LAS NOTICIAS CON LA MONT* 📰
📃 *Premio Internacional Periodismo Y Periodismo Migrante*📃
La Información Directa a tu Celular 📲 de HOY *Martes 13 de Febrero 2024* *En El Plano Nacional e Internacional*:
*Ahora también ya estamos en la redes y síguenos a través de nuestros siguientes medios:*
– *TikTok*: https://www.tiktok.com/@federicolamontoficial?_t=8jFPned2p8f&_r=1
*YouTube:* https://www.youtube.com/@FedericoLamontTv
*Instagram:* https://instagram.com/federicolamontoficial?utm_source=qr&igshid=ZDc4ODBmNjlmNQ%3D%3D
*Twitter:* https://twitter.com/federicolamont_?t=1JFGx2rnaadYGDPKxR_jpA&s=09
*Colaboración Especial En:* http://MexicoTodayUSA.com
*Senate Passes Aid to Ukraine, but Fate Is Uncertain in a Hostile House*
Democrats and a group of Republicans teamed up to approve the $95 billion bill, which also includes aid to Israel and civilians in conflict zones, but the House speaker threatened to ignore it.
The Senate passed a long-awaited foreign aid package for Ukraine and Israel early Tuesday morning, delivering a bipartisan endorsement of the legislation after months of negotiations, dire battlefield warnings and political mudslinging. But the measure faced a buzz saw of opposition in the House, where Republican resistance threatened to kill it.
The 70-to-29 vote reflected a critical mass of support in Congress for the $95 billion emergency aid legislation and for continuing to arm Ukraine in its fight against Russian aggression. The measure would provide an additional $60.1 billion for Kyiv — which would bring the total U.S. investment in the war effort to more than $170 billion — as well as $14.1 billion for Israel’s war against Hamas and almost $10 billion for humanitarian aid for civilians in conflict zones, including Palestinians in Gaza.
But it also splintered Republicans and foretold a bumpy road ahead in the G.O.P.-led House, where the speaker suggested late Monday that he would not act on it.
Twenty-two Senate Republicans voted with almost all Democrats for the bill — five more than had helped it over a final procedural hurdle on Monday night — while the rest of the party argued against continuing to fund a foreign nation’s battle to protect its sovereignty without first cracking down on an influx of migration into the United States across its border with Mexico.
ADVERTISEMENT
The vote took place after an all-night Senate session in which a parade of Republican opponents made speeches denouncing various aspects of the bill.
Republican hostility to the measure has been egged on by former President Donald J. Trump, who encouraged G.O.P. senators to reject an earlier version that would have included a bipartisan border security deal, and Speaker Mike Johnson.
“House Republicans were crystal clear from the very beginning of discussions that any so-called national security supplemental legislation must recognize that national security begins at our own border,” Mr. Johnson said in a statement on Monday night, adding: “In the absence of having received any single border policy change from the Senate, the House will have to continue to work its own will on these important matters.”
ADVERTISEMENT
His comments suggested that the foreign aid bill’s only path through the House may be for a bipartisan coalition like the one in the Senate — including more mainstream, national security-minded Republicans — to come together and use extraordinary measures to force action on it.
Image
Senator Rand Paul walking down white marble steps. A painting hangs on the wall.
“A literal invasion is coming across our border,” said Senator Rand Paul, Republican of Kentucky and an opponent of the bill who bemoaned the lack of immigration restrictions in it.Credit…Anna Rose Layden for The New York Times
“If we want the world to remain a safe place for freedom, for democratic principles, for our future prosperity, then America must lead the way — and with this bill, the Senate declares that American leadership will not waver, will not falter, will not fail,” Senator Chuck Schumer, Democrat of New York and the majority leader, said after the vote.
Later, in a news conference at the Capitol, he laid out the stakes should the bill falter across the rotunda.
“Now it’s up to the House: Meet this moment, do the right thing and save democracy,” Mr. Schumer said. “If the hard right kills this bill, it would be an enormous gift to Vladimir Putin. It would be a betrayal of our partners and allies, and an abandonment of our service members.”
ADVERTISEMENT
Senator Mitch McConnell, the Kentucky Republican and minority leader who has vocally championed aiding Ukraine, celebrated the vote as a triumph over the skeptics in his own party — though he refrained from directly challenging Mr. Johnson to put the bill on the House floor.
