United States Politics and Government

Subterms

    More stories

    • 138 Shares199 Views

      in Elections

      Schiff Warned of Wipeout for Democrats if Biden Remains in Race

      by

      Representative Adam B. Schiff of California told attendees at a Democratic fund-raiser that the party would lose the Senate and miss a chance to take the House if the president did not drop out.Representative Adam B. Schiff, the California Democrat who is running for Senate, warned during a private meeting with donors on Saturday that his party was likely to suffer overwhelming losses in November if President Biden remained at the top of the ticket, according to two people with direct knowledge of Mr. Schiff’s remarks at the meeting.If Mr. Biden remained, not only would he lose to former President Donald J. Trump, he could be enough of a drag on other Democratic candidates that the party would most likely lose the Senate and miss an opportunity to win control of the House, Mr. Schiff said at a fund-raiser in New York.“I think if he is our nominee, I think we lose,” Mr. Schiff said during the meeting, according to a person with access to a transcription of a recording of the event. “And we may very, very well lose the Senate and lose our chance to take back the House.”Mr. Schiff’s remarks underscore the depth of the concerns in the president’s party about the prospects for downballot Democrats if Mr. Biden remains in the race, even if most senior Democrats are still unwilling to express such dire warnings in public.The event was held in East Hampton, N.Y., shortly before Mr. Trump was shot on Saturday. Public calls from Democrats for Mr. Biden to step aside as a candidate have dropped off since the attempt on Mr. Trump’s life, providing Mr. Biden, who is insisting the he will remain in the race, an opportunity to overcome the dissent.In an effort to end the internal battle, leaders of the Democratic National Committee are moving to formally nominate Mr. Biden as the party’s candidate by the end of the month, weeks before their convention in Chicago in August.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 Shares119 Views

      in Elections

      Un tiroteo conmociona una campaña en EE. UU., ya de por sí accidentada

      by

      El atentado contra Donald J. Trump fue la última escalada de violencia política y un recordatorio de la creciente fragilidad de la democracia pacífica en Estados Unidos.[Estamos en WhatsApp. Empieza a seguirnos ahora]El intento de asesinato contra Donald Trump del sábado en su mitin en Pensilvania sumió la contienda presidencial de 2024 en un estado de conmoción e incertidumbre.La campaña del presidente Joe Biden se apresuró a retirar sus anuncios de televisión de los medios de todo el país e interrumpió todas las comunicaciones oficiales externas. No habría ningún llamado a recaudar fondos ni comunicados de prensa. Una orden interna de la campaña de Biden pedía a todos los miembros de su personal que “se abstuvieran de hacer comentarios en las redes sociales o en público”, lo mismo dictó un lineamiento interno de la campaña de Trump.Biden, quien estaba la iglesia en el momento del atentado, condenó la violencia como “enfermiza” en un breve discurso a la nación desde un departamento de policía local en Delaware, luego cambió de planes y regresó a la Casa Blanca después de la medianoche. Él y Trump hablaron el sábado a última hora, una llamada que un funcionario de la Casa Blanca describió como “buena, respetuosa y breve”.Trump emitió su propio relato gráfico del momento difícil en una publicación en sus cuentas de redes sociales mientras regresaba a Nueva Jersey antes de la Convención Nacional Republicana que, según las autoridades, continuará como estaba previsto el lunes en Milwaukee: “Oí un zumbido, disparos e inmediatamente sentí la bala desgarrándome la piel”.“¡Nunca me Rendiré!”, escribió Trump en un mensaje de texto a sus seguidores.Sus dos principales asesores, Susie Wiles y Chris LaCivita, escribieron en un mensaje público la noche del sábado que Trump no dejaría de asistir a la convención para reunirse con sus partidarios. Y en un mensaje interno al personal de la campaña de Trump, escribieron que estaban “reforzando la presencia de seguridad armada con oficiales en todo momento en el lugar” tanto en Washington como en West Palm Beach, Florida, en las oficinas de campaña.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 Shares199 Views

      in Elections

      Biden Had a Clear Message: Trump Was a Threat. Then the Shooting Happened.

