Voting and Voters

Subterms

    More stories

    • 88 Shares129 Views

      in Elections

      Can Gov. Gavin Newsom Keep His Job?

      by

      The vote is expected to come down to whether Democrats can mobilize enough of the state’s enormous base to counteract Republican enthusiasm for Gavin Newsom’s ouster.President Biden sent an urgent message last week to the most populous state in the nation: Keep Gov. Gavin Newsom “on the job.” On the airwaves, Senator Elizabeth Warren, the prominent progressive from Massachusetts, has been repeatedly warning that “Trump Republicans” are “coming to grab power in California.”Text messages — a half-million a day — are spreading the word on cellphones. Canvassers are making their case at suburban front doors. As some 22 million ballots land in the mailboxes of active registered voters this week in anticipation of the Sept. 14 recall election, Mr. Newsom — a Democrat elected in a 2018 landslide — has been pulling out all the stops just to hold on to his post.The vote is expected to come down to whether Democrats can mobilize enough of the state’s enormous base to counteract Republican enthusiasm for Mr. Newsom’s ouster. Recent polls of likely voters show a dead heat, despite math that suggests the governor should ultimately prevail.Less than a quarter of the electorate is Republican. Mr. Newsom has raised more campaign cash than all four dozen or so of his challengers put together. And the governor’s most serious rival is the talk radio host Larry Elder, who has called global warming “a crock,” says the minimum wage should be “zero-point-zero-zero,” and gave Stephen Miller, the hard-line Trump administration immigration adviser, his first big public platform.But the coronavirus pandemic has not been particularly governor-friendly. Polls this month show that approval for Gov. Ron DeSantis of Florida is sagging as the state writhes under spiking deaths and hospitalizations. And Mr. Newsom’s supporters are encountering a striking degree of ambivalence and distraction.“I think he has done as well in the job as any governor could have, given the last year of the pandemic, but I’m not a fan,” Anamaria Young, 53, said recently in El Dorado Hills, east of Sacramento. Removing the governor more than a year before the end of his first term feels undemocratic, Ms. Young, a Democrat, said, but she also dislikes his lack of progress on homelessness and his deference to teachers’ unions.“When my ballot comes,” she said, “I really don’t know how — or if — I am going to vote.”Only one other attempt to recall a California governor has come to a vote, when Arnold Schwarzenegger replaced Gray Davis in 2003.Mike Blake/ReutersInitiated by Republicans who took issue with Mr. Newsom on the death penalty and immigration, the once long-shot effort to recall the governor gained improbable traction as the coronavirus persisted. First, pandemic-related shutdowns prompted a judge to extend the measure’s signature-gathering deadline, and then word leaked that the governor had dined unmasked with lobbyists at an exclusive restaurant after imploring Californians to cover their faces and stay home.If a majority of voters decide to recall Mr. Newsom, the new governor will be whoever among his 46 challengers gets the most votes, even if no rival gets a majority.Critics of the state’s recall rules have long worried that 49 percent of the electorate could vote to keep an incumbent, only for a tiny plurality of voters to choose a replacement. On Friday, a lawsuit was filed in federal court challenging the recall’s constitutionality, based on that argument. Mr. Newsom has been urging Democrats to vote no on the recall and not even bother to answer the second question, which asks who should replace him. Among likely voters, recent polls show support for Mr. Elder, the current front-runner, at around 20 percent..css-1xzcza9{list-style-type:disc;padding-inline-start:1em;}.css-3btd0c{font-family:nyt-franklin,helvetica,arial,sans-serif;font-size:1rem;line-height:1.375rem;color:#333;margin-bottom:0.78125rem;}@media (min-width:740px){.css-3btd0c{font-size:1.0625rem;line-height:1.5rem;margin-bottom:0.9375rem;}}.css-3btd0c strong{font-weight:600;}.css-3btd0c em{font-style:italic;}.css-w739ur{margin:0 auto 5px;font-family:nyt-franklin,helvetica,arial,sans-serif;font-weight:700;font-size:1.125rem;line-height:1.3125rem;color:#121212;}#NYT_BELOW_MAIN_CONTENT_REGION .css-w739ur{font-family:nyt-cheltenham,georgia,’times new roman’,times,serif;font-weight:700;font-size:1.375rem;line-height:1.625rem;}@media (min-width:740px){#NYT_BELOW_MAIN_CONTENT_REGION .css-w739ur{font-size:1.6875rem;line-height:1.875rem;}}@media (min-width:740px){.css-w739ur{font-size:1.25rem;line-height:1.4375rem;}}.css-9s9ecg{margin-bottom:15px;}.css-uf1ume{display:-webkit-box;display:-webkit-flex;display:-ms-flexbox;display:flex;-webkit-box-pack:justify;-webkit-justify-content:space-between;-ms-flex-pack:justify;justify-content:space-between;}.css-wxi1cx{display:-webkit-box;display:-webkit-flex;display:-ms-flexbox;display:flex;-webkit-flex-direction:column;-ms-flex-direction:column;flex-direction:column;-webkit-align-self:flex-end;-ms-flex-item-align:end;align-self:flex-end;}.css-12vbvwq{background-color:white;border:1px solid #e2e2e2;width:calc(100% – 40px);max-width:600px;margin:1.5rem auto 1.9rem;padding:15px;box-sizing:border-box;}@media (min-width:740px){.css-12vbvwq{padding:20px;width:100%;}}.css-12vbvwq:focus{outline:1px solid #e2e2e2;}#NYT_BELOW_MAIN_CONTENT_REGION .css-12vbvwq{border:none;padding:10px 0 0;border-top:2px solid #121212;}.css-12vbvwq[data-truncated] .css-rdoyk0{-webkit-transform:rotate(0deg);-ms-transform:rotate(0deg);transform:rotate(0deg);}.css-12vbvwq[data-truncated] .css-eb027h{max-height:300px;overflow:hidden;-webkit-transition:none;transition:none;}.css-12vbvwq[data-truncated] .css-5gimkt:after{content:’See more’;}.css-12vbvwq[data-truncated] .css-6mllg9{opacity:1;}.css-qjk116{margin:0 