2024-03-05
-
  Christopher Santiago, 38, hangs out at home in Alsip, Ill., with one of his three children, 9-year-old Calliope. He says Cook County's basic income program has let him provide more for his kids. Taylor Glascock for NPR Christopher Santiago recalls being skeptical the first time he heard about basic income — giving people cash with no conditions on how to spend it. It was 2020, when presidential candidate Andrew Yang pitched it for all American adults, and Santiago thought, "That doesn't make much sense." But for a year now, Santiago has been getting $500 a month through one of the largest cash aid pilots in the U.S., and he's come around. The single dad of three lives in Alsip, Ill., and was one of a whopping 233,000 people who applied for the program in Cook County, which includes Chicago. (There was a lottery to pick the 3,250 participants.) As a public employee, his income is toward the upper end of the program cutoff, but he says it hardly feels like enough for a family of four. Snuggling on the couch next to his youngest daughter, 9-year-old Calliope, he says the extra cash has helped him manage skyrocketing prices for everything. And it's let him provide more for his children, including ballet classes, a birthday visit to Disney on Ice, and family trips. "It's a hard thing to have to tell a child, 'No,' " he says. "It kind of kills you a little bit." Santiago was also able to avoid a mini-emergency when right after a weekend trip, his furnace broke. "It was a $700 part and I was just like, 'Oh God, this would have sunk me.' " ### A once radical idea got a boost during the pandemic Cash aid without conditions was considered a radical idea before the pandemic. But early [results](https://www.npr.org/2021/03/04/973653719/california-program-giving-500-no-strings-attached-stipends-pays-off-study-finds) from a program in Stockton, Calif., showed promise. Then interest exploded after it became clear how much COVID stimulus checks and emergency rental payments had helped people. The U.S. Census Bureau found that an expanded child tax credit cut child poverty in half. That is, until the expansion ended and [child poverty spiked](https://www.npr.org/2023/09/12/1198923453/child-poverty-child-tax-credi-pandemic-aid-census-data). Around the country, from big cities to rural counties, there've been more than [150](https://basicincome.stanford.edu/experiments-map/) basic income [pilots](https://guaranteedincome.us/), and counting. Supporters say it works because people can spend the money on whatever they need most. "They can pursue education for themselves and their children," says Toni Preckwinkle, president of the Cook County Board of Commissioners. "They can invest in their families in ways that makes them more productive and more stable over time."   Toni Preckwinkle, president of the Cook County Board of Commissioners, says she hopes to prove basic income works so that it could someday go nationwide. Taylor Glascock for NPR The idea is not new. Preckwinkle notes that the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. and the Black Panthers called for guaranteed income. So, briefly, did [President Richard Nixon](https://thecorrespondent.com/4503/the-bizarre-tale-of-president-nixon-and-his-basic-income-bill/173117835-c34d6145). These days, some [tech entrepreneurs](https://www.npr.org/2016/09/24/495186758/as-our-jobs-are-automated-some-say-well-need-a-guaranteed-basic-income) argue that cash aid will be needed as gig work, automation and AI threaten jobs. Preckwinkle thinks cash aid should be a permanent part of the social safety net. And she wants to prove it works, so it could someday go nationwide. "The federal government is really the only entity that has the resources to do this on the mass scale that it needs to be done," she says. ### As pandemic money runs out, basic income programs might sputter The pandemic also spurred cash aid because cities got their own pot of COVID relief money. Many are using that to fund guaranteed income pilots. Philanthropic donations are another major funding source, including from [groups](https://www.givedirectly.org/united-states/) that have long organized direct cash payments to combat poverty in developing nations. The pilots target low- to moderate-income people, from a few hundred to a few thousand households, and generally pay them $500 or $1,000 a month for a year or two. When Cook County's two-year pilot ends, Preckwinkle has vowed to use the county's own budget to keep it going. A [few states](https://www.michigan.gov/budget/-/media/Project/Websites/budget/Fiscal/Executive-Budget/Current-Exec-Rec/FY25-Budget-Book.pdf) have also [allocated funding](https://www.gov.ca.gov/2023/11/03/launch-of-first-state-funded-guaranteed-income-pilot-programs/) to cash aid programs. But as pandemic money runs out, it's possible this mass experiment could fizzle. "That's a concern, and that's what we are pushing back against," says Natalie Foster, president of the Economic Security Project, which advocates for guaranteed income. She founded the group along with Chris Hughes, a co-founder of Facebook. Foster says the U.S. has more poverty than almost any other rich nation and that its social safety net is one of the stingiest. "If you look at so many other countries with similar economies, you understand that college is free," Foster says. "They ensure that health care is cheap and affordable. Oftentimes, child care is free. That is the type of life we could offer Americans and choose not to." The problem hit home for Ameya Pawar with a trip to his local pharmacy. He's now a senior adviser with the Economic Security Project in Chicago. But in 2016, he was a new dad who was sent to get diapers and was puzzled to find them and other baby products under lock and key.   Ameya Pawar is a senior adviser with the Economic Security Project in Chicago. He says cash can help people buy things as simple as diapers and wipes, which are not covered by the existing U.S. social safety net. Taylor Glascock for NPR He came to realize that people are not allowed to use public assistance to buy diapers or wipes, and saw the locks as a heartbreaking sign of their desperation. Because "you need to send your infant with diapers or wipes to attend child care, so you can go to work," he says. Pawar and others point to welfare reform in the 1990s, which dramatically [reduced](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/mar/07/clinton-era-welfare-reforms-american-poor-bernie-sanders) the amount of cash assistance. For the poorest families, that lack of cash can make it hard to pay for things like utilities, transportation to a job, enough food for a full month or school supplies for children. This is partly why advocates for basic income say it's not meant to replace other assistance, but to add to it. ### An extra $500 a month may still not be enough to get ahead TaylorRaquel Adams says the $500 she gets each month from the Cook County pilot is a blessing, even if she's "still in poverty." She works an overnight shift at an Amazon plant — 3:30 a.m. to 8:30 a.m. — in the department where things get returned. "I'm inspecting it to see if we can resell it, if it needs to be refurbished, or if it's salvage," she says. Adams is 42, single and has no children. She's worked since she was 15 and would love to work full time again. But she says it would be tough, given that she suffers PTSD from childhood trauma and has schizoaffective disorder. Adams gets disability income, a housing subsidy and food aid. And still, despite her conscientious budgeting, the extra cash basically helps her make ends meet. "I'm hoping in the next couple of months I get some savings," she says. Much of the money has gone for medical expenses. Adams' Medicare plan does not cover dental or vision, and she needs to spend $500 more a month for that. Two years ago, she was diagnosed with ulcerative colitis, and the supplements and vitamins her doctor recommends can mean spending hundreds of dollars some months. The cash aid also let her buy Christmas presents last year for the first time in a while. And it allowed her to splurge on a pedicure for her birthday — what she calls "pamper-me time." One month's payment went for a pricey repair on her Chevy Spark, an enormous help given her nearly hourlong commute to Amazon. "You need income to work," she says. "There's only so many jobs in my area that's within walking distance."   Matt Harvey, 25, recently started working at a Chicago nonprofit called Equity and Transformation. He says extra cash from Cook County's basic income pilot program helps him and his partner pay for day care for their 2-year-old son. Taylor Glascock for NPR For Matt Harvey, the extra monthly income has made it far easier for him to work full time. Harvey is 25 and was unemployed when he applied for Cook County's basic income pilot. He and his girlfriend lived separately at the time, but he did most of the parenting for their toddler son while she worked. After they moved in together, they used the extra money for groceries and household items. Harvey says the payments lowered his stress and made him "feel more like I'm contributing." He tried to ramp up side gigs as a driver for Uber and Amazon Flex. But he says it was always a calculation over whether the money he made from those hours was worth the cost of day care, "because the day care is expensive." Then Harvey got a full-time job in research and communications at a nonprofit. It meant his son would have to be in child care full time at a cost that felt out of reach: $2,000 a month. "We were only able to put him in day care because of the extra $500," he says. Their rent is going up again this year. And though Harvey didn't finish college, he still owes about $20,000 in student debt. Still, he feels they're in better shape with his new job. And they're planning ahead so they can be prepared for when the extra monthly payments stop. ### Cash aid can also help people's psychological well-being Guaranteed income programs specifically do not require people to work. That's a selling point for supporters, who say the extra cash can create the time and space to find a better job or perhaps a new direction. But the lack of any work requirement is a main concern for opponents, especially if no-strings cash aid were to be made permanent. "My fear is that we would see earnings and hours and work decrease amongst low income Americans," says Leslie Ford, with the conservative American Enterprise Institute. She agrees the U.S. social safety net needs to change but says work should remain at the heart of it. "Ultimately, if we want this person to become self-sufficient, if we want the outcome of our safety net to not merely be subsistence, work is a key aspect of flourishing long term," Ford says. So far, with one- to two-year cash aid pilots, researchers say there's been no significant impact on whether people have jobs. Some parents, though, have cut back on gig work to spend more time with their children. Researchers also reject the stigma that poor people can't be trusted with free money.   Calliope Santiago with her cat, Pixel. Among other things, her dad has used extra cash payments to pay for her ballet classes and family trips. Taylor Glascock for NPR "They spend the money in ways that everyone does," says Stacia West, a co-founder of the University of Pennsylvania's Center for Guaranteed Income Research. "Going to the grocery store, making sure the rent is paid, paying the car note." She and her co-researcher Amy Castro have published peer-reviewed research on several cash aid pilots, including in [Stockton, Calif.](https://sp2.upenn.edu/study-guaranteed-income-improved-peoples-health-during-pandemic/), and are following others [around the country](https://www.penncgir.org/pilots). They find that — no surprise — the extra income makes people more financially stable. After about six months of payments, they also start to see "little glimmers of changes in a person's psychology," says West. "We see increases in a person's psychological well-being, so a reduction in psychological distress." They also find the changes fade within months after the money stops, as more households report they would not have $400 for an emergency. Castro says public momentum on basic income is moving faster than the data, and there are still many open questions. "How long do people need to be receiving cash in order to create change? And how do we put that into policy in such a way that it actually makes sense?" she asks. "These programs are expensive. People should be asking those questions." Castro, West and others are racing to find answers, as more and more places turn to direct cash payments to help struggling Americans.
2024-03-13
-
[Skip to content](https://www.nytimes.com/live/2024/03/12/us/2024-election-trump-biden/uncommitted-biden-washington-state#site-content)[Skip to site index](https://www.nytimes.com/live/2024/03/12/us/2024-election-trump-biden/uncommitted-biden-washington-state#site-index) Credit...Doug Mills/The New York Times; Tom Brenner for The New York Times President Biden and former President Donald J. Trump on Tuesday secured the delegates necessary to clinch their parties’ presidential nominations, according to The Associated Press, cementing a general election rematch in November months in the making. Both men and their campaigns have long anticipated this moment. Mr. Biden faced only token opposition in the Democratic primary, as is typical for a sitting president, while Mr. Trump had been his party’s dominant front-runner for months. Their November collision began to look even more likely after Mr. Trump scored a decisive win in Iowa in January. His victory cleared the field of all but one of his major Republican rivals and put him on a glide path to his party’s nomination. His last remaining primary challenger, Nikki Haley, [suspended her campaign](https://www.nytimes.com/2024/03/06/us/politics/nikki-haley-drops-out-trump.html) last week, further clearing a path that had already been remarkably free of obstacles for a candidate facing considerable legal problems. The Associated Press named Mr. Biden the presumptive Democratic nominee on Tuesday after projecting his victory in Georgia, while Mr. Trump was designated the presumptive Republican nominee after he swept the G.O.P. contests in Georgia, Mississippi and Washington State. Later, Mr. Trump captured the Republican caucuses in Hawaii. Tuesday’s results cleared the way for a 2024 general election campaign that, at just under eight months, is set to be one of the longest in modern American history and will be the country’s first presidential rematch in nearly 70 years. Already, Mr. Trump and Mr. Biden had shifted their focus away from the primaries. With the president facing no significant challengers, Mr. Biden’s campaign speeches emphasized not just his record but the danger he believes is posed by Mr. Trump. In a statement, Mr. Biden said he was honored that Democratic voters “have put their faith in me once again to lead our party — and our country — in a moment when the threat Trump poses is greater than ever.” And even as Mr. Trump was working to dispatch his Republican rivals, his campaign speeches centered on criticisms of Mr. Biden and his insistence that the primary needed to come to a swift end so that his party could focus its energy and resources on November. In a video posted on social media by his campaign after he clinched the nomination, Mr. Trump called Tuesday a “great day of victory,” but said it was immediately time to focus on defeating Mr. Biden in November. “I want to thank everybody, but much more importantly, we have to get to work to beat Joe Biden,” he said. Neither man will be formally selected until his party’s conventions this summer. But Mr. Biden has already been using the political and financial apparatus of the Democratic National Committee. And last week, the Trump campaign effectively [took over](https://www.nytimes.com/2024/03/08/us/politics/trump-rnc-lara-michael-whatley.html) the Republican National Committee, [imposing mass layoffs](https://www.nytimes.com/2024/03/11/us/politics/rnc-trump-layoffs.html) on Monday as it reshapes the party’s operations. That Mr. Trump was able to lock up the Republican nomination fairly quickly demonstrates the grasp he has kept on the party and his conservative base, despite his 2020 loss and failed efforts to overturn it; a string of disappointing midterm losses by candidates he backed; and his 91 felony charges in [four criminal cases](https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2023/us/trump-investigations-charges-indictments.html). The former president won nearly every nominating contest that awarded delegates, with Ms. Haley scoring wins in only Vermont and Washington, D.C., where she became the first woman to ever win a Republican presidential primary or caucus. But Mr. Trump’s swift path to the nomination also reflects a backroom effort by him and his political team to [bend rules around primaries and delegates](https://www.nytimes.com/2023/10/14/us/politics/trump-delegate-strategy.html?module=inline) in his favor. The rules that states use to award delegates to particular candidates are decided by state party officials, and Mr. Trump and his advisers built relationships with those officials to ease his path. In one critical example, Mr. Trump’s campaign worked to shape California’s rules, leading party officials there to adopt a “winner take all” system that would award the state’s delegates to a candidate who swept 50 percent of the vote statewide. That threshold favored Mr. Trump, the only candidate polling at that level there. Mr. Trump ultimately won California’s primary last week, a major moment in the delegate race. California’s 169 delegates gave him 14 percent of the 1,215 delegates needed to win the nomination. Similarly, Mr. Biden faced little opposition in his march to the nomination, dominating every contest by wide margins. Robert F. Kennedy Jr., the political scion and environmental lawyer, dropped out of the Democratic nominating contest to run as an independent. Representative Dean Phillips of Minnesota and the self-help guru Marianne Williamson never attracted more than a fraction of the vote. Both men’s strength in their primaries may belie weaknesses within their coalitions that could pose difficulty for them in November, particularly given that the 2020 election was decided by narrow margins in just a handful of states. In some places where Mr. Trump won the Republican contests convincingly, he still performed [comparatively weaker with voters in suburban areas](https://www.nytimes.com/2024/03/06/us/politics/donald-trump-primary-wins.html) and those who identify as moderates or independents. Such groups, whose support Mr. Trump lost in 2020, may be crucial in tightly contested battleground states. Mr. Biden, for his part, faced a campaign in several primary states that urged voters to protest his handling of Israel’s war in Gaza by voting “uncommitted.” Losing the support of those voters in the fall could weaken the coalition that helped Mr. Biden oust Mr. Trump in 2020. During Mr. Biden’s first term, voters have questioned his age and his record, even as economic indicators improve. The president has shown weakness with young people and Black and Hispanic voters, key groups in the coalition that powered him to victory last time around. Mr. Biden is [viewed unfavorably](https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/favorability/donald-trump/) by a majority of Americans — a precarious position for a president seeking re-election — although so is Mr. Trump. Both campaigns have argued that voters who backed them in previous years will return to them as the choice crystallizes. Mr. Biden and his allied groups also have [a significant financial advantage over Mr. Trump](https://www.nytimes.com/2024/02/21/us/politics/biden-trump-campaign-money.html), whose legal bills are taking a toll. With Tuesday’s victories, Mr. Trump has locked up the nomination before any of his four criminal cases have proceeded to trial. His Manhattan criminal case, which stems from a hush-money payment to a porn star in 2016, is [set to go to trial on March 25](https://www.nytimes.com/2024/02/15/nyregion/trump-manhattan-criminal-case.html) and is expected to last six weeks. Mr. Trump’s lawyers had argued unsuccessfully that the timing would interfere with his presidential campaign, pointing in part to the primary calendar. More recently, Mr. Trump’s legal team made a [last-ditch effort](https://www.nytimes.com/2024/03/11/nyregion/trump-carroll-bond.html) to delay the trial before it starts. In court papers made public on Monday, his lawyers argued that the trial should not take place until the Supreme Court has decided [whether Mr. Trump is immune from prosecution](https://www.nytimes.com/2024/02/28/us/supreme-court-trump-immunity-trial.html) in his Washington criminal case, which involves accusations that he plotted to overturn the 2020 election. The judge in the New York case, Juan M. Merchan, is unlikely to grant the request. Updates From Our Reporters  March 13, 2024, 5:45 a.m. ET March 13, 2024, 5:45 a.m. ET Donald Trump has won the Republican caucuses in Hawaii, according to the Associated Press, winning the last of the Republican contests scheduled on Tuesday.  