“The Senate understands the responsibilities of America’s national security and will not neglect them,” Mr. McConnell said in a statement after the vote. “History settles every account. And today, on the value of American leadership and strength, history will record that the Senate did not blink.”
Still, Mr. McConnell’s stance was a break with a majority of Republicans in Congress, who have repudiated the measure, reflecting a turn away from the party’s traditional hawkish posture and belief in projecting American power and democratic principles around the world.
Mr. Trump in particular has railed against the legislation from the campaign trail. In recent days, he has argued on social media that it was “stupid” for the United States to offer foreign aid instead of loans and encouraged Russia to “do whatever the hell they want” to NATO members that did not spend enough money on their own defense.
ADVERTISEMENT
Image
Senator Chuck Schumer in a dark suit and orange tie.
Senator Chuck Schumer, Democrat of New York and the majority leader, urged his fellow senators to pass the aid bill on Monday night.Credit…Valerie Plesch for The New York Times
The pressure did little to erode a coalition of Republicans that cast multiple votes to keep the aid bill moving forward; in fact, the bloc grew as the legislation made its way to passage.
That task will be more difficult in the Republican-led House, where Mr. Johnson controls the floor and right-wing lawmakers have shown a willingness to block legislation they oppose from even coming up for a vote. Still, if proponents can muster enough support from Democrats and mainstream and national security-minded Republicans willing to buck Mr. Trump and the far right, they could steer around the opposition through a maneuver known as a discharge petition. That allows lawmakers to force legislation to the floor if they can gather the signatures of a majority of the House — 218 members — calling for the action.
In the Senate, Republicans who supported the legislation argued that its passage was imperative to maintain the United States’ international standing as a guardian of Western-style democracy against threats posed by authoritarian regimes. They held up Ukraine’s war as a critical test of whether Washington is serious about standing up to aggressors like President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia.
ADVERTISEMENT
“If it only stays this bad for the next couple of years, Putin is losing,” Senator Thom Tillis, Republican of North Carolina, said of Ukraine’s war effort. He argued that helping Kyiv could weaken Mr. Putin’s grip on power — “and that’s damn sure worth $60 billion, or $600 billion, to get rid of him.”
Mr. Tillis also dismissed the idea that skepticism of the bill by Republican voters was a reason to oppose it.
Image
Senator J.D. Vance of Ohio is displayed on a TV screen. Reporters are on couches in the foreground.
“The supplemental represents an attempt by the foreign policy blob/deep state to stop President Trump from pursuing his desired policy,” said Senator J.D. Vance, Republican of Ohio.Credit…Anna Rose Layden for The New York Times
“When people use the base as a reason for saying they have to oppose it, I say, I go home, show my base some respect, dispel the rumors, talk about the facts,” he said. “And then I don’t have a base problem.”
Many of the Republican opponents cited the lack of tough border restrictions for the United States. But they also led the charge last week to kill a version of the legislation that paired the aid with stiffer border enforcement measures, including stricter asylum laws, increased detention capacity and accelerated deportations.
“A literal invasion is coming across our border,” Senator Rand Paul, Republican of Kentucky, said on the floor on Monday. “And all they had time to do in the Senate was get the money, get the cash pallets, load the planes, get the champagne ready and fly to Kyiv.”
Other Republicans argued that it was folly to send Ukraine more tens of billions of dollars, questioning whether Kyiv could ever get the upper hand against Russia.
Mr. Putin is “an evil war criminal, but he will not lose,” said Senator Ron Johnson, Republican of Wisconsin, adding that “the continuation of this war is destroying Ukraine.”
And in a memo to colleagues, Senator J.D. Vance, Republican of Ohio, suggested that the entire bill was designed to compromise Mr. Trump’s ability to cut off aid to Kyiv in the future should he win the election.
Image
The Capitol at sunrise.
The vote took place after an all-night Senate session.Credit…Kenny Holston/The New York Times
“The supplemental represents an attempt by the foreign policy blob/deep state to stop President Trump from pursuing his desired policy,” Mr. Vance wrote, adding that Democrats were trying to “provide grounds to impeach him and undermine his administration.”
A few Senate Democrats also opposed the legislation over the billions of dollars worth of offensive weapons included for Israel.