auto;overflow:hidden;}.css-qjk116 strong{font-weight:700;}.css-qjk116 em{font-style:italic;}.css-qjk116 a{color:#326891;-webkit-text-decoration:underline;text-decoration:underline;text-underline-offset:1px;-webkit-text-decoration-thickness:1px;text-decoration-thickness:1px;-webkit-text-decoration-color:#326891;text-decoration-color:#326891;}.css-qjk116 a:visited{color:#326891;-webkit-text-decoration-color:#326891;text-decoration-color:#326891;}.css-qjk116 a:hover{-webkit-text-decoration:none;text-decoration:none;}“No intellectually honest analysis” would predict the governor’s defeat, said Paul Mitchell, vice president of the bipartisan data firm Political Data Inc. in Sacramento. But state lawmakers in February extended pandemic-related accommodations to voters through the year, dealing a wild card.The rules allow voting by mail at a scale comparable only to the 2020 presidential election — which is seemingly a Democratic advantage, although off-year participation is harder to forecast. Only one other attempt to recall a California governor has come to a vote, and 18 years have passed since the state replaced Gray Davis with Arnold Schwarzenegger, Mr. Mitchell noted.“The swing voters in this campaign are not the usual ones choosing which party to vote for,” agreed Nathan Click, a former spokesman for the governor who is now campaigning to defend him. “They’re Democrats who are choosing whether to vote.”Mr. Elder, 69, a Black “small-l libertarian” lawyer who rose to national stature from Los Angeles, where he has been a talk radio fixture for decades, said in an interview that he was not “some wild-eyed radical,” and that he entered the race at the behest of “normal people” such as his barber and dry cleaner as well as like-minded friends such as Dennis Prager, his right-wing broadcast mentor. His priorities — public school choice, high housing costs and rising crime — transcend party labels, he said.Larry Elder, who has been a talk radio fixture in Los Angeles for decades, is the leading Republican candidate in the recall election.Marcio Jose Sanchez/Associated PressHe said his opposition to abortion was irrelevant in a state that supports abortion rights as much as California, and his view that a minimum wage deters job creation is mainstream economics. Remarks such as the one he made in 2008 on “Larry King Live” discounting global warming were merely to criticize “alarmism,” he said, acknowledging that climate change is happening but adding, falsely, that “nobody really knows to what degree” it is caused by humans.He said he has voted for every Republican presidential candidate since the 1970s, not just Donald J. Trump.“Why bring up Stephen Miller? Why bring up abortion? Why bring up minimum wage?” Mr. Elder said. “Because Gavin Newsom cannot defend his record.”Polls indicate that majorities of Californians approve of Mr. Newsom’s policies, but when surveys are narrowed to the most likely voters, his margin thins.A statewide poll in mid-July by the Institute of Governmental Studies at the University of California, Berkeley, found that likely voters were almost evenly split over whether to oust the governor, with 47 percent saying they would vote to recall him and 50 percent saying they would retain him, an edge that just barely exceeded the poll’s margin of error. Subsequent polls have affirmed those results.So Mr. Newsom has spent big to turn out his party’s 46 percent share of the voters. His recall defense campaign received some $46 million in contributions through July, far more than Mr. Elder ($4.5 million); Kevin Faulconer, the former mayor of San Diego ($2.1 million); John Cox, the businessman campaigning with a bear ($9.4 million, mostly self-funded); the reality television figure and former Olympian Caitlyn Jenner ($750,000); or any other candidate.Canvassers for an immigrant advocacy group pitched Mr. Newsom to voters in Palmdale, Calif., last month.Rozette Rago for The New York TimesThe mere reminder that ballots are heading for mailboxes should turn many tuned-out Democrats into likely voters, Mr. Click said, and teams of supporters have been texting some 500,000 Democrats daily. Representative Barbara Lee, co-founder and the co-chair of the group Women Against the Recall, said the national Democratic Party is looking to such grass-roots efforts as a potential model for future campaigns.But Sonja Diaz, the director of the Latino Policy and Politics Initiative at the University of California, Los Angeles, said Democrats seemed to be playing catch-up as the Delta variant preoccupied voters.“People have been procrastinating,” she said, comparing the governor’s team to overconfident students failing to study for a final. “Delta has made it clear you’re not prepared for the exam.”Northeast of Los Angeles, in Palmdale, canvassers for an immigrant advocacy group pitched the governor to voters last week.Ashley Reyes, 27, a registered Democrat who was watching her toddler and his cousins play in her gated driveway, said she did not realize the recall had qualified for the ballot. Her parents and in-laws were immigrants, she said, adding that she would vote to keep the governor.Ashley Reyes, a registered Democrat, said she would vote to keep the governor.Rozette Rago for The New York TimesPeering into 101-degree heat through his metal screen door, Edgar Robleto, 62, a Republican, replied “I want him gone” when the canvassers mentioned Mr. Newsom. The state G.O.P., which represents 24 candidates, voted last weekend against endorsing one contender, lest any Republican opt not to vote.Experts predict a slugfest. “Negative partisanship is the biggest driver of political decision-making right now,” said Mike Madrid, a longtime Republican adviser.David Townsend, a Democratic consultant, agreed: “This is going to be totally tribal.”“This is not going to be about Newsom,” he said. “It’s going to be about whether Democrats want Trump to have a governor in California.” More

