Voting and Voters

Subterms

    More stories

    • 163 Shares99 Views

      in Elections

      In the N.Y.C. Mayor’s Race, Being Second Might Be Good Enough to Win

      by

      Political campaigns are considering cross-endorsements and vying for the No. 2 spot on voters’ ballots.In the fiercely competitive world of New York City politics, it is hard to imagine a candidate embracing a strategy to be voters’ second choice. Yet in the volatile, crowded race for mayor, such a gambit might actually pay off.The reason? Ranked-choice voting.The introduction this year of the ranked-choice system — allowing the selection of up to five choices for mayor, ranked in preferential order — has inserted a significant measure of unpredictability into an election still unsettled by the pandemic.With the June 22 primary less than two weeks away, campaign officials for the leading Democratic candidates are still trying to figure out how best to work the system to their advantage.Some campaigns have hired staffers who have experience with ranked-choice voting. They are weighing the risks of making a cross-endorsement with a rival. And candidates are openly reaching out to voters committed elsewhere, hoping to become their second choice.When Eric Adams, the Brooklyn borough president, recently lost an important endorsement from his friend John Liu, a state senator, he was unbowed. He called on Mr. Liu to rank him second, behind a key opponent, Andrew Yang.“I’m going to need No. 2 voters, and I’m hoping that I can get him to endorse me as No. 2,” Mr. Adams said.Even before Shaun Donovan, the former federal housing secretary, entered the race last year, an “electability” presentation to potential backers extolled how his “broad appeal makes him a natural second and third choice for voters.”New York City approved the switch to a ranked-choice system in a 2019 referendum; it was designed to give voters broader influence by allowing them to back their top choice while still weighing in on the race’s other candidates — lessening the chances of a scenario where two popular candidates split the vote and a candidate without broad support wins.If a candidate does not initially win a majority of the votes, the rankings come into play. The last-place candidate is eliminated in a series of rounds, with that candidate’s votes reallocated to whichever candidate their supporters ranked next. The rounds continue until there are two candidates left, and the winner has a majority.The winner will still need to appear as the first choice on as many ballots as possible. But with 13 Democratic candidates diffusing the vote, securing the second spot on other ballots could be just as important, and could elevate a candidate with fewer first-place votes into the lead.How Does Ranked-Choice Voting Work in New York?New Yorkers voting in the June 22 primary for mayor will use ranked-choice voting for the first time this year. Confused? We can help.Uncertainty over how voters will approach the new voting system is making many of the campaigns nervous.“We’re in uncharted territory, and our campaign has done everything it can to ensure that we get as many votes as we can get,” said Chris Coffey, a campaign manager for Mr. Yang, a former presidential candidate.In most cases where ranked-choice elections have been held, the candidate who is ahead in the first round prevails. But there have been exceptions, including the 2010 mayoral election in Oakland, Calif., where Jean Quan won despite placing second in the first round. Ms. Quan, the city’s first female mayor, collected more second- and third-choice votes than her top rival, boosting her to victory.Ms. Quan had openly supported the candidate who placed third, Rebecca Kaplan, as her second choice and believes that the friendly gesture helped her with voters.“I knew there was a risk of helping Rebecca, but I thought it was more important to beat the front-runner,” she said in an interview.Those types of alliances have been rare in New York.A campaign adviser who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss internal planning said that a cross-endorsement would only work if the other candidate was unquestionably lower in the standings. “You have to know that you’re going to beat the person you’re cross-endorsing — that’s rule No. 1,” the adviser said.Indeed, the campaigns of Mr. Yang and his chief rival, Mr. Adams, both considered trying to craft a cross-endorsement deal with Kathryn Garcia, the former sanitation commissioner, according to two people familiar with the plans. But her recent rise in the scant public polling available has made that proposition more unlikely.