“I cannot vote to send more bombs and shells to Israel when they are using them in an indiscriminate manner against Palestinian civilians,” Senator Jeff Merkley of Oregon said in a statement Monday night. He joined Senator Bernie Sanders, independent of Vermont, who normally votes with Democrats but broke with the party because of his objections to Israel’s actions against Palestinians in Gaza.
*Middle East Crisis Mediators in Cairo, Including C.I.A. Chief, Renew Push for Gaza Cease-Fire*
Hezbollah, the Lebanese militia, fired missiles into northern Israel on Tuesday that injured at least two people, emergency officials said, amid a fresh diplomatic push to end months of clashes along the border.
Hezbollah said that it had launched two separate attacks into Israel — one aimed at Israeli soldiers and the other at a police building in the northern town of Kiryat Shmona.
A 15-year-old boy and a 47-year-old woman were seriously wounded in Kiryat Shmona, according to Magen David Adom, Israel’s nonprofit emergency medical service. They had gotten out of the car they were traveling in when an anti-tank missile hit nearby, only to be injured when another landed, said Ofir Yehezkeli, Kiryat Shmona’s deputy mayor.
Israel and Hezbollah — an ally of Hamas in Gaza — have engaged in near-daily cross-border strikes since the deadly Hamas-led Oct. 7. attacks in Israel. The clashes have displaced more than 150,000 people from their homes on both sides of the Israel-Lebanon border.
The United States and others have engaged in diplomatic efforts to reduce the tensions. A Western diplomat said on Tuesday that France had presented a proposal to Israel, Lebanon’s government and Hezbollah. The French proposal was first reported by Reuters.
The proposal details a 10-day process of de-escalation and calls for Hezbollah to withdraw its fighters to a distance of 10 kilometers (six miles) from Lebanon’s border with Israel, according to the diplomat, who is involved in the talks and who requested anonymity to discuss the sensitive deliberations. The diplomat said that France’s foreign minister, Stéphane Séjourné, presented the proposal in writing to Lebanon’s government last week while on a visit to the country.
Lebanon’s Foreign Ministry confirmed that the government had received the proposal. The French Foreign Ministry and Hezbollah did not immediately respond to requests for comment.
In recent weeks, Israel has warned that unless a diplomatic solution is reached, it would have to use military force to stop Hezbollah’s attacks in order to allow for tens of thousands of Israelis to return to their homes.
Patrick Kingsley, Roger Cohen and Cassandra Vinograd contributed reporting.
— Euan Ward, Hwaida Saad and Adam Sella
Show less
Maps: Tracking the Attacks in Israel and Gaza
See where Israel has bulldozed vast areas of Gaza, as its invasion continues to advance south.
A bill with $14 billion for Israel’s war in Gaza passes the Senate, but may falter in the House.
Image
The U.S. Capitol dome appears behind the branches of a tree.
A vote on an aid bill came after an all-night Senate session in which Republican opponents made speeches denouncing various aspects of the bill.Credit…Valerie Plesch for The New York Times
A $95 billion foreign aid package passed by the Senate on Tuesday morning includes $14.1 billion for Israel’s war against Hamas, though the bill still faces uncertainty in the House.
The $95 billion legislation also sets aside almost $10 billion for humanitarian aid for civilians in conflict zones around the world, including Palestinians in Gaza.
A Tunnel Offers Clues to How Hamas Uses Gaza’s Hospitals
By Matthew Rosenberg, Ronen Bergman, Aric Toler and Helmuth Rosales Feb. 13, 2024
Gaza’s hospitals have emerged as a focal point in Israel’s war with Hamas, with each side citing how the other has pulled the facilities into the conflict as proof of the enemy’s disregard for the safety of civilians.
In four months of war, Israeli troops have entered several hospitals, including the Qatari Hospital, Kamal Adwan Hospital and Al-Rantisi Specialized Hospital for Children, to search for weapons and fighters. But Al-Shifa Hospital has taken on particular significance because it is Gaza’s largest medical facility, and because of Israel’s high-profile claims that Hamas leaders operated a command-and-control center beneath it. Hamas and the hospital’s staff, meanwhile, insisted it was only a medical center.
Al-Shifa’s value as a military target was not immediately clear in the days after the Nov. 15 raid, even after the Israeli military released the tunnel video that was used to create the 3-D model seen here.
