ReportWire

Tag: press conference

  • Biden and Trudeau vow cooperation on trade and security after talks in Canada

    Biden and Trudeau vow cooperation on trade and security after talks in Canada

    [ad_1]

    President Biden and Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau vowed to continue and strengthen their cooperation on trade, security and addressing climate change Friday after a day of meetings, speeches and a joint press conference in Ottawa.

    Trudeau hosted the president for a state visit in the Canadian capital, the first time Mr. Biden has traveled to the U.S. neighbor to the north as president. The pair addressed the Canadian Parliament and held bilateral talks before holding a joint press conference. Trudeau is hosting the president and first lady for a gala dinner Friday night.

    In his speech to Parliament, Mr. Biden underscored the lengthy and robust relationship between Canada and the United States. The leaders issued a joint statement documenting their commitment to embrace clean energy and create good jobs, strengthen semiconductor supply chains, protect their shared waters and the Arctic ecosystem, and bolster global alliances such as NATO, the United Nations and the G20. 

    “Today I say to you, and to all of the people of Canada, that you will always, always be able to count on the United States of America,” Mr. Biden said. “Nothing gives me greater confidence in the future than knowing Canada and the United States stand together still.” 

    In his remarks, Trudeau emphasized the importance of the U.S.-Canadian partnership in developing clean energy and technology, and boosting production capacity for semiconductors and electric vehicles.

    “This time, with all the challenges we face, we are doubling down on our partnership and on our friendship,” Trudeau said.

    President Biden and Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau hold a joint press conference at the Sir John A. Macdonald Building in Ottawa on March 24, 2023.
    President Biden and Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau hold a joint press conference at the Sir John A. Macdonald Building in Ottawa on March 24, 2023.

    MANDEL NGAN/AFP via Getty Images


    Canada is one of the United States’ closest allies, with a shared border that makes the country a critical economic and trade partner. In one concrete development to emerge from the trip, the two leaders announced a deal on migration aimed at stemming the flow of thousands of asylum-seekers across the border.

    A 2004 pact has allowed American and Canadian border officials to send some asylum-seekers across the border under the premise that both nations are safe countries where migrants can seek humanitarian refuge. But the agreement has only applied at official border crossings, meaning that American and Canadian authorities have been unable to turn away asylum-seekers who cross into each country illegally. 

    The new agreement will close this loophole and allow either country to send back asylum-seekers, even those who cross between border checkpoints. Canada has been dealing with an influx of tens of thousands of asylum-seekers who have crossed into the country from the U.S. between official checkpoints, and they have sought this change for years.

    “The United States and Canada will work together to discourage unlawful border crossings and fully implement the updated ‘safe third country’ agreement,” Mr. Biden told members of Parliament. In exchange for the new enforcement measures, Canada will accept 15,000 more migrants from across the Western Hemisphere.

    National security issues were also a focus of the president’s visit. Canada, a NATO ally, has joined the U.S. and European allies in supporting Ukraine in its war with Russia and has welcomed Ukrainian refugees, provided humanitarian and military aid and issued targeted sanctions targeting the Kremlin. Trudeau reiterated Canada’s “steadfast support for the Ukrainian people” and vowed to continue to help Ukraine repel Russia’s “barbaric invasion.”

    In their press conference, Mr. Biden fielded a question about the U.S. banking system, and said he was confident the problems in the industry are contained following multiple bank failures.

    “First of all, have you ever known Wall Street not in consternation, number one?” Mr. Biden said, referencing uncertainty in the markets. “Look, I think we’ve done a pretty damn good job. Peoples’ savings are secure.”

    The president said the federal government could take more steps to secure deposits “if we find that there’s more instability than it appears.”

    “I think it’s going to take a little while for things to just calm down, but I don’t see anything that’s on the horizon that’s about to explode,” he said. “But I do understand there’s an unease about this. And these midsize banks have to be able to survive, and I think they’ll be able to do that.” 

    Camilo Montoya-Galvez contributed reporting.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Watch Live: Biden and Trudeau hold press conference after meeting in Canada

    Watch Live: Biden and Trudeau hold press conference after meeting in Canada

    [ad_1]

    President Biden and Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau are holding a joint press conference in Ottawa on Friday after they addressed the Canadian Parliament and underscored the strong relationship between Canada and the United States.

    “Today I say to you, and to all of the people of Canada, that you will always, always be able to count on the United States of America,” Mr. Biden said. “Nothing gives me greater confidence in the future than knowing Canada and the United States stand together still.” 

    In his remarks, Trudeau also emphasized the importance of the U.S.-Canadian partnership. He said Russian President Vladimir Putin has “underestimated” the resolve of NATO allies and the courage and strength of the Ukrainian people.

    The visit is Mr. Biden’s first to the country as president, and the two leaders were expected to discuss cooperation on national security matters, migration, climate change and other issues. Trudeau and Mr. Biden held a bilateral meeting before their remarks to lawmakers.

    “We disagree and agree on things occasionally,” Mr. Biden said as the two met. “But there’s no fundamental difference in the democratic values we share.”

    After their speeches, the leaders issued a joint statement establishing their commitment to embrace clean energy and create good jobs, strengthen semiconductor supply chains, protect their shared waters and the Arctic ecosystem, and bolster global alliances such as NATO, the United Nations and the G20. 

    President Biden shakes hands with Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau at the Canadian Parliament in Ottawa on March 24, 2023.
    President Biden shakes hands with Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau at the Canadian Parliament in Ottawa on March 24, 2023.

    KEVIN LAMARQUE/POOL/AFP via Getty Images


    Following their press conference, Trudeau will host the president and first lady for a gala dinner.

    Canada is one of the United States’ closest allies, with a shared border that makes the country a critical economic and trade partner. Mr. Biden announced a deal on migration that will allow both countries to turn away migrants apprehended between official points of entry along the U.S.-Canada border, a change that Canada has long sought. 

    A 2004 agreement has allowed American and Canadian border officials to send some asylum-seekers across the border under the premise that both nations are safe countries where migrants can seek humanitarian refuge. But the agreement has only applied at official border crossings, meaning that American and Canadian authorities have been unable to turn away asylum-seekers who cross into each country illegally. Canada has been dealing with an influx of tens of thousands of asylum-seekers who have crossed into the country from the U.S. between official checkpoints.

    “The United States and Canada will work together to discourage unlawful border crossings and fully implement the updated ‘safe third country’ agreement,” Mr. Biden told members of Parliament.

    National security issues were also expected to be a focus of the president’s visit. Canada, a NATO ally, has joined the U.S. and European allies in supporting Ukraine in its war with Russia and has welcomed Ukrainian refugees, provided humanitarian and military aide and issued targeted sanctions targeting the Kremlin.