“We’re not overthinking our ranked-choice strategy,” said Lindsey Green, a spokeswoman for Ms. Garcia. “The goal is still to get as many No. 1 votes as we can and to win outright.”Kathryn Garcia, a veteran of city government, was thought to be a target of her rivals for a friendly co-endorsement, but her rise in polling has made that more unlikely.Michelle V. Agins/The New York TimesOnly two of the leading mayoral candidates, in fact, are even willing to list a second choice: Mr. Yang backs Ms. Garcia; Mr. Donovan, the former federal housing secretary, supports Maya Wiley, a former counsel to Mayor Bill de Blasio.The only known cross-endorsement pact was between Joycelyn Taylor, a businesswoman, and Art Chang, an entrepreneur, two Democrats who have shown little support in polling and fund-raising, and stand little chance of winning.The mayoral primary will be the first citywide contest in New York City to use ranked-choice voting, and the new system was expected to change the race’s dynamics.Most mayoral primaries typically feature bruising campaigns; ranked-choice was supposed to discourage that, with candidates wary of alienating each other’s base. That had largely been true this year, but the level of sniping and negative campaigning has increased in recent weeks.One thing is certain: There will be no costly runoff this year; whoever emerges as the winner will be the Democratic nominee, even if that person did not get 50 percent of the initial vote.But the voting system also has its quirks.Assuming no one wins a majority in the first round, the city’s Board of Elections must completely receive and process mail-in ballots before it begins the ranked-choice tally. That is expected to take weeks, and officials have cautioned that a victor may not be declared until mid-July.“Ranked-choice voting has definitely added an unpredictability to the race,” said Ester Fuchs, a politics professor at Columbia University. “The candidates would like to figure out how to maximize their chances of winning, and they haven’t been able to figure it out.”.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;}Mr. Yang, who has strong name recognition and centrist views, has tried to evoke a cheerful image on the campaign trail. He said recently on MSNBC that the voting system rewards candidates like him with “broad appeal.”Mr. Yang is working with Bill Barnes, a veteran of San Francisco government, which uses ranked-choice voting, and Billy Cline, who worked on the campaign of London Breed, that city’s first Black female mayor.Mr. Adams, who appears to be the front-runner in the race, is working with Evan Thies, a media strategist who has experience with the issue, and Ben Tulchin, a San Francisco-based pollster from Senator Bernie Sanders’s presidential campaign.At the same time, progressive groups and the city’s powerful teachers’ union are urging New Yorkers not to rank Mr. Yang or Mr. Adams at all.“Any appearance on your ballot, even as your fifth choice, can get them elected,” the United Federation of Teachers recently told its members.Our City, a super PAC backed by progressive groups, is also arguing that anyone else would be better than Mr. Yang or Mr. Adams.“The rest of the candidates — we don’t feel like they’re completely unreachable for progressive issues,” said Gabe Tobias, who is running the PAC. “Adams and Yang are unreachable. That’s a situation where we couldn’t win any of the things we want to win.”Andrew Yang,who has mostly evoked a cheerful image during the campaign, said that ranked-choice voting rewards people like him with “broad appeal.”Sara Naomi Lewkowicz for The New York TimesOver the last few weeks, more endorsements have been given in ranked-choice format: The Working Families Party had endorsed the city comptroller, Scott M. Stringer, first; Dianne Morales, a nonprofit executive, second; and Ms. Wiley third. But the group withdrew its support for Mr. Stringer and Ms. Morales after their campaigns became mired in controversy, and it is now supporting only Ms. Wiley.Daniel Rosenthal, a state assemblyman, and two Jewish groups in Queens just ranked Ms. Garcia second. Their first choices were split between Mr. Yang and Mr. Adams.Representative Adriano Espaillat, the first Dominican-American to serve in Congress, also recently endorsed Mr. Adams first and Ms. Wiley second. (He rescinded his initial endorsement of Mr. Stringer after allegations emerged that Mr. Stringer had sexually harassed a woman working on his 2001 campaign for public advocate. Mr. Stringer denies the allegations.)The system allows voters to hedge their bets and rank multiple candidates — extending the odds of casting a winning vote for someone agreeable, even if not preferable. A voter could, for instance, rank three left-leaning candidates — Ms. Wiley, Mr. Stringer and Ms. Morales — guaranteeing that one would get their vote in a late round.The same scenario could present itself to a voter who wanted to support a Black candidate, and rank only the four major Black Democrats: Mr. Adams, Ms. Wiley, Ms. Morales, who identifies as Afro-Latina, and Raymond J. McGuire, a former Wall Street executive.Yet some Black leaders are also concerned that minority and working-class voters might not rank more than one candidate because there has not been enough public education about the process. More than half of voters say they will pick a second choice; 30 percent said they would only pick one choice, according to a Fontas Advisors poll in May.Susan Lerner, the executive director of Common Cause New York, a good government advocacy group, said that ranked-choice voting eliminates the need for an expensive runoff election, which could take just as long to find a winner.“Democracy takes time, and every vote counts,” she said. “Accurate and fair election results are worth waiting for.” More