But evidence examined by The New York Times suggests Hamas used the hospital for cover, stored weapons inside it and maintained a hardened tunnel beneath the complex that was supplied with water, power and air-conditioning.
Classified Israeli intelligence documents, obtained and reviewed by The Times, indicate that the tunnel is at least 700 feet long, twice as long as the military revealed publicly, and that it extends beyond the hospital and likely connects to Hamas’s larger underground network.
According to classified images reviewed by The Times, Israeli soldiers found underground bunkers, living quarters and a room that appeared to be wired for computers and communications equipment along a part of the tunnel beyond the hospital — chambers that were not visible in the video released by the Israeli military.
What the video showed under Al-Shifa
The • dot on the diagram follows the path of the video below that was released by Israel after the raid.
Stairs to surfaceDoorElectrical panelBathroomSinkBathroomRoomRoomDead endTunnel extends
from hereI.D.F.-forced entry point to tunnelSURGERY BUILDING ABOVE TUNNELSHACK ABOVE TUNNEL
By Malika Khurana and Helmuth Rosales; video from the Israel Defense Forces
The Israeli military, however, has struggled to prove that Hamas maintained a command-and-control center under the facility. Critics of the Israeli military say the evidence does not support its early claims, noting that it had distributed material before the raid showing five underground complexes and also had said the tunnel network could be reached from wards inside a hospital building. Israel has publicly revealed the existence of only one tunnel entrance on the grounds of the hospital, at the shack outside its main buildings.
The Israeli military says that it moved carefully because the tunnel was booby-trapped and ran out of time to investigate before it destroyed the tunnel and withdrew from the hospital. Israeli and Qatari officials, speaking on condition of anonymity, said Israel had to leave the hospital to comply with the terms of a temporary ceasefire in late November.
American officials have said their own intelligence backs up the Israeli case, including evidence that Hamas used Al-Shifa to hold at least a few hostages. American intelligence also indicates that Hamas fighters evacuated the complex days before Israeli forces moved into Al-Shifa, destroying documents and electronics as they left.
Hospitals are protected under international law, even if they provide medical care for combatants, but their use for other acts that are “harmful to the enemy” can make them legitimate targets for military action. But any action must weigh the expected military advantage against the expected harm to civilians.
Al-Shifa, Israeli officials have argued, is an example of Hamas’s willingness to use hospitals as cover and turn civilians into human shields. But critics say it is also an example of the toll on civilians when Israeli forces surround and raid hospitals to pursue Hamas fighters or rescue hostages, operations that can cut off doctors from fuel and supplies and residents from urgently needed medical care.
Five premature babies died at Al-Shifa before the raid “due to lack of electricity and fuel,” according to the U.N. Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs, which helped organize the evacuation of 31 other infants.
“We all know that the health care system is or has collapsed,” Lynn Hastings, the U.N.’s humanitarian coordinator for Gaza, has told reporters.
Shack
Built early July 2021
Surgery
building
Tunnel
Al-Shifa Hospital
100 ft
N
The portion of the tunnel visible in the Israeli military video is at least 350 feet long. But confidential military documents reveal that the tunnel extends twice as far. Satellite Image by Planet Labs
Israel launched its war in Gaza after the Hamas-led attack on Oct. 7, in which at least 1,200 people were killed and more than 200 were taken hostage. Since the start of the war, more than 28,000 people have been killed in Gaza, according to health officials there.
In the face of international opprobrium over its raids on hospitals, Israel has publicized evidence that it says shows that Hamas hid fighters among the ill and injured, and held hostages in the facilities. The Israeli military said that before entering Al-Shifa, it warned the buildings’ occupants, opened evacuation routes and sent Arabic-speaking medical teams along with the soldiers.
Hamas and Gazan health officials say the hospitals have served only as medical facilities. But beyond accusing the Israeli military of planting evidence at hospitals, Hamas and Gazan officials have not directly refuted the evidence presented by Israel.
The Israeli military said it apprehended dozens of “terror operatives” at Kamal Adwan Hospital in December, and released videos, at the time, of men carrying weapons. A spokesman for the health ministry in Gaza said that Israeli forces had asked the hospital’s administrators to hand over the weapons of its security guards.