    Intrusions into U.S. and Canadian airspace were also likely to be a topic of discussion. Trudeau announced last month that he ordered the takedown of an unidentified object that violated Canadian airspace, and a U.S. fighter jet ultimately successfully shot down the object. The move came after the U.S. downed a Chinese surveillance balloon after it traversed the country.

    The visit is a whirlwind trip for the president, who arrived in Ottawa on Thursday night and visited the Trudeau family at their official residence. Mr. Biden leaves later Friday night to spend the weekend in Delaware. 


    How to watch Biden and Trudeau’s press conference 

    • What: President Biden and Prime Minister Justin Trudeau hold a press conference in Ottawa, Canada
    • Date: March 24, 2023
    • Time: 3:45 p.m. ET
    • Location: Ottawa
    • Online stream: Live on CBS News in the player above and on your mobile or streaming device.

    Camilo Montoya-Galvez contributed reporting.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • How the Fed affects the stock market

    How the Fed affects the stock market

    [ad_1]

    Share

    When members of the Federal Reserve make public statements, investors tend to listen. Over the past two decades, central bankers have consistently shared key information about the future trajectory of important inputs like interest rates. The Fed’s forward guidance on interest rates amid historic inflation has taken stock markets for a ride in 2022. As investors wait for a pivot, a panel of experts explains why many in the market choose not to fight the Fed.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • How the Federal Reserve affected 2022’s stock market

    How the Federal Reserve affected 2022’s stock market

    [ad_1]

    The Federal Reserve, over its more than centurylong existence, has emerged as a leading force in the stock market.

    This stature was bolstered by the central bank’s adoption of two unconventional policy tools in the 2000s – large-scale asset purchases and forward guidance.

    Large-scale asset purchases refer to the Fed’s emergency buying of government debt and mortgage-backed securities. Forward guidance refers to the central bank’s public communications about the future trajectory of monetary policies. The guidance often hints at the expected path of the federal funds interest rate target in advance of a policy change.

    Central bankers in 2022 repeatedly told the public to expect tighter economic conditions as it battles inflation. Economists believe this has contributed to months of declining prices across the S&P500.

    “I think they know they gambled and lost and that they have to do something serious in order to get inflation back under control” said Jeffrey Campbell, an economics professor at Notre Dame University and former Federal Reserve economist. “I fear that they took a gamble that inflation wasn’t too real at the beginning of 2021.”

    The Fed has reacted to hotter-than-expected inflation with seven interest rate hikes in 2022. These higher rates can weigh on publicly traded companies, particularly growth stocks in tech.

    Meanwhile, the Fed’s asset portfolio has decreased more than $336 billion since April 2022.  Experts tell CNBC that the full combined effects of this economic tightening are unknown.

    That has many people on Wall Street waiting for the central bank to pivot, and bring interest rates back down. At the same time, many financial advisors are calling for caution.

    “If you have somebody that has a thumb on the scale or has a decided advantage about what’s going to happen, whether we think good things or bad things are going to happen, it’s best not to fight that policy.” said Victoria Greene, founding partner and chief investment officer at G Squared Wealth Management.

    Nonetheless, many experts believe that central bank policy is only one piece of the puzzle. Both black swan events and investor sentiment play a massive role in shaping the trajectory of markets, too. “Sure don’t fight the Fed but … don’t believe too much that the Fed is all powerful,” said John Weinberg, policy advisor emeritus in the research department at the Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond.

    Watch the video above to learn how the Fed shaped 2022’s stock market.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • The House GOP’s Investigation Conundrum

    The House GOP’s Investigation Conundrum

    [ad_1]

    The list of investigative priorities for the House Judiciary Committee that the incoming chairperson, Jim Jordan, sent to the Justice Department earlier this month reads like an assignment sheet for Fox News.

    And that was before Jordan, with incoming House Oversight and Government Reform Committee Chair James Comer, repeatedly insisted the FBI had colluded with “Big Tech” to undermine former president Donald Trump by “suppressing” information about Hunter Biden’s laptop prior to the 2020 election.

    It was also before reports surfaced that Kevin McCarthy, in his bid to secure the votes as speaker, promised far-right members of his caucus that he would authorize investigations into the Justice Department’s treatment of the insurrectionists who rioted in support of Trump on January 6. This was also before McCarthy threatened to launch impeachment proceedings against Department of Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas.

    Two months before taking power, the new House Republican majority has signaled that its investigative agenda will channel the preoccupations of the former president and his die-hard base of supporters. But it has set this course immediately after a midterm election in which voters outside the core conservative states sent an unmistakable signal of their own by repeatedly rejecting Trump-backed candidates in high-profile senate and gubernatorial races. That contrast captures why the GOP’s plans for aggressive investigations of President Joe Biden may present as much political risk for the investigators as it does for the targets.

    House Republicans and their allies are confident that the investigations will weaken Biden in advance of the 2024 presidential election. “This is not just superficial stuff—this is damaging stuff,” former Republican Representative Tom Davis, who chaired the National Republican Congressional Committee, told me.

    But the new majority’s focus on airing echo-chamber conservative obsessions risks further stamping the GOP as the party of Trump precisely as more Republican leaders and donors insist the recent election results demonstrate the need to move beyond him.

    “All these folks are coming out saying, ‘Turn the page; move forward’ … and I think this is really a problem if some of these [House] members are going to continue to look back and embrace Trump at a time when we saw the most Trumpian candidates get their heads handed to them,” former Republican Representative Charlie Dent told me.

    The choices confronting GOP leaders on what—and how—to investigate encapsulates the much larger challenge they will face in managing the House. This month’s midterm election left the GOP with a House majority much smaller than it expected. The results also created a kind of split-personality caucus operating with very different political incentives.

    Most incoming House Republicans represent districts in Trump country: 168 of them hold seats that Trump won by 10 percentage points or more in 2020. Another three dozen represent more marginal Republican-leaning seats that Trump carried by fewer than 10 points two years ago.

    But the GOP majority relies on what will likely be 18 members (when all the final votes are counted) who won districts that voted for Biden in 2020. Eleven of those 18 are in New York and California alone—two states that will likely become considerably more difficult for Republicans in a presidential-election year than during a midterm contest.

    For the Republicans from the hard-core Trump districts, demonstrating a commitment to confronting Biden at every turn is crucial for preempting any possible primary challenges from their right, says the Democratic consultant Meredith Kelly, a former communications director at the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee. But, as Dent told me, the Republicans precariously holding the Biden seats have the “polar opposite” incentive: “They need to have bipartisan victories and wins.”