    • 188 Shares189 Views

      in Elections

      Bolsonaro ataca el sistema de votación; hay inquietud de que intente seguir en el poder

      by

      Los cuestionamientos del presidente de Brasil a las máquinas de votos de su país han generado comparaciones a la complicada elección de 2020 en Estados Unidos.RÍO DE JANEIRO — Ante la posibilidad de una derrota aplastante en las urnas el próximo año, el presidente de Brasil, Jair Bolsonaro, está movilizando a sus seguidores para una batalla existencial contra las máquinas de votación.Acosado por el devastador número de víctimas del coronavirus, una economía tambaleante y un rival en ascenso, el presidente ha lanzado un ataque a todo pulmón contra el sistema de votación electrónica en el que Brasil ha confiado durante 25 años. A menos que los electores consigan registrar su elección en boletas impresas, algo que el sistema actual no permite, Bolsonaro ha advertido que las elecciones de 2022 podrían suspenderse.“Una elección fuera de esos parámetros no es una elección”, dijo Bolsonaro a sus partidarios durante un mitin reciente en la ciudad sureña de Florianópolis, en el que convocó a su base de seguidores a prepararse para “luchar con todas las armas”.La posibilidad de un enfrentamiento desestabilizador el año próximo surgió el martes, cuando el gobierno de Bolsonaro organizó un desfile militar en el que tanques blindados circularon frente al Congreso horas antes de que los legisladores tuvieran que debatir un proyecto de ley que requeriría que las máquinas de votación electrónica impriman boletas de papel.El martes a última hora, la Cámara de Diputados de Brasil votó en contra de la propuesta.Sin embargo, la campaña para volver a un sistema de boletas de papel, una vieja obsesión de Bolsonaro, ha alarmado a los líderes del poder judicial, a los legisladores de la oposición y a los politólogos, que ven en sus estrategias los ingredientes de una perpetuación en el poder en la nación más grande de América Latina. Funcionarios electorales y expertos independientes dicen que el sistema de votación electrónica de Brasil, adoptado en 1996, tiene fuertes salvaguardas y un historial impecable.“Enturbiar el debate público con desinformación, mentiras, odio y teorías conspirativas es una conducta antidemocrática”, afirmó en un discurso reciente Luís Roberto Barroso, juez del Supremo Tribunal Federal (STF, por su sigla en portugués) y jefe del tribunal electoral de Brasil.Vehículos militares desfilaron cerca de afiches electorales a favor de Bolsonaro el martesVictor Moriyama para The New York TimesAludiendo al retroceso democrático en Turquía, Hungría, Nicaragua y Venezuela, Barroso dijo que se ha vuelto preocupantemente común que los líderes que llegan al poder a través de las urnas “desmantelen, ladrillo por ladrillo, los pilares de la democracia”.Los críticos temen que, al igual que el expresidente estadounidense Donald Trump convenció a muchos partidarios de que le habían robado la victoria en 2020, Bolsonaro esté sentando las bases para disputar una derrota electoral en octubre de 2022.Fernando Luiz Abrucio, politólogo de la Fundación Getúlio Vargas, dijo que ese escenario podría llevar a un caos mucho mayor en Brasil (donde la democracia apenas se restauró a fines de la década de 1980) que en Estados Unidos.“Si Bolsonaro pierde las elecciones, puede movilizar al ejército, la policía y las milicias”, dijo Abrucio. “El grado de violencia podría ser mucho mayor que el episodio del Capitolio de Estados Unidos”.La exhibición militar del martes desencadenó una serie de declaraciones de condena y memes.Vehículos militares desfilaron por el Congreso el martes.Victor Moriyama para The New York Times“Es inaceptable que las fuerzas armadas hayan permitido que su imagen sea utilizada de esta manera, para plantear la posibilidad del uso de la fuerza en apoyo a una medida antidemocrática golpista defendida por el presidente”, dijeron nueve partidos de la oposición en un comunicado.Bolsonaro comenzó a despotricar contra el sistema de votación hace varios años, cuando era un diputado marginal y ultraconservador con poco poder y visibilidad en la capital.En 2015, propuso una enmienda constitucional que exigía que las máquinas de votación electrónica imprimieran un registro de cada voto, el cual se depositaría en una urna. Bolsonaro argumentó entonces que la redundancia reduciría la “posibilidad de fraude a cero”.El Congreso aprobó la medida, pero el STF determinó que violaba la privacidad y la declaró inconstitucional, por lo que el sistema de votación permaneció sin cambios.El asunto desapareció del radar político hasta que Bolsonaro emergió como el candidato presidencial favorito tras la primera ronda de votación en las elecciones de octubre de 2018. En lugar de celebrar su triunfo, Bolsonaro sorprendió a la clase política al afirmar que le habían robado una victoria absoluta, lo que habría requerido ganar más del 50 por ciento de los votos.Incluso después de haber ganado las elecciones en 2018 con un margen de 10 puntos porcentuales, Bolsonaro siguió afirmando, sin presentar pruebas, que el sistema estaba amañado. Su intento para desacreditar la integridad del sistema electoral se ha vuelto más ruidosa y audaz en las últimas semanas, debido a que Bolsonaro ha caído en las encuestas en medio de la creciente exasperación por el manejo gubernamental de la pandemia de coronavirus.Una encuesta realizada a principios de agosto por la firma Poder Data muestra que uno de cada cinco votantes que apoyó a Bolsonaro en 2018 votaría ahora por su principal rival, el expresidente Luis Inácio Lula da Silva. En un enfrentamiento entre dos candidatos, Da Silva superaría al actual mandatario con un 52 por ciento de los votos contra un 32 por ciento para Bolsonaro, según el sondeo.Los sondeos indican que el expresidente Lula da Silva triunfaría en una contienda contra BolsonaroMiguel Schincariol/Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesEl martes Da Silva acusó al presidente de utilizar el debate en torno al voto impreso para desviar la atención de su desempeño en materia de desempleo y pobreza, dos indicadores que han crecido durante la pandemia.“Bolsonaro debe prepararse para enfrentar este hecho: va a perder la elección”, dijo en un comunicado el expresidente Da Silva, presentando la posibilidad de que el titular del ejecutivo se rehúse a participar en las ceremonias de transferencia de mando.Los magistrados del STF se alarmaron ante los ataques de Bolsonaro contra el sistema de votación, que ha expuesto en largas entrevistas con periodistas conservadores y en videos que el presidente difunde en las redes sociales. A principios de este mes, el tribunal abrió investigaciones en torno a las afirmaciones del presidente sobre el fraude en las máquinas de votación.Filipe Barros, un legislador que apoya a Bolsonaro, dijo en una entrevista que las máquinas electrónicas podrían ser manipuladas y que las boletas de papel crearían un mecanismo para certificar de manera independiente el resultado registrado por las máquinas.“Es un riesgo para la democracia”, aseveró.Los expertos afirman que las máquinas de votación en Brasil, donde el voto es obligatorio, cuentan con medidas de seguridad sólidas. No están conectadas a internet, por lo que es prácticamente imposible hackearlas. La identidad de los votantes se verifica mediante un escáner biométrico que escanea la huella dactilar de la persona.Las máquinas de votación de Brasil, que son muy segurasEraldo Peres/Associated PressEl mes pasado, ocho ex procuradores generales emitieron un comunicado en el que calificaban de inconstitucionales los llamados para crear un sistema de sufragio en papel y argumentaban que el paso adicional ponía en riesgo el derecho al voto secreto. En Brasil, es la oficina del procurador general el que está a cargo de investigar los crímenes de índole electoral.Los expertos dicen que antes de que se adoptara el sistema actual, era común que los personeros políticos llevaran a los votantes a las urnas para verificar cómo habían marcado las boletas.“En ningún momento se ha cuestionado el sistema de votación actual, ni ha habido evidencia de que se haya manipulado alguna vez”, dijo Raquel Dodge, una de las signatarias de la carta. “El sistema electoral de Brasil está muy avanzado y creo que necesitamos que esto sea claro y transparente para los votantes brasileños y para el mundo”.El gobierno del presidente Joe Biden también se mostró a favor del sistema actual y Jake Sullivan, asesor de seguridad nacional de Biden, planteó el tema a Bolsonaro durante una reciente visita a Brasilia.Los funcionarios estadounidenses dijeron tener “una gran confianza en la capacidad de las instituciones brasileñas para llevar a cabo unas elecciones libres y justas con las debidas salvaguardas contra el fraude”, declaró el lunes a la prensa Juan González, director principal del Consejo Nacional de Seguridad de Estados Unidos para el Hemisferio Occidental. “Subrayamos la importancia de no minar la confianza en ese proceso”.Ernesto Londoño es el jefe de la corresponsalía de Brasil, con sede en Río de Janeiro. Antes fue escritor parte del Comité Editorial y, antes de unirse a The New York Times, era reportero en The Washington Post. @londonoe | Facebook More