*Trump Is Losing It*
It is unclear whether Donald Trump has forgotten the precise nature of NATO or whether he ever fully grasped it in the first place.
What is clear, however, is that Trump — who ostensibly spent four years as president of the United States — has little clue about what NATO is or what NATO does. And when he spoke on the subject at a rally in South Carolina over the weekend, what he said was less a cogent discussion of foreign policy than it was gibberish — the kind of outrageous nonsense that flows without interruption from an empty and unreflective mind.
“One of the presidents of a big country stood up and said, ‘Well, sir, if we don’t pay, and we’re attacked by Russia, will you protect us?’” Trump said, recalling an implausible conversation with an unnamed, presumably European head of state. “‘You didn’t pay? You’re delinquent?’” Trump recounted responding. “‘No, I would not protect you. In fact, I would encourage them to do whatever the hell they want. You gotta pay. You gotta pay your bills.’”
The former president’s message was clear: If NATO members do not pay up, then he will leave them to the mercy of a continental aggressor who has already plunged one European country into death, destruction and devastation.
ADVERTISEMENT
Except NATO isn’t a mafia protection racket. NATO, in case anyone needs to be reminded, is a mutual defense organization, formed by treaty in 1949 as tensions between the United States and the Soviet Union hardened into conflict. “The parties agree that an armed attack against one or more of them in Europe or North America shall be considered an attack against them all,” states Article 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty.
According to the terms of an agreement reached last year, member states will work to spend at least 2 percent of national G.D.P. on military investment.
But let’s set this bit of fact-checking aside for a moment and look at the big picture.
It is not just that Trump is ignorant on this and other vital questions; it is that he is incoherent.
Consider his remarks at a recent gathering of the National Rifle Association in Harrisburg, Pa. “We have to win in November, or we’re not going to have Pennsylvania. They’ll change the name. They’re going to change the name of Pennsylvania,” Trump said.
ADVERTISEMENT
Who, exactly, is going to change the name of Pennsylvania? And to what? I don’t know. I doubt Trump does either.
Or consider the time, last November, when Trump confused China and North Korea, telling an audience of supporters in Florida that “Kim Jong Un leads 1.4 billion people, and there is no doubt about who the boss is. And they want me to say he’s not an intelligent man.”
There was also the time that Trump mistook Nikki Haley, his former ambassador to the United Nations, for Nancy Pelosi, the former speaker of the House.
“Nikki Haley, you know they, do you know they destroyed all of the information, all of the evidence, everything, deleted and destroyed all of it. All of it, because of lots of things like Nikki Haley is in charge of security. We offered her 10,000 people, soldiers, National Guard, whatever they want. They turned it down. They don’t want to talk about that. These are very dishonest people,” Trump said, repeating his false claim that Pelosi was responsible for the failure of Capitol security on Jan. 6.
ADVERTISEMENT
If you would like, you can also try to make sense of the former president’s recent attempt to describe a missile defense system:
“I will build an Iron Dome over our country, a state-of-the-art missile defense shield made in the U.S.A.,” Trump said, before taking an unusual detour. “These are not muscle guys here, they’re muscle guys up here, right,” he continued, gesturing to his arms and his head to emphasize, I guess, that the people responsible for building such systems are capable and intelligent.
“And they calmly walk to us, and ding, ding, ding, ding, ding, ding. They’ve only got 17 seconds to figure this whole thing out. Boom. OK. Missile launch. Whoosh. Boom,” he added.
I assume Trump is describing the pressure of actually manning a missile defense system. Even so, one would think that a former president — currently vying to be the next president — would at least try to be a little more articulate.
But this gets to one of the oddest things about this election cycle so far. There is no shortage of coverage of President Biden’s age, even if there’s no evidence that his age has been an obstacle to his ability to perform his duties. Indeed, it is plainly true that Biden has been an unusually successful president in areas, like legislative negotiations, that require skill and mental acuity.
ADVERTISEMENT
Coverage of Biden’s age, in other words, has more to do with the vibes of an “elderly” president — he isn’t as outwardly vigorous and robust as we would like — than it does with any particular issue with his performance.
In contrast to the obsessive coverage of Biden’s age, there is comparatively little coverage of Trump’s obvious deficiencies in that department. If we are going to use public comments as the measure of mental fitness, then the former president is clearly at a disadvantage.