    Amid that cross-pressure, many analysts second the prediction of outgoing Democratic Representative David Price of North Carolina, a political scientist who has written several books about Congress, that the new GOP House majority is not likely to pass much legislation. The problem, Price told me, is not only the partisan and ideological fracture in the GOP caucus, but that its members do not have “an agenda that they campaigned on or they are committed to.”

    All members of the GOP caucus might agree on legislation to extend the Trump tax cuts, to promote more domestic energy production, or to increase funding for border security. But resistance from the Republicans in blue and purple districts may frustrate many of the right’s most ambitious legislative goals, such as repealing elements of Biden’s Inflation Reduction Act, passing a national ban on abortion, and forcing cuts to Social Security and Medicare.

    With their legislative opportunities limited, House Republicans may see relentless investigation of Biden and his administration as a path of least resistance that can unite their caucus. And, several observers in both parties told me, all sides in the GOP are likely to support efforts to probe the White House’s policy record. Such targets could include the administration’s handling of border security, the chaotic withdrawal from Afghanistan, and how it is allocating the clean-energy tax credits and loan guarantees that the Inflation Reduction Act established.

    But Republicans have already indicated they are unlikely to stop at such conventional targets.

    Jordan, in his letter to Attorney General Merrick Garland earlier this month, warned of coming investigations into the Justice Department’s treatment of Project Veritas; allegations that the department has targeted conservative parents as “domestic terrorists” for their actions at school-board meetings; and the department’s decision making in the choice to execute a search warrant at Mar-a-Lago.

    At the press conference last week with Jordan, Comer declared that evidence from the GOP’s investigation of Hunter Biden’s business activities, including information obtained from his laptop, “raises troubling questions about whether President Biden is a national-security risk.”

    Jordan, asked at that press conference about the reports that McCarthy has committed to an investigation of the prosecution and treatment of the January 6 rioters, refused to deny it, instead repeating his determination to explore all examples of alleged politicization at the Justice Department. At one point, Jordan, an unwavering defender of Trump through his two impeachments, delivered an impassioned attack on federal law enforcement that reprised a long list of familiar Trump grievances. “When is the FBI going to quit interfering with elections?” Jordan excitedly declared.

    Jordan doesn’t even represent the outer edge of conservative ambition to use House investigations to settle scores for Trump. Earlier this week, Representative Matt Gaetz of Florida tweeted that when Republicans take the majority, they “should take over the @January6thCmte and release every second of footage that will exonerate our Patriots!”

    That might be a bridge too far even for McCarthy. But as he scrambles to overcome conservative resistance to his bid for speaker, he has already shown deference to demands from the Trump-country members who constitute the dominant block in his caucus. One example was the report that he promised Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene that he would allow some investigation into treatment of the January 6 rioters. Another came in his appearance along the Texas border this week. McCarthy went beyond pledging oversight of the Biden administration’s border record to raise the much more incendiary (but also Fox-friendly) notion of impeaching Mayorkas.

    Dent, the former GOP representative, told me that on all these fronts, House Republicans risk pushing oversight to a confrontational peak that may damage its members from marginal seats at least as much as it hurts Biden—particularly if it involves what he described as airing Trump grievances. “These rabbit holes are just fraught with political peril in these more moderate districts,” Dent said.

    Democrats hope that the coming GOP investigations will alienate more voters than they alarm. Several Democratic strategists told me they believe that the focus on so many conservative causes will both spotlight the most extreme Trump-aligned voices in the Republican caucus, such as Jordan and Greene, and strike swing voters as a distraction from their kitchen-table concerns.

    Leslie Dach, a veteran Democratic communications strategist now serving as a senior adviser to the Congressional Integrity Project, a group mobilizing to respond to the investigations, told me the GOP inquiries will inexorably identify the party with the same polarizing style of Trump-like politics that voters just repudiated in states such as Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Arizona. “We saw in this election that voters reject the Trump playbook and MAGA politics, but that is exactly what they will see in these hearings,” he said.

    Congressional investigations always carry the risk of disclosures that could hurt or embarrass Biden and other officials. And whatever they find, investigations also promise to divert significant amounts of the administration’s time and energy. The White House has already staffed up a unit in the counsel’s office dedicated to responding to the inquiries. Cabinet departments are scrambling to do the same.

    Recognizing the potential political risk, several Republican representatives newly elected in Biden districts have already urged their party to move slowly on the probes and instead to prioritize action on economic issues. Their problem is that McCarthy already has given every indication he’s likely to prioritize the demands for maximum confrontation from his caucus’s pro-Trump majority.

    “If past is prologue, Kevin McCarthy will fall much on the side of the ruby-red Republican base and the pro-investigation, pro-culture-war side,” Kelly says. “He’s never proven able to stand up to the fringe.” And that means the new members from Biden-leaning districts who have provided the GOP its narrow majority have reason to sweat almost as much as the Biden administration over the swarm of investigations that House Republicans are poised to unleash.

    [ad_2]

    Ronald Brownstein

    Source link

  • How Election Denial Lost

    How Election Denial Lost

    [ad_1]

    Outside the Maricopa County tabulation center last weekend, a few dozen outraged Arizonans paced single file along the sidewalk waving KARI LAKE flags. Through megaphones, some of them denounced imaginary corruption schemes and clamored for a “redo” election. Others chanted the Lord’s Prayer, like the musicians on the Titanic playing hymns to calm the passengers.

    The noteworthy thing about the Maricopa protest, though, wasn’t the scene. It was its singularity. Two years ago, shouts of “Stop the steal!” could be heard across the country in nearly every state. This year, the refrain was largely limited to one block in downtown Phoenix, where at times reporters outnumbered the demonstrators.

    If any state was going to devolve into chaos after a disappointing election for Republicans, it would have been Arizona—ground zero for election denial in 2020, and where this year, primary voters nominated an entire slate of fringe election cranks to all of the state’s major offices. Instead, the midterms delivered a sure blow to the election-denial movement, both there and everywhere else: The most prominent conspiracists, such as the Arizona secretary-of-state candidate Mark Finchem and Pennsylvania’s Doug Mastriano, lost by significant margins; some of these candidates even acknowledged their losses by—surprise!—actually conceding. On Monday night, Lake was declared the loser in her race for Arizona’s governorship, adding a final note to what has seemed like a comprehensive repudiation of the denialists. And where experts and reporters had anticipated widespread election-fraud mayhem, nothing close to it has yet emerged.