March 12, 2024, 11:26 p.m. ET March 12, 2024, 11:26 p.m. ET Voters have repeatedly expressed [discontent with a Trump-Biden rematch](https://www.nytimes.com/2024/03/06/us/politics/trump-biden-presidential-campaign.html) in November, but strong majorities have chosen both candidates.  March 12, 2024, 11:07 p.m. ET March 12, 2024, 11:07 p.m. ET Donald Trump has won the Washington State primary, according to The Associated Press. His victory in the state will most likely put him over the 1,215 delegates needed to clinch the Republican presidential nomination, once more votes are counted there.  March 12, 2024, 11:07 p.m. ET March 12, 2024, 11:07 p.m. ET President Biden has won the Democratic primary in Washington State, according to The Associated Press. Observers are closely watching for the strength of the “uncommitted” ballot option, which received significant support in previous primaries as a way to protest Biden’s handling of the war in Gaza.  March 12, 2024, 8:04 p.m. ET March 12, 2024, 8:04 p.m. ET President Biden and Donald Trump have won their respective primaries in Mississippi, according to The Associated Press. Biden clinched the Democratic nomination with his victory earlier tonight in Georgia, and Trump could do the same on the Republican side later tonight.  March 12, 2024, 7:51 p.m. ET March 12, 2024, 7:51 p.m. ET In a statement after securing enough delegates to clinch the 2024 Democratic nomination, President Biden vowed that he would defeat Donald Trump again this November. “Voters now have a choice to make about the future of this country,” he said. “Are we going to stand up and defend our democracy or let others tear it down?”  March 12, 2024, 7:13 p.m. ET March 12, 2024, 7:13 p.m. ET Donald Trump has won the Republican primary in Georgia, according to The Associated Press, winning in a state where he is under indictment on 13 charges, including racketeering, in connection with his effort to overturn the 2020 election.  March 12, 2024, 7:10 p.m. ET March 12, 2024, 7:10 p.m. ET President Biden has won the Democratic primary in Georgia, according to The Associated Press, a state he narrowly won in the 2020 election.  March 12, 2024, 7:08 p.m. ET March 12, 2024, 7:08 p.m. ET A Manhattan federal judge has approved [a $91.6 million bond posted by Donald Trump](https://www.nytimes.com/2024/03/08/nyregion/trump-carroll-bond-defamation.html) that will prevent E. Jean Carroll from collecting an $83.3 million defamation judgment while he appeals his civil trial loss. The bond – provided by Federal Insurance Company, an arm of the insurance giant Chubb – is higher than the judgment because Trump is also responsible for interest. Lawyers on both sides declined to comment.  March 12, 2024, 6:12 p.m. ET March 12, 2024, 6:12 p.m. ET Donald Trump, who is currently unopposed in the Republican primary, just got a few delegates closer to securing his party’s nomination, which he could clinch tonight. The Texas Republican Party just announced that it was awarding 11 outstanding delegates to him, which will bring him closer to the 1,215 required. He needs 126 more.  March 12, 2024, 4:49 p.m. ET March 12, 2024, 4:49 p.m. ET Representative Ruben Gallego, who is essentially running unopposed in the Democratic primary for Arizona’s tightly contested Senate seat, is up with his first ad of the cycle. The television spot, which the campaign plans to spend about $1 million on this month, emphasizes his military service in Iraq and working-class upbringing.  March 12, 2024, 4:17 p.m. ET March 12, 2024, 4:17 p.m. ET The departure of Representative Ken Buck, who announced Tuesday that he would leave his seat at the end of next week, also comes as Congress is facing yet another shutdown deadline — also at the end of next week. But he has been a consistent opponent of spending bills and would not have provided a vote to pass legislation to keep the government open.  March 12, 2024, 3:43 p.m. ET March 12, 2024, 3:43 p.m. ET House Speaker Mike Johnson will headline a fundraiser in Hartford on Saturday for George Logan, who hopes to avenge his 2022 loss to Representative Jahana Hayes, a Democrat who beat him [by just over 2,000 votes](https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2022/11/08/us/elections/results-connecticut-us-house-district-5.html) in Connecticut’s Fifth District. Republicans have targeted Hayes, a former National Teacher of the Year [once featured on the cover of Rolling Stone](https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-features/jahana-hayes-congress-interview-797222/) with Nancy Pelosi, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Ilhan Omar.  March 12, 2024, 3:01 p.m. ET March 12, 2024, 3:01 p.m. ET Colorado already has planned elections for primary congressional races for open seats in the Third and Fourth Districts on June 25. That date also falls within the window that state law requires the governor to set a special election date by in the event of a vacated seat — which is now relevant, given Representative Ken Buck’s early departure.  March 12, 2024, 2:35 p.m. ET March 12, 2024, 2:35 p.m. ET Representative Ken Buck’s departure next week will reduce the G.O.P.’s House majority to 218-213, meaning Speaker Mike Johnson can afford to lose only two votes and still pass legislation on a strict party-line vote. Special elections later this year will fill some of the vacancies, but those are months away. Any significant legislation is being passed with a combination of Republican and Democratic votes these days.  March 12, 2024, 2:24 p.m. ET March 12, 2024, 2:24 p.m. ET Representative Ken Buck, a Colorado Republican who had previously announced that he would not seek re-election this year and has criticized election deniers in his party, said on Tuesday that he would leave office early and would do so at the end of next week.  March 12, 2024, 1:27 p.m. ET March 12, 2024, 1:27 p.m. ET President Biden spent about an hour with the Teamsters. He brought an important validator along with him: Marty Walsh, his former labor secretary who is now executive director of the National Hockey League Players’ Association.  March 12, 2024, 11:15 a.m. ET March 12, 2024, 11:15 a.m. ET President Biden, who is banking on support from organized labor to beat former President Donald J. Trump this fall, is courting the International Brotherhood of Teamsters on Tuesday. He will meet with the influential union’s leadership and some members in Washington behind closed doors in hopes of winning an important endorsement. Trump has previously met with the Teamsters to make his own pitch.  March 12, 2024, 10:28 a.m. ET March 12, 2024, 10:28 a.m. ET Representative Adam Schiff, the front-runner in California’s open-seat Senate race and a manager in Donald Trump’s first impeachment, told MSNBC on Monday night that the former president was trying to buy time in his immunity claim case. “He’s hoping to string this out past the presidential campaign,” he said.  March 12, 2024, 10:05 a.m. ET March 12, 2024, 10:05 a.m. ET Donald Trump will appear at a rally in Ohio on Saturday hosted by a PAC backing Bernie Moreno, who Trump is backing in the state’s competitive Senate primary. The Senate race is seen as one of Republicans’ best chances to flip a seat from Democrats in November.  March 12, 2024, 9:37 a.m. ET March 12, 2024, 9:37 a.m. ET The White House announced that President Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris will travel to North Carolina on March 26. The state has become [a top target for the Biden campaign](https://www.nytimes.com/2024/03/11/us/politics/biden-trump-north-carolina-georgia.html), thanks in part to a high-profile governor’s race with a divisive G.O.P. candidate.  March 12, 2024, 9:33 a.m. ET March 12, 2024, 9:33 a.m. ET Donald Trump said in a social media post late Monday that he would, if elected, “free” those convicted of crimes for their role in the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol on his first day in office. Trump has previously suggested he would pardon Jan. 6 rioters, including Enrique Tarrio, the former leader of the Proud Boys who was [sentenced to 22 years in prison](https://www.nytimes.com/2023/09/05/us/politics/enrique-tarrio-proud-boys-sentenced.html) on charges of seditious conspiracy for his role in the attack. Credit...Grant Hindsley for The New York Times After weeks of losing sizable shares of Democratic primaries to “uncommitted” votes protesting his policy toward Israel’s war in Gaza, President Biden took a commanding percentage of the [Washington State primary results](https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2024/03/12/us/elections/results-washington-democratic-presidential-primary.html) reported Tuesday. About 8 percent of the Washington State Democratic ballots counted on Tuesday night went for “uncommitted,” though the state has not yet reported all of its primary ballots. Washington State elections are conducted entirely by mail, and a proportion of the ballots that were returned on Tuesday will not be counted until later this week. “Uncommitted” was winning 10 percent of the vote in King County, which includes Seattle, the state’s largest and most progressive city. With nearly 1.2 million ballots tallied by late Tuesday in both parties’ contests, Stuart Holmes, the director of elections for the Washington secretary of state’s office, said there were 183,000 total ballots left to count. Washington State’s vote follows Democratic contests in Michigan, where “uncommitted” received [13 percent of the vote](https://www.nytimes.com/2024/02/28/us/politics/michigan-primary-biden-trump.html), and Minnesota, where it received [19 percent](https://www.nytimes.com/2024/03/05/us/politics/biden-uncommitted-protest-vote-minnesota.html). In the little-watched, low-turnout Democratic caucuses in Hawaii, where there was not an organized campaign to cast protest votes against Mr. Biden’s handling of the war, “uncommitted” received [29 percent](https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2024/03/06/us/elections/results-hawaii-democratic-caucus.html). By the time Washington State’s results were reported Tuesday, Mr. Biden had clinched the Democratic presidential nomination with his victory in Georgia’s Democratic primary. Mr. Biden also won the Mississippi Democratic primary on Tuesday. Groups in Washington State that oppose Mr. Biden’s stance toward the war in Gaza won endorsements for “uncommitted” from local supermarket workers’ and teachers’ unions as well as from The Stranger, an alternative weekly newspaper in Seattle. The “uncommitted” push in the state was also backed by Our Revolution, the political organization started by supporters of Senator Bernie Sanders, independent of Vermont. Mr. Sanders himself, though, has encouraged Democrats to vote for Mr. Biden in the primary. Credit...Megan Mendoza/The Republic, via USA Today Network Christina Bobb, a former host at the far-right One America News Network who has relentlessly promoted false claims that the 2020 election was stolen from Donald J. Trump, has been appointed senior counsel for election integrity at the Republican National Committee. “I’m honored to be a part of the new team at the R.N.C.,” Ms. Bobb said on social media, linking to [a Washington Post article](https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2024/03/12/rnc-trump-firings-takeover/) that reported her hiring. Ms. Bobb [jumped from her job at the media company to serve as a lawyer](https://www.nytimes.com/2023/02/10/us/politics/evan-corcoran-mar-a-lago.html) for Mr. Trump in 2022. Soon after, she [gave a false statement to the Justice Department](https://www.nytimes.com/2022/10/11/us/politics/christina-bobb-trump-lawyer-investigation.html) about classified documents that were kept at Mr. Trump’s private club and residence Mar-a-Lago in Palm Beach, Fla. — a crucial episode that ultimately [led to Mr. Trump’s indictment in the case](https://int.nyt.com/data/documenttools/trump-indictment-document/967835b8a14a6b03/full.pdf#page=25). The Justice Department investigated if her actions in that episode had constituted obstruction of justice, or if she had committed other crimes, though Ms. Bobb was not among those charged in the documents case. A self-described conspiracy theorist and election denier, Ms. Bobb will take on a role overseeing Republican election integrity efforts — after years of aggressively promoting false claims about the 2020 election. Her appointment reflects the ascendant role of election deniers in Republican leadership and in Mr. Trump’s presidential campaign. Ms. Bobb, a former Marine who served in Afghanistan, was appointed a day after [mass layoffs at the national committee](https://www.nytimes.com/2024/03/11/us/politics/rnc-trump-layoffs.html) pushed out more than 60 officials, including senior staff members, in what amounted to a gutting of the party apparatus in an election year. On Friday, Michael Whatley, a close ally to Mr. Trump, and Lara Trump, the former president’s daughter-in-law, [were unanimously elected](https://www.nytimes.com/2024/03/08/us/politics/trump-rnc-lara-michael-whatley.html) as the committee’s chair and co-chair. Chris LaCivita, one of Mr. Trump’s top campaign advisers, was also tapped to serve as the chief operating officer. In a statement, a spokesman for the Democratic National Committee, Alex Floyd, said Ms. Bobb’s hiring at the D.N.C.’s Republican counterpart was another sign that “democracy is on the ballot this November.” He added that Ms. Bobb “will fit right in with the far-right extremists and election deniers who make up the new MAGA senior leadership at the R.N.C.” Credit...Sophie Park for The New York Times Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has recently approached the N.F.L. quarterback Aaron Rodgers and the former Minnesota governor and professional wrestler Jesse Ventura about serving as his running mate on an independent presidential ticket, and both have welcomed the overtures, two people familiar with the discussions said. Mr. Kennedy confirmed on Tuesday that the two men were at the top of his list. It is not clear if either has been formally offered the post, however, and Mr. Kennedy is still considering a shortlist of potential candidates, the people familiar with the discussions said. Mr. Kennedy said that he had been speaking with Mr. Rodgers “pretty continuously” for the past month, and that he had been in touch with Mr. Ventura since the former governor introduced him at a campaign event last month in Arizona. A representative for Mr. Rodgers did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Mr. Ventura’s son, Tyrel Ventura, said in an email message late Tuesday: “No one has officially asked Gov. Ventura to be a vice-presidential candidate so the governor does not comment on speculation.” The involvement of Mr. Rodgers — who is expected to start for the New York Jets this fall, at the height of campaign season — or of Mr. Ventura could add star power and independent zeal to Mr. Kennedy’s outsider bid. Polls show Mr. Kennedy [pulling roughly equal numbers](https://static.foxnews.com/foxnews.com/content/uploads/2024/03/Fox_February-25-28-2024_National_Topline_March-3-Release.pdf) of votes away from both President Biden and former President Donald J. Trump — but Democrats are far more worried than Republicans that he could tilt a close election to Mr. Trump. Mr. Biden’s allies [have been working to block Mr. Kennedy](https://www.nytimes.com/2023/10/08/us/politics/biden-trump-third-parties-no-labels.html) from the ballot across the country. Mr. Kennedy, 70, an environmental lawyer and scion of a storied Democratic family, has in recent years become prominent for his vaccine skepticism and his [promotion of conspiracy theories](https://www.nytimes.com/2023/07/06/us/politics/rfk-conspiracy-theories-fact-check.html) about the federal government and public health apparatus. Mr. Rodgers, too, has increasingly embraced the role of celebrity provocateur and contrarian for his stances on vaccines, public health and the coronavirus pandemic. Aaron Rodgers is expected to start at quarterback for the New York Jets this fall, a year after rupturing his left Achilles’ tendon in his first regular season game