Unfortunately for Biden, Trump benefits from something akin to the soft bigotry of low expectations. Because no one expected Trump, in the 2016 election, to speak and behave like a normal candidate, he was held to a lower effective standard than his rivals in both parties. Because no one expected him, during his presidency, to be orderly and responsible, his endless scandals were framed as business as usual. And because no one now expects him to be a responsible political figure with a coherent vision for the country, it’s as if no one blinks an eye when he rants and raves on the campaign trail.
It’s not that there aren’t legitimate reasons to be concerned about Biden’s age. He is already the oldest person to serve in the Oval Office. The issue here is one of proportion and consequence. Biden may be unable to do the job at some point in the future; Trump, it seems to me, already is.
One of those is a lot more concerning than the other.
*Biden’s Age Is a Campaign Problem, Not a Governing One*
Last fall I found myself at a dinner party that included a former Biden administration official and a Democratic donor, and the conversation turned, naturally, to President Biden’s age and his prospects for re-election. The ex-official said that from inside the White House, where people experience the policymaking process firsthand, Biden was overwhelmingly seen as an effective leader who should run again. The donor, on the other hand, saw Biden mostly at the fund-raisers where watching the president’s meandering speeches left him terrified about the upcoming campaign. The gulf in their perceptions, I think, speaks to the fact that Biden’s age has impaired his ability to campaign much more than his ability to govern, which has created an impossible dilemma for the Democratic Party.
I have argued since 2022 that Biden shouldn’t run again because he’s too old, but there’s never been much sign that his advanced age affects his performance in office. I’m not aware of any leaks from the White House suggesting that Biden is confused, exhausted or forgetful when setting priorities or making decisions. It’s not just Democratic partisans who find Biden more impressive up close than his frail, halting image in the media would suggest. As Politico reported of the ousted House speaker Kevin McCarthy, “On a particularly sensitive matter, McCarthy mocked Biden’s age and mental acuity in public, while privately telling allies that he found the president sharp and substantive in their conversations.” There are obviously things Biden does that I disagree with; I wish he’d take a much harder line with Israel over civilian casualties in Gaza. But while his reluctance to publicly criticize Israel might stem from an anachronistic view of the country — Biden likes to talk about the Labor Zionist prime minister Golda Meir, who left office 50 years ago — his position is a mainstream one in the Democratic Party and can’t be attributed to senescence.
Because Biden has delivered on many Democratic priorities, there was never any real push within the party to get him to step aside, forfeiting the advantages of incumbency in favor of a potentially bruising primary contest. But it’s obvious to most people watching the president from afar that he looks fragile and diminished and that his well-known propensity for gaffes has gotten worse. Poll after poll shows that voters are very concerned about his age. That’s why the special counsel Robert Hur’s gratuitous swipes at Biden as someone who might seem to a jury like a “sympathetic, well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory” have caused an epic freakout among Democrats. His words brought to the surface deep, terrifying doubts about Biden’s ability to do the one part of his job that matters above all others, which is beating Donald Trump.
That’s true even though the report by Hur, a former Trump appointee tapped by Merrick Garland to investigate Biden’s handling of classified documents, looks like a partisan hit job. (Democratic attorneys general have a terrible habit of appointing Republican special counsels in an effort to display their own impartiality — a type of moral preening that Republican administrations rarely fall victim to.) Since Hur decided not to charge Biden with any crimes, his comments about Biden’s age, particularly his claim that Biden couldn’t remember the year his son Beau died, seemed designed to shiv him politically. If so, it worked.
ADVERTISEMENT
Some Democrats are now comparing the media fixation on Biden’s age to the saturation coverage of Hillary Clinton’s emails eight years ago, and there are similarities. Betty Friedan wrote that “housewifery expands to fill the time available,” and the same is true of bad political news. Trump’s scandals are so multifarious that each one tends to get short shrift, while his opponents’ weaknesses and missteps can be examined at length precisely because there are fewer of them. This asymmetry worked to Trump’s advantage in 2016, and it’s helping him now.
But there’s also a crucial difference between Clinton’s emails and Biden’s years. Clinton’s vulnerability was never really about her insufficient care with information security protocols. Instead, the emails became a symbol of a powerful but inchoate sense, magnified by disproportionate press attention, that she was devious and deceptive. Biden’s age is a much more straightforward issue; people think he’s too old because of how he looks and sounds. Pretending it’s not a problem isn’t going to make voters worry about it less; it’s just going to make them feel they’re being lied to.