    It would be foolish, though, to pronounce “Stop the Steal” dead. The movement may have fizzled without Donald Trump, but if he runs again in 2024, we haven’t seen the last of it. Even if Trump isn’t on the ballot, an entire swath of the Republican Party is now open to the idea that any narrow loss can be blamed on fraud. Trust in elections among rank-and-file GOP voters remains low, and in some respects has gotten worse, according to a recent survey from the Pew Research Center. The damage inflicted in 2020 endures. “He’s broken the seal,” Sarah Longwell, the publisher of The Bulwark, told me. Election denial “is part of our politics now.”

    Things could have been so much worse.

    Ahead of the election, poll workers in Arizona and beyond feared for their safety, and the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law reported an uptick in calls to its Election Protection hotline. In the Phoenix suburbs, armed men were patrolling ballot drop-off sites. The day before the election, I watched a group of women stake out a ballot box, studying voters through binoculars for signs of cheating. The central counting facility in downtown Phoenix was fenced off with a ring of plastic Jersey barriers, and police patrolled the streets on horseback.

    Election officials in Maricopa County, who appeared very tightly wound, held a press conference to get ahead of any potential claims of election chicanery. A time-consuming vote count does not indicate fraud, they reminded the room full of reporters; ballots are processed and reviewed by bipartisan teams; tabulation machines work.

    Unfortunately, events on Election Day quickly undermined those careful efforts at reassurance. The sun had not yet risen when the first handful of tabulation machines stopped reading ballots. By midday, dozens of machines were malfunctioning at polling sites throughout the county. Voters at those sites were told to feed their ballots into “Door 3,” a regrettably sinister-sounding name for a secure slot that would sort the misread ballots to be counted later. And they would be counted later, as officials reassured voters in a series of follow-up press conferences.

    Voters I spoke with were understandably confused and frustrated. And the malfunctioning machines had state GOP leaders immediately taking to Twitter to suggest wrongdoing. “They are incompetent and/or engaging in malfeasance just like in 2020,” GOP Chair Kelli Ward posted. Those complaints spiraled into partisan hysteria as the counting went on. Frustrated MAGA commentators suggested that Maricopa County officials had engaged in outright corruption and “CIVIC TERRORISM.” Finchem accused them of “screwing with the election counts.”

    Still, despite those initial glitches and dark mutterings, Election Day unfolded mostly without threats or funny business. Poll workers weren’t harmed, and voters were, for the most part, not intimidated. Almost everyone on the America First Secretary of State Coalition slate lost last week, including Michigan’s Kristina Karamo, who’d described Democrats as having a “satanic agenda”; Finchem, the mustachioed Oath Keeper of Arizona; and the head of the coalition himself, Nevada’s Jim Marchant.

    Parroting Trump’s election lies got many Republican candidates across the finish line in their primary. Finchem’s repeated election-fraud claims won him a regular spot on Steve Bannon’s War Room podcast. The former president has praised Lake’s commitment to the bit, too, reportedly telling donors that even if asked about the weather, Lake would find a way to bring the conversation back to 2020. But these wild claims proved poisonous to moderates and swing voters—polling suggests that some went to the polls explicitly to vote against deniers. We know this because many Republicans who didn’t traffic in election lies performed well: Brian Kemp beat Stacey Abrams by almost eight points in the Georgia governor’s race. In Florida, Governor Ron DeSantis won reelection by nearly 20 points.

    Fans of democracy can take heart that only 14 out of 94 election deniers won in races for positions that oversee elections, including secretary of state, attorney general, and governor, according to States United Action, a nonpartisan nonprofit that advocates for election integrity. Of those 14, only five candidates were not incumbents. “The movement is still not gaining ground,” Joanna Lydgate, the CEO of States United Action, told me.

    That things didn’t turn out worse is a relief, given the chaos of 2020. But the dynamic of this year’s election was different in a few important ways. Republicans were on the defensive back then: The general election was a national referendum on their president. This year, Trump himself wasn’t on the ballot—whereas, in 2020, he had spent months priming the base to blame polling fraud if he lost. It’s clear now that nobody does Stop the Steal like 45.

    “The thing that gives you power as an election denier is that people believe you, and Trump was able to make people believe him,” Longwell told me. Few other candidates have that power, and none in this midterm election could nationalize the issue as he did in the presidential contest. This time, the GOP had no central character over whom Trump supporters could feel outraged.

    Yet the election-fraud fires that Trump and his allies have fanned for so long will not be easily extinguished. If repeated audits and cold evidence haven’t done enough to deter conspiracists these past two years, then a disappointing midterm cycle won’t dissuade them either.

    Election deniers didn’t win in swing states, but elsewhere they did. Four of them will oversee elections in Indiana, Wyoming, Alabama, and South Dakota. More than 200 Republicans running for Congress and statewide positions who’d questioned the legitimacy of the 2020 election won or retained their office last week, including more than 180 in the House. Other election deniers won at the state level in ultraconservative districts across the country. These ruby-red areas might sink deeper into denial, creating islands where both voters and officials are debilitatingly distrustful of elections.

    Take Cochise County, Arizona. There, 170 miles southeast of Phoenix, some GOP election officials have been hankering to do a full hand-count audit in the election. Paradoxically, Republican candidates won handily there both this year and in 2020, so no obvious motive for distrusting the results is apparent. But the years-long drumbeat of misinformation from the state GOP chair, Ward, and her allied band of election-fraud kooks have nurtured a deep suspicion of the whole process.

    Republican leaders in Arizona don’t believe in machine tabulation and view hand counts as the purest, most accurate way to tally votes—never mind the extensive evidence that the opposite is true. This year, Cochise County tried to forge ahead with a full hand-count audit, even after a judge ordered local officials not to. Only a timely ruling from the Arizona Supreme Court last week kept them from carrying one out. “What I’ll be doing over the next two years is looking at these counties that have gone really hard to the right,” Jessica Huseman, the editorial director of Votebeat, a nonpartisan election-news outlet, told me. “Because there’s no one to push back.”

    Even in states where election deniers lost, voters have been primed to suspect outcomes they don’t like, glitches they don’t understand, and delays in counting. “If [Lake] doesn’t announce that she’s going to win tonight, we might have to go through like a week or so of shenanigans—the same shenanigans that they pulled in 2020,” Stephen Tenner, a former actor from New York, told me at a lavish GOP Election Night party in Scottsdale. “We’re waiting for it this time; we weren’t ready last time. So we’re going to catch the fraud.”

    Other Republicans I interviewed were less persuaded of the likelihood of fraud, but were comfortable entertaining the idea. “I’d like to go back to same-day voting and paper ballots. There are problems with machines,” a man named William from Phoenix, who declined to give his last name, told me at the party. Would he blame fraud if Republicans lost? I asked. “Well, there were problems with the elections two years ago,” he said, adding that, this time around, Secretary of State Katie Hobbs should have recused herself from official duties during the election. “I would be hesitant to say I thought [this one] was completely honest.”