for the team last season.Credit...Al Bello/Getty Images Mr. Kennedy is expected to name his running mate in the coming weeks, ahead of deadlines in states that require him to have a vice-presidential pick to petition for ballot access. He initially ran for president as a Democrat but announced in October that he would run as an independent instead, accusing Democrats of corruptly blocking his challenge to Mr. Biden. In recent months, Mr. Kennedy and his camp have approached at least a half-dozen people, with varying degrees of formality, to gauge their interest in serving as his running mate. Aside from Mr. Rodgers and Mr. Ventura, he is said to have spoken with former Representative Tulsi Gabbard of Hawaii; Senator Rand Paul of Kentucky; and Andrew Yang, the former candidate for president and New York mayor, the two people familiar with the discussions said. Puck News [previously reported](https://puck.news/kennedys-fantasy-veepstakes-the-s-b-f-brady-draft/) the outreach to Mr. Yang. Mr. Yang did not respond to requests for comment. Mr. Paul’s office did not respond to a request for comment. Ms. Gabbard could not be reached for comment. All have turned him down, or their conversations have not advanced, except for Mr. Rodgers and Mr. Ventura, the people familiar with the discussions said. If anything could be interpreted as a hint of where Mr. Kennedy might lean, the domain name kennedyrodgers.com was registered last week using a GoDaddy host. Mr. Rodgers, 40, is a four-time winner of the N.F.L.’s Most Valuable Player award, leading the Green Bay Packers to a Super Bowl victory in 2011. He is expected to start for the New York Jets this year, after his debut with the team last season ended abruptly with [a rupture of his left Achilles’ tendon in the opening minutes](https://www.nytimes.com/2023/09/12/sports/football/aaron-rodgers-achilles-injury-jets.html) of the first game. It is not clear how running for the second-highest office in the land would work with his day job. He [said recently](https://www.newyorkjets.com/news/aaron-rodgers-jets-hopeful-to-play-3-or-4-more-years) that he hoped to play in the N.F.L. for “two or three or four more years.” It would also not be the first time Mr. Rodgers sought to add a side gig to his football career. In 2021, while playing for the Packers, he was [among those who auditioned](https://www.nytimes.com/2021/08/14/business/media/jeopardy-mike-richards-ken-jennings.html) to be the host of the quiz show “Jeopardy!” A spokesman for the New York Jets did not immediately respond to a request for comment. The team is owned by Woody Johnson, a prominent donor to former President Donald J. Trump. [Mr. Trump appointed Mr. Johnson](https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/19/us/politics/woody-johnson-trump-ambassador.html) to be his ambassador to Britain. Mr. Rodgers has been outspoken on political and social issues in recent years. Last month, in an appearance on Joe Rogan’s popular podcast, Mr. Rodgers said he had lost friends, allies and sponsorships over his public decision not to get vaccinated. Mr. Rodgers has promoted his skepticism about Covid vaccines during his regular guest spots on the ESPN show hosted by Pat McAfee, a former football punter-turned-podcaster. In January, Mr. Rodgers had [a spat with the late-night host Jimmy Kimmel](https://www.nytimes.com/2024/01/09/arts/television/jimmy-kimmel-aaron-rodgers-apology.html) when he falsely suggested court documents would link Mr. Kimmel with Jeffrey Epstein during an appearance on Mr. McAfee’s show. Mr. Rodgers was an [early backer](https://twitter.com/AaronRodgers12/status/1648749003499257856) of Mr. Kennedy’s presidential bid. Last month, Mr. Kennedy shared a [picture](https://twitter.com/RobertKennedyJr/status/1760124775983362290?s=20) on social media of them hiking together. Mr. Ventura, 72, was famous in the 1970s and ’80s as a professional wrestler known as Jesse “the Body” Ventura, and he also appeared in movies and television before he entered politics. He was elected governor of Minnesota in 1998 on the Reform Party ticket, and served for one term. He has since become a prominent figure in independent and third-party politics. He has written several books, and now has a [Substack](https://jesseventura.substack.com/), “Die First Then Quit,” with his son. In a YouTube [interview](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yoJMlIfFXg0) four months ago, Mr. Ventura said he would consider an offer from Mr. Kennedy to serve on his ticket. Reid J. Epstein and Maggie Haberman contributed reporting. Kitty Bennett and Susan C. Beachy contributed research. 1. Nicole Craine for The New York Times 2. Nicole Craine for The New York Times 3. Rory Doyle for The New York Times 4. Rory Doyle for The New York Times 5. Nicole Craine for The New York Times 6. Rory Doyle for The New York Times 7. Nicole Craine for The New York Times 8. Christian Monterrosa for The New York Times 9. Rory Doyle for The New York Times Credit...Haiyun Jiang for The New York Times President Biden clinched the Democratic nomination on Tuesday, securing enough delegates to send him into a looming rematch against former President Donald J. Trump after a mostly uncontested primary campaign that was nevertheless marked by doubts — even from supporters — over his age, foreign policy and enduring strength as a candidate. Mr. Biden faced little opposition in his march to the nomination. Robert F. Kennedy Jr., the political scion and environmental lawyer, dropped out of the Democratic nominating contest to run as an independent. Representative Dean Phillips of Minnesota and the self-help guru Marianne Williamson never attracted more than a fraction of the vote. In fact, Mr. Biden’s most serious rival was not a candidate but a protest movement over his support for Israel in its war in Gaza. The movement — organized by Muslim American activists and progressives — urged voters to cast their ballot for the “uncommitted” option rather than Mr. Biden. It received [significant support](https://www.nytimes.com/2024/02/28/us/politics/michigan-primary-biden-trump.html) in Michigan, winning more than 101,000 votes, as well as in [Minnesota](https://www.nytimes.com/2024/03/05/us/politics/biden-uncommitted-protest-vote-minnesota.html) and Hawaii. Organizers also [targeted](https://www.nytimes.com/live/2024/03/12/us/2024-election-trump-biden/uncommitted-biden-washington-state#biden-uncommitted-washington-israel-gaza) Washington State, which held its primary on Tuesday, although the full results there will not be known for several days. Still, with his victory in Georgia, Mr. Biden on Tuesday crossed the necessary threshold of 1,968 delegates to become his party’s standard-bearer this year. In a statement, Mr. Biden said he was honored that Democratic voters “have put their faith in me once again to lead our party — and our country — in a moment when the threat Trump poses is greater than ever.” He looked toward November, saying, “Voters now have a choice to make about the future of this country. Are we going to stand up and defend our democracy or let others tear it down? Will we restore the right to choose and protect our freedoms or let extremists take them away?” He added, “I believe that the American people will choose to keep us moving into the future.” On the Republican side, Mr. Trump was expected to secure the Republican nomination later on Tuesday. The early conclusion to the nominating contests means Americans will face a lengthy general-election campaign. Mr. Trump, who faces 91 criminal charges in four cases, is leading Mr. Biden in many polls. Voters have questioned Mr. Biden’s age and his record during his first term, even as economic indicators improve. The president has shown weakness with young people and Black and Hispanic voters, key groups in the coalition that powered him to victory in 2020. Only 83 percent of voters who backed him four years ago say they plan to do so again, according to [a recent New York Times/Siena College poll](https://www.nytimes.com/2024/03/02/us/politics/biden-trump-times-siena-poll.html). For Mr. Trump, the figure is 97 percent. Mr. Biden is [viewed unfavorably](https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/favorability/donald-trump/) by a majority of Americans — a precarious position for a president seeking re-election — although so is Mr. Trump. Mr. Biden and his allied groups do have [a significant financial advantage over Mr. Trump](https://www.nytimes.com/2024/02/21/us/politics/biden-trump-campaign-money.html), whose legal bills are taking a toll. The Biden campaign has argued that Democratic voters will come back to the president as the choice crystallizes between him and Mr. Trump, whom Mr. Biden has portrayed as a threat to democracy. Trying to assuage concerns about his age and stamina, Mr. Biden delivered a [robust State of the Union address](https://www.nytimes.com/2024/03/08/us/politics/biden-sotu-speech.html) last week, followed by trips to [crucial battleground states](https://www.nytimes.com/live/2024/03/10/us/2024-presidential-election#biden-trump-election). He has also talked [more forcefully](https://www.nytimes.com/2024/03/08/us/politics/biden-campaign.html) about his accomplishments and begun to [lay out his vision](https://www.nytimes.com/2024/03/11/us/politics/biden-health-care.html#:~:text=Mr.%20Biden%20highlighted%20pledges%20he,%242%2C000%20annually%20for%20all%20Americans.) for a second term, and his campaign has started a [$30 million advertising blitz](https://www.nytimes.com/2024/03/09/us/politics/biden-ad-age.html). The candidates will not be formally anointed as their parties’ nominees until their national conventions this summer. Democrats will hold their convention in Chicago starting on Aug. 19. Republicans will hold theirs in Milwaukee starting on July 15. Credit...Travis Dove for The New York Times A bipartisan panel of three judges in North Carolina ruled that a Republican-led effort in the state legislature to restructure state and county election boards is unconstitutional. Their ruling, which contained no dissent, leaves in place the current makeup of the state election board, which has three Democratic members and two Republican members. Representatives for the Republican-led legislature on Tuesday did not indicate whether they would appeal the decision. The legislation, passed by the Republican supermajority last year, would have upended the balance of state and county election boards in the state, creating an eight-member state election board with an equal number of Democrats and Republicans appointed to the board by the state legislature. County election boards would be set up for similar stalemates. Under current law, the state’s governor appoints the members of the five-person state election board. The process for county election boards, which currently have five members, is more complex, but the governor appoints the chairs. Election experts and Democrats, including Gov. Roy Cooper, contended that the bill would lead to deadlock on many key election issues. The three-judge panel, made up of two Republicans and one Democrat, called the effort a “stark and blatant removal of appointment power from the governor” and said that it “infringes upon the governor’s constitutional duties.” Republicans who support the law have a shrinking window to appeal the decision in time for the 2024 elections, and will most likely have to go to the state Supreme Court if they want to have a decision in place before November. Credit...Emily Elconin for The New York Times Washington State’s primary voters will offer the next glimpse of how many Democratic voters oppose President Biden’s policy toward Israel’s war in Gaza, though it may be days before a full picture of the results is clear. The state’s primary on Tuesday comes after noteworthy numbers of Democratic voters in other states chose “uncommitted” in apparent protest of Mr. Biden’s position, including [13 percent in Michigan](https://www.nytimes.com/2024/02/28/us/politics/michigan-primary-biden-trump.html), [19 percent in Minnesota](https://www.nytimes.com/2024/03/05/us/politics/biden-uncommitted-protest-vote-minnesota.html) and [29 percent in the little-watched Democratic caucuses in Hawaii](https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2024/03/06/us/elections/results-hawaii-democratic-caucus.html), where the antiwar advocacy groups that organized elsewhere did not have a presence. Washington’s brand of [anti-establishment Pacific Northwest liberalism](https://www.nytimes.com/2024/03/06/us/politics/uncommitted-biden-washington-state.html) has the potential to be a good fit for the “uncommitted” vote that has won increasing slices of the Democratic electorate in recent weeks. And it is unlikely Mr. Biden’s forceful performance in his State of the Union address last week would have a strong impact on the results in Washington, which votes entirely by mail. More than 512,000 Democratic primary ballots had already been received by Thursday, when he delivered the speech, according to [data from the Washington secretary of state’s office](https://www.sos.wa.gov/elections/data-research/election-data-and-maps/ballot-return-statistics). Stuart Holmes, the director of elections for the secretary of state, said to expect about half the state’s ballots to be counted and reported when polls close on Tuesday night. The rest of the ballots will be tabulated and reported once a day until all votes are counted, with the vast majority of the counting expected to be complete by the end of this week, Mr. Holmes said. Shasti Conrad, the chairwoman of the Washington State Democrats, said the party would support Mr. Biden. “We know President Biden and Vice President Harris are working tirelessly toward an end to the violence and a just, lasting peace in the Middle East,” Ms. Conrad said. “Voters in Washington understand the tremendous progress Democrats have made.” “Uncommitted” backers have offered a low bar for success in each of the preceding states where they have been active. Larry Cohen, the chairman of Our Revolution, the political organization begun by supporters of Senator Bernie Sanders that is backing “uncommitted,” put the goal for success in Washington State at 10 percent — far less than previous states but more than “uncommitted” received in 2020, when [6,450 people, about 0.4 percent of Democratic primary voters](https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/03/10/us/elections/results-washington-president-democrat-primary-election.html), chose “uncommitted.” The state [canceled its presidential primaries](https://www.reuters.com/article/us-campaign-washington-primary-idUSTRE74B7OQ20110512/) in 2012, the last time an incumbent Democratic president was seeking re-election. The parties held nominating caucuses instead. Credit...Tom Brenner for The New York Times A Republican group dedicated to opposing former President Donald J. Trump is planning to spend $50 million to stop him through a series of homemade testimonial videos of voters who backed him in past elections but say they can no longer support him in 2024. The group, Republican Voters Against Trump, [first emerged in the 2020 campaign](https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/28/us/politics/republican-voters-against-trump.html) and made a return appearance [for the 2022 midterm elections](https://www.nytimes.com/2022/07/11/us/politics/republican-accountability-pac-trump.html). It is run by Sarah Longwell, a leading figure in Never-Trump politics whose focus groups and polling are a staple of [center-right podcasts](https://www.thebulwark.com/podcast/focus-group/) and have made her a go-to figure [for political reporters](https://www.nytimes.com/2024/03/05/us/politics/trump-presidency-election-voters.html) aiming to decipher the motivations behind Trump supporters. Unlike [Democratic organizations](https://www.nytimes.com/2024/01/26/us/politics/moveon-biden-democrats.html) that aim to help President Biden [by promoting his record](https://www.nytimes.com/2024/02/05/us/politics/votevets-biden-democrats-ads.html) in office, Ms. Longwell’s group focuses solely on attacking Mr. Trump through the voices of his former backers. The Republican Voters Against Trump website [features 100 videos](http://www.rvat.org/), from one to three minutes long, of Republicans speaking to a computer or mobile-phone camera about why they voted for Mr. Trump in 2016 or 2020 and will not do so in 2024. The personal testimonial style, Ms. Longwell said, has proved far more successful in her focus groups at cleaving Trump voters away from him than traditional attack advertising that contrasts Mr. Trump with Mr. Biden. Notably, the [speakers in the videos do not praise Mr. Biden](https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLlt57MwlA6N8zZa-Rnkeq2oGT87HTud39) or offer a case for why he deserves a second term. Nor do any of the initial testimonials address abortion rights — the issue that has powered Democratic electoral victories since the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade and ended a constitutional right to an abortion in June 2022. “It’s really important to understand you’re not building a pro-Joe Biden coalition,” Ms. Longwell said. “You’re building an anti-Trump coalition.” In 2020, Republican Voters Against Trump ended the presidential campaign with more than 1,000 homemade videos on its website of people who voted for Mr. Trump in 2016 but said they would not do so again. For 2024, the group is starting with 100 testimonials and instructions on its website for past Trump supporters to submit their own stories. So far, the anti-Trump Republicans who have recorded their thoughts for Ms. Longwell have focused on Mr. Trump’s attempt to overturn the 2020 election, blaming him for the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol. Abortion, Ms. Longwell said, was a far less urgent concern for these voters. She said many of them did not connect Mr. Trump with the Supreme Court’s 2022 decision and did not believe he opposes the practice. “They view Trump as a cultural moderate,” she said. “They think he’s paying for abortions. Nobody thinks this guy has an ounce of sexual morality. They don’t think he’s Mike Pence. And so that sort of helps him.” Ms. Longwell said she had $20 million already committed to her 2024 effort and aimed to raise the rest of the money for her advertising campaign between now and the fall. Advertisement [SKIP ADVERTISEMENT](https://www.nytimes.com/live/2024/03/12/us/2024-election-trump-biden/uncommitted-biden-washington-state#after-dfp-ad-bottom) * [© 2024 The New York Times Company](https://help.nytimes.com/hc/en-us/articles/115014792127-Copyright-notice) * [Manage Privacy Preferences](https://www.nytimes.com/privacy/manage-settings)