      by

      Former President Donald J. Trump has gone from being an instigator of political violence to a victim of it. The assassination attempt raised questions about how far language should go in a heated campaign.For months, the message from the White House and Wilmington was as stark as it was simple: This year’s election amounts to an existential choice between a defender of democracy and a destroyer of democracy. Nothing less than the future of America is at stake.And then the bullets started flying.The assassination attempt over the weekend has complicated President Biden’s argument now that former President Donald J. Trump has gone from being a longtime instigator of political violence to a victim of it. Republicans, including Mr. Trump’s newly anointed running mate, Senator J.D. Vance of Ohio, instantly blamed Mr. Biden, citing his sharp rhetoric.No one in Mr. Biden’s camp thinks that is a good-faith argument, especially from allies of a former president who sent the mob that marauded the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, and did nothing to stop its assault, and has now vowed to pardon rioters convicted of violent crimes. But the images of Mr. Trump with blood streaked across his face after being grazed by a would-be assassin’s bullet raise the question of how far language should go in a heated campaign.Mr. Biden, who has long preached unity and civility, conceded on Monday that it was “a mistake” to tell supporters a week ago that he wanted to “put Trump in a bull’s-eye,” an expression that was certainly metaphorical but opened the president to criticism after his opponent found himself in literal cross hairs. At the same time, Mr. Biden and his team have made clear that they will not back off efforts to demonstrate that Mr. Trump is a budding dictator who is dangerous to the country.“How do you talk about the threat to democracy, which is real, when a president says things like he says?” Mr. Biden asked Lester Holt of NBC News on Monday during his first interview since the assassination attempt. “Do you just not say anything because it may incite somebody? Look, I’m not engaged in that rhetoric. Now, my opponent is engaged in that rhetoric.”Mr. Biden responded to the shooting in Butler, Pa., on Saturday by calling Mr. Trump to express relief that he was not more seriously wounded and urging Americans to “lower the temperature” this campaign season. His campaign suspended television ads and its regular barrage of attack emails.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 Shares149 Views

      in Elections

      Republicans Place Shooting in Trump’s Narrative of Persecution

      by

      For Donald J. Trump’s most ardent supporters, the assassination attempt on Saturday was the climax and confirmation of a story that Mr. Trump has been telling for years.It is the story of a fearless leader surrounded by shadowy forces and intrigue, of grand conspiracies to thwart the will of the people who elected him. A narrative in which Mr. Trump, even before a gunman tried to take his life, was already a martyr.“They’re not coming after me,” he declared at the first rally of his 2024 campaign, last year in Waco, Texas. “They’re coming after you — and I’m just standing in their way.”In the hours after the shooting — before the gunman’s name, much less a motive, was known — many Republican politicians and Trump supporters blamed Democrats and the news media. They pointed to portrayals of Mr. Trump as an authoritarian and anti-democratic force in politics, which they argued created a climate that made an attempt on his life inevitable.“Dems and their friends in the media knew exactly what they were doing” in comparing Mr. Trump to Hitler, Donald Trump Jr. wrote on Sunday in one of several accusatory posts on X about his father’s shooting.Others pointed to President Biden’s remarks on a call with donors last week in which he said, “It’s time to put Trump in a bull’s-eye.” Citing the speech, Mike Collins, a Republican congressman from Georgia, wrote on X: “Joe Biden sent the orders.”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 Shares189 Views

      in Elections

      Gunman Appears to Have Acted Alone, but Motives Remain Unclear

      by

      The 20-year-old gunman who tried to assassinate former President Donald J. Trump at a rally in Pennsylvania appears to have acted alone, F.B.I. officials said on Sunday, but investigators remain unsure of his motives and political beliefs and have not yet been able to determine what evidence might be on his cellphone.Agents found what officials described as a “rudimentary” explosive device in the gunman’s vehicle, and possible explosives were also found at his residence, according to a person with knowledge of the investigation.F.B.I. officials confirmed that the gunman’s father had legally purchased the AR-15-type semiautomatic rifle used in the shooting. But they said it was not clear whether the father gave his son the weapon or whether he took it without permission.Kevin Rojek, the F.B.I. special agent in charge in Pittsburgh, said the family was cooperating with the investigation.Dozens of federal investigators scrambled to determine why the gunman, Thomas Matthew Crooks of Bethel Park, Pa., climbed atop a nearby building and squeezed off a volley of shots on Saturday evening that injured Mr. Trump, killed a man attending the rally with his family and left two other people at the site critically injured before he was killed by a Secret Service sniper.F.B.I. officials said Mr. Crooks did not have a history of mental illness or criminal activity.He does not appear to have left behind any written statement that could easily explain his motivations or provide clues to any external connections or influences, according to a senior law enforcement official.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 Shares99 Views