    • 75 Shares199 Views

      in Elections

      California's Impending Recall Election Is Unconstitutional

      by

      The most basic principles of democracy are that the candidate who gets the most votes is elected and that every voter gets an equal say in an election’s outcome. The California system for voting in a recall election violates these principles and should be declared unconstitutional.Unless that happens, on Sept. 14, voters will be asked to cast a ballot on two questions: Should Gov. Gavin Newsom be recalled and removed from office? If so, which of the candidates on the ballot should replace him?The first question is decided by a majority vote. If a majority favors recalling Mr. Newsom, he is removed from office. But the latter question is decided by a plurality, and whichever candidate gets the most votes, even if it is much less than a majority, becomes the next governor. Critically, Mr. Newsom is not on the ballot for the second question.By conducting the recall election in this way, Mr. Newsom can receive far more votes than any other candidate but still be removed from office. Many focus on how unfair this structure is to the governor, but consider instead how unfair it is to the voters who support him.Imagine that 10 million people vote in the recall election and 5,000,001 vote to remove Mr. Newsom, while 4,999,999 vote to keep him in office. He will then be removed and the new governor will be whichever candidate gets the most votes on the second question. In a recent poll, the talk show host Larry Elder was leading with 18 percent among the nearly 50 candidates on the ballot. With 10 million people voting, Mr. Elder would receive the votes of 1.8 million people. Mr. Newsom would have the support of almost three times as many voters, but Mr. Elder would become the governor.That scenario is not a wild hypothetical. Based on virtually every opinion poll, Mr. Newsom seems likely to have more votes to keep him in office than any other candidate will receive to replace him. But he may well lose the first question on the recall, effectively disenfranchising his supporters on the second question.This is not just nonsensical and undemocratic. It is unconstitutional. It violates a core constitutional principle that has been followed for over 60 years: Every voter should have an equal ability to influence the outcome of the election.The Supreme Court articulated this principle in two 1964 cases, Wesberry v. Sanders and Reynolds v. Sims. At the time, in many states, there were great disparities in the size of electoral districts. One district for a state legislative or a congressional seat might have 50,000 people and another 250,000. Those in the latter district obviously had less influence in choosing their representative.In Wesberry, the court held that congressional districts of widely varying size are unconstitutional because they are akin to giving one citizen more votes than another, denying citizens equal protection as a result. The court extended that reasoning later that year to state legislatures in Reynolds. Today the one-person one-vote principle requires roughly equal-size districts for every legislative body — the House of Representatives, state legislatures, City Councils, school boards — except for the United States Senate, where the Constitution mandates two senators per state.After Chief Justice Earl Warren retired in 1968, he remarked that of all the cases decided during his time on the court, the one-person one-vote rulings were the most important because they protected such a fundamental aspect of the democratic process.The California recall election, as structured, violates that fundamental principle. If Mr. Newsom is favored by a plurality of the voters, but someone else is elected, then his voters are denied equal protection. Their votes have less influence in determining the outcome of the election.This should not be a close constitutional question. It is true that federal courts generally are reluctant to get involved in elections. But the Supreme Court has been emphatic that it is the role of the judiciary to protect the democratic process and the principle of one-person one-vote.This issue was not raised in 2003 before the last recall, when Gray Davis was removed from office after receiving support from 44.6 percent of the voters. But his successor, Arnold Schwarzenegger, was elected to replace him with 48.5 percent of the vote. So Mr. Schwarzenegger was properly elected.This time, we hope that a state or federal lawsuit will be brought challenging the recall election. The court could declare the recall election procedure unconstitutional and leave it to California to devise a constitutional alternative. Or it could simply add Mr. Newsom’s name on the ballot to the list of those running to replace him. That simple change would treat his supporters equally to others and ensure that if he gets more votes than any other candidate, he will stay in office.A court might not want to get involved until after the election, hoping that as in the last recall election, Mr. Newsom will not end up being replaced by a less popular candidate. But that would be unwise. Undoing an unconstitutional election after the fact would be considerably messier than fixing the process beforehand.The stakes for California are enormous, not only for who guides us through our current crises — from the pandemic to drought, wildfires and homelessness — but also for how we choose future governors. The Constitution simply does not permit replacing a governor with a less popular candidate.Erwin Chemerinsky is the dean of the School of Law at the University of California, Berkeley, and the author of the forthcoming book “Presumed Guilty: How the Supreme Court Empowered the Police and Subverted Civil Rights.” Aaron S. Edlin is a professor of law and of economics at Berkeley.The 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. More

    • 88 Shares179 Views

      in Elections

      Brazil's President Seeks to Discredit Electronic Voting

      by

      President Jair Bolsonaro’s attacks on Brazil’s voting system as his standing in the polls slips is drawing comparisons to the messy 2020 election in the United States.RIO DE JANEIRO — Facing the prospect of a crushing defeat at the polls next year, President Jair Bolsonaro of Brazil is rousing supporters for an existential battle — against voting machines.Beleaguered by the devastating toll of the coronavirus, a sputtering economy and a surging rival, the president has launched a full-throated attack on the electronic voting system Brazil has relied on for 25 years. Unless voters get to record their choice on paper ballots, which the current system doesn’t allow, Mr. Bolsonaro has warned that the 2022 election could be suspended.“An election outside those parameters is not an election,” Mr. Bolsonaro told supporters during a recent rally in the southern state of Florianópolis, calling on his base to prepare to “fight with all the weapons.”The prospect of a destabilizing showdown next year loomed on Tuesday as Mr. Bolsonaro’s government organized a military parade in which armored tanks rumbled past Congress just hours before legislators were scheduled to debate a bill that would require electronic voting machines to print paper ballots.The lower house of Congress voted late Tuesday to reject the proposal.But the campaign for a return to a paper ballot system — a longtime obsession of Mr. Bolsonaro’s — has alarmed leaders in the judiciary, opposition lawmakers and political scientists, who see in his playbook the makings of a power grab in Latin America’s largest nation. Election officials and independent experts say Brazil’s electronic voting system, which was adopted in 1996, has strong safeguards and a stellar track record.“To defile the public debate with disinformation, lies, hatred and conspiracy theories is undemocratic conduct,” Luís Roberto Barroso, a Supreme Court justice and the head of Brazil’s electoral tribunal said in a recent speech.Military vehicles passed by election posters for Mr. Bolsonaro on Tuesday.Victor Moriyama for The New York TimesCiting democratic backsliding in Turkey, Hungary, Nicaragua and Venezuela, Justice Barroso said it has become alarmingly common for leaders who come to power through the ballot box to “deconstruct, brick by brick, the pillars of democracy.”Critics fear that much like President Donald J. Trump convinced many supporters that he was robbed of a victory in 2020, Mr. Bolsonaro is laying the groundwork to dispute an electoral loss in October 2022.Fernando Luiz Abrucio, a political scientist at the Getúlio Vargas Foundation, said that such a scenario could lead to far more mayhem in Brazil, where democracy was restored only in the late 1980s, than it did in the United States.“If he loses the election, he can mobilize the military forces, the police, the militias,” Mr. Abrucio said. “The degree of violence could be much greater than the episode in the U.S. Capitol.”The military display on Tuesday triggered a cascade of condemnation statements and memes.Military vehicles parading past Congress on Tuesday.Victor Moriyama for The New York Times“It’s unacceptable that the armed forces have allowed their image to be used in this manner, to raise the possibility of the use of force in support of a coup-minded antidemocratic measure defended by the president,” nine opposition parties said in a statement.Mr. Bolsonaro began railing against the voting system several years ago, when he was a fringe, ultraconservative member of Congress with little power or visibility in the capital.In 2015, he proposed a constitutional amendment requiring that electronic machines print a record of each vote, which would be deposited in a ballot box. Mr. Bolsonaro argued at the time that the redundancy would reduce the “chance of fraud to zero.”Congress approved the measure, but the Supreme Court said it violated privacy and ruled it unconstitutional, which meant the voting system remained unchanged.The matter faded from the political radar until Mr. Bolsonaro emerged as the presidential front-runner following the first round of voting in the October 2018 election. Instead of celebrating his triumph, Mr. Bolsonaro stunned the political establishment by claiming that he had been robbed of an outright victory, which would have required winning more than 50 percent of votes.Even after he won the election in 2018 with a 10 percentage point margin, Mr. Bolsonaro continued to claim, without presenting evidence, that the system was rigged. His quest to discredit the integrity of the election system has become louder and more audacious in recent weeks as Mr. Bolsonaro’s standing in the polls has slipped amid growing exasperation over the government’s handling of the coronavirus pandemic.A poll conducted in early August by the firm Poder Data shows that one in every five voters who supported Mr. Bolsonaro in 2018 would now vote for his main rival, former President Luis Inácio Lula da Silva. In a two-candidate matchup, Mr. da Silva would trounce the incumbent 52 percent to 32 percent, according to the poll.Polls project that the former President Luis Inácio Lula da Silva would win in an election against Mr. Bolsonaro.Miguel Schincariol/Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesMr. da Silva on Tuesday accused the president of using the printed vote debate to divert attention from his track record on unemployment and poverty, which have grown during the pandemic.“Bolsonaro must be ready to face this fact: He is going to lose the election,” Mr. da Silva said in a statement, raising the prospect that the incumbent will refuse to participate in the traditional transfer of power rituals. Supreme Court justices have reacted with alarm to Mr. Bolsonaro’s attacks against the voting system, which have played out in lengthy interviews by conservative journalists and in the videos the president broadcasts on social media. Earlier this month, the court opened investigations into the president’s claims about voting machine fraud.Filipe Barros, a lawmaker who supports Mr. Bolsonaro, said in an interview that electronic machines could be tampered with and that paper ballots would create a mechanism to independently certify the outcome recorded by machines.“It’s a risk to democracy,” he said.Experts say the voting machines in Brazil, where voting is compulsory, have robust security measures. They are not connected to the internet, which makes them all but impossible to hack. The identity of voters is verified by a biometric scanner that scans a person’s fingerprint.Brazil’s electronic voting machines are highly secure.Eraldo Peres/Associated PressLast month eight former attorneys general issued a statement calling efforts to create a paper ballot system unconstitutional, arguing that the added step would compromise the right to vote secretly. In Brazil, the attorney general’s office is in charge of investigating electoral crimes.Before the current system was adopted, experts say, it was common for political power brokers to take people to the polls and verify how they filled out ballots.“At no time has the current voting system been called into question, nor has there been any evidence that it has ever been tampered with,” said Raquel Dodge, a former attorney general who was among the signatories of the letter. “Brazil’s electoral system is very advanced, and I believe we need to make this clear and transparent to Brazilian voters and the world.”President Biden’s administration has also demonstrated its support for the current system, with Jake Sullivan, Mr. Biden’s national security adviser, raising the topic with Mr. Bolsonaro during a recent visit to Brasília.American officials conveyed “great confidence in the ability of the Brazilian institutions to carry out a free and fair election with proper safeguards in place against fraud,” Juan González, the senior director for the Western Hemisphere at the National Security Council told reporters on Monday. “We stressed the importance of not undermining confidence in that process.” More