    • 88 Shares149 Views

      in Elections

      Don’t Overthink Ranked-Choice Voting, New York City

      by

      Last month this board endorsed Kathryn Garcia for mayor of New York City and urged voters to cast a ballot for her in the June 22 Democratic primary. (Early voting begins June 12.)Normally, that would be the end of it. But this year’s ballot looks different, for mayor and for other citywide races. Instead of having only one choice in each race, New York City voters have the opportunity to rank up to five candidates, in order of preference.Ranked-choice voting, as it’s known, has been in use for decades around the world and has been gaining popularity around the United States recently. That’s for good reason: It allows voters to vote for candidates they genuinely like best, it forces candidates to appeal to more voters than they might in a traditional election, and it results in a winner who is acceptable to a majority of the electorate.The whole point of representative democracy is — or should be — to elect leaders who are chosen by a broad cross-section of voters and who are responsive to all of them. This matters all the more today, when distortions like partisan gerrymandering have warped the relationship between voters and their representatives.New York City, which adopted ranked-choice voting by referendum in 2019, is so far the largest jurisdiction in the country to give it a try. This year’s Democratic primary is just what the system was designed for. A large and diverse slate of candidates, none of whom seem likely to pull away from the pack and win an outright majority in the first count, is an ideal scenario for ranked-choice voting to play out.Still, many New Yorkers remain confused or apprehensive about the new system. Here’s how it works in practice, and here are the two key things to keep in mind when you go to fill out your ballot.First, vote with your heart, at least for your top choice. Don’t try to game the system or do mental gymnastics about your rankings. The great thing about ranked-choice voting, in contrast to the traditional first-past-the-post method, is that you have the freedom to vote for the candidate you like best and still have a say in the outcome if that candidate doesn’t win.Second, it’s best if you fill in your ballot completely, which means ranking five candidates, not one or two or three. You’re not required to do this, but if you do, the system works better. If you don’t and the candidate or candidates you rank are eliminated, your ballot stops counting. Filling in all five rankings eliminates this problem of “exhausted ballots,” and it guarantees your voice will count in the choosing of the next mayor — even if that person wasn’t your first (or second or third) choice.It’s also a good idea to include at least one of the front-runners on your ballot, even if you put him or her at the very bottom. That way you are more likely to have a say all the way to the end.What does this mean for the 2021 mayoral race and how you should fill out your ballot?If you agree with us that Ms. Garcia should get the job, rank her first. If you prefer another candidate, rank that person first. After that, rank the other candidates you like — or whom you could at least live with being mayor — in order of your preference.Whichever candidates you choose, be patient. There is a good chance New Yorkers won’t know on election night who their next mayor will be. It could take a few weeks to get a final result, in fact.Not only can ranked-choice ballots take longer to tabulate, but New York, after decades of operating in the electoral Dark Ages, has also finally adopted several modern voting reforms, including early voting and no-excuse absentee voting. Absentee ballots are allowed to arrive up to a week after the election, and voters have seven business days to fix any problems that might invalidate their ballots. Because so many people are expected to vote absentee this year, those ballots may be decisive in one or more races.The city plans to release first-choice totals from early votes and Election Day votes on election night. One week later, it will release a ranked-choice tally of those ballots plus any absentee ballots that have arrived and been processed, which could result in a different candidate taking the lead.As soon as all absentee ballots are in and errors are fixed, the city needs to promptly release all results. A bill under consideration in Albany would provide public access to the raw digital data of ballots within a week after an election, allowing anyone to run that data through a ranked-choice software program and get a result. (The bill has passed the Senate and is waiting for a vote in the assembly.)The bottom line: Don’t overthink things. Vote for your favored candidates, in the order you prefer them. Fill in your whole ballot.This year’s mayoral election is perhaps the most consequential in a generation, so it’s fitting that voters will have an opportunity to decide that election in a new and more democratic way. By adopting ranked-choice voting, New Yorkers gave themselves more of a voice in choosing their leaders. It’s time to use it.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 Shares129 Views

      in Elections

      Voter Suppression Must Be the Central Issue

      by

      The right to vote is everything in a democracy.Without influence over power, you are completely vulnerable to that power. There is no way to access prosperity or ensure personal protection when you live in a society in which people who share your interests are inhibited in their political participation. More