-
The New York Jets quarterback Aaron Rodgers and the former pro wrestler and Minnesota governor Jesse Ventura are at the top of Robert F Kennedy Jr’s list of potential running mates for his independent presidential campaign, the New York Times [reported](https://www.nytimes.com/2024/03/12/us/politics/rfk-jr-aaron-rodgers-jesse-ventura.html). Kennedy [told](https://www.nytimes.com/2024/03/12/us/politics/rfk-jr-aaron-rodgers-jesse-ventura.html) the paper he was speaking to Rodgers – a fellow conspiracy theorist and anti-vaccine campaigner – “pretty continuously” and had been in touch with Ventura since being introduced by him at an event in Arizona last month. Rodgers did not immediately comment. Ventura’s son [said](https://www.nytimes.com/2024/03/12/us/politics/rfk-jr-aaron-rodgers-jesse-ventura.html) his father “does not comment on speculation”. Democrats fear Kennedy, 70 and the son of the assassinated US attorney general and New York senator Robert F Kennedy, could prove a spoiler in Joe Biden’s rematch with Donald Trump. Polling gives Kennedy a [positive](https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/favorability/robert-f-kennedy/) favorability rating with voters, a luxury denied to [Biden](https://www.newsweek.com/joe-biden-approval-rating-sotu-address-2024-1878673) and [Trump](https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/favorability/donald-trump/). A polling average compiled [by the Hill](https://elections2024.thehill.com/national/biden-trump-rfk-general/) shows Trump at 41.6%, Biden at 38.6% and Kennedy at 11.3%. Democrats have worked to keep Kennedy off ballots in key states. In Kennedy’s search for a running mate, those who have turned him down include Rand Paul, a Republican senator from Kentucky; Tulsi Gabbard, a former Democratic congresswoman from Hawaii; and Andrew Yang, a tech entrepreneur who failed in runs for the Democratic presidential nomination and for the mayoralty of New York City. Paul [told Politico](https://www.politico.com/news/2024/03/12/robert-kennedy-jr-vice-president-pick-00146665?nname=playbook&nid=0000014f-1646-d88f-a1cf-5f46b7bd0000&nrid=0000014e-f116-dd93-ad7f-f917ef350000&nlid=630318): “I’m supportive of \[Kennedy’s\] ability to have a platform to speak out. I think he’s saying a lot of good things. But I have no plans to get involved in the campaign.” Gabbard is widely thought to be courting Trump. Politico said she had stopped cooperating with Kennedy’s vetting committee. Kennedy is an environmental lawyer and campaigner whose turn to conspiracy theorising and vaccine scepticism has stoked controversy and [rebukes](https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2024-election/kerry-kennedy-rebukes-brother-rfk-jr-linked-covid-19-jewish-people-rcna94718) from his famous family. Last month, he [apologised](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/feb/12/robert-f-kennedy-jr-apologizes-super-bowl-ad-jfk) for – but kept promoting – a Super Bowl spot based on a famous ad for his uncle John F Kennedy’s victorious 1960 presidential campaign. Rodgers made his name with the Green Bay Packers, winning the Super Bowl in 2011. Now 40, his move to the Jets began with [a serious achilles tendon injury](https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2023/sep/12/aaron-rodgers-injury-new-york-jets-debut-nfl-football). A familiar media presence who even auditioned to host the gameshow [Jeopardy!](https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2021/jan/13/aaron-rodgers-jeopardy-host-alex-trebek-death-nfl-packers), Rodgers last week responded to Kennedy’s response to Biden’s State of the Union address by [saying](https://twitter.com/AaronRodgers12/status/1766316961812885751): “This is presidential.” Like Kennedy, Rodgers has stirred controversy with [conspiracy-laced opinions](https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2024/jan/10/aaron-rodgers-pat-mcafee-show-anthony-fauci-nfl-jimmy-kimmel) about Covid-19, masking and [vaccines](https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2021/nov/06/aaron-rodgers-covid-interview-vaccine-hesistanccy). [skip past newsletter promotion](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/mar/13/robert-kennedy-jr-aaron-rodgers-running-mates#EmailSignup-skip-link-12) Sign up to First Thing Our US morning briefing breaks down the key stories of the day, telling you what’s happening and why it matters **Privacy Notice:** Newsletters may contain info about charities, online ads, and content funded by outside parties. For more information see our [Privacy Policy](https://www.theguardian.com/help/privacy-policy). We use Google reCaptcha to protect our website and the Google [Privacy Policy](https://policies.google.com/privacy) and [Terms of Service](https://policies.google.com/terms) apply. after newsletter promotion He has also said he has used psychedelics to help his NFL career. “Is it not ironic,” [he said last year](https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2023/jun/22/ayahuasca-48-touchdowns-mvp-rodgers-says-psychedelics-helped-nfl-career), “that the things that actually expand your mind are illegal and the things that keep you in the lower chakras and dumb you down have been legal for centuries?” In 1999, when Ventura was elected governor of Minnesota on the Reform party ticket, critics who could not know what was coming next, in the form of the Tea Party and Trumpism, bemoaned evidence of a dumbing down of [US politics](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/us-politics). A Vietnam veteran and member of the [WWE Hall of Fame](https://www.wwe.com/shows/wwe-hall-of-fame), Ventura left the Reform party in office. Since [stepping down](https://www.nytimes.com/2002/06/19/us/gov-ventura-says-he-won-t-seek-re-election.html) as governor in 2003, he has often flirted with third-party runs for Congress or for president. Like Kennedy, Ventura has [written for the Guardian](https://www.theguardian.com/profile/robert-f-kennedy-jr). In 2013, he [wrote](https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/nov/22/remember-kennedy-assassination-take-country-back) about his admiration for Robert F Kennedy Jr’s uncle, the 35th president who Ventura said “brought us away from the brink of death and destruction” in the Cuban missile crisis, “by standing up to the war mongers and allowing sanity to prevail”.
2024-04-04
-
Chris Inclan, an alcohol and drug counselor from Sonoma, Calif., voted for the Green Party candidate Jill Stein in 2016. In 2020, he backed Andrew Yang in the Democratic primary, and then cast a ballot for Donald Trump in the general election. Joe Biden, he said, was “so ingrained in the establishment and politics as usual,” while Trump “went against the grain on a lot of issues,” including wars and government regulation. But Inclan, a big bearded 39-year-old with tattoos on his hands, doesn’t want to have to make that choice again, which is why he’s now enthusiastically supporting Robert F. Kennedy Jr. I met Inclan at the Oakland rally where Kennedy introduced his new running mate, the 38-year-old political donor Nicole Shanahan. Held in the auditorium of the Henry J. Kaiser Center for the Arts, it was the first political rally Inclan had ever attended. “The system is corrupt,” he said of what he called the two-party “duopoly.” “We keep playing the same game. But I think Americans are fed up.” He’d joined Kennedy’s We the People Party, formed to help Kennedy get on the ballot in several states, and has aspirations to run for office himself someday. Image Setting up banners at Kennedy’s campaign event in Oakland, Calif., to announce his pick for a running mate. Inclan’s politics are hard to understand in purely left or right terms. The more relevant dichotomy, for him as for many Kennedy voters, is insider versus outsider, which is why Kennedy’s following sometimes overlaps, in unexpected ways, with the MAGA movement. Matt Castro, a San Francisco bus driver at the rally, described himself as “extremely left-leaning,” but didn’t vote in the last election and said that, if Kennedy isn’t on the ballot, he’d probably vote for Trump in the next one, because of his opposition to military support for Ukraine. Alex Klett, a 33-year-old Kennedy volunteer from Wisconsin who was handing out American flags, described himself as a right-leaning independent who voted for Trump in 2016 and then, in 2020, wrote in Kanye West. Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and [log into](https://myaccount.nytimes.com/auth/login?response_type=cookie&client_id=vi&redirect_uri=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.nytimes.com%2F2024%2F04%2F04%2Fopinion%2Frfk-movement-trump.html&asset=opttrunc) your Times account, or [subscribe](https://www.nytimes.com/subscription?campaignId=89WYR&redirect_uri=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.nytimes.com%2F2024%2F04%2F04%2Fopinion%2Frfk-movement-trump.html) for all of The Times. Thank you for your patience while we verify access. Already a subscriber? [Log in](https://myaccount.nytimes.com/auth/login?response_type=cookie&client_id=vi&redirect_uri=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.nytimes.com%2F2024%2F04%2F04%2Fopinion%2Frfk-movement-trump.html&asset=opttrunc). Want all of The Times? [Subscribe](https://www.nytimes.com/subscription?campaignId=89WYR&redirect_uri=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.nytimes.com%2F2024%2F04%2F04%2Fopinion%2Frfk-movement-trump.html).
2024-06-02
-
Peaceful “reunification” with [Taiwan](https://www.theguardian.com/world/taiwan) remains China’s goal but the prospect is being eroded by Taiwanese “separatists” and external forces, the Chinese defence minister, Dong Jun, has said. Taiwan – which is democratically governed, and has never been ruled from the Communist-run People’s Republic of China – on 20 May [inaugurated its newly elected president, Lai Ching-te](https://www.theguardian.com/world/article/2024/may/22/china-warns-of-reprisals-against-taiwan-after-presidents-inauguration-speech). The routine democratic transition was greeted with fury by the Chinese Communist party, which staged [war games around the island as a “punishment”](https://www.theguardian.com/world/article/2024/may/24/china-military-drills-drills-seize-power-taiwan-president-inauguration). Speaking at the Shangri-La Dialogue conference in Singapore on Sunday, Dong said Taiwan was the “core of core issues” for [China](https://www.theguardian.com/world/china). He accused Taiwan’s ruling Democratic Progressive party of incrementally pursuing separatism and working to erase Chinese identity. Dong accused Taiwan’s leaders of “fanatical statements”, while employing fevered language of his own in his address to defence officials and politicians from around the world. “They \[‘separatists’\] will be nailed to the pillar of shame in history,” he said. “The Chinese People’s Liberation Army has always been an indestructible and powerful force in defence of the unification of the motherland, and it will act resolutely and forcefully at all times to curb the independence of Taiwan and to ensure that it never succeeds in its attempts. [ How significant are China’s military drills around Taiwan? ](https://www.theguardian.com/world/article/2024/may/23/how-significant-are-chinas-military-drills-around-taiwan) “Whoever dares to split Taiwan from China will be crushed to pieces and suffer his own destruction.” Taiwan’s government said it deeply regretted the “provocative and irrational” remarks by Dong. China has repeatedly threatened Taiwan with force at international events, Taiwan’s China-policy making Mainland Affairs Council said in a statement. After his speech, Dong was asked several questions by delegates but remained preoccupied with Taiwan and had to be prompted by the moderator to address other issues. He accused foreign powers of interfering in “domestic issues” and “emboldening Taiwan separatists”. “We’re very confident in our capability to deter Taiwan independence.” China has been angered by US support for Taiwan, such as arms sales, though Washington – like most countries – does not diplomatically recognise Taiwan as a country in its own right. “They are selling a lot of weapons to Taiwan,” said Dong. “This kind of behaviour sends very wrong signals to the Taiwan independence forces and makes them become very aggressive. I think we are clear that the foreign power’s true purpose is to use Taiwan to contain China.” Andrew Yang, a former Taiwan defence minister, said Beijing had said it would pursue “reunification” by winning the hearts and minds of Taiwanese but “their deeds have yet to match their words”. Beijing was instead “holding a big stick” and was “confrontational and contradictory”, he said. Yang said he hoped the US would keep to its schedule of arms sales to Taiwan for self-defence. Lai has repeatedly offered talks with Beijing, but been rebuffed. The [Taiwanese president](https://www.theguardian.com/world/article/2024/may/19/new-taiwan-president-lai-ching-te-profile-bio-details) has [called for China to cease hostile actions](https://www.theguardian.com/world/article/2024/may/20/lai-ching-te-taiwan-new-president) and said only Taiwan’s people can decide their future. The annual security forum in Singapore led to the first substantive face-to-face talks in 18 months between the defence chiefs of China and the US as Dong met with Lloyd Austin. “We have always been open to exchanges and cooperation, but this requires both sides to meet each other halfway,” Dong told the forum. “We believe that we need more exchanges precisely because there are differences between our two militaries.” Dong and Austin met for over an hour. After the meeting, Austin said phone conversations between US and Chinese military commanders would resume “in the coming months”. China scrapped military communications with the US in 2022 because the then US House speaker, Nancy Pelosi, visited Taiwan. _With Reuters and Agence France-Presse_
2024-06-28
-
6 hours ago By Kayla Epstein, BBC News, at the debate in Atlanta EPA California Governor Gavin Newsom Joe Biden’s campaign was prepared to come out swinging after tonight’s debate against Donald Trump. Instead, they were backed into a corner. The campaign’s top surrogates wound up pinned at one end of the debate spin room by a mob of reporters on Thursday night, fielding questions about ousting 81-year-old Mr Biden at the top of the ticket and whether tonight's performance fuelled more [concerns about his fitness for office.](https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/crgedpw4r5eo) California Governor Gavin Newsom was asked whether the Democratic Party should replace the president as its candidate. The 56-year-old Democrat responded that he was “old fashioned” and cared more about the “substance and facts” discussed rather than a frenzy over Mr Biden’s energy. It was not the conversation that Democrats hoped to have after the debate. But Mr Biden’s subdued performance during the 90-minute event, during which he sometimes [stumbled through answers and spoke with a cold-induced rasp](https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/crgedpw4r5eo), sent Democrats into an immediate panic as they were pressed on how his campaign would recover. Watch: Biden stumbles during answer on taxes, childcare Voters' concerns about his age already weighed heavily on the debate, and even Mr Biden's staunchest supporters acknowledged the performance would likely not help. David Plouffe, a Democratic strategist who managed Barack Obama’s 2008 campaign, called it "a Defcon 1 moment”, referring to the US military phrase for the highest level of a nuclear threat. “They seemed about 30 years apart tonight,” he said of the two candidates, who are fewer than four years apart in age. “And I think that’s going to be the thing that voters really wrestle with coming out of this.” Andrew Yang, who challenged Mr Biden in 2020’s Democratic primary and dropped out early in the race, wrote on X that the president should “do the right thing” by “stepping aside and letting the DNC choose another nominee". He added the hashtag #swapJoeout. It is unlikely that Mr Biden will be replaced as the Democratic Party’s nominee for a number of reasons: he's the incumbent president, there are only a handful of months left before the election and the chaotic process of choosing another nominee could derail the party's chances of winning the White House in November. Yet the debate was “an important reminder of why, after we save democracy and defeat Trump, we’ve got to end the gerontocracy", Amanda Litman, who works to recruit young Democratic candidates, told the BBC. “I think his job just became a little bit harder,” David Axelrod, another top Obama lieutenant, said on CNN. Name-calling and insults - key moments from Biden and Trump’s debate Back in the spin room, the campaign’s surrogates answered question after question about Mr Biden’s performance. Try as they might, they could not change the conversation. Congressman Robert Garcia of California said that Trump “lied, and lied, and lied again.” The former president did make misleading statements during the debate. He falsely claimed that Democratic-controlled states wanted to allow abortion “after birth” – a talking point used by anti-abortion activists. He also said Mr Biden “encouraged” Russian President Vladimir Putin to attack Ukraine, when in reality his administration has staunchly backed Ukraine in the war. The Biden campaign pushed similar talking points. “Donald Trump is a liar. And a criminal. And he cannot be our president,” the campaign said in a statement after the debate. Vice-President Kamala Harris echoed the attack. “Donald Trump lied over and over and over again,” she told CNN. When he appeared at a post-debate watch party, Mr Biden zeroed in on this argument. "They're going to be fact-checking all the things he said," the president told the crowd. "I can't think of one thing he said that was true." "Look, we're going to beat this guy, we need to beat this. I need you, in order to beat him. You're the people I'm running for," Mr Biden added. In the spin room afterwards Trump's allies and campaign staff happily declared victory. Meanwhile, Democrats including Mr Newsom, Mr Garcia and Senator Raphael Warnock made relatively brief appearances, answering the same questions over and over about Mr Biden’s performance. “I have been a surrogate for some presidential candidates in my time,” former Democratic US senator Claire McCaskill told MSNBC. “When you’re a surrogate you have to focus on the positives,” she said. But now, she said, she had to be “really honest.” “He had one thing he had to accomplish, and that was to reassure America he was up to the job at his age. And he failed at that tonight.”