    • 113 Shares189 Views

      in Elections

      Georgia G.O.P. Edges Toward Election Takeover in Fulton County

      by

      Republicans in Georgia’s General Assembly have requested a performance review of the top election official in Fulton County, the first step in a possible takeover of the county’s electoral process that could give the Republican-led legislature more control over an area with the largest concentration of Democratic voters in the state.The request, submitted in a letter on Tuesday by State Senator Butch Miller and signed by about two dozen other Republican state senators, calls for a panel review of Richard Barron, the county election director, over what the lawmakers described as a failure to properly perform risk-limiting audits, a process that helps ensure the correct results and security, after the 2020 election.“We do so as a measure of last resort, having failed to adequately assuage the concern that we, as elected officials, have regarding the integrity of the Fulton County elections process,” Mr. Miller wrote in the letter.Fulton County, which includes much of Atlanta, has a record of problems with its elections. Most recently, its June 2020 primary contest was marred by voting machine difficulties that were exacerbated by the small size and poor training of its staff, causing lines to stretch for hours across the county.But the November general election and the January runoff elections in the county ran relatively smoothly on each Election Day, with few reports of lengthy waits or other complications. There were no legitimate questions about the accuracy of the results in any of the three recent elections. In the presidential race, President Biden carried the county with more than 72 percent of the vote and more than 380,000 votes.The review process for local election officials is a newly critical element to Georgia elections after state Republicans passed a sweeping new voting law in April. It includes several provisions that lay the groundwork for an extraordinary takeover of election administration by partisan lawmakers.Under the new law, the State Elections Board is permitted to replace county election board members after a performance review or investigation. But the new law also restructures the state board, stripping the secretary of state of his authority and giving the legislature the ability to appoint members, including the chair.The letter, which was earlier reported by The Atlanta Journal-Constitution, was signed by three Republican members of the Fulton County delegation in the State Senate. The letter’s authors said they expected members of Fulton County’s House delegation to join them, which would automatically begin the review.State Representative Chuck Martin, a Republican member of the Fulton County House delegation, said he supported the request for the performance review. Jan Jones, the speaker pro tempore and another member of the delegation, said that she would send a letter on Friday to the State Elections Board requesting a performance review of Fulton County elections officials, and that it would be signed by four members of the Fulton delegation.“Mine is not with an eye on taking over elections,” Mr. Martin said in an interview on Thursday. “This just seems to be the only way we can get data to get answers for the people we represent.”Mr. Barron, the Fulton County election director, did not respond to requests for comment.Democrats quickly denounced the move, warning that it undermined the sanctity of future elections.“After giving themselves unprecedented power under Senate Bill 202, Republicans wasted no time in waging an anti-democratic, partisan power grab, attempting to seize control of elections in Georgia’s largest county, home to the greatest number of voters of color in the state,” said Lauren Groh-Wargo, the chief executive of Fair Fight Action, a Democratic voting rights group based in Georgia. “Their partisan efforts risk election subversion.”Brad Raffensperger, the Republican secretary of state, supported the review.“I have called repeatedly for change in Fulton’s elections leadership, so I’m glad Republican legislators are joining me in this effort,” he said in a statement. “After Fulton’s failures last June, I required Fulton to accept a monitor during the general election and runoffs, and forced the county into a consent agreement to start fixing their management problems.” More