    The thing about trust is that it’s painstakingly hard to build and relatively easy to demolish. Election denial is now a chronic wound in America’s body politic, only partially healed, and ready to reopen—red and raw—whenever circumstances permit. Those circumstances may arise sooner rather than later if Trump is on the ballot again in 2024. Even if he isn’t, the former president has already broken the tradition of gracious presidential concessions and peaceful transfers of power. He’s encouraged a populist animus toward institutions that will likely remain a litmus test for future Republican candidates. And more than anything, Trump has created a blueprint for exploiting the messiness and complexity of America’s elections. An audience for this type of exploitation is still out there, if Republicans want to take advantage of it.

    On Monday, after Maricopa County released a decisive batch of ballots that led all major news networks to declare Hobbs the next governor of Arizona, a few members of Team Lake sprang into action to ensure that any ballots with errors were quickly cured. That’s a standard and legitimate procedure in elections, and can be helpful in especially close ones. But other Republicans continued to follow the denialist script. Ward accused Maricopa County of voter suppression. Finchem, the failed secretary-of-state candidate, began to do the impossible calculations. “I should win by 3% and @KariLake should win by 11%,” he tweeted. “If that doesn’t happen you know the real story.”

    Lake’s own account was silent for more than an hour after the networks had called the race. After all of this, would this cycle’s Stop the Steal standard-bearer actually concede? The answer came at 10:30 p.m. eastern, with a simple tweet: “Arizonans know BS when they see it,” Lake wrote.

    [ad_2]

    Elaine Godfrey

    Source link

  • In Arizona, Shouts of ‘Fraud’ Again

    In Arizona, Shouts of ‘Fraud’ Again

    [ad_1]

    PHOENIX, Ariz.—The Watchers tend to show up at sundown—or so I’d heard. And yesterday evening, I went looking for them. Around 7 p.m., at a ballot drop-off site next to a juvenile-detention center in Mesa, just east of Phoenix, I sat on a concrete bench and waited under the parking lot’s bright lights. A steady stream of cars drove through, and people hopped out to slip their green mail-in-ballot envelopes into the big metal box. After two hours, the Watchers arrived: three women in camp chairs, sitting far enough away in the semi-darkness to not be easily noticed. Each peered at the ballot box through a set of binoculars.

    Here in Maricopa County, there have been a few reports of such citizen surveillance operations: people keeping an eye out for so-called mules, who might be stuffing stacks of illegitimate ballots into the boxes. Sometimes, these Watchers have carried guns. When I approached the women, they declined to tell me their names. They all looked to be in their early 60s—around my mom’s age, I kept thinking—and were bundled up against the chilly desert air. They sat around a folding table on which sat travel mugs and a single bag of kettle chips. The trunk of their SUV was open in order, I assume, to obscure their license plate.

    “We’re just doing our due diligence,” one of them told me. I asked if they were looking out for voters dropping off multiple ballots. “Well, it’d have to be more than a couple, because people drop them off for their family,” another said, without looking away from her binoculars. So how was it going? I asked. The third woman, wearing a green visor over her curly hair, looked at me and shrugged: “It all seems like it’s on the up and up so far.”

    For the past two years, Maricopa County has served as the beating heart of America’s emergent election-denial movement—ever since then-President Donald Trump lost to Joe Biden here in 2020. Back then, “Stop the Steal” groups protested for weeks to overturn the closer-than-expected results, and a noisy partisan review of the results kept national media attention on Arizona for nearly a year—until even that clown show of an inquiry concluded that Biden had, in fact, won.

    By Monday night, on the eve of another election, GOP leaders in the state had spent so long fanning the flames of conspiracy theory that many voters were anticipating trickery. Election Day may once have been a moment to celebrate democracy and savor the ritual of taking part in the political process. But to visit Maricopa County today is to visit a place on high alert.

    “We have enough security to invade a small country,” one county leader told me at the Tabulations and Elections Center, which attracted angry protests in 2020 and is now surrounded by heavy plastic Jersey barriers. The day before, Sheriff Paul Penzone had told the press that plainclothes police officers would be present at every voting location all Election Day—and that they would exercise a “zero tolerance” policy toward anyone threatening voters or poll workers, he said.

    At that same press conference, county leaders aimed to get a head start on debunking some of the false narratives that might emerge in the coming days. Bill Gates, the chair of the county board of supervisors, and Stephen Richer, the county recorder, reiterated that a days-long vote count does not indicate any fraud; that voting machines are tested for accuracy and are not susceptible to hacking; and that ballots are reviewed and processed by a bipartisan team of election workers.

    Already on Election Day, though, those careful efforts at transparency and heading off mistrust were undermined by the most unfortunate error: Early this morning, tabulation machines in roughly 20 percent of Maricopa County’s more than 200 polling sites stopped working. Voters at these centers have had to choose whether to put their ballots in a secure box to be counted later at the Tabulation Center in downtown Phoenix or to travel to a different polling location to cast a vote. (The root of the machines’ malfunctioning had been identified and begun to be resolved by late afternoon, according to the county elections department.)

    Whatever voters choose, their ballots will be counted, county officials have assured. But the damage has been done. The problems have understandably frustrated voters—and, perhaps more dangerously, tossed an enormous hunk of raw meat into the ravening jaws of the election conspiracists. “They are incompetent and/or engaging in malfeasance just like in 2020,” the state GOP chair Kelli Ward tweeted this morning. She and others have suggested that the tabulators seemed to be malfunctioning only in conservative areas. Kari Lake, the Republican running for Arizona governor, told reporters that she chose to vote in a liberal area “because we wanted to make sure we had good machines.”

    Trump, always eager to take advantage of an election-fraud narrative, has weighed in too. “People of Arizona, don’t get out of line until you cast your vote,” the former president posted on Truth Social. “They are trying to steal the election with bad Machines and DELAY. Don’t let it happen!”

    A few hours after the tabulation news came in this morning, Gates and Richer delivered another impromptu press conference, and shared a video showing voters what a tabulation machine looks like and explaining that all valid ballots, regardless of how they’re submitted, will be counted. Shortly after 4 p.m., in a statement posted to Twitter, Richer apologized for the machine errors and reiterated his commitment to assisting voters. The statement immediately garnered hundreds of replies. A few thanked Richer for his transparency. But many just used one word, in all caps: “RESIGN.”

    There was always a decent chance that Election Night in Maricopa County would culminate, once again, in angry protests outside the county recorder’s office and shrill allegations of coordinated fraud. Now, whether Republicans win big tonight or not, that outcome seems likelier than ever.