2024-06-30
-
On Thursday night, after the first presidential debate, MSNBC’s Alex Wagner interviewed Gov. Gavin Newsom of California. “You were out there getting a chorus of questions about whether Biden should step down,” she said. “There is a panic that has set in.” Newsom’s reply was dismissive. “We gotta have the back of this president,” he said. “You don’t turn your back because of one performance. What kind of party does that?” Perhaps a party that wants to win? Or a party that wants to nominate a candidate that the American people believe is up to the job? Maybe the better question is: What kind of party would do nothing right now? In February, I [argued](https://www.nytimes.com/2024/02/16/opinion/ezra-klein-biden-audio-essay.html) that President Biden should step aside in the 2024 election and Democrats should do what political parties did in presidential elections until the 1970s: choose a ticket at their convention. In public, the backlash I got from top Democrats was fierce. I was a bed-wetter living in an Aaron Sorkin fantasyland. In private, the feedback was more thoughtful and frightened. No one tried to convince me that Biden was a strong candidate. They argued instead that he couldn’t be persuaded to step aside, that even if he could, Vice President Kamala Harris would lose the election and that if a convention didn’t choose Harris, passing her over would fracture the party. They argued not that Biden was strong but that the Democratic Party was weak. I think Democrats should give themselves a little bit more credit. Biden’s presidency is proof of the Democratic Party’s ability to act strategically. He didn’t win the Democratic nomination in 2020 because he set the hearts of party activists aflame. Support for him always lacked the passion of support for Bernie Sanders or Elizabeth Warren or even Andrew Yang. Biden won because the party made a cold decision to unite around the candidate it thought was best suited to beating Donald Trump. Biden won because Democrats did what they had to do, not what they wanted to do. Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and [log into](https://myaccount.nytimes.com/auth/login?response_type=cookie&client_id=vi&redirect_uri=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.nytimes.com%2F2024%2F06%2F30%2Fopinion%2Fbiden-debate-convention.html&asset=opttrunc) your Times account, or [subscribe](https://www.nytimes.com/subscription?campaignId=89WYR&redirect_uri=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.nytimes.com%2F2024%2F06%2F30%2Fopinion%2Fbiden-debate-convention.html) for all of The Times. Thank you for your patience while we verify access. Already a subscriber? [Log in](https://myaccount.nytimes.com/auth/login?response_type=cookie&client_id=vi&redirect_uri=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.nytimes.com%2F2024%2F06%2F30%2Fopinion%2Fbiden-debate-convention.html&asset=opttrunc). Want all of The Times? [Subscribe](https://www.nytimes.com/subscription?campaignId=89WYR&redirect_uri=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.nytimes.com%2F2024%2F06%2F30%2Fopinion%2Fbiden-debate-convention.html).
2024-07-19
-
Minutes after Donald Trump announced that he had [selected](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/article/2024/jul/15/trump-vp-jd-vance-election) JD Vance as his running mate, [Elon Musk](https://www.theguardian.com/technology/elon-musk) rushed to endorse the two Republican candidates to his 190 million followers on the social network that he owns. The tech billionaire proclaimed on X, formerly Twitter, that the ticket “resounds with victory”. Since the [assassination attempt on Trump](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/donald-trump-pennsylvania-rally-shooting) this past weekend, the CEO of Tesla and SpaceX has thrown his support behind the Republican party and positioned himself as the herald of Silicon Valley’s shift rightward. He wrote on X the day of Trump’s near-fatal shooting: “I fully endorse President Trump and hope for his rapid recovery” and called on others in the industry to join him. Musk, in contention for the title of the world’s richest man, [will reportedly](https://www.wsj.com/politics/elections/elon-musk-has-said-he-is-committing-around-45-million-a-month-to-a-new-pro-trump-super-pac-dda53823?mod=hp_lead_pos1) pledge $45m per month to a pro-Trump political action committee backed by other wealthy tech elites. Musk’s open support for one presidential candidate is a break from the role that major social media heads and big tech leaders have traditionally played in American politics. His wholehearted embrace of Trump and the Republican party is more the continuation of a rightward shift than an abrupt about-face, but endorsing Trump while steering one of the world’s most influential sites for political discourse and advertising represents an unprecedented position. [Mark Zuckerberg](https://www.theguardian.com/technology/mark-zuckerberg), Musk’s rival in the social networking industry, has shied away from taking sides in elections while running Meta, parent company of Facebook, Instagram and WhatsApp. Jack Dorsey, former Twitter CEO, donated to the long-shot 2020 campaigns of Tulsi Gabbard and Andrew Yang but did not advocate for either candidate in the general election. [ What we know about the shooting at a Donald Trump rally ](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/article/2024/jul/13/shots-fired-donald-trump-rally) Musk’s willingness to openly promote his political beliefs is a shift from how other social media leaders have strained to appear only as apolitical, pro-democracy stewards. Dorsey and Zuckerberg previously defended themselves [in front of congressional committees](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/nov/17/twitter-facebook-senate-hearing-anti-conservative-bias) over allegations of anti-conservative bias, and the latter has since [backed away from making political donations](https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2022-election/zuckerberg-money-wont-aid-elections-rcna24002) to election security following right-wing backlash. Zuckerberg has been especially quiet this election cycle, mostly posting PR-friendly content of him celebrating a birthday or wakesurfing on the Fourth of July. The Meta CEO and his deputies have asserted that their newest network, the X imitator Threads, is [not a place to find news or political discussion online](https://www.theguardian.com/media/2023/jul/06/threads-review-twitter-without-rough-edges-or-news). YouTube CEO Neal Mohan and Snap CEO Evan Spiegel have rarely dipped their toes into politics and have not endorsed candidates in this election. TikTok’s CEO, Shou Zi Chew, finds himself caught between political enemies past and present. Trump tried to ban the app in 2020 but now says he’s “[for TikTok](https://www.reuters.com/technology/trump-says-im-tiktok-potential-us-ban-looms-2024-07-16/)”; Joe Biden signed a bill banning the app if it did not sell to an American parent company in 2024. Musk, by contrast, has become consistently, overtly political. He frequently engages with and posts anti-immigrant content, declares his opposition to trans rights and attacks diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives. During the 2022 midterms, he stated that for the first time he would be voting Republican – casting his ballot for a [congressional candidate who posted support](https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/mayra-flores-texas-congress-qanon-1368616/) for the QAnon conspiracy theory. Although Musk stated on Wednesday that X will remain a “free speech” platform and he will not ban leftwing accounts, it remains to be seen whether the platform will remain entirely neutral. Already, he has used his pulpit to advocate for Trump and amplify other conservative tech billionaires while pushing right-wing narratives around the assassination attempt. The opaque nature of Twitter’s recommendation algorithm also means that Musk could decide to boost certain types of content over others if he chooses, promoting his preferred political narratives over others. The social network previously throttled traffic and slowed down loading times to sites that were critical of Musk, [a Washington Post analysis found](https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2023/08/15/twitter-x-links-delayed/) last year, and X’s hollowed-out content moderation teams frequently allow online abuse and misinformation to spread. The composition of users’ feeds may change due to his influence even if they don’t follow him. Musk’s ownership of the platform has resulted in the platform becoming generally more popular among conservatives, with [a Pew Research poll](https://www.pewresearch.org/2024/06/12/how-americans-navigate-politics-on-tiktok-x-facebook-and-instagram/) earlier this year finding that the share of Republican users who view the platform as good for democracy roughly tripled in the past three years. In the same time, Democrats’ support for the platform has plummeted, per Pew. The owner of X has also become fervently anti-media in recent years as Journalists have reported on him secretly [having children](https://www.businessinsider.com/elon-musk-shivon-zilis-secret-twins-neuralink-tesla) with one of his executives, [his associates’ concerns over ongoing alleged drug use](https://www.wsj.com/business/elon-musk-illegal-drugs-e826a9e1), his rumored [affair with another tech billionaire’s wife](https://www.nytimes.com/2024/05/22/technology/nicole-shanahan-rfk-jr-vp.html) who is now RFK Jr’s running mate, [declining profits at his companies](https://www.theverge.com/2024/4/23/24134282/tesla-earnings-q1-2024-profit-demand-elon-musk), the [sexual harassment and retaliation lawsuits against him](https://www.axios.com/2024/06/12/elon-musk-spacex-sexual-harassment-lawsuit), his [other secret child](https://www.theverge.com/2024/6/21/24183083/elon-musk-secret-child-shivon-zilis-exec-neuralink) with one of his executives, his decision to reinstate the Twitter account of not only Donald Trump but also [a prominent white nationalist Holocaust denier](https://www.axios.com/2024/05/03/elon-musk-nick-fuentes-x-account), the heap of lawsuits claiming that he [illegally fired workers](https://www.wsj.com/tech/elon-musk-scores-win-against-former-twitter-employees-in-500-million-severance-suit-f4d75b7e), monkeys [dying horrifically at his labs](https://www.wired.com/story/elon-musk-pcrm-neuralink-monkey-deaths/), his obsession with demographic change and [promotion of racist conspiracy theories](https://www.theverge.com/2024/3/25/24111405/elon-musk-great-replacement-conspiracy-immigration-don-lemon), his promotion of potentially harmful misinformation and [his embrace of anti-democratic leaders](https://www.nytimes.com/2024/05/12/technology/elon-musk-world-leaders.html). Musk has denied almost all of the reports and told his followers to no longer read legacy news outlets. In late 2022, he suspended the accounts of 10 journalists who had published stories about him and his companies. As Musk has bashed news outlets reporting critically on his personal and professional life, he has promoted conservative and libertarian-leaning commentators who agree with him. He has frequently interacted with accounts on [X](https://www.theguardian.com/technology/twitter) that espouse rightwing misinformation and reinstated accounts banned for a variety of reasons, from violating Twitter’s previous rules on hate speech to spreading election denialism. Musk’s wholehearted endorsement of Trump is also reflective of his embrace of other rightwing leaders around the world, especially in countries with resources and supply chains that interact with his various companies. Musk is one of Argentinian President Javier Milei’s most vocal online supporters and [gave him a personal tour](https://apnews.com/article/milei-musk-tesla-spacex-argentina-us-texas-economy-7af43102c5dcf5398a97d1010463f5a1) of a Tesla factory in Texas earlier this year. Argentina has one of the world’s largest reserves of lithium, a rare mineral needed for producing electric cars. Musk developed [similar symbiotic relationships](https://www.nytimes.com/2024/05/12/technology/elon-musk-world-leaders.html) with leaders like India’s prime minister, Narendra Modi, and, while he was still in power, Brazil’s Jair Bolsonaro. The stakes are highest for Musk in the US, however, where he has [relied on billions in government subsidies](https://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-hy-musk-subsidies-20150531-story.html) for companies such as SpaceX and Tesla. That fact is apparently not lost on Trump, who in 2022 posted a photo of Musk’s visit to the White House and claimed that Musk had pleaded with Trump for help on his various subsidized projects and expressed his support for the Republican party. “I could have said ‘drop to your knees and beg,’ and he would have done it,” Trump wrote.