    • 188 Shares99 Views

      in Elections

      After New York Tests a New Way of Voting, Other Cities May Do the Same

      by

      Elected leaders and voters in New York remain split over the ranked-choice system, but officials in Washington and elsewhere like the results. The most high-profile experiment in ranked-choice voting in U.S. history just took place in New York City. The reviews are mixed.Hundreds of thousands of voters ranked up to five candidates on their ballots in the Democratic primary for mayor, and many were glad to have that option. Others found the system confusing or wished they had been more strategic in making their choices.Some elected officials want to scrap the system because they believe it may disenfranchise Black voters, among others. But for now, it appears, ranked-choice voting is here to stay. Eric Adams, the winner of the Democratic mayoral primary, saw his lead over the second-place candidate shrink from 75,000 votes to only 7,197 after ranked-choices were counted, and he attacked two of his rivals for campaigning together in the race’s final days to try to beat him. One of Mr. Adams’s allies, Councilman I. Daneek Miller of Queens, is promoting a bill that would let New Yorkers decide whether they want to keep ranked-choice voting, although there does not appear to be enough support among his colleagues for it to be approved.“You see these large leads dwindle because of voter rankings,” Mr. Miller said. “Is this an exercise in mediocrity? Do we want fourth- and fifth-place votes deciding leadership?”This year’s primary was the first time New York had used ranked-choice voting in a citywide race. The system is used in other countries and in cities like San Francisco, but it had never been attempted in a larger American city. Other places, including Washington D.C., the Seattle area and Lansing, Mich., could move to adopt the system. Christina Henderson, a member of Washington’s city council and a supporter of a bill that would bring ranked-choice there, said the New York election showed the system’s benefits, including the diversity of winning candidates like Mr. Adams, who is likely to become the city’s second Black mayor.“Races are more dynamic and collegial with genuine policy debates supplanting negative campaign tactics,” Ms. Henderson said.The new system changed how some candidates campaigned for mayor, encouraging them to appeal to their rivals’ supporters to earn a spot on their ballots. By striking a late alliance with Andrew Yang, for example, Kathryn Garcia won over many of his voters.But a major snafu by the city’s perennially dysfunctional Board of Elections — accidentally releasing an inaccurate vote count — could undermine confidence in the system. And although Mr. Adams won the primary, his allies have raised concerns that ranked-choice voting could hurt Black voters who might choose only one candidate. Some Black leaders sued last year to try to stop the system from being introduced.Mr. Adams himself has criticized how ranked-choice voting was rolled out, but he does not want to eliminate it. He said it was an obstacle for some voters and called for more education about it. “Your New York Times readers, your Wall Street Journal readers and all of those that had the ability to analyze all this information, it’s fine for them,” Mr. Adams said in a radio interview on WNYC this week. “But that’s not the reality when English is a second language, that’s not the reality for 85- and 90-year-old voters who are trying to navigate the process. Every new barrier you put in place, you’re going to lose voters in the process.”The system’s supporters have defended it vigorously, arguing that voters did understand how to use it. Maya Wiley, who finished third in the Democratic mayoral primary, wrote a piece for The Washington Post in support of the system despite losing. Ranked-choice advocates say the system helped improve the fortunes of female and minority candidates. The City Council appears poised to have its first-ever female majority, and women finished second and third in the mayoral primary. “We won’t let anyone take away the people’s voice and go back to the old system where costly, low-turn out runoff elections actually disenfranchised people,” said Debbie Louis, the lead organizer for Rank the Vote NYC, a group that supports the voting system. Some voters did not like the new approach. Rebecca Yhisreal, 61, who lives in West Harlem, said she voted for Mr. Adams first and ranked three other candidates on her ballot. But she said she preferred the old system, under which New Yorkers voted for one candidate and if no one got more than 40 percent of the vote, the top two finishers would go to a runoff. “It was kind of confusing,” she said. “I would rather it go back to how it was.”William Brown, a retiree who lives in Harlem, said the crowded mayoral ballot, which had 13 Democrats, had made it difficult for him to make sense of each candidate’s positions and to determine how to rank those he liked best. He said he had ranked Raymond J. McGuire, a former Wall Street executive, first, and had forgotten how many other candidates he ranked.“It’s unfair,” he said. “You have to take the time to understand it, but there’s too many candidates. It’s detrimental.”Mr. Miller, who is in his final year in the City Council and testified at a State Assembly hearing this week with other critics of ranked-choice voting, said residents in his Southeast Queens district had complained to him about the new system. It encouraged voters to focus on the horse race between candidates rather than on issues, he said.Under ranked-choice voting, if no candidate gets more than 50 percent of first-choice votes on an initial tally, the process moves to an elimination-round method. The lowest-polling candidates are eliminated, with their votes reallocated to whichever remaining candidates those voters ranked next. The process continues until one candidate has more than 50 percent of the vote.Some voters expressed regret that they had not been more shrewd by picking between Mr. Adams or Ms. Garcia so that their ballot helped decide the winner. More than 140,000 ballots were “exhausted,” meaning they did not name either finalist and were therefore thrown out. Those ballots represented nearly 15 percent of the 940,000 votes cast, a higher rate than in some other ranked-choice elections. In London Breed’s 2018 mayoral victory in San Francisco, about 8.5 percent of ballots were exhausted. Advocates for ranked-choice voting say the share of exhausted ballots should decrease as New Yorkers become more familiar with the system.Mr. de Blasio, a Democrat in his second term, said he wanted to see more detailed voter data before deciding whether the system was a success. He said he would be concerned if the data showed wealthy voters ranking five candidates and poorer ones not doing so.“What I don’t want to see is a system that enfranchises some people and not others and we need the research to really tell what happened here,” Mr. de Blasio said.The city’s Board of Elections is planning to release detailed ballot information in the coming weeks that will reveal which neighborhoods took full advantage of ranked-choice voting. The information, known as the cast-vote record, will not be made public until recounts are completed in two unresolved City Council races. Corey Johnson, the City Council speaker, does not appear to favor doing away with ranked-choice voting. Asked about his position on Mr. Miller’s bill, Mr. Johnson’s spokeswoman said in a statement that New Yorkers had voted to create the system in 2019.“Nearly three-quarters of voters approved the new system,” the spokeswoman, Jennifer Fermino, said. “The mission now should be to help provide more education on this important change to our elections.”Many voters liked ranked-choice voting. In Brooklyn’s Bedford-Stuyvesant neighborhood, Andrew Wilkes, 35, a pastor and policy director for Generation Citizen, a nonprofit civic-education group, said he felt the system gave voters more choices and made it easier for candidates of color to enter the race. He ranked Ms. Wiley first among the five candidates he listed for mayor.“I found it pretty intuitive,” Mr. Wilkes said. More