    [ad_2]

    Elaine Godfrey

    Source link

  • America’s COVID Booster Rates Are a Bad Sign for Winter

    America’s COVID Booster Rates Are a Bad Sign for Winter

    [ad_1]

    And just like that, with the passing of Labor Day, fall was upon us. Seemingly overnight, six-packs of pumpkin beer materialized on grocery shelves, hordes of city dwellers descended upon apple orchards—and America rolled out new COVID boosters. The timing wasn’t a coincidence. Since the beginning of the pandemic, cases in North America and Europe have risen during the fall and winter, and there was no reason to expect anything different this year. Spreading during colder weather is simply what respiratory diseases like COVID do. The hope for the fall booster rollout was that Americans would take it as an opportunity to supercharge their immunological defenses against the coronavirus in advance of a winter wave that we know is going to come.

    So far, reality isn’t living up to that hope. Since the new booster became available in early September, fewer than 20 million Americans have gotten the shot, according to the CDC—just 8.5 percent of those who are eligible. The White House COVID-19 response coordinator, Ashish Jha, said at a press conference earlier this month that he expects booster uptake to increase in October as the temperatures drop and people start taking winter diseases more seriously. That doesn’t seem to be happening yet. America’s booster campaign is going so badly that by late September, only half of Americans had heard even “some” information about the bivalent boosters, according to a recent survey. The low numbers are especially unfortunate because the remaining 91.5 percent of booster-eligible people have already shown that they’re open to vaccines by getting at least their first two shots—if not already at least one booster.

    Now the bungled booster rollout could soon run headfirst into the winter wave. The virus is not yet surging in the United States—at least as far as we can tell—but as the weather cools down, cases have been on the rise in Western Europe, which has previously foreshadowed what happens in the U.S. At the same time, new Omicron offshoots such as BQ.1 and BQ.1.1 are gaining traction in the U.S., and others, including XBB, are creating problems in Singapore. Boosters are our best chance at protecting ourselves from getting swept up in whatever this virus throws at us next, but too few of us are getting them. What will happen if that doesn’t change?

    The whole reason for new shots is that though the protection conferred by the original vaccines is tremendous, it has waned over time and with new variants. The latest booster, which is called “bivalent” because it targets both the original SARS-CoV-2 virus and BA.5, is meant to kick-start the production of more neutralizing antibodies, which in turn should prevent new infection in the short term, Katelyn Jetelina, a public-health expert who writes the newsletter Your Local Epidemiologist, told me. The other two goals for the vaccine are still being studied: The hope is that it will also broaden protection by teaching the immune system to recognize other aspects of the virus, and that it will make protection longer-lasting.

    In theory, this souped-up booster would make a big difference heading into another wave. In September, a forecast presented by the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP), which advises the CDC, showed that if people get the bivalent booster at the same rate as they do the flu vaccine—optimistic, given that about 50 percent of people have gotten the flu vaccine in recent years—roughly 25 million infections, 1 million hospitalizations, and 100,000 deaths could be averted by the end of March 2023.

    But these numbers shouldn’t be taken as gospel, because protection across the population varies widely and modeling can’t account for all of the nuance that happens in real life. Gaming out exactly what our dreadful booster rates mean going forward is not a simple endeavor “given that the immune landscape is becoming more and more complex,” Jetelina told me. People received their first shots and boosters at different times, if they got them at all. And the same is true of infections over the past year, with the added wrinkle that those who fell sick all didn’t get the same type of Omicron. All of these factors play a role in how much America’s immunological guardrails will hold up in the coming months. “But it’s very clear that a high booster rate would certainly help this winter,” Jetelina said.

    At this point in the pandemic, getting COVID is far less daunting for healthy people than it was a year or two ago (although the prospect of developing long COVID still looms). The biggest concerns are hospitalizations and deaths, which make low booster uptake among vulnerable groups such as the elderly and immunocompromised especially worrying. That said, everyone aged 5 and up who has received their primary vaccine is encouraged to get the new boosters. It bears repeating that vaccination not only protects against severe illness and death but has the secondary effect of preventing transmission, thereby reducing the chances of infecting the vulnerable.

    What will happen next is hard to predict, Michael Osterholm, an epidemiologist at the University of Minnesota, told me, but now is a bad time for booster rates to be this low. Conditions are ripe for COVID’s spread. Protection is waning among the unboosted, immunity-dodging variants are emerging, and Americans just don’t seem to care about COVID anymore, Osterholm explained. The combination of these factors, he said, is “not a pretty picture.” By skipping boosters, people are missing out on the chance to offset these risks, though non-vaccine interventions such as masking and ventilation improvements can help, too.

    That’s not to say that the immunity conferred by the vaccination and the initial boosters is moot. Earlier doses still offer “pretty substantial protection,” Saad Omer, a Yale epidemiologist, told me. Not only are eligible Americans slacking on booster uptake, but lately vaccine uptake among the unvaccinated hasn’t risen much either. Before the new bivalent shots came around, less than half of eligible Americans had gotten a booster. “That means we are, as a population, much more vulnerable going into this fall,” James Lawler, an infectious-diseases expert at the University of Nebraska Medical Center, told me.

    If booster uptake—and vaccine uptake overall—remains low, expecting more illness, particularly among the vulnerable, would be reasonable, William Schaffner, a professor of infectious diseases at Vanderbilt University Medical Center, told me. Hospitalizations will rise more than they would otherwise, and with them the stress on the health-care system, which will also be grappling with the hundreds of thousands of people likely to be hospitalized for flu. While Omicron causes relatively minor symptoms, “it’s quite capable of producing severe disease,” Schaffner said. Since August, it has killed an average of 300 to 400 people each day.

    All of this assumes that we won’t get a completely new variant, of course. So far, the BA.5 subvariant targeted by the bivalent booster is still dominating cases around the world. Newer ones, such as XBB, BQ.1.1, and BQ.1, are steadily gaining traction, but they’re still offshoots of Omicron. “We’re still very hopeful that the booster will be effective,” Jetelina said. But the odds of what she called an “Omicron-like event,” in which a completely new SARS-CoV-2 lineage—one that warrants a new Greek letter—emerges out of left field, are about 20 to 30 percent, she estimated. Even in this case, the bivalent nature of the booster would come in handy, helping protect against a wider crop of potential variants. The effectiveness of our shots against a brand-new variant depends on its mutations, and how much they overlap with those we’ve already seen, so “we’ll see,” Omer said.