    • 88 Shares109 Views

      in Elections

      What to Know About Virginia's Democratic Primaries

      by

      Former Gov. Terry McAuliffe is seeking his old job, and Democrats will square off in races for lieutenant governor and attorney general.WASHINGTON — Virginia Democrats go to the polls on Tuesday to determine their candidates in races ranging from governor to the State House, but the onset of summer isn’t the only reason this year’s primary season has been sleepy.Taking place just months after a presidential election, nominating contests in Virginia often reflect the mood of the electorate. And if this year’s primary never seemed to get off the ground, it was in part because many voters are burned out on politics after four convulsive years of the Trump administration, a bitter 2020 campaign and a coronavirus pandemic that is only now receding.The most dedicated political aficionados have still followed the 2021 races in Virginia. However, former President Donald J. Trump’s ongoing refusal to acknowledge defeat, the storming of the Capitol and the subsequent impeachment inquiry diverted attention from state politics in a way that effectively delayed the start of the primary and starved former Gov. Terry McAuliffe’s opponents in the governor’s race of political oxygen.This was all manna from heaven for the once and potentially future governor, Mr. McAuliffe, who was succeeded by Gov. Ralph Northam in 2018 because Virginia is the last state in America to bar governors from serving for consecutive terms.Wielding perhaps the two most powerful weapons in a statewide primary — name recognition and cash on hand — Mr. McAuliffe has staked out a wide lead in the polls against four Democrats who are comparatively little-known and lightly financed: Lt. Gov. Justin Fairfax, State Senator Jennifer McClellan, State Delegate Lee Carter and former State Delegate Jennifer Carroll Foy.But just because Mr. McAuliffe appears poised to claim the nomination on Tuesday for his old job does not mean the results won’t be revealing.Here’s what to watch for in the Democratic races. (Virginia Republicans nominated their ticket last month, with Glenn Youngkin, a self-funding former private equity executive, emerging as the party’s nominee for governor.)How many voters will turn out?In 2009, Virginia Democrats had a hotly contested primary for governor that included two candidates from the vote-rich Washington suburbs, but only 319,000 voters cast ballots. In 2017, more than 543,000 Virginians voted in the Democratic primary for governor.The ultimate difference in those two election cycles: Twelve years ago, in the aftermath of President Barack Obama’s election, Republicans would claim the governorship, while four years ago, Democrats rode a wave of anti-Trump energy to sweep all three state offices: governor, lieutenant governor and attorney general.“We need not have Donald Trump in the White House for our people to get out and vote, because Trumpism is alive and well in the Virginia Republican Party,” said Speaker Eileen Filler-Corn of the State House, a Democrat who was elevated to her position when, in 2019, another anti-Trump wave swept her party to the majority.Republicans, and some Democrats, are not convinced, especially given the G.O.P.’s nomination of Mr. Youngkin, a Northern Virginia businessman with roots in Hampton Roads.Without the one-man Democratic turnout lever that was Mr. Trump still in the Oval Office, can the party still overwhelm Republicans in the suburbs, where Virginia elections are often decided?Overall turnout on Tuesday will offer some initial clues.Terry McAuliffe, a former governor, has staked out a wide lead in the polls against four Democrats who are comparatively little-known and lightly financed.Parker Michels-Boyce for The New York TimesCan Terry McAuliffe win a majority?Capturing a majority of the vote in a five-way race can be difficult. But Mr. McAuliffe has so dominated the primary that it’s possible he can crack 50 percent. While it’s admittedly an arbitrary figure, a majority would represent a strong vote of confidence in Mr. McAuliffe.He appears well positioned to reach that threshold. He has claimed endorsements from much of Virginia’s Democratic establishment, including Mr. Northam, who’s now highly popular among Democrats despite his infamous blackface scandal in 2019. And despite running against three Black candidates, Mr. McAuliffe has also received endorsements from many of the state’s prominent African-American leaders.He has run as the de facto incumbent, linking his governorship and that of Mr. Northam to trumpet the last eight years and the broader Democratic takeover of Virginia. Republicans have not won a statewide race since 2009 and are now in the minority of both chambers of the General Assembly.“We’re a new state today,” Mr. McAuliffe said last week during a stop at a pie shop in Arlington, recalling what he called the “anti-women, anti-gay, anti-environment, anti-immigrant, pro-gun” Republican legislature when he took office in 2014.The question is whether his popularity, and the credit he gets from Democrats for Virginia’s transformation, is enough to run away with a race against a field that includes younger, more diverse and more progressive opponents.Will there be a suburban surge?The Virginia suburbs outside Washington used to be strikingly different from the rest of the state. “Occupied territory” was the joke residents who lived south of the Rappahannock River would make about the more transient, less culturally Southern communities outside the nation’s capital.But now far more of Virginia resembles Northern Virginia. In their demographics and, increasingly, their politics, the population hubs of Richmond and Hampton Roads are closer to Arlington than Abingdon.This is all to say that Mr. McAuliffe’s performance and the overall turnout are worth watching most closely in the so-called urban crescent, stretching from Northern Virginia down Interstate 95 to Richmond and then east on I-64 to Hampton Roads.Are these Democrats a) enthusiastic to vote and b) eager to support an older, more moderate contender? They were in the 2017 primary, when Mr. Northam fended off a challenge from his left by former Representative Tom Perriello, but Tuesday will tell us more about the state of the party in the precincts that have turned Virginia blue.Primaries for the nomination for lieutenant governor and other state offices are also on the ballot on Tuesday.Parker Michels-Boyce for The New York TimesWhat about the down-ballot races?Races for governor always get the most attention in Virginia’s year-after-the-presidential-election contests because they can be a handy temperature check on the electorate. Backlashes are often first detected here. In fact, until Mr. McAuliffe’s 2013 victory, Virginia had a decades-long streak of electing a governor of the opposite party from the occupant of the White House.But the other two races for statewide office, lieutenant governor and attorney general, are also worth keeping tabs on.The primary for the state’s No. 2 job is sprawling, with six candidates running. Three state lawmakers — Sam Rasoul, Hala Ayala and Mark Levine — have the most money. Ms. Ayala enjoys the support of Mr. Northam, and Mr. Rasoul would be the first Muslim elected to statewide office in Virginia.While the job brings few official duties beyond breaking ties in the State Senate, it’s coveted by up-and-coming politicians because, given Virginia’s one-and-done rule for governors, it can be a quick steppingstone to the top job. Former Govs. Charles S. Robb, L. Douglas Wilder and Tim Kaine, as well as Mr. Northam, followed that route.Attorney general can also be a launching pad for governor — the joke being that A.G. stands for Almost Governor — and that’s what many believed Attorney General Mark Herring, a Democrat, would be running for this year. But with Mr. McAuliffe seeking the governorship, Mr. Herring, who had his own blackface scandal in 2019, decided to seek what would be a third term.He drew a challenge from a young, Black state lawmaker, Jay Jones, who picked up the support of Mr. Northam. Mr. Herring, though, has outraised Mr. Jones and has benefited from stronger name recognition. In a primary season that was slow to start and never seemed to fully flower, that could prove enough. More