      in Elections

      The Reason People Aren’t Telling Joe Biden the Truth

      by

      They entered with courage and exited as cowards. In the past two weeks, several leaders have told me they arrived at meetings with President Biden planning to have serious discussions about whether he should withdraw from the 2024 election. They all chickened out.I don’t know whether Mr. Biden should drop out of the race. It’s impossible to predict the outcome with certainty. My concern is about the decision process. There’s a gap between what people say behind the president’s back and what they say to his face. Instead of dissent and debate, they’re falling victim to groupthink.According to the original theory, groupthink happens when people become so cohesive and close-knit that they put harmony above honesty. Extensive evidence has debunked that idea. The root causes of silence are not social solidarity but fear and futility. People bite their tongues when they doubt that it’s safe and worthwhile to speak up. Leaders who want to make informed decisions need to make it clear they value candid input.Mr. Biden has done the opposite, declaring first that only the Lord almighty could change his mind and then saying that he’ll drop out only if polls say there’s no way for him to win. That sends a strong message: If you’re not an immortal being or a time traveler from the future, it’s pointless to share any concerns about the viability of his candidacy.The president is in a tough spot. Even conceding privately that he might consider stepping aside could crush the confidence of his advisers and risk a leak to the press. But a little humility could go a long way: “I believe I’m the best qualified to govern, but I don’t know for sure. I think I can win, but I might be wrong.” Along with inviting dissent, these acts of receptiveness might make Mr. Biden more persuasive. People put more faith in a balanced argument and a leader who wants to learn.Showing openness can raise people’s confidence, but it’s not always enough to quell their fear. In our research, Constantinos Coutifaris and I found that it helps for leaders to criticize themselves out loud. That way, instead of just claiming that they want the truth, they can show that they can handle the truth. If he hasn’t already, Mr. Biden could do that by gathering his family and advisers to watch a video of the debate with him and then kicking off a candid discussion by talking about what he thought he did wrong. Reviewing the game tape together would demonstrate that he’s willing to take an honest look in the mirror.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

    • 188 Shares179 Views

      in Elections

      The Sunday Read: ‘A Republican Election Clerk vs. Trump Die-Hards in a World of Lies’

      by

      Tally Abecassis and Listen and follow The DailyApple Podcasts | Spotify | Amazon Music | YouTubeCindy Elgan glanced into the lobby of her office and saw a sheriff’s deputy waiting at the front counter. “Let’s start a video recording, just in case this goes sideways,” Elgan, 65, told one of her employees in the Esmeralda County clerk’s office. She had come to expect skepticism, conspiracy theories and even threats related to her job as an election administrator. She grabbed her annotated booklet of Nevada state laws, said a prayer for patience and walked into the lobby to confront the latest challenge to America’s electoral process.The deputy was standing alongside a woman that Elgan recognized as Mary Jane Zakas, 77, a longtime elementary schoolteacher and a leader in the local Republican Party. She often asked for a sheriff’s deputy to accompany her to the election’s office, in case her meetings became contentious.“I hope you’re having a blessed morning,” Zakas said. “Unfortunately, a lot of people are still very concerned about the security of their votes. They’ve lost all trust in the system.”After the 2020 election, former President Donald J. Trump’s denials and accusations of voter fraud spread outward from the White House to even the country’s most remote places, like Esmeralda County. Elgan knew most of the 620 voters in the town. Still, they accused her of being paid off and skimming votes away from Trump. And even though their allegations came with no evidence, they wanted her recalled from office before the next presidential election in November.There are a lot of ways to listen to “The Daily.” Here’s how.We want to hear from you. Tune in, and tell us what you think. Email us at thedaily@nytimes.com. Follow Michael Barbaro on X: @mikiebarb. And if you’re interested in advertising with The Daily, write to us at thedaily-ads@nytimes.com.Additional production for The Sunday Read was contributed by Isabella Anderson, Anna Diamond, Sarah Diamond, Elena Hecht, Emma Kehlbeck, Tanya Pérez, Frannie Carr Toth and Krish Seenivasan. More

    • 88 Shares189 Views

      in Elections

      America’s Gerontocracy Problem Goes Beyond the President

      by

      Whether or not Joe Biden persists in his run for president, America’s gerontocratic crisis will keep on worsening. But high-profile symptoms like Mr. Biden’s difficulties provide an opportunity to confront the issue — a social form of sclerosis that will persist unless and until more power is transferred from the wrinkled to the rest.Gerontocracy transcends government as a full-scale social phenomenon, in which older people accumulate power of different kinds, and then retain it.This form of power is both old and new. The term “gerontocracy” was popularized a century ago by the Scottish anthropologist J.G. Frazer to refer to a very early form of government, in which power reposed in councils of elders. Since premodern societies valued the past over the future, and the ancestral over the innovative, it was only natural to allocate authority to those with cumulative experience and nearer the realm of the honored dead.When the Constitution imposed an age minimum of 30 (and no maximum) on the Senate, that restriction alone excluded roughly three-quarters of the white population from serving. This set up the distant possibility of our present, in which Mr. Biden could become one of the youngest senators ever when he took his seat at age 30, while Dianne Feinstein (age 90), Robert Byrd (92) and Strom Thurmond (100) all either died in office or just months after retirement.The Supreme Court is also an outpost of elder rule. The Constitution gives federal judges life tenure, so it is entirely up to them when they finally depart, alive or dead. And it is not surprising when they die in the midst of opining on the law: Ruth Bader Ginsburg at 87, William Rehnquist at 80 and Antonin Scalia at 79. At least five federal judges have passed 100 years of age while on the bench.The Supreme Court was quasi-gerontocratic from the start, like the Senate, only more so. The popular and professional ideology of the judicial role emphasizes even more the association of age with wisdom. And the Supreme Court’s oracular purposes, priestly trappings and mystical rituals make it resemble, more than any other American political institution, gerontocratic clubs like the Roman Catholic Church’s College of Cardinals.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