    • 113 Shares119 Views

      in Elections

      German Candidates Fail to Find Footing in Flood Response

      by

      So far, none of the main contenders to replace Angela Merkel have come across as strong leaders in the aftermath of floods that killed 170 people and caused billions in damages.BERLIN — Floods have had a way of reshaping German politics.Helmut Schmidt made a name for himself responding to deadly floods in Hamburg in 1962, and went on to become chancellor in the 1970s. Images of Gerhard Schröder wading through muddy water along the Elbe River in 2002 are credited with helping him win another term.The floods that ravaged Germany last week — more severe than any in centuries — are already doing their work in this election year. But the striking thing they have revealed, political analysts say, is that none of the major candidates has been able to demonstrate the level of leadership in a crisis the public has grown accustomed to under Chancellor Angela Merkel.While the deadly flash floods have offered the candidates a chance to show their stuff, political experts said that each has struggled to communicate competence and reassurance. Voters seem to agree.The first poll since the flooding showed a drop in popularity for the two leading candidates — the conservative Armin Laschet and his Green party rival, Annalena Baerbock — after what political experts say have been lackluster performances by both this week.“This will not be an election in which the candidates play a deciding role,” said Uwe Jun, a professor of political science at the University of Trier. “None of the candidates have the kind of overwhelming charisma that is able to fully convince voters.”The floods have killed 170 people, with more than 150 still unaccounted for, the police said on Wednesday. The number of missing is significantly lower than figures announced last week, when downed communication networks and blocked roads rendered many people unreachable.In the latest polling, which was carried out from Tuesday to Sunday, Mr. Laschet’s leading Christian Democratic Union dipped below 30 percent support, to 28 percent, while their main rivals, the second-place Greens, held steady at 19 percent.When asked if they could vote for an individual candidate (Germans cast votes only for parties), which one would receive their endorsement, only 23 percent said Mr. Laschet, according to the survey by the Forsa polling group.On Saturday, Mr. Laschet came under fierce public criticism after he was caught on camera chatting and laughing with colleagues, while President Frank-Walter Steinmeier was giving a solemn statement to reporters after the two had met with flood victims in the city of Erftstadt.Mr. Laschet, 60, who is the governor of North Rhine-Westphalia, was forced to apologize. On Tuesday he visited another devastated town alongside the chancellor.Chancellor Angela Merkel and her party’s chancellor candidate, Armin Laschet, behind her, visiting the flood-ravaged city of Iversheim on Tuesday. The town is in North Rhine-Westphalia, where Mr. Laschet is governor.Pool photo by Wolfgang RattayIf there is one thing Ms. Merkel has learned in her four terms in offices, it is how to be calm in the face of calamity — whether pledging to keep Germans’ savings safe in 2008, or wading through the flooded streets of eastern Germany five years later.Standing beside her Tuesday after meeting with volunteers in the city of Bad Münstereifel, Mr. Laschet tried a more statesmanlike tone. He offered an open ear and a supportive clap on the shoulder to people cleaning the mud and debris from their homes, as well as condolences for victims.“Nothing we can do can bring them back, and we barely have words for the suffering of those who survived,” he said, pledging to double his state’s contribution to emergency aid. “So that we, too, are doing our part,” he said.Ms. Merkel’s government on Wednesday approved a 200 million euro, or $235 million, package of emergency assistance to be paid out to flood victims immediately. That figure will be matched by the affected states.An estimated 6 billion euros, $7 billion, will be needed to repair the infrastructure that has been damaged, including roads, bridges, homes and buildings.Much of that money will flow through the finance ministry run by Olaf Scholz, a Social Democrat, who is also running for chancellor. Getting financial aid to people quickly could give him an edge, but so far he has failed to translate his position into a political advantage, experts say.“If we need more money, then we will make it available,” Mr. Scholz, 63, told reporters in Berlin, “We will do what we have to do to help everyone who needs it.”Markus Söder, Bavaria’s governor, right, and Olaf Scholz, the country’s finance minister and another chancellor candidate, visited the municipality of Schoenau am Koenigssee on Sunday.Lukas Barth-Tuttas/EPA, via ShutterstockMr. Scholz visited stricken communities in Rhineland-Palatinate last week and then headed to the southern state of Bavaria just days after the heavy rains stopped there. But he has failed to connect with voters in a meaningful way, experts said. His party gained only 1 percentage point in the most recent survey and Mr. Scholz’s personal popularity remained unchanged.“He is a candidate that people just can’t really warm up to,” Mr. Jun said.But if any party should be in a position to find a political advantage in the events of the past week, it should be the Greens, who have been pushing for Germany to speed up its transformation to a green economy for decades.Especially popular among the country’s younger voters, climate issues have helped the Greens to replace the Social Democrats as the second most popular party in recent years. But after their candidate for chancellor, Ms. Baerbock, 40, stumbled over accusations of plagiarism in a recently published book and inaccuracies on her résumé, even a deadly weather catastrophe appeared unable to lift the party’s standing significantly.The Greens remained firmly in second place, according to the most recent poll, with 19 percent support — enough to create a majority if they were to agree to join forces in a government led by Mr. Laschet’s conservatives, in a tie-up that many observers believe would be the most likely coalition.Making Ms. Baerbock’s position more difficult is the fact that she currently does not hold a political office that would give her the opportunity to make a public visit to the stricken regions, as do both of her competitors. Last week she decided against taking members of the news media with her when she visited communities in Rhineland-Palatinate afflicted by the severe weather.In several interviews afterward, Ms. Baerbock called for Germany to move more quickly on its exit from coal, currently planned for 2030, and to increase spending to better prepare communities for the dangers posed by extreme weather. She also laid out a three-point plan that included adapting to the changing climate, amid attempts to halt it.“This is not an either-or between climate precaution, climate adaptation and climate protection, but a triad that is actually decided in the same way in all the climate protection treaties worldwide,” Ms. Baerbock told ARD public television.In the wake of last week’s flooding, the Greens are no longer the only party making such calls, but as the images of devastation retreat from the headlines, her party remains in the strongest position to gain voters from the renewed focus on the threat posed by changes to the world’s climate.“I assume that the weather events will indeed raise the issue of climate change to the top of the electorate’s agenda, which will help the Greens,” said Ursula Münch, director of the Academy of Political Education in Tützing, but added that it would not be enough of an advantage to close the gap with the leading conservatives. “It still won’t help Ms. Baerbock into the chancellor’s office.” More

    • 163 Shares189 Views

      in Elections

      How The Cleveland House Race Between Turner and Brown Captures Democrats' Generational Divide