    • 150 Shares109 Views

      in Elections

      German Conservatives Appear to Lead in Last State Election Before National Vote

      by

      The contest in an eastern state, a stronghold of the Alternative for Germany, had been closely watched for signs of the far-right party’s appeal.BERLIN — Voters in the eastern German state of Saxony-Anhalt appeared in a Sunday vote to support a return of the ruling conservatives, which made strong gains in a contest that had been closely watched for signs of a far-right party’s strength months ahead of a national election.Initial partial returns suggested that the conservative Christian Democratic Union were poised to break a losing streak in state ballots and expand their past margins over the nationalist Alternative for Germany, or AfD.Although Saxony-Anhalt is one of the country’s smallest states, with only 1.8 million people eligible to cast ballots, many Germans were looking to Sunday’s vote for indications about the national election for a new Parliament on Sept. 26.The outcome on Sunday could bolster the campaign of Armin Laschet, the current leader of the Christian Democrats, who is hoping to replace Angela Merkel. She is stepping down after 16 years in office as chancellor.Mr. Laschet, 60, the governor of North Rhine-Westphalia, has struggled to gain traction across the country, especially in the states of the former East Germany, and the strong showing for his party in the last regional election before the national ballot could give his contest a boost.“Today is a clear win for the Christian Democrats,” said Volker Bouffier, the governor of the western state of Hesse and a senior member of the conservative party. “But the fight is still at the beginning, the fight for the democratic center.”Despite the conservatives’ apparent ability to attract more support, the early partial returns suggested that AfD remained firmly the second most popular party in the state, a position it won five years ago when it received nearly a quarter of votes in the Saxony-Anhalt state election, shocking the country and propelling the party from the far-right nationalist fringe onto the national stage.The following year, the AfD won more than 12 percent in the national election, becoming the largest opposition party in the national Parliament, with 88 seats.A polling place at an art history museum in Magdeburg, the capital of Saxony-Anhalt, on Sunday.John Macdougall/Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesSince then, Alternative for Germany has struggled to contend with a more extremist wing that has pulled the party branch in Saxony-Anhalt even further to the right, capturing the attention of the country’s domestic intelligence service. The state’s leaders in the party, along with those from the branches in Brandenburg and Thuringia, are under official scrutiny for their anti-Semitic and anti-Muslim statements. Whether the AfD at the national level will also be placed under observation is on hold, pending the outcome of a legal challenge.While much about the Saxony-Anhalt contest is unique to the region, heavily focused on local issues like schools and economic restructuring, a majority of voters told pollsters with infratest.dimap on Sunday they were satisfied with the work of their governor, Reiner Haseloff, a member of the Christian Democrats who sought to clearly distance his party from the AfD.“I am thankful that our image remains, we have a reputation of democracy here in Saxony-Anhalt that we upheld tonight,” Mr. Haseloff said after initial projections had shown his party the clear winner of the evening.Mr. Haseloff has been a strong champion of the states in eastern Germany, home to many regions that are still struggling with the fallout from economic restructuring more than 30 years after the fall of the Berlin Wall.The persistent lack of jobs and economic infrastructure in those states, and a feeling that traditional parties do not take their concerns seriously, were other key factors that led many voters to shift their support to the AfD five years ago. That result forced Mr. Haseloff to form a coalition government across a wide political spectrum, including the center-left Social Democrats as well as the environmentalist Greens, in an effort to keep the far-right in the opposition.On Sunday, the Social Democrats suffered one of their worst showings in a state election, while the Greens were able to gain marginal support in the region, where they have traditionally struggled to attract voters.The other winner of the state ballot, along with the conservatives, appeared to be the pro-business Free Democratic Party, which voters returned to the statehouse for the first time in a decade. More