    Just as it isn’t too late to get boosted, there’s still time to improve uptake in advance of a wave. If you’re three to six months out from an infection or your last shot, the best thing you can do for your immune system right now is to get another dose, and do it soon. Though there’s no perfect and easy solution that can overcome widespread vaccine fatigue, that doesn’t mean trying isn’t worthwhile. “Right now, we don’t have a lot of people that feel the pandemic is that big of a problem,” and people are more likely to get vaccinated if they feel their health is challenged, Osterholm said.

    There’s also plenty of room to crank the volume on the messaging in general: Not long ago, the initial vaccine campaign involved blasting social media with celebrity endorsers such as Dolly Parton and Olivia Rodrigo. Where is that now? Lots of pharmacies are swimming in vaccines, but making getting boosted even easier and more convenient can go a long way too. “We need to catch them where they come,” said Omer, who thinks boosters should be offered at workplaces, in churches and community centers, and at specialty clinics such as dialysis centers where patients are vulnerable by default.

    After more than two years of covering and living through the pandemic, believe me: I get that people are over it. It’s easy not to care when the risks of COVID seem to be negligible. But while shedding masks is one thing, taking a blasé attitude toward boosters is another. Shots alone can’t solve all of our pandemic problems, but their unrivaled protective effects are fading. Without a re-up, when the winter wave reaches U.S. shores and more people start getting sick, the risks may no longer be so easy to ignore.

    [ad_2]

    Yasmin Tayag

    Source link

  • The Alexander Gaston Estate Donates $7.2 Million to the Pearl Harbor Historical Sites Fund

    The Alexander Gaston Estate Donates $7.2 Million to the Pearl Harbor Historical Sites Fund

    [ad_1]

    In a Historic investment in Hawaii’s future, the Alexander Gaston Estate is making a significant donation, managed by the Hawaii Community Foundation (managers of the fund) and Bank of Hawaii (investment managers of the fund). This large donation of $7.2 million goes toward the Pearl Harbor Historical Sites Fund.

    Press Release


    Oct 25, 2022

    In a Historic investment in Hawaii’s future, the Alexander Gaston Estate is making a significant donation, managed by the Hawaii Community Foundation (managers of the fund) and Bank of Hawaii (investment managers of the fund). This large donation of $7.2 million goes toward the Pearl Harbor Historical Sites Fund. 

    Mr. Gaston was one of Hawaii’s leading donors to the Pearl Harbor Historical Sites Fund. Now, this foundation will be set up to exist in perpetuity, creating an opportunity to support and educate school-age children.

    The Pearl Harbor Historical Sites Fund was started in 2009. The fund is asking the worldwide community, especially individual donors, and companies across Hawaii to support this fund with a 100% tax-deductible donation. All proceeds will support the PHHSF so that all the children of Hawaii, regardless of their financial ability, will have an opportunity to visit, learn and enjoy all there is to know about Pearl Harbor with a school field trip or daylong or overnight stay visit to Pearl Harbor historical sites. The funds raised support school visits, school tours, and are for children attending from all Hawaiian Islands. With these programs, the students have an opportunity to visit all four sites including the USS Arizona Memorial, the USS Battleship Missouri, the USS Bowfin Submarine, and the Pearl Harbor Aviation Museum.

    This foundation was inspired by Sandy’s long-time friend Jay Dunn, who was a volunteer running the flight simulators at the Pacific Aviation Museum. A child told him that a classmate couldn’t come to the museum that day with the class.

    Jay asked, “Why did your friend not come today?” and the child replied, “His mom didn’t have the $30.00  for transportation, admission, lunch.” Jay met with Sandy and his other brother-in-arms, Lee Collins, and the three decided to start a foundation specifically designed to address this problem for Hawaii’s families. 

    While Sandy Gaston, Jay Dunn, and Lee Collins initially served as the advisors to the fund, with Sandy’s passing, these responsibilities have now passed to representatives of the beneficiary museums and memorials, who will work directly with HCF to advise on the fund going forward. As co-trustees of the Gaston estate, they’ll continue to promote the program to the world and invite more people and corporate sponsors to become donors so that the fund may continue to grow and provide free access to Hawaii’s students in perpetuity. All three, having served in the military and having been veterans of war, agreed that all Hawaii’s school children should have an opportunity to enjoy and learn from the importance of all the Pearl Harbor Historic Sites. To make a tax-deductible donation visit www.PearlHarborFund.org 

    WHAT: PRESS CONFERENCE, USS Bowfin Submarine Museum & Park

    WHEN: October 25, 2022, 11am speakers from all historic sites

    WEBSITE: https://pearlharborfund.org

    Source: Alexander Gaston Estate

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Why This Election Is So Weird

    Why This Election Is So Weird

    [ad_1]

    The two major factors shaping the 2022 midterm elections collided in tumultuous fashion on Tuesday morning.

    First came the government report that inflation last month had increased faster than economists had expected or President Joe Biden had hoped. The announcement triggered a sharp fall in the stock market, the worst day on Wall Street in two years.

    That same afternoon, Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina introduced legislation that would impose a nationwide ban on abortion after 15 weeks of pregnancy.

    The inflation report captured this year’s most powerful tailwind for Republicans: widespread dissatisfaction with Biden’s management of the economy. Graham’s announcement captured this year’s strongest Democratic tailwind: widespread unease about abortion rights.

    The shift in the campaign debate away from Biden’s management of the economy and toward the GOP’s priorities on abortion and other issues has been the principal factor improving Democratic prospects since earlier this summer. But the unexpectedly pessimistic inflation report—which showed soaring grocery and housing bills overshadowing a steady decline in gasoline prices—was a pointed reminder that the economy remains a formidable threat to Democrats in November.

    These two events also underscored how, to an extremely unusual degree, the parties are talking past each other. As the Democratic pollster Molly Murphy told me, 2022 is not an election year when most Americans “agree on what the top priorities [for the country] are” and debate “different solutions” from the two major parties.

    Instead, surveys show that Republican voters stress inflation, the overall condition of the economy, crime, and immigration. For Democratic voters, the top priorities are abortion rights, the threats to democracy created by former President Donald Trump and his movement, gun control, climate change, and health care.

    Few questions may shape the November results as much as whether the issues Democrats are stressing continue to motivate roughly as many voters as Republicans’ preferred issues. Gene Ulm, a Republican pollster, told me he believes that pocketbook strains will ultimately prove decisive for most voters, particularly those without a college degree. Those voters, he added, are basically saying, “‘I am worried about putting food on the table, and you are talking to me about all this other crap.’”

    Yet there is no question that Democratic candidates are performing far above the consistently bleak public assessments of the economy, and especially Biden’s management of it. In one sense, that’s not shocking: Over the past few decades, voters’ economic assessments have become less predictive of election results, in large part because those judgments are themselves so heavily shaped by partisanship. But even in light of that trend, the disconnect between voters’ views on Biden’s economic management and their willingness to support Democratic candidates for the House and Senate remains striking.