      by

      Nina Turner’s move from Bernie Sanders’s campaign co-chairwoman to House candidate has highlighted a Democratic divide between impatient young activists and cautious older voters.WARRENSVILLE HEIGHTS, Ohio — Nina Turner had just belted out a short address to God’s Tabernacle of Faith Church in the cadences and tremulous volumes of a preacher when the Rev. Timothy Eppinger called on the whole congregation to lay hands on the woman seeking the House seat of greater Cleveland.“She’s gone through hell and high water,” the pastor said to nods and assents. “This is her season to live, and not to die.”On Aug. 3, the voters of Ohio’s 11th District will render that judgment and with it, some indication of the direction the Democratic Party is heading: toward the defiant and progressive approach Ms. Turner embodies or the reserved mold of its leaders in Washington, shaped more by the establishment than the ferment stirring its grass roots.Democrats say there is little broader significance to this individual House primary contest, one that pits two Black women against each other in a safe Democratic district that had been represented by Marcia Fudge before she was confirmed as President Biden’s secretary of housing and urban development.Yet in the final weeks of the campaign, the party establishment is throwing copious amounts of time and money into an effort to stop Ms. Turner, a fiery former Cleveland councilwoman and Ohio state senator known beyond this district as the face and spirit of Bernie Sanders’s presidential campaigns, a co-chairwoman in 2020 and a ubiquitous surrogate for the socialist senator.That suggests leaders understand that the outcome of the race will be read as a signal about the party’s future. It has already rekindled old rivalries. The Congressional Black Caucus’s political action committee has endorsed Ms. Turner’s main rival, Shontel Brown, the Cuyahoga County Democratic Party chairwoman. So have Hillary Clinton and the highest-ranking Black member of the House, James E. Clyburn of South Carolina, who will be campaigning here this weekend for Ms. Brown. They argue that Ms. Brown is the better candidate, with a unifying message after four divisive years of Donald J. Trump.Ms. Brown sees herself as liberal, but she would move step by step, for instance embracing Mr. Biden’s call for adding a “public option” to the Affordable Care Act before jumping straight to the single-payer Medicare-for-all health care system Ms. Turner wants.“I’m not one to shy away from a challenge or conflict; I just don’t seek it out,” said Ms. Brown, who sees the differences as more style than substance. “And that’s the major difference: I’m not looking for headlines. I’m looking to make headway.”In turn, liberal activists around the country have rushed to Ms. Turner’s defense, with money, volunteers and reinforcements. Her campaign has raised $4.5 million for a primary, $1.3 million in the last month. Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York will be knocking on doors for her the same weekend Mr. Clyburn will be in town. Mr. Sanders will join the fray in person the last weekend before Election Day.“She would be a real asset for the House,” Mr. Sanders said. “She is a very, very strong progressive, and I hope very much she is going to win.”Supporters of Shontel Brown say she presents a more unifying message after four years of the Trump administration.Mike Cardew/Akron Beakon Journal, via USA Today NetworkThe race has captured less an ideological divide than a generational split, pitting older voters turned off by the liberal insurgency’s disparagement of Democratic leaders and brash demands for rapid change against younger voters’ sense of urgency and anger about the trajectory of the country and world being left to them.At every turn here, Ms. Turner hits on the struggles of her city, the poorest large municipality in the country, but also America’s mountain of student debt, its inequity in health care and a climate crisis that has left the West parched and burning, the ice caps melting and Europe digging out from a deluge.Cleveland’s mayor, Frank Jackson, has endorsed Ms. Turner, as has The Plain Dealer. But Ms. Brown has the most reliable voters, many of them older, more affluent and white.For Ms. Turner to win, she needs people like Dewayne Williams, 31 and formerly incarcerated, who came out in the rain on Saturday to the Gas on God Community Giveaway, for $10 worth of free gas in one of Cleveland’s most dangerous neighborhoods.“I’m just young, don’t know much about politics, but I know she’s a good woman,” Mr. Williams said, growing emotional after Ms. Turner leaned into his car to give him a hug. Given his experience in the prison system, he said, “the changes she’s trying to do — to even care a little bit about that situation — I definitely appreciate.”“Oh man,” Mr. Williams added, “you’ve got to have a loud voice. You’ve got to be loud so people can hear.”The outcome of the special election could reverberate through the party. Progressive primary challengers have already declared — and are raising impressive sums, far more than previous challengers — to take on Representatives Carolyn B. Maloney in New York, Danny K. Davis in Chicago, John Yarmuth in Louisville and Jim Cooper in Nashville. They are hoping to build on the successes of Representatives Ocasio-Cortez and Jamaal Bowman in New York, Ayanna S. Pressley in Boston, Marie Newman in Chicago and Cori Bush in St. Louis — all of whom have knocked off Democratic incumbents since 2018.All of them face opposition from the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, the Congressional Black Caucus and a new political action committee, Team Blue, started by Representatives Hakeem Jeffries of New York, the Democratic Caucus chairman; Josh Gottheimer, a moderate from New Jersey; and Terri A. Sewell, a Black Caucus member from Alabama.“It speaks volumes to where they want us to be going as a party,” said Kina Collins, who is challenging Mr. Davis. “The message is, ‘You’re not welcome, and if you try to come in, we’re going to pony up the resources to silence you.’”Ms. Turner spoke with voters at a Gas on God Community Giveaway in Cleveland on Saturday.Maddie McGarvey for The New York TimesMs. Turner said she wanted the race to be about her issues: single-payer Medicare for all, a $15-an-hour minimum wage, canceling student loan debt and other centerpieces of the Sanders movement she helped create. She said she had been warned from the beginning of her candidacy that Washington Democrats would unite around an “anyone but Nina” candidate.But on Sunday, even she seemed surprised by the bitter turn the contest had taken. The Congressional Black Caucus PAC’s intervention particularly rankled. With the rise of liberal groups like Justice Democrats dedicated to unseating entrenched Democrats in safe seats, the caucus has emerged as something of an incumbent protection service.It backed Representative William Lacy Clay Jr. of Missouri, a caucus member, in his unsuccessful bid to stave off a Black challenger, Ms. Bush, last year, and Representative Joyce Beatty of Ohio, now the chairwoman of the caucus, in her successful bid to beat a Justice Democrat.But the PAC also backed Representative Eliot Engel of New York, who is white, last year against his progressive challenger, Mr. Bowman, who is Black.And now, inexplicably to Ms. Turner and her allies, the powerful Black establishment is intervening in an open-seat race between two Black candidates.“I don’t begrudge anybody wanting to get involved in the race,” Ms. Turner said, “but the entire Congressional Black Caucus PAC? That’s sending another message: Progressives need not apply.”Mr. Clyburn’s high-profile intervention is especially striking. In endorsing Ms. Brown, Mr. Clyburn said he was choosing the candidate he liked best, not opposing Ms. Turner. But he did speak out against the “sloganeering” of the party’s left wing.Representative James E. Clyburn of South Carolina, the highest-ranking Black Democrat in the House, has endorsed Ms. Brown.Stefani Reynolds for The New York TimesIn Cleveland, not everyone appreciated the distinction.“They want somebody they can control, and they want somebody to fall in line,” said State Representative Juanita Brent, who backs Ms. Turner. She said she had a message for Mr. Clyburn: “Congressman, with all due respect, stay out of our district.”Ms. Brown, younger than Ms. Turner, with an easygoing demeanor that does not match the Turner campaign’s description of her negative campaigning, pushed back hard against the characterization of her as a Washington puppet.Her campaign is staffed by help from SKDK, a powerhouse Democratic political firm stocked with old hands from the Clinton and Obama days. Her endorsements include moderate House Democrats like Mr. Gottheimer, many of whom are motivated by Ms. Turner’s favorable statements on Palestinian rights.But Ms. Brown insists she is no pawn for establishment Democrats.“You should ask the people who have tried to control me,” she said. “You will find that I am an independent thinker. I am one that likes to gather all of the facts and make an informed decision.”At Alfred Grant’s motorcycle shop in Bedford, Ohio, where Ms. Brown was dropping by a show of motorcycle muscle on Saturday night, older Black voters backed her campaign’s assessment of Ms. Turner: You either love her or you really don’t.“It seems to me that Nina tends to work for herself more than working together,” Roberta Reed said. “I mean, I need people who are going to work together to make it all whole.”“She’s going to help the Biden-Harris agenda; that means a lot,” Denise Grant, Mr. Grant’s wife, said of Ms. Brown, hitting on her biggest talking point. “We don’t need anybody fighting with Biden there.”Her husband jumped in, expressing weariness of the kind of confrontational politics that Ms. Turner embraced. “We did four years of foolishness,” he said. “Now it’s calmed down. That’s how politics should be. I don’t have to look at you every day.”Ms. Turner does not back down from that critique. Voters can take it or leave it.“My ancestors would have never been set free but for somebody bumping up against the status quo and saying, ‘You will not enslave us anymore,’” she said.Parishioners prayed over Ms. Turner at God’s Tabernacle of Faith Church on Sunday.Maddie McGarvey for The New York Times“Martin Luther King, Minister Malcolm X, Congresswoman Shirley Chisholm, Fannie Lou Hamer — I’m just giving examples of people who I’m sure folks who believe in the status quo wish had been nicer,” she said.At God’s Tabernacle of Faith, Pastor Eppinger teed up Ms. Turner with a rousing sermon inspired by the Hebrew prophet Ezekiel.“How long will you walk through dead schools, dead communities, dead governments?” he thundered. “Can these dry bones live?”Ms. Turner, in a bright yellow dress, removed her matching, bright yellow mask, and answered, “All Sister Turner is saying is, we need somebody to speak life into the dry bones of City Hall, the dry bones in Congress, and if God blesses me to go to that next place, I am going to continue to stand for the poor, the working poor and the barely middle class. Can these dry bones live?”To that, the 50 or so parishioners gave an amen. More