    • 125 Shares199 Views

      in Elections

      Democratic Report Raises 2022 Alarms on Messaging and Voter Outreach

      by

      A new report, in perhaps the most thorough soul-searching done by either party this year, points to an urgent need for the party to present a positive economic agenda and rebut Republican misinformation.Democrats defeated President Donald J. Trump and captured the Senate last year with a racially diverse coalition that delivered victories by tiny margins in key states like Georgia, Arizona and Wisconsin.In the next election, they cannot count on repeating that feat, a new report warns.A review of the 2020 election, conducted by several prominent Democratic advocacy groups, has concluded that the party is at risk of losing ground with Black, Hispanic and Asian American voters unless it does a better job presenting an economic agenda and countering Republican efforts to spread misinformation and tie all Democratic candidates to the far left.The 70-page report, obtained by The New York Times, was assembled at the behest of three major Democratic interest groups: Third Way, a centrist think tank, and the Collective PAC and the Latino Victory Fund, which promote Black and Hispanic candidates. It appears to be the most thorough act of self-criticism carried out by Democrats or Republicans after the last campaign.The document is all the more striking because it is addressed to a victorious party: Despite their successes, Democrats had hoped to achieve more robust control of both chambers of Congress, rather than the ultra-precarious margins they enjoy.Read the reportThree prominent Democratic groups, Third Way, the Collective PAC and the Latino Victory Fund, conducted a review of the 2020 election.Read Document 73 pagesIn part, the study found, Democrats fell short of their aspirations because many House and Senate candidates failed to match Joseph R. Biden Jr.’s support with voters of color who loathed Mr. Trump but distrusted the Democratic Party as a whole. Those constituencies included Hispanic voters in Florida and Texas, Vietnamese American and Filipino American voters in California, and Black voters in North Carolina.Overall, the report warns, Democrats in 2020 lacked a core argument about the economy and recovering from the coronavirus pandemic — one that might have helped candidates repel Republican claims that they wanted to “keep the economy shut down,” or worse. The party “leaned too heavily on ‘anti-Trump’ rhetoric,” the report concludes.“Win or lose, self-described progressive or moderate, Democrats consistently raised a lack of strong Democratic Party brand as a significant concern in 2020,” the report states. “In the absence of strong party branding, the opposition latched on to G.O.P. talking points, suggesting our candidates would ‘burn down your house and take away the police.’”Former Representative Debbie Mucarsel-Powell, a Democrat who lost re-election in South Florida in November, said in an interview that she had spoken with the authors of the report and raised concerns about Democratic outreach to Hispanic voters and the party’s failure to rebut misinformation in Spanish-language media.“Unfortunately, the Democratic Party has in some ways lost touch with our electorate,” Ms. Mucarsel-Powell said. “There is this assumption that of course people of color, or the working class, are going to vote for Democrats. We can never assume anything.”The report, chiefly written by a pair of veteran Democratic operatives, Marlon Marshall and Lynda Tran, is among the most significant salvos yet in the Democratic Party’s internal debate about how it should approach the 2022 elections. It may stir skepticism from some quarters because of the involvement of Third Way, which much of the left regards with hostility.A fourth group that initially backed the study, the campaign finance reform group End Citizens United, backed away this spring. Tiffany Muller, the head of the group, said it had to abandon its involvement to focus instead on passing the For the People Act, a sweeping good-government bill that is stuck in the Senate.Former Representative Debbie Mucarsel-Powell, a Democrat, lost re-election in South Florida last year. She remains worried about her party’s outreach to Hispanic voters.Saul Martinez for The New York TimesMr. Marshall and Ms. Tran, as well as the groups sponsoring the review, have begun to share its conclusions with Democratic lawmakers and party officials in recent days, including Jaime Harrison, the chairman of the Democratic National Committee.The study spanned nearly six months of research and data analysis that scrutinized about three dozen races for the House and the Senate, and involved interviews with 143 people, including lawmakers, candidates and pollsters, people involved in assembling the report said. Among the campaigns reviewed were the Senate elections in Arizona, Georgia and North Carolina, as well as House races in the suburbs of Minneapolis, Los Angeles, Atlanta and Dallas, and in rural New Mexico and Maine.The study follows an internal review conducted by the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee that was unveiled last month. Both projects found that Democratic candidates had been hobbled by flawed polling and pandemic-imposed limitations on campaigning.In the D.C.C.C. report, the committee attributed setbacks at the congressional level to a surge in turnout by Trump supporters and an inadequate Democratic response to attacks calling them police-hating socialists.Some lawmakers on the left have complained that criticism of left-wing messaging amounts to scapegoating activists for the party’s failures.Yet the review by Third Way, the Collective PAC and the Latino Victory Fund goes further in diagnosing the party’s messaging as deficient in ways that may have cost Democrats more than a dozen seats in the House. Its report offers a blunt assessment that in 2020, Republicans succeeded in misleading voters about the Democratic Party’s agenda and that Democrats had erred by speaking to voters of color as though they are a monolithic, left-leaning group.Representative Tony Cárdenas of California, who helms the Congressional Hispanic Caucus’s political action committee, embraced that critique of Democratic messaging and said the party should discard the assumption “that voters of color are inherently more progressive.”