Instead, Biden’s campaign should be candid about the challenges of aging — which, of course, the increasingly incoherent Trump shares — while doing its best to demonstrate that Biden’s judgment and grasp of complicated issues are still strong. That means doing a lot more interviews and events, especially those focused on policy questions, letting the American people see the version of Biden visible to those who work with him. He’ll almost certainly make plenty of verbal slips, but as they pile up, they might start to seem like old news, especially if he’s not defensive about them.
And if he’s not up for a major change in strategy? It might sound extreme, but in that case, he should find some medical pretext to step aside in time for a replacement to be chosen at the Democratic convention. Biden’s greatest contribution to this country was saving us from another Trump term. If his unwillingness to face his own limitations now clears the way for Trump’s restoration, it will be not just a mistake but a tragedy.
*A ‘Democracy Party’ Like No Other: One of the World’s Biggest Elections*
The celebration of the act of casting a vote has particular resonance in Indonesia, which until a few decades ago was a brutal dictatorship.
The young women and men moved from booth to booth, asking questions about the political hopefuls’ track records and visions for the country. A few steps away, first-time voters practiced casting their ballots in pretend voting booths. And onstage, talk show guests discussed how to make an informed choice in backing a candidate.
This gathering of more than a thousand people one recent Sunday in Jakarta, the capital of Indonesia, was a prelude to a celebration that is widely known here as “Pesta Demokrasi,” or Democracy Party.
Otherwise known as Election Day, it’s when tens of millions of people across this vast archipelago of thousands of islands head to polling stations that are sometimes decorated with balloons, garlands and flowers, and manned by officials dressed up as Spider-Man, Batman, Thor or other superheroes. After voting for presidential, parliamentary and local legislative candidates, people camp out near their polling places with food as they wait for early counts to trickle in. The next “party” is on Wednesday.
ADVERTISEMENT
Free and fair elections in Indonesia were unthinkable as recently as the mid-1990s, when it was still under the brutal rule of Suharto. But after his fall in 1998, the country emerged as the world’s third-largest democracy. Partly because Election Day is a national holiday, voter turnout has consistently been among the highest in the world and reached a record 80 percent in 2019. With the minimum voting age set at 17, the biggest bloc this time is people under 40, who make up more than half of the 205 million voters in Indonesia.
Image
In a black and white photo, a man writes on a large board with papers while adults and children, sitting and standing, look on.
Counting votes during the presidential election in Jakarta in June 1999.Credit…Roger Lemoyne/Getty Images
The presidential election is a three-way race, and billboards with the faces of the three candidates — Anies Baswedan, Prabowo Subianto and Ganjar Pranowo — loom over major roads. Their debates are furiously discussed on Instagram, TikTok and X. Indonesians refer to the three men by their candidate numbers, so in homes, warungs and cafes here, the inevitable question is: “Are you voting for 1, 2 or 3?”
But even this vibrant electoral process has its limits.
“Indonesia is very new to democracy, and a lot of people are not used to choosing their candidates based on track records and ideas,” said Abigail Limuria, an organizer of the “Election Festival” gathering in Jakarta that aimed to educate voters about the candidates and issues. “Many of them just vote based on who their family is choosing.”
Image
People dressed in red, including some wearing traditional Indonesian theater costumes, wave flags as they ride motorcycles.
A campaign event for the Indonesian Democratic Party of Struggle in May 1999. Some of the rally-goers wore traditional costumes from Indonesian theater, an early example of how political campaigns in the country became festive occasions. Credit…Eddy Purnomo/Agence France-Presse — Getty Images
ADVERTISEMENT
This campaign has also raised serious questions about the future of the hard-won democratic norms in Indonesia. President Joko Widodo, the popular incumbent who is barred from seeking a third five-year term, has alarmed critics with dynastic machinations that have allowed his son to run for vice president. Though not explicitly endorsing anyone, he has appeared to engineer an alliance with Mr. Prabowo, a former rival who has long been accused of human rights abuses and was once married to a daughter of Suharto, the dictator.
Yet there is still a belief that ultimately every vote matters.
