian migrants were abducting and eating pets. (Springfield’s Republican mayor said this week that a visit from Mr. Trump would burden the city’s strained resources.)Mr. Trump’s rally on Long Island was his second campaign event since the apparent assassination attempt against him on Sunday in West Palm Beach, Fla. Though he spoke with typical vigor about the incident, he later appeared jumpy at one point, as someone apparently approached the stage.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

    • 138 Shares169 Views

      in Elections

      El posible segundo atentado contra Trump genera alarma en el extranjero

      by

      Existe la preocupación generalizada de que las elecciones de noviembre no acaben bien y de que la democracia estadounidense haya llegado a un punto crítico.[Estamos en WhatsApp. Empieza a seguirnos ahora]En los nueve años transcurridos desde que Donald Trump entró en la política estadounidense, la percepción global de Estados Unidos se ha visto sacudida por la imagen de una nación fracturada e impredecible. Primero un atentado contra la vida del expresidente, y ahora un segundo posible atentado, han acentuado la preocupación internacional, suscitando temores de una agitación violenta que podría desembocar en una guerra civil.Keir Starmer, el primer ministro británico, ha dicho que está “muy preocupado” y “profundamente perturbado” por lo que, según el FBI, fue un intento de asesinar a Trump en su campo de golf de Florida, a menos de 50 días de las elecciones presidenciales y dos meses después de que una bala ensangrentó la oreja de Trump durante un mitin de campaña en Pensilvania.“La violencia no tiene cabida alguna en un proceso político”, afirmó Starmer.Sin embargo, la violencia ha tenido un lugar preponderante en esta tormentosa y tambaleante campaña política estadounidense, y no solo en los dos posibles intentos de asesinato. Ahora existe una preocupación generalizada en todo el mundo de que las elecciones de noviembre no acaben bien y de que la democracia estadounidense, que solía ser un modelo para el mundo, haya llegado a un punto crítico.En México, donde este año se celebraron las elecciones más violentas de la historia reciente del país, con 41 candidatos y aspirantes a cargos públicos asesinados, el presidente Andrés Manuel López Obrador dijo en una publicación en la plataforma social X: “Aun cuando todavía no se conoce bien lo sucedido, lamentamos la violencia producida en contra del expresidente Donald Trump. El camino es la democracia y la paz”.En un momento de guerras en Europa y el Medio Oriente y de inseguridad global generalizada mientras China y Rusia afirman la superioridad de sus modelos autócratas, la precariedad estadounidense pesa bastante.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

    • 125 Shares199 Views

      in Elections

      Secret Service Scrambled After Trump’s Short Notice on Golf Outing

      by

      Former President Donald J. Trump gave his Secret Service detail short notice that he would be golfing at his course in West Palm Beach, Fla., on Sunday, causing agents to forgo a scan of the perimeter, according to two people familiar with the events.The decision not to survey the course at Trump International Golf Club, because of a lack of time, before Mr. Trump’s outing allowed a man with a gun to sit concealed in bushes for almost 12 hours. The barrel of the gun was noticed by an agent ahead of Mr. Trump on the course. The agent shot at the man, who fled. A suspect was later captured.That swift action was praised by the acting Secret Service director, Ronald L. Rowe Jr., in remarks to reporters on Monday.But the missed opportunity to find the gunman, identified by the authorities as Ryan W. Routh, as he lurked near the golf course has raised questions about the Secret Service’s ability to protect Mr. Trump, who enjoys his freedom and being around adoring fans.It also heightens pressure on the agency to add resources to protect Mr. Trump in the final months of the presidential campaign, even as the Secret Service is straining under its workload in a time of threatened violence. But some lawmakers have questioned whether more money will bring about better protection.Just two months after a different gunman fired on Mr. Trump at an outdoor rally in Butler, Pa., grazing the former president’s ear and killing an attendee, the agency once again must examine why it was unable to more decisively forestall an event that could have led to the death of the Republican nominee for president — and a national catastrophe.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