“That’s been a ridiculous idea and that’s never been true,” Mr. Cárdenas said, lamenting that Republicans had succeeded in “trying to confuse Latino voters with the socialism message, things of that nature, ‘defund the police.’”Quentin James, the president of the Collective PAC, said it was clear that “some of the rhetoric we see from coastal Democrats” had been problematic. Mr. James pointed to the activist demand to “defund” the police as especially harmful, even with supporters of policing overhauls.“We did a poll that showed Black voters, by and large, vastly support reforming the police and reallocating their budgets,” Mr. James said. “That terminology — ‘defund’ — was not popular in the Black community.”A report by the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee attributed the party’s setbacks to a surge in turnout by Trump supporters and an inadequate Democratic response to Republican attacks.Alyssa Schukar for The New York TimesKara Eastman, a progressive Democrat who lost her bid for a House seat based in Omaha, said Republicans had succeeded in delivering a “barrage of messages” that tarred her and her party as being outside the mainstream. Ms. Eastman said she had told the authors of the 2020 review that she believed those labels were particularly damaging to women.Matt Bennett, a Third Way strategist, said the party needed to be far better prepared to mount a defense in the midterm campaign.“We have got to take very seriously these attacks on Democrats as radicals and stipulate that they land,” Mr. Bennett said. “A lot of this just didn’t land on Joe Biden.”Democrats maintained a large advantage with voters of color in the 2020 elections, but the report identified telling areas of weakness. Mr. Biden and other Democrats lost ground with Latino voters relative to the party’s performance in 2016, “especially among working-class and non-college voters in these communities,” the report found.The report found that a surge in Asian American turnout appeared to have secured Mr. Biden’s victory in Georgia but that Democratic House candidates ran behind Mr. Biden with Asian American voters in contested California and Texas races. In some important states, Democrats did not mobilize Black voters at the same rate that Republicans did conservative white voters.“A substantial boost in turnout netted Democrats more raw votes from Black voters than in 2016, but the explosive growth among white voters in most races outpaced these gains,” the report warns.There has been no comparable self-review on the Republican side after the party’s severe setbacks last year, mainly because G.O.P. leaders have no appetite for a debate about Mr. Trump’s impact.Republicans will continue to have structural advantages in Washington because of congressional gerrymandering and the disproportionate representation of rural white voters in the Senate and the Electoral College. Erin Scott for The New York TimesThe Republican Party faces serious political obstacles, arising from Mr. Trump’s unpopularity, the growing liberalism of young voters and the country’s growing diversity. Many of the party’s policies are unpopular, including cutting social-welfare and retirement-security programs and keeping taxes low for the wealthy and big corporations.Yet the structure of the American electoral system has tilted national campaigns toward the G.O.P., because of congressional gerrymandering and the disproportionate representation of rural white voters in the Senate and the Electoral College.Democratic hopes for the midterm elections have so far hinged on the prospect of a strong recovery from the coronavirus pandemic and on voters’ regarding Republicans as a party unsuited to governing.Representative Mikie Sherrill of New Jersey, a moderate Democrat who was briefed on the findings of the report, called it proof that the party needed a strong central message about the economy in 2022.“We need to continue to show the American people what we’ve done, and then talk incessantly across the country, in every town, about how Democrats are governing,” Ms. Sherrill said.Largely unaddressed in the report is the immense deficit Democrats face among lower-income white voters. In its conclusion, however, Mr. Marshall and Ms. Tran write that Democrats need to deliver a message that includes working-class whites and matches the G.O.P.’s clear “collective gospel” about low taxes and military strength.“Our gospel should be about championing all working people — including but not limited to white working people — and lifting up our values of opportunity, equity, inclusion,” they write. More

    • 125 Shares199 Views

      in Elections

      State Election Officials Are Under Attack. We Will Defend Them.