    Biden has positive trends in the economy to celebrate, particularly robust job growth. He’s been cutting ribbons at a steady procession of infrastructure projects and manufacturing-plant openings (like last week’s groundbreaking for an Intel semiconductor facility in Ohio) tied to the tax incentives and direct spending from the infrastructure, climate, and semiconductor bills that he’s signed. Those economic milestones—yesterday, for instance, the White House touted $85 billion in new private investments for electric-vehicle production since Biden took office—will likely be a political asset for him in 2024, especially in the pivotal states across the industrial Midwest. But those accomplishments won’t necessarily sway voters this November, and in any case, all of these favorable trends for now are being overshadowed in most households by the persistent pain of higher prices on consumer goods.

    Even before this week’s inflation report, voters gave Biden an extremely negative grade for his economic performance. In an NPR/PBS NewsHour/Marist Institute poll released last week, just 34 percent of those surveyed said that his actions have helped the economy, while 57 percent said they have hurt it. Not surprisingly, that discontent was most intense among Republicans and also among white voters without a college degree (a stunning 76 percent of whom said Biden’s actions had hurt the economy.) But that belief was also shared by 63 percent of independents, 55 percent of Generation Z and Millennial voters, 47 percent of nonwhite voters, and even 16 percent of people who voted for him in 2020.

    However, the share in each of these groups that gave Biden an overall positive mark on his job performance was consistently five to nine percentage points higher than those who believed his actions had helped the economy. And the share in each group that said they intend to support House Democrats in the November election was higher still—enough to give Democrats a narrow lead on that crucial question. Independents, for example, were split evenly on which party they intend to support in November, even though they were negative on Biden’s economic performance by more than two to one.

    This stark pattern points to another consequential anomaly in the 2022 polling so far. One of the most powerful modern trends in congressional races is a correlation between voters’ attitudes toward the president and their willingness to vote for candidates from his party. Virtually all voters who “strongly disapprove” of a president have voted against his party’s candidates in recent House and Senate elections. In 2018, two-thirds of voters who even “somewhat disapproved” of Trump voted for Democratic House candidates, according to exit polls. In 2010, two-thirds of voters who “somewhat disapproved” of Barack Obama likewise voted for Republican candidates.

    By contrast, in the Marist survey, and another recent national poll by the Pew Research Center, Democrats led slightly among those who “somewhat disapproved” of Biden—a stunning result.

    Murphy told me this disconnect has been evident since the outset of Biden’s presidency: Even when his approval numbers were high during his first months, she said of her polling, that didn’t lift other Democratic candidates, so she’s not entirely surprised that his decline hasn’t tugged them down. But Murphy, like others in the party, believes that concerns about Republicans—centered on their abortion-restriction efforts, their nomination of extremist and election-denying candidates, and their unflagging defense of Trump—also explain why Democratic candidates are consistently running ahead of Biden’s approval rating.

    “It should have been pretty easy for [Republicans] to put these races away, given how concerned voters are about the economy and inflation,” Murphy told me. Now, she said, “I do think they are having to go back to the drawing board.”

    Graham’s abortion legislation is certain to benefit Democratic efforts to shift voter focus from what Biden has done to what Republicans might do if returned to power. In a press conference, Graham flatly declared, “If we take back the House and Senate, I’ll assure you we’ll have a vote on our bill.” Although many Republican senators and candidates quickly distanced themselves from his proposal, his pledge meant that every Democratic Senate candidate can plausibly argue that creating a GOP majority in the chamber will ensure a congressional vote on a national abortion ban.

    Dan Sena, the former executive director of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, who now consults for many party House candidates, told me that the abortion fight’s biggest impact will be to inspire higher turnout from liberal-leaning and young voters. Abortion, he said, “has energized a group of people that we saw in 2018 and we saw in 2020 that traditionally don’t participate in midterm elections and are much more motivated by the cultural fight.”

    Yet few Democrats believe that the political threat from inflation and general unease about the economy is behind them in this election cycle. In focus groups, Ulm, the GOP pollster, told me, “We hear more gripes about groceries than anything.” Sena largely agrees: “Jobs and paychecks still matter, pal,” he said.

    One Democratic pollster, who asked not to be identified while discussing private campaign research, told me that inflation and crime—the principal issues Republicans are stressing on the campaign trail—remain tangible and immediate concerns in swing districts. In House district polling, the pollster said, the firm often asks voters whether they worry more that Democratic policies are fueling inflation and crime or that Republicans are too extreme on abortion and too soft on the January 6 insurrection. On balance, the pollster told me, most respondents in swing districts say they worry more about Democratic policies.

    Yes, the pollster said, the Supreme Court abortion decision, the revelations about Trump from the House January 6 committee hearings, and the Justice Department’s investigation into his stockpiling of classified documents have energized and awakened Democratic voters. But, the pollster added, it’s not as if everyone has decided that abortion and January 6 are more important than crime and inflation.

    Strategists and pollsters on both sides believe that these diverging agendas could intensify one of the most powerful trends in modern American politics: the class inversion in which Democrats are running stronger among white voters with college degrees and Republicans are gaining ground among white voters without them, as well as among blue-collar Latino voters.

    In white-collar America, inflation may be more of an inconvenience than an existential threat, which provides space for voters to prioritize their values on issues such as abortion or Trump’s threat to democracy. In blue-collar America, where inflation often presents more difficult daily choices and sacrifices, abortion and the fate of democracy may be less salient, even among those who agree with Democrats on those issues. In the Marist poll, twice as many white voters without a college degree picked inflation over abortion as their top concern in November, while slightly more college-educated white voters picked abortion than inflation.

    Even with inflation at its highest level in 40 years, Republicans appear unlikely to significantly cut into such key Democratic constituencies as college-educated white voters, young people, and residents of large metropolitan areas. And even such a seismic shock as the Supreme Court abortion decision may not significantly loosen the Republican hold on white women without a college education. Although there may be some movement around the edges (inflation, for instance, could help Republicans gain among Latino voters), the biggest story of 2022 may be how closely it follows the lines of geographic and demographic polarization that the 2016, 2018, and 2020 elections have engraved.

    As in those contests, a handful of competitive swing states (Georgia, Arizona, Nevada, Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania) will tip the precarious national balance of power between red and blue areas that now behave more like separate nations than different sections. The November elections seem likely to demonstrate again that the U.S. remains locked in a struggle between two coalitions that hold utterly antithetical visions of America’s future—yet remain almost equal in size.

    [ad_2]

    Ronald Brownstein

    Source link