2024-07-22
-
We’re [flooded](https://www.washingtonpost.com/magazine/2022/10/24/universal-basic-income/) by guaranteed income pilot experiments that offer some promising results, but [don’t seem](https://www.vox.com/future-perfect/2023/9/21/23882353/child-poverty-expanded-child-tax-credit-census-welfare-inflation-economy-data) to be moving us any closer to actual federal policy. Yet findings published today from the largest randomized basic income experiment in the US to date, backed by Sam Altman and OpenAI, should get your notice. The study, held from November 2020 through October 2023, gave 1,000 recipients $1,000 per month, no strings attached. It’s one of the biggest and longest trials ever run on direct cash giving. Many other [basic income pilots](https://guaranteedincome.us/) have given people $500 or less, and rarely for more than a year or two. While the study was run by a group of academics, it was [set in motion](https://www.ycombinator.com/blog/basic-income) by OpenAI CEO Sam Altman. For years, Altman has been publicly worrying that basic income will become necessary as AI eliminates traditional jobs while creating huge stockpiles of wealth held by a few. “If public policy doesn’t adapt accordingly, most people will end up worse off than they are today,” [he wrote](https://moores.samaltman.com/) in 2021. (Disclosure: Vox Media is one of several publishers that have signed partnership agreements with OpenAI. Our reporting remains editorially independent.) Altman isn’t alone. Many major figures in the tech world, from [Elon Musk](https://www.businessinsider.com/elon-musk-universal-basic-income-ubi-ai-automation-unemployment-quotes-2024-6) to the “godfather of AI,” [Geoffrey Hinton](https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cnd607ekl99o), believe AI will usher a wave of technological unemployment, and basic income will become necessary to keep us all afloat. On this, I’m conflicted. In general, unconditional cash can be [an effective anti-poverty policy](https://www.vox.com/future-perfect/23965898/child-poverty-expanded-child-tax-credit-economy-welfare-phase-ins), but the extensive list of small experiments and accumulating evidence doesn’t seem to be furthering the case of basic income to becoming a reality. So maybe any press is good press, and all the attention AI leaders are bringing to basic income will help it along. Spreading the fear of AI stealing all our jobs seems to garner much more enthusiasm for basic income than continually [pointing at the evidence](https://www.economicpossibility.org/reports/basic-income). (Just look at Andrew Yang’s [2020 presidential campaign](https://www.vox.com/future-perfect/2019/10/18/20919322/basic-income-freedom-dividend-andrew-yang-automation), which centered on universal basic income as a response to automation.) But hitching [the case for basic income](https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/7/17/15364546/universal-basic-income-review-stern-murray-automation) to fears of rapid AI progress makes it far more vulnerable than it needs to be. If there’s no great wave of AI-driven unemployment, if the AI [bubble bursts](https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2024-07-18/goldman-s-top-stock-analyst-is-waiting-for-ai-bubble-to-burst) and turns out to be [hardly any different](https://www.vox.com/future-perfect/2023/7/18/23794187/telephone-operator-switchboard-automation-att-feigenbaum-gross) than cycles of innovation and technological unemployment in the past, support for basic income would fall, too. Yet the arguments for some kind of basic income are strong, no matter what happens with AI. There could be absolutely no further progress, AI could come to a complete and eternal standstill, and the case for basic income would remain as strong as ever: unconditional cash can be a simple and flexible way to style income-support policies that actually reach everyone in need (at the trade-off of higher taxes). The basic income movement might be better off severing ties with speculations about AI altogether. Then, the conversation could focus on what basic income can actually be: an effective anti-poverty tool that would neither stave off dystopia nor usher in a leisurely paradise, but instead, just [a world with less poverty](https://www.vox.com/future-perfect/2023/10/13/23914745/basic-income-radical-economy-poverty-capitalism-taxes). Many cash transfer advocates feel that the movement is [overdue to graduate](https://www.vox.com/future-perfect/2022/4/28/23044957/ubi-guaranteed-income-baltimore-new-york-mississippi) from research to actual policy. But the “Unconditional Income Study,” as this three-year endeavor by the nonprofit [OpenResearch](https://www.openresearchlab.org/approach) has been dubbed, added some welcome substance to the otherwise slim pile of research on big cash transfers over long periods of time. (OpenResearch is not affiliated directly with OpenAI, but it grew out of the tech accelerator Y Combinator when Altman ran it, and has received a combined $24 million from Altman and OpenAI’s nonprofit organization.) The study gave out monthly checks to people between the ages of 21 and 40 living in Texas and Illinois. To qualify, their 2019 household income had to be less than 300 percent of the federal poverty line: that would mean $77,250 for a [family of four](https://aspe.hhs.gov/topics/poverty-economic-mobility/poverty-guidelines/prior-hhs-poverty-guidelines-federal-register-references/2019-poverty-guidelines), or $37,470 for an individual. The average participant’s household income in 2019 was about $30,000. One thousand people were randomized into the treatment group and received the full $1,000 per month, while another 2,000 were part of a control group that got $50 per month. [The results](https://www.openresearchlab.org/studies/unconditional-cash-study/study) are coming out in batches, with [two papers](https://www.openresearchlab.org/studies/unconditional-cash-study/study) out today — one on employment effects and another on health outcomes — and another on consumption still in the works. So far, the results are kind of scrambled, refusing to neatly fit into any particular view on basic income. Recipients spent an average of $310 more per month, mostly on housing, food, and car expenses. Overall, however, their incomes fell by about $125 per month, excluding the transfers.The drop in earnings was largely driven by people choosing to work a little less (since the transfers meant they still came out ahead). In total, labor market participation declined by 2 percent, cashing out as working about 1.3 hours less per week, or roughly eight fewer days of work over the course of a year. At first glance, this finding is somewhat at odds with [other basic income experiments](https://www.nber.org/papers/w24337) in the US, and challenges [the narrative advocates](https://www.vox.com/future-perfect/23965898/child-poverty-expanded-child-tax-credit-economy-welfare-phase-ins) have been pushing that unconditional cash won’t make people choose less work. Sometimes, maybe it will. But eight fewer days of work per year doesn’t exactly look like the doomsday scenario of everyone choosing to live out their remaining days on welfare, [surfing](https://www.jstor.org/stable/2265291), or playing video games on the taxpayer’s dime. The cash’s impact on health was a little more straightforward: it didn’t seem to do much. Despite detailed data, including blood samples from some participants and nutritional intake, “We find essentially no evidence of improvements in physical health due to the transfers,” the paper states, “and can rule out even small improvements.” There were short-lived improvements in mental health, mostly through reductions in stress. But they faded by the end of the first year. Recipients also showed a major increase in food security during year one, which also faded by the second year. If there was any silver lining in the paper on health, it was that recipients went to hospitals, doctors, and dentists more often, and spent about $20 more per month on medical care as a result of the transfer, which the authors note could translate into indirect benefits in the long term. “The appeal of cash transfers lies in the freedom that they give beneficiaries to make their own choices about what type of consumption to prioritize,” the authors conclude. “However, the nature of that freedom means that cash transfers are a blunt instrument for improving health and reducing health disparities specifically.” The results suggest that policymakers interested in improving particular health outcomes might be better off pursuing more targeted interventions, like expanding Medicaid eligibility, reducing prescription drug costs, or making it easier to make primary care appointments. Targeting health directly, in other words, rather than simple cash. As the researchers argue, “if policymakers seek to reduce poverty and improve the well-being of low-income groups more generally, cash transfers could still represent an important option, even if they do not improve health outcomes in the near term.” One of the most controversial and politically [charged](https://www.cnbc.com/2022/01/04/manchin-wont-support-enhanced-child-tax-credit-without-work-requirement.html) parts of the basic income debate is how it would affect work. Among critical economists and policy wonks, the [concern](https://www.nytimes.com/2022/12/20/opinion/child-tax-credit-basic-income.html?partner=slack&smid=sl-share) isn’t that we’ll need basic income because there won’t be any jobs left after AI, but that basic income could itself be the thing that [wipes away](https://www.nytimes.com/2021/03/02/opinion/child-allowance-credit-romney.html) our desire to work. Whether these results support that fear depends on how deeply you read into the details. The results clearly show that people do work a little less. But going a bit deeper, the employment effects were concentrated among young, single parents. Does the option for single parents to choose an extra eight days off per year constitute a policy failure — or success? The project also captured pretty detailed time-use data, letting researchers figure out where recipients were re-allocating their newly chosen time away from work. Though 1,000 people obviously made a variety of choices over the course of three years, the dominant trade was clearly toward more leisure time. I’ve [previously written](https://www.vox.com/the-highlight/24065976/economists-post-scarcity-abundance-industrial-revolution-socialism-capitalism) about how, until recently, Americans across the political spectrum used to see the promise of capitalism as exactly that: delivering people the choice of cashing in economic progress for more leisure time. Getting an economic boost and subsequently choosing to work a little less was not seen as a policy failure, but [the whole point](https://www.bostonreview.net/articles/mike-konczal-tk/). “But for decades, workers haven’t even been getting that choice because, for the most part, productivity growth has ended up as higher profits and more inequality,” sociologist Aaron Benanav [told me last year](https://www.vox.com/the-highlight/2023/10/10/23895776/four-day-workweek-leisure-progress-labor-economy-utopia-capitalism-burnout-worker-satisfaction). “It takes a political movement to cash that out in terms of a reduced workweek.” Apparently, a generous basic income can at least help nudge that choice back into workers’ lives. After getting an extra $1,000, recipients effectively traded in $125 to get five-and-a-half more hours per month outside of work. In addition to the survey data, OpenResearch held voluntary interviews with participants after the transfers ended to hear more about their experiences. Though only nine were recorded, I kept hearing variations on a theme that wasn’t captured in the statistics. (All names were changed by OpenResearch to protect the identities of participants.) As Alina, a single mom living in Chicago, put it: “My whole mind kinda began to shift ... I had to stop myself so that I could have the mental mind shift, the paradigm shift to say, ok, we can actually engage in system planning.” Or Celene, who lived with her ex-wife and their kids in a friend’s basement before the transfers helped them get their own home: “It helped my mind clear a little bit because I didn’t feel like as much of a failure.” Or Dominic, who lost his job during the pandemic: “The biggest thing it did was allow me a time of peace of mind so I could explore what I really wanted out of life.” Everyone seemed to mention how getting unconditional cash was literally changing their minds for the better. The mechanism doesn’t have to be all that mysterious. Everyone faces their own challenges, and people with low incomes especially so. But woven through all the differences is at least one shared consequence: stress. And we already know that stress can literally warp the mind, [especially around scarcity](https://www.vox.com/the-highlight/24065976/economists-post-scarcity-abundance-industrial-revolution-socialism-capitalism). Giving people cash comes with the flexibility to address whatever sources of stress are loudest in their lives, freeing up the mind. And yet, according to the numbers, the sharp reductions in stress that recipients had in the first year didn’t last, even though they shared these powerful stories after the third year. Which raises an interesting tension: Why is there such a big difference between the extremely positive stories that people are telling about their experiences, and the story that the numbers tell, which basically amounts to a shrug? Part of it could be sampling bias: since the interviews were voluntary, maybe only people who had powerful and positive experiences opted in to the voluntary interviews to talk more about them. More broadly, though, there are parts of the human experience — and more specifically, the experience of being a participant in a basic income experiment — that statistics either fail to capture, or even conceal. When I spoke with Elizabeth Rhodes, who has a joint doctorate in social work and political science, and directed the study for OpenResearch, she explained that all the variation across how people used the money, or what a “good outcome” actually is based on someone’s particular circumstances, made them difficult to capture in top-line statistics. One person might wind up finding [better work and taking on more hours](https://www.economicpossibility.org/insights/stockton-basic-income-employment) thanks to the cash, while another might scale back their hours to spend more time with their kids. Both cases can be good outcomes to the individuals involved, but “as an average treatment effect, where one person worked a lot more, while another worked less, it all kind of averages out.” she said. Despite receiving funding from much of the tech world where talk of AI is everywhere, none of the papers published from the Unconditional Income Study mentioned AI at all. That’s a good thing, because as I mentioned earlier, we should insulate the case for basic income from the volatility and unknowns of AI. Against the backdrop of all the “changing the world as we know it” talk, a number of analysts are beginning to think the AI [bubble](https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2024-07-18/goldman-s-top-stock-analyst-is-waiting-for-ai-bubble-to-burst) is already [beginning](https://www.ben-evans.com/benedictevans/2024/7/9/the-ai-summer) to [burst](https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2024/apr/13/from-boom-to-burst-the-ai-bubble-is-only-heading-in-one-direction). Maybe it will, and then it’ll inflate again. And maybe one of these go-rounds will actually lead to changes that go beyond the cycles of innovation and technological unemployment [we’ve weathered for centuries](https://www.vox.com/future-perfect/2023/7/18/23794187/telephone-operator-switchboard-automation-att-feigenbaum-gross). Or maybe they won’t. Who knows! The strongest arguments for unconditional income don’t need to rest on speculation. We have a [lot of evidence](https://basicincome.stanford.edu/research/ubi-visualization/). We have real-world experience from [a ton of pilot experiments](https://guaranteedincome.us/) and [lapsed national policies](https://www.vox.com/future-perfect/23965898/child-poverty-expanded-child-tax-credit-economy-welfare-phase-ins). And we already have [an urgent need](https://www.vox.com/future-perfect/23792854/poverty-mortality-study-public-health-antipoverty-america-deaths-poor-life-expectancy) for better anti-poverty policies, even if there wasn’t an iota more of AI development. Breaking the link between basic income and automation would also force us to consider what — if not UBI — actually would be a good policy response to major technological unemployment. Because if we really do all lose our jobs to AI, $12,000 per year isn’t going to cushion the blow much. This is a persistent confusion in debate around basic income: if you’re talking about unconditionally giving people enough to live on indefinitely, you’re either imagining a society of monks, that everyone lives in rural West Virginia, or you aren’t actually talking about basic income at all, at least as it exists in any viable form. The average living wage for a family of four in the US is about $104,000 per year, according to the MIT [Living Wage calculator](https://livingwage.mit.edu/articles/103-new-data-posted-2023-living-wage-calculator#:~:text=An%20analysis%20of%20the%20living,in%20the%20United%20States%20is). Even if a guaranteed income on the scale of this study gave the full amount to children (which most proposals do not), the same family would only get $48,000 per year, less than half the living wage. There is no realistic guaranteed income proposal that could serve as a substitute for wages altogether. Altman himself [has argued](https://moores.samaltman.com/) for something more nuanced in the past: taxes on AI companies and land values that feed into a [social wealth fund](https://www.peoplespolicyproject.org/projects/social-wealth-fund/) where every citizen holds an equal share, receiving a dividend that rises or falls with the fund value. That’s basically a version of UBI that’s styled away from guaranteeing an end to poverty, and toward being able to adapt to [runaway economic growth](https://www.vox.com/future-perfect/24108787/ai-economic-growth-explosive-automation). In addition, maybe we’ll need to consider [job guarantees](https://pavlina-tcherneva.net/the-case-for-a-job-guarantee/). Or maybe compulsory employment is an iron cage we’ll finally break by more deeply [democratizing](https://www.dissentmagazine.org/article/a-world-without-work/) the economy, and whatever diminishing pools of work remain. Either way, basic income advocates are left with a choice. You can welcome fears around AI as an incredibly effective marketing tool to spread awareness for basic income, and then try to jiu-jitsu that attention toward sturdier motivations, like [more effectively reducing poverty](https://jainfamilyinstitute.org/wp-content/uploads/pdf/reweaving-the-safety-net-12.15.20.pdf) than a patchwork of means-tested programs. Or, like me, you can try shouting into the void that we shouldn’t associate basic income and automation in the first place, since it sets the case for unconditional cash on shaky foundations, while there’s [an empirically sturdy basis](https://www.economicpossibility.org/reports/basic-income) already established. With the OpenResearch studies, that basis continues to grow. Whether or not that’ll lead to any policy breakthroughs before AI flops, fades into being just another new technology that shifts things around for a bit, or really does transform the economy, who knows? You’ve read 1 article in the last month Here at Vox, we believe in helping everyone understand our complicated world, so that we can all help to shape it. Our mission is to create clear, accessible journalism to empower understanding and action. If you share our vision, please consider supporting our work by becoming a _Vox Member_. Your support ensures Vox a stable, independent source of funding to underpin our journalism. If you are not ready to become a Member, even small contributions are meaningful in supporting a sustainable model for journalism. Thank you for being part of our community.  Swati Sharma Vox Editor-in-Chief [Join for $5/month](https://vox.memberful.com/checkout?plan=99543&itm_campaign=swati-launch-banner&itm_medium=site&itm_source=footer) We accept credit card, Apple Pay, and Google Pay. You can also contribute via [](https://www.paypal.com/donate/?hosted_button_id=VSP4PYJX98SHL)