      by

      Tucked into many of the election laws Republicans are pushing or enacting in states around the country are pernicious provisions threatening punishment of elections officials and workers for just doing their jobs.Laws like those already passed in Republican-controlled states like Georgia and Iowa, no matter their stated intent, will be used as a weapon of intimidation aimed at the people, many of them volunteers, charged with running fair elections at the local and state levels. By subjecting them to invasive, politically motivated control by a state legislative majority, these provisions shift the last word in elections from the pros to the pols. This is a serious attack on the crucial norm that our elections should be run on a professional, nonpartisan basis — and it is deeply wrong.It is so wrong that having once worked together across the partisan divide as co-chairs of the 2013-14 Presidential Commission on Election Administration, we have decided to come together again to mobilize the defense of election officials who may come under siege from these new laws.Bear in mind that this is happening after the 2020 election, run in the midst of a once-in-a-century pandemic, went off much better than expected. Voter turnout was the highest since 1900. A senior official in the Trump administration pronounced it the “most secure election in American history,” with “no evidence that any voting system deleted or lost votes, changed votes or was in any way compromised.” Multiple recounts, contests and court cases brought by former President Donald Trump and his allies failed to persuade any courts or state officials to overturn the results of any election.The new laws establish civil penalties for technical infractions and subject officials to threats of suspension and even criminal prosecution. Iowa state election officials are now subject to fines of $10,000 and suspension for any actions that “hinder or disregard the object of the law.” They are also subject to criminal penalties when seeking to address disruptive conduct by partisan poll watchers. In Georgia, an election official threatened with suspension may appeal, but the law restricts state-financed support for the individual’s legal defense. The Georgia secretary of state, the chief election official, has been removed from the chairmanship of the State Elections Board, demoted to nonvoting ex officio status.Other states are considering laws containing similar threats to the impartial administration of elections. It can be no surprise that officials around the country are also experiencing threats and harassment ranging from physical confrontation to social media postings of personal information from their Facebook pages. And this dangerous behavior is spreading throughout the electoral process. Last month, election officials in Anchorage, Alaska, issued a report describing the “unprecedented harassment of election officials” during the conduct of a mayoral runoff election.The partisan efforts to control election outcomes will result in the corruption of our system of government, which is rooted in fair, free elections. We say this as longtime election lawyers from opposing political parties. In jointly leading the presidential commission, we worked with numerous local and state elections officials. We saw firsthand the dedication and professionalism they brought to their jobs. They work hard with inadequate resources and are rarely praised for what goes well and are quickly blamed for what goes wrong.In 2020, after the pandemic struck, these officials performed the near-impossible task of locating replacements for thousands of poll workers, reconfiguring polling places to offer safe voting spaces for voters and poll workers and ramping up effective mail voting where allowed under state law.Now their nonpartisan performance of their duties is under attack — even to the point of being criminalized. So we are committed to providing these officials a defense against these attacks and threats by recruiting lawyers around the country, Democrats and Republicans, to establish a network that would provide free legal support to election officials who face threats, fines or suspensions for doing their jobs. This national network will monitor new threats as they develop and publicly report on what it learns.The defense of the electoral process is not a partisan cause, even where there may be reasonable disagreements between the parties about specific voting rules and procedures. The presidential commission we led concluded that “election administration is public administration” and that whenever possible, “the responsible department or agency in every state should have on staff individuals who are chosen and serve solely on the basis of their experience and expertise.” To serve voters, those officials would require independence from partisan political pressures, threats and retaliatory attacks.These state laws, and the blind rage against our election officials that they encourage or reinforce, will corrode our electoral systems and democracy. They will add to the recent lamentable trend of experienced officials’ retiring from their active and vitally needed service — clearing the way for others less qualified and more easily managed by partisans. Early surveys show that in our nation’s larger jurisdictions, up to a quarter of experienced election officials are planning to leave their jobs. A primary reason they cite: “the political environment.”No requirement of our electoral process — of our democracy — is more critical than the commitment to nonpartisanship in the administration of our system for casting and counting of ballots now being degraded by these state laws. This challenge must be strongly and forcefully met in every possible way by Democrats and Republicans alike.Bob Bauer, a former senior adviser to the Biden campaign, is a professor at New York University School of Law and a co-author of “After Trump: Reconstructing the Presidency.” Ben Ginsberg practiced election law for 38 years representing Republican candidates and parties.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

      Kyrsten Sinema and Joe Manchin’s Nihilistic Bipartisanship

      by

      We are in the eye of the storm of American democratic collapse. There is, outwardly, a feeling of calm. The Biden administration is competent and placid. The coronavirus emergency is receding nationally, if not internationally. Donald Trump, once the most powerful man on earth and the emperor of the news cycle, is now a failed blogger under criminal investigation. More