“I am taking this as an opportunity to contribute to change Indonesia for the better,” said Shiela Mutia Larasati, 25, a fashion entrepreneur based in Jakarta. “Previously, I was still young and apathetic. But now, I have hope for Indonesia.”
Image
Three people in superhero costumes sit and stand behind a table piled high with paper ballots.
Election officials wearing costumes at a polling station in Surabaya in 2019.Credit…Zabur Karuru/Antara Foto, via Reuters
Recent elections in Indonesia, which has the world’s largest Muslim population, have been marred by ugly identity politics — Mr. Joko was called a “Chinese Christian” (he is neither), and Mr. Prabowo, who has sought the presidency multiple times but never won, was dogged by questions about how many times he prayed in a day. Campaigning used to mean distributing food supplies to get votes. But this year, the political discussion appears to be more open about issues like democracy and defense, even if the presidential candidates all offer a vision akin to that of Mr. Joko: policy based on infrastructure and welfare projects.
ADVERTISEMENT
“I think that’s a good sign of the improvement of democracy,” said Danis Syahroni, 24, a postgraduate student at Gadjah Mada University in the city of Yogyakarta. “We can debate and discuss candidates’ ideas.”
Image
A large stadium full of people, many waving various flags. Two large inflatable figures of men are visible above the crowd.
A campaign rally for Prabowo Subianto in Jakarta on Saturday.Credit…Kim Kyung-Hoon/Reuters
About 1,200 young people turned up at a convention hall in Jakarta where the “Election Festival,” known locally as “Festival Pemilu,” was held. By midafternoon, the line was so long that organizers had to turn people away. One of the headliners was a group of young comedians known as “Trio Netizen.”
“If you get elected and you become someone important, don’t become crazy, yah?” said one of the comedians, Eky Priyagung, a reference to the 2019 election, when the opposite happened: Some candidates who lost were so devastated that they had to seek inpatient care for their mental health. The crowd burst out laughing. (This year, several hospitals have announced that they have prepared psychiatric wards for candidates.)
ADVERTISEMENT
The event was an offshoot of a website called “Bijak Memilih,” or Choose Wisely, that caters to young voters. Ms. Abigail said she wanted to start the website because many young people have expressed confusion about whom to vote for in this election. Some are skeptical about the independence of the country’s media outlets, owned by tycoons who often hew to their political patron’s interests.
Image
People on a small boat loaded with white cardboard boxes, some flat and some assembled and inside clear plastic bags, distribute them to other boats and up onto land.
Workers distributing ballot boxes by boat to Bulang island on Wednesday.Credit…Antara Foto, via Reuters
To drive voters to polls, activists have relied on memes and stunts like putting out TikTok videos equating the candidates with various Taylor Swift songs. A Spotify Wrapped campaign playfully overlaps music with corruption statistics.
At least one candidate has also used social media to his advantage. With the aid of savvy digital tactics, Mr. Prabowo has had some success in rebranding himself from a feared general into a cuddly grandfather. Many young people simply do not know about his past. His apparent alliance with Mr. Joko has additionally helped his popularity.
ADVERTISEMENT
In recent weeks, opposition to Mr. Prabowo has coalesced around images of people brandishing four fingers on one hand. The message: Voters should pick anyone except Mr. Prabowo and choose either No. 1 (Mr. Anies) or No. 3 (Mr. Ganjar).
Image
Women in head scarves look at merchandise, like small posters and pictures of T-shirts.
Supporters of Anies Baswedan buying campaign merchandise at a rally in Jakarta on Thursday.Credit…Yasuyoshi Chiba/Agence France-Presse — Getty Images
Mr. Anies, a former governor of Jakarta, has found support from an unlikely bloc: Indonesian K-pop fans. They have rented a food truck, crowd-funded digital billboards, and ordered light sticks for his last rally before the election. Many say they were taken by Mr. Anies after he emerged from a debate and did a TikTok livestream with his supporters, where, like a K-pop star, he answered questions about his love life and his favorite books.
If none of the three candidates win more than 50 percent of the vote, the race will head to a runoff in June. Recent surveys suggest Mr. Prabowo could pass the 50 percent mark, but that is far from certain. What remains certain is the high level of civic engagement.
*ATENTAMENTE*
*MAESTRO FEDERICO LA MONT*
Sent from my iPod
Mexico Today USA 