-
The Unconditional Income Study, which began in 2019 and stands as one of the biggest direct income programs to date, finally [released on Monday](https://www.openresearchlab.org/studies/unconditional-cash-study/study) research related to its findings. The project found that, in general, [distributing $1,000 monthly](https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2024-07-22/ubi-study-backed-by-openai-s-sam-altman-bolsters-support-for-basic-income) to recipients in Illinois and Texas provided improved financial flexibility without disincentivizing workforce participation. But just as interesting as the research itself is the group behind the work: The study was backed by OpenAI CEO Sam Altman, making it just the latest—and perhaps the largest—experiment in [universal basic income](https://www.fastcompany.com/91159827/thailand-universal-basic-income-digital-currency) (UBI) to come out of Silicon Valley. Before Altman was making headlines there was Andrew Yang, the former tech executive and onetime candidate in the 2020 presidential election, who built his political platform on a “freedom dividend” of $1,000 to offset the job displacement from automation. Y Combinator first announced its [Basic Income Project](https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/jun/22/silicon-valley-universal-basic-income-y-combinator) in 2016, and the Destination: Home program (which has about nine pilots running) gets a third of their funding [from the tech world](https://www.nytimes.com/2024/07/16/technology/ubi-openai-silicon-valley.html). Meanwhile, Both [Elon Musk](https://www.businessinsider.com/elon-musk-universal-basic-income-ubi-ai-automation-unemployment-quotes-2024-6) and Twitter cofounder [Jack Dorsey](https://philanthropynewsdigest.org/news/dorsey-commits-15-million-for-universal-basic-income-pilot-projects) have also expressed their support for UBI. Still, despite [dozens of tests](https://guaranteedincome.us/) and backing from some of the biggest names in American industry, UBI has yet to catch on—at least not on a macro level. UBI has long been a popular talking point for many tech giants. Much of their enthusiasm has to do with the products they are creating; if automation and artificial intelligence is set to [replace jobs](https://www.fastcompany.com/90931184/can-coding-academies-survive-the-ai-era), UBI could be necessary to sustaining personal economic livelihood. These forward-looking statements of UBI approval are spread across Silicon Valley. Yang argued that UBI payments would “enable millions of Americans to meaningfully transition in the time of economic transformation, including that [brought by AI](https://hai.stanford.edu/news/radical-proposal-universal-basic-income-offset-job-losses-due-automation#:~:text=%E2%80%9CA%20universal%20basic%20income%20would,our%20public%20trust%2C%20confidence%2C%20and).” Altman, who [donated to Yang’s campaign](https://www.businessinsider.com/sam-altman-holds-fundraiser-for-andrew-yang-2019-10), called UBI an “[obvious conclusion](https://www.vice.com/en/article/mv5d3y/something-for-everyone-0000546-v22n1).” But Karl Widerquist, an economist at Georgetown University-Qatar, takes issue with such framing. “They tend to focus on the more fanciful, sci-fi becomes reality aspect of it,” Widerquist says. “\[That’s\] still in the future when we have all these commanding reasons in the present why we should have basic income now.” Silicon Valley has also seen a [rightward shift](https://www.vox.com/politics/361087/trump-silicon-valley-fundraising-musk-andreessen-horowitz) during the 2024 presidential election, with many leading VCs and executives preferring the small government approach [promised by Donald Trump](https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2024/07/22/inside-the-trump-plan-for-2025). Liz Fouksman, a social justice professor at King’s College London, sees UBI as a sort of ideological middle ground that can appeal to [progressives](https://www.washingtonpost.com/magazine/2022/10/24/universal-basic-income/) and [libertarians](https://chicagounbound.uchicago.edu/law_and_economics/836/) alike. (Indeed, pundits at [_Reason_](https://reason.com/2013/11/26/scrap-the-welfare-state-give-people-free/) and the erstwhile [Bleeding Heart Libertarians](https://bleedingheartlibertarians.com/2012/04/bhls-ubis/) blog have come out to support the initiative.) “There’s such a strong attachment there to this libertarian Ayn Randian mode of thinking,” Fouksman says. “There is a version of basic income that can fit really nicely into that. You just give people money and then get on with it.” There have been some small political wins—it’s likely that a $750 guaranteed check, funded by a 3% corporate tax, will make it onto the [Oregon ballot](https://www.oregonlive.com/politics/2024/06/proposed-ballot-measure-proposal-to-raise-corporate-taxes-give-every-oregonian-750-a-year-likely-to-make-november-ballot.html) this year—but UBI has yet to make any headwinds on the federal level. Part of that is because pilot programs, like Altman’s Unconditional Income Study, don’t do much to push the political needle. Widerquist wrote a [book](https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-3-030-03849-6) on the topic, arguing that these experiments fail to consider what’s holding UBI back. It’s a moral question, he says, not a question of effectiveness. “For the most part, we know what basic income is going to do,” he says. “The question is, do we want what basic income does? No amount of experimentation is going to tell us the answer to that question.” Much of UBI’s backlash has to do with the origin of its funding. Are Americans willing to endure higher taxes or cuts to other programs to institute a UBI? Pilots like Altman’s do not consider such questions; they merely look at the effectiveness once a guaranteed income has been installed. “Even when the data shows that individuals use unconditional cash well, there is this resilient myth that cash no strings attached promotes laziness,” says Juliana Uhuru Bidadanure, a philosophy professor at New York University. A further complication: A true UBI push from Silicon Valley would likely include self-taxation—something that, according to Widerquist, Altman and his ilk are unlikely to support. “What the tech industry people should do,” Widerquist adds, “is say, ‘We need this. I’m well off, I’m willing to make the sacrifices necessary to make this happen.’” _Apply to the [Most Innovative Companies Awards](https://www.fastcompany.com/apply/most-innovative-companies) and be recognized as an organization driving the world forward through innovation. Don’t miss the super-early rate deadline on Friday, July 26!_
2024-07-28
-
Daniel Chiang can remember one Asian American who ran for president in 2020: Andrew Yang, a Taiwanese American entrepreneur. But he was surprised to learn last week that there was another person running for president then, and in 2024, who counted herself an Asian American: Kamala Harris. “I never got that impression,” said Mr. Chiang, 38, a Taiwanese American from Connecticut. Ms. Harris, the vice president and likely Democratic nominee for president, is known widely as the first Black woman to be elected vice president. But Ms. Harris, whose mother emigrated from India and whose father emigrated from Jamaica, is less known as an Indian American and Asian American. Asked to name a famous Asian American, only 2 percent of Americans said Kamala Harris, according to a [recent survey](https://www.taaf.org/our-work/staatus-index-2024) by The Asian American Foundation. Ms. Harris does not shy away from talking about her Indian heritage and Asian American identity. She speaks often about the strong influence her [Indian mother](https://www.nytimes.com/2020/09/13/us/kamala-harris-parents.html) and [grandfather](https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/16/world/asia/kamala-harris-india.html) had on her life. When she has addressed gatherings of Asian American leaders as vice president, she has often spoken in terms of “we” and “us” and referred to herself as a “member of the community.” As a freshman senator, Ms. Harris, who assumed that role in 2017, was a member of the Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus, as well as the Congressional Black Caucus. She has been a high-profile surrogate for the Biden administration to Asian Americans, hosting [Diwali](https://x.com/VP/status/1723804608793911783) and [Lunar New Year](https://x.com/VP/status/1756426868415164455) celebrations and even an [Asian-themed night market](https://dc.eater.com/2024/5/15/24155616/vice-president-kamala-harris-mangoes-residence-white-house-aapi-month-may) at her residence in Washington. Nam Nguyen said that it was “kind of neat” to see someone who also identified as Asian American at the top of the ticket. But Mr. Nguyen said he was more excited about the possibility that Ms. Harris could be the country’s first female president.Credit...Lawren Simmons for The New York Times Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and [log into](https://myaccount.nytimes.com/auth/login?response_type=cookie&client_id=vi&redirect_uri=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.nytimes.com%2F2024%2F07%2F28%2Fus%2Fpolitics%2Fharris-asian-american-black-woman.html&asset=opttrunc) your Times account, or [subscribe](https://www.nytimes.com/subscription?campaignId=89WYR&redirect_uri=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.nytimes.com%2F2024%2F07%2F28%2Fus%2Fpolitics%2Fharris-asian-american-black-woman.html) for all of The Times. Thank you for your patience while we verify access. Already a subscriber? [Log in](https://myaccount.nytimes.com/auth/login?response_type=cookie&client_id=vi&redirect_uri=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.nytimes.com%2F2024%2F07%2F28%2Fus%2Fpolitics%2Fharris-asian-american-black-woman.html&asset=opttrunc). Want all of The Times? [Subscribe](https://www.nytimes.com/subscription?campaignId=89WYR&redirect_uri=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.nytimes.com%2F2024%2F07%2F28%2Fus%2Fpolitics%2Fharris-asian-american-black-woman.html).
2024-08-21
-
CNN political analyst Van Jones wants to “Make [Wakanda](https://www.fastcompany.com/90812389/how-hannah-beachler-designed-the-world-of-wakanda-forever) real” with his new initiative, the Dream Machine Innovation Lab. When it comes to overlooked communities, Jones believes artificial intelligence isn’t an access to hardware problem—almost everyone has a smartphone—but rather a matter of the heart and mind, a “wetware” problem. Alongside the U.S. presidential election, empowering who innovates with the next era of technology will determine our future. _This is an abridged transcript of an interview from_ [Rapid Response](https://mastersofscale.com/episode_category/rapid-response/)_, hosted by former_ Fast Company _editor-in-chief Robert Safian. From the team behind the_ Masters of Scale _podcast,_ Rapid Response _features candid conversations with today’s top business leaders navigating real-time challenges. Subscribe to_ Rapid Response _wherever you get your podcasts to ensure you never miss an episode._ **You’re launching a new initiative, this Dream Machine Innovation Lab, to address the impact of AI on underrepresented communities. Is there a connection for you between what’s going on in the political world and what’s going on in the tech world?** There is a big connection because if you’re waiting for politics and politicians to fix this stuff, you’re going to be waiting for a long time. In the last century, you could be excused for having a more state-oriented, government-oriented view of change. Because in the last century, you had politicians, political figures, Churchill, you know, JFK, FDR, Dr. King. These were political people who were either politicians or protesters trying to make governments work better, trying to get the New Deal done so working families could have some support, trying to get civil rights and women’s rights done so that we really all can be seen as created equal. These are all the tasks of government. What political figure is there on the world stage right now that you think is up to the task of even being a good dog catcher or city council member? Compared to the challenges that we’re facing: catastrophic global warming, the rise of all these authoritarian governments, the United States kind of falling all over itself and infighting . . . And the political class is not up to this fight. Meanwhile, who are the people really shaping tomorrow? It’s not the politicians, it’s the technologists. The technologists are the ones who are basically creating a new human civilization right before our eyes. Look, I’ve got two kids from my first marriage. One’s in college, one’s in high school. But I’ve also, in my new relationship, I’ve got two little babies, 2 and a half years old and 6 months old. By the time they’re my age, they will be living in a different human civilization. Their first crushes or best friends might be AIs. When it’s time for them to have kids, they might use biotech tools to design their kids. They might be buried on the moon or on Mars. All of that is different than where I grew up. I was born in 1968. This is all _Jetsons_ stuff. And yet, that’s what’s being created. Now, my local congressperson has very little leverage on that. I’m sorry, but there’s about 10,000 people in the AI community. They’re going to have a much bigger impact on all of that than any 10,000 politicians. And so, that’s why will.i.am and I got together and said, “Let’s launch a campaign to try to get the next generation of young minds, especially from Black and brown and other overlooked communities, get them focused on AI.” So we have a campaign called “Make Wakanda Real,” trying to excite the imagination of young people. What if you could use all these technology tools to solve problems? Wakanda being the incredibly technologically advanced super-nation in the superhero universe of Marvel. What if you could make that real? And so it’s a vote of confidence in the future in that we think that technology can be used for good. **If the driving force of creating this future is tech, like Black representation in tech, Black people make up maybe 8% of tech employees and like 3% of tech C-suite executives. I mean, the creators of this future don’t necessarily represent all of us.** It’s bad. And it’s dangerous. It’s not, “Oh, it’s terrible for the poor Black people.” Though it is. “Oh, it’s terrible for the Native Americans and whatever.” Though it is. It’s terrible for everybody. The last time we let one little group determine human civilization, we had 400 years of slavery, colonialism, environmental destruction. You don’t want that. But I’ll tell you this—and this is gonna get me in trouble with some of my liberal friends, at least at the consumer level—we call it the digital divide. We’ve been talking about that for 20, 30 years. It is no longer a hardware issue for a lot of America. I’m not saying you don’t have some deserts, \[but\] most people have a smartphone. They could download ChatGPT. They could download Midjourney. It’s not so much a hardware problem, it’s a wetware problem. It’s in your mind, in your brain, in between these two ears. “Do I believe that this stuff is for me? Do I believe that this technology is supposed to be in my hands? Or is it for someone else? Is it for the white folks? Is it for the rich folks?” That’s a wetware problem. Is it corny? Or is it cool? That’s a wetware problem. And so we’re trying to have a campaign that looks at some of these African American communities, Latino communities, Native American overlooked, underestimated, Appalachian. You’ve got creative people. You’ve got resilient people. You’ve got grit. You’ve got determination. You’ve got innovative people. What if you gave those communities the most creative tools ever imagined and told them, “This is not a hand grenade. This is a jetpack for you.” You don’t have to go to four years of college and then go beg somebody for a bunch of capital. A lot of what you’re doing now is you’re replacing capital with code. **For this presidential election, there have been strong words on both sides about the repercussions if the other candidate is elected. What do you think’s at stake?** I really do think you have very stark differences between these candidates. There always are differences, but I think the direction of society is at stake. If the very worst potential in Donald Trump would come out, I don’t want to find out in his next presidency, but I don’t want to find out because if it did, he’s already tested and strained American institutions to the point of breaking. The worst of Kamala Harris would be more aid and comfort to really obnoxious people on the left who think they’re better than everybody. And you know, talk down to people. That strikes me as survivable. The worst that comes from Kamala Harris is maybe too much government spending, maybe a tax policy that punishes innovation in a way, at least in the eyes of the innovators and entrepreneurs. That sucks, but you can then hire somebody else to be president in four years. It’s survivable. The worst from Donald Trump, I don’t know. That takes 50 years to fix, 20 years, 100 years. I mean, how do you fix that stuff? So I think it’s very, very consequential. **The state of the electorate is part of what makes me so anxious, that there are so many people who adamantly believe that one candidate is a crook, and you can find lots of people on both sides who will make that argument about the other candidate. I guess I was hoping that business leaders would take up the middle and mend some of that. But it seems like that’s kind of subsided, and business folks are just like, “Yeah, I don’t want to piss anybody off.**“ I think that the business community, when \[Joe\] Biden was clearly incapable of running and certainly incapable of serving, and the bite of taxes at the very, very top created permission structure for a lot of people in the business community to move in directions that are just very scary to me. Elon Musk, he was an Andrew Yang supporter in 2020. So four years ago, Elon Musk was supporting an innovation-first Democrat. And now he’s clearly to the right of Trump, and I think imagines himself maybe being some kind of an oligarch in some more authoritarian country. That is terrifying to me. I like Elon Musk when he’s trying to figure out how to get to space and how to make clean cars and how to get innovation in government going with Andrew Yang. That’s a massive asset to humanity. I’d like to see a lot more of the old Elon Musk. **Well, power sometimes does strange things to people, right?** I’d like to find out. If I can get some more power, I’ll let you know how it goes. But in the meantime, I just get to talk about the people who do have it. _Apply to the [Most Innovative Companies Awards](https://www.fastcompany.com/apply/most-innovative-companies) and be recognized as an organization driving the world forward through innovation. Early-rate deadline: Friday, August 23._
2024-08-28
-
Five days before Donald Trump defeated Hillary Clinton to win the 2016 U.S. presidential election, I wrote a story that [turned the presidential politics clock back to 1992](https://www.fastcompany.com/3065162/1992-the-year-presidential-campaigning-went-online). That was the first year the campaign had a digital element—particularly for underdog candidates such as former Irvine, California, Mayor Larry Agran. Unable to get mainstream news outlets to pay attention to his bid, Agran did something no would-be president had ever done. He held a press conference that was virtual, because it took place on CompuServe, the largest online service of the time. Agran went on to get fewer than 60,000 votes in Democratic primaries. But other candidates also added a digital element to their campaigns, including President George H.W. Bush and Democratic nominee Bill Clinton. An article in CompuServe’s print magazine said such high-tech outreach efforts might help transcend “politics’ high-gloss superficiality and the ‘sound-bite’ orientation of the mass media.” In a term redolent of the dial-up age, it called the trend “modemocracy.” In retrospect, there’s something touchingly naive about those early expectations. Some 32 years later, a massive chunk of how we experience presidential elections has moved online. Yet the process has hardly grown more sober and fact-oriented as a result. Particularly since the advent of social media, it’s gotten even shallower, as takes, screeds, and clips scroll by in our feeds, sometimes interspersed with misinformation and outright disinformation. That brings us up to 2024, and the first presidential election of the generative AI era. As the year began, a deepfaked President Joe Biden [robocalled New Hampshire voters](https://www.fastcompany.com/91020077/ai-deepfakes-taylor-swift-joe-biden-2024-election) telling them not to vote. Trump, once again the Republican nominee, has both [shared deepfakes](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/article/2024/aug/19/trump-ai-swift-harris-musk-deepfake-images) and falsely accused Vice President Kamala Harris of using AI to [fake a rally crowd](https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2024/aug/12/donald-trump/why-trumps-claim-that-the-harris-campaign-used-ai/). On X, Elon Musk [shared a video featuring a synthesized Harris voice](https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2024/aug/12/donald-trump/why-trumps-claim-that-the-harris-campaign-used-ai/) without making clear it was a parody; he also unveiled [a new image generator](https://www.theverge.com/2024/8/14/24220173/xai-grok-image-generator-misinformation-offensive-imges) that users immediately put to work creating imaginary photos of Trump, Harris, and others in improbable situations. Most of this presidential election’s fakes haven’t been terribly convincing if you’re paying attention; we’re probably lucky that the technology hasn’t been used to even more chilling effect (so far). Still, like social networking before it, artificial intelligence shows no signs of ennobling the sacred rite of American democracy in action. You can’t fault 1992’s techno-optimists for not anticipating the advent of deepfakes decades later. They also wouldn’t have known what to make of pressing 2024 online debates such as whether [Harris is brat](https://www.fastcompany.com/91161535/kamala-harris-memes-marketing-to-gen-z). But even in the early ’90s, it occurred to some people that the online services of the time didn’t exactly reflect American society at large. An article by _Businessweek_’s Evan I. Schwartz [quoted](https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/1992-03-15/putting-the-pc-into-politics) Clem Bezold, executive director of the Institute for Alternative Futures think tank: “How many poor people have Prodigy or CompuServe?” Even among more affluent types, going online was a pricey, fairly exotic hobby—CompuServe, the biggest of the services, cost $12.80 an hour and had fewer than a million users, not all of whom partook in its political aspect. Today, our digital culture still bears only so much resemblance to life in its traditional form. Among the terminally online, 2020 Democratic contender [Andrew Yang](https://www.fastcompany.com/90452713/math-obsessed-andrew-yang-should-be-thrilled-with-these-twitter-hashtag-numbers) and 2024 Republican [Vivek Ramaswamy](https://www.wired.com/story/vivek-ramaswamy-campaign/) were favorite sons of their respective races. Outside that bubble, neither fared anywhere near so well among voters at large. Maybe you think that proves something is broken about our electoral politics, but it’s still evidence of a disconnect. Of course, the internet isn’t one big bubble—it’s a bubble of bubbles. Last week, when Musk conducted a [“super unscientific” presidential poll](https://x.com/elonmusk/status/1826015426658415033?s=61) of his X followers, Trump (whom Musk has [endorsed](https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1812256998588662068)) crushed Harris, 74% to 26%. That result says more about Musk’s fan base than it does about the consensus of all X users, and I feel slightly dumber just for having paid attention to it at all. Especially after I dredged up a June 1992 column by the _St. Louis Dispatch_’s William F. Woo, who thought the fact that 57% of CompuServe users supported third-party candidate [Ross Perot](https://www.fastcompany.com/90374043/how-ross-perot-helped-bring-us-the-iphone) might mean an epoch-shifting moment in American history was imminent. (Only 8% of CompuServers favored Clinton, the eventual winner.) As happy as I am not to get sucked too deeply into Musk’s particular bubble, I also worry about growing too attached to one of my own. The internet is much better at creating feedback loops than enabling the sort of shared reality that the democratic process requires, a defining dysfunction of our times that was hard to foresee in 1992. To be clear, I’m not saying I want to go back to the days when presidential campaigns were filtered almost exclusively through newspapers, magazines, broadcast TV and radio, and maybe an all-news cable channel or two. I’ve been gorging on coverage of this year’s extraordinary election that could never have existed in those days, and am pretty much addicted to podcasts on the subject. But to quote [Linus](https://www.gocomics.com/peanuts/1963/03/22), there’s no heavier burden than a great potential. And for all the ways the online world has changed our lives for the better, most of modemocracy’s promise remains unfulfilled. _You’ve been reading Plugged In,_ Fast Company_‘s weekly tech newsletter from me, global technology editor Harry McCracken. If a friend or colleague forwarded this edition to you—or if you’re reading it on FastCompany.com—you can [check out previous issues and sign up to get it yourself](https://www.fastcompany.com/section/plugged-in) every Wednesday morning. I love hearing from you: Ping me at [[email protected]](mailto:[email protected]) with your feedback and ideas for future newsletters._ _Apply to the [Most Innovative Companies Awards](https://www.fastcompany.com/apply/most-innovative-companies) and be recognized as an organization driving the world forward through innovation. Early-rate deadline: Friday, August 30._ Harry McCracken is the global technology editor for _Fast Company_, based in San Francisco. In past lives, he was editor at large for _Time_ magazine, founder and editor of _Technologizer_, and editor of _PC World_ [More](https://www.fastcompany.com/user/harry-mccracken)
2024-09-19
-
American democracy is in a fragile place. If you haven’t figured that out by this point, you haven’t been paying attention. The dangers are coming from all sides. [Donald Trump](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/donaldtrump) has just survived his second apparent assassination attempt. The governor of Ohio has had to call in the state police to monitor a spate of bomb threats to local schools after falsehoods about Haitian immigrants eating cats and dogs in the area began circulating. That’s aside from all the usual mass shootings, Proud Boy marches and the rest of it. But inside this fomenting turmoil, the most dangerous spot in the whole country, the rock on which the American state may well founder, is the quiet congressional district of Omaha, Nebraska, the very heart of the American heartland. Omaha is dangerous, not in itself, but due to the entirely weird position it inhabits inside the electoral college. In one of those strange freaks of American politics, [Nebraska](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/nebraska) has a split electoral college vote, and for the past few elections the city of Omaha has reliably voted Democrat. The other four electoral districts vote solidly Republican. Ordinarily, this little hiccup in the system wouldn’t matter much. But 2024 represents a uniquely precarious moment. As it stands, once you remove the settled Democrat and Republican states, the most direct path to a Kamala Harris victory is by way of Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania. With those three states, she would receive exactly 270 electoral college seats, the number she needs to win. In that case, she would win if, and only if, she holds that one electoral college vote in the congressional district of Omaha, Nebraska. The Omaha congressional district hasn’t mattered much due to a kind of bipartisan detente, a balance of power. Nebraska is not the only state that splits its electoral system by district. So does Maine. And Maine, while mostly Democratic, has a similarly reliable Republican constituency, which will almost certainly give its electoral college seat to Trump. If Nebraska changes its system to give Trump an advantage, Maine has said it will [reciprocate](https://nebraskaexaminer.com/2024/04/26/maine-draws-a-line-in-the-sandhills-will-match-nebraska-on-winner-take-all/) in order to cancel out any attempt to shift the balance of power. Largely for this reason, the inclination to change the law has been muted in Nebraska, even though Republicans control the statehouse. Having a contested electoral college seat also makes Nebraska slightly more worthy of attention from both national parties, meaning the current division is, to some small degree, in the interests of Nebraskans on the whole. Yet that state of detente may be set to unravel. The Maine legislature has now gone out of session, and last Friday, Jim Pillen, the governor of Nebraska, made a public statement: “I strongly support statewide unity and joining 48 other states by awarding all five of our electoral college votes to the presidential candidate who wins the majority of Nebraskans’ votes,” he said. “As I have also made clear, I am willing to convene the Legislature for a special session to fix this 30-year-old problem before the 2024 election. However, I must receive clear and public indication that 33 senators are willing to vote in such a session to restore winner-take-all.” Pillen is effectively deflecting the electoral college question onto the state senators, but he is also opening the door to the possibility of the switch, which could alter the course of the election. Republicans would not even need to switch the electoral college seat to win. They only need to muddy the waters. If, for example, the Nebraska legislature ensured that their electoral college votes were in dispute, and the courts had not decided the matter by 6 January, and no one had reached the threshold of 270, that state of affairs would automatically trigger a [contingent election](https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/sep/18/donald-trump-could-win-contingent-election). In a contingent election, another abstruse mechanism of the US electoral system, each state delegation, whether it’s California or Wyoming, gets a single vote, which means that the Republicans would always win. (This possibility is the subject of [a book](https://www.akashicbooks.com/catalog/last-election/) I wrote with Andrew Yang, The Last Election.) The sheer boredom of what I’m describing here, the banal technicalities of the complex legal structures in place, may, on the surface, seem less frightening than assassination attempts and bomb threats and cooked pets and armed militias. But don’t misunderstand: this is the real danger America faces. The complexity _is_ the trap. The complexity makes it easy for people to believe that somehow they haven’t been tricked, that a functioning democratic system, however bizarre, is still in place, even when it clearly isn’t anymore. It goes without saying that the nightmare I’ve described here – which could absolutely happen – is only one of several glitches in the electoral system which could undo the United States. [(Georgia is a whole other nightmare.)](https://www.nytimes.com/2024/09/18/us/elections/georgia-elections-board-rules.html) The Republicans have set themselves up to maximize incoherence, exactly because they are aware of the vulnerability of the system. Needless to say, incoherence of outcome is precisely the opposite of what the founders intended when they established the electoral college 240 years ago. They were living in a different world, though. The electoral college was the product of an 18th-century agrarian society whose Capitol sat a hundred miles from virgin forest. At this point in history, it is little more than a legitimacy crisis in progress. The founders built their system to avoid exactly the kind of situation that the erasure of the district Omaha, Nebraska, would represent: the possibility of democracy in bad faith and by name only. * Stephen Marche is a Canadian essayist and novelist. He is the author of The Next Civil War and How Shakespeare Changed Everything
2024-10-07
-
 研究显示,「国民基本收入」等于每年多放一个十一长假(不调休版),从 13 薪变 12 薪 ...  人工智能的风刮了两年,在 AI普及之前,工作的「存在主义危机」先一步到来,互联网上关于人工智能何时能取代人的工作,能取代什么工作的讨论层出不穷。在人工智能的道德伦理边界的讨论上,「警惕人工智能大规模造成失业潮,引起社会恐慌」也是其中一项
2024-11-09
-
November 9, 2024, 7 AM ET If this wasn’t the Podcast Election, it was certainly a podcast-y election. Millions of people [watched](https://x.com/maxwelltani/status/1854292715527135247) the results come in on a handful of livestreams hosted by popular podcasters, including one [hosted by Tucker Carlson](https://www.bloomberg.com/news/newsletters/2024-11-07/the-podcasters-who-reported-celebrated-election-night-at-mar-a-lago?utm_medium=email&utm_source=newsletter&utm_term=241107&utm_campaign=soundbite) from Mar-a-Lago, on which Donald Trump’s sons Donald Trump Jr. and Eric Trump appeared as guests. Trump also enjoyed a late-breaking endorsement from Joe Rogan, host of [the world’s most popular podcast](https://www.theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2019/08/my-joe-rogan-experience/594802/). For the past several months, much was made about the Trump campaign’s podcast strategy, [reportedly](https://www.thetimes.com/world/us-world/article/barron-trump-son-donald-trump-election-campaign-podcasts-5gkz205l8) masterminded by Trump’s son Barron, which included interviews with the tech-world whisperers Lex Fridman and the _All-In_ _Podcast_. Trump took advantage of every opportunity to be interviewed at length and in casual conversation for huge audiences of young men; Harris did not, and immediately after her loss, this stood out to many people as a big problem. As [_New York Times_ editor Willy Staley](https://x.com/willystaley/status/1854595499279495181) put it in a wry (or grim) post on X, there is now palpable “soul-searching among Democrats about the podcast situation.” I spent Election Night watching a livestream hosted by _The Free Press_, the media company founded by the former _New York Times_ writer Bari Weiss. The guest list was a strange assemblage of iconoclasts and establishment castoffs, and it was obvious from the comments that many viewers were just there to watch It Girls Dasha Nekrasova and Anna Khachiyan, hosts of the [cultish podcast](https://www.thecut.com/2018/10/profile-red-scare-podcast.html) _Red Scare_, smirk and sip teensy glasses of champagne while barely saying anything. (One of Nekrasova’s longer sentences of the night was “He’s winning like crazy, right?”) [Read: Bad news](https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2024/11/you-are-the-media-now/680602/) A little after 8 p.m., the [former presidential candidate Andrew Yang](https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2022/08/andrew-yang-forward-party/671254/) called in from a parking lot in Philadelphia. “I gotta say, the vibe’s kind of Trumpy,” he told Weiss. He had voted for Kamala Harris, he told her, though he hadn’t been excited about it. He offered his critique of the campaign run by Harris and Tim Walz, which he felt was overly risk-averse and uncharismatic. Specifically, he called out the missed opportunity to appear on _The Joe Rogan Experience_, as both [Trump](https://www.nytimes.com/2024/10/25/us/politics/trump-joe-rogan-podcast.html) and [J. D. Vance](https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2024-election/vance-joe-rogan-interview-trump-normal-gay-guy-vote-rcna178135) had done. (Harris purportedly could have appeared on the show if she followed the host’s terms; in late October, Rogan [wrote on X](https://x.com/joerogan/status/1851118464447971595) that, contrary to the campaign’s desires, he would not accept a one-hour time limit on the interview and that he wanted to record in his studio in Austin.) “It pisses me off,” Yang said. “That was a gimme,” he went on. “The Rogan interview would have been almost entirely upside. It’s low-propensity male voters, people that are not inclined to vote for you, so you have nothing to lose.” On Carlson’s [Election Night livestream](https://www.bloomberg.com/news/newsletters/2024-11-07/the-podcasters-who-reported-celebrated-election-night-at-mar-a-lago?utm_medium=email&utm_source=newsletter&utm_term=241107&utm_campaign=soundbite), Elon Musk made a similar argument, alluding to the parasocial, possibly persuasive power of podcasts: “To a reasonable-minded, smart person who’s not hardcore one way or the other, they just listen to someone talk for a few hours, and that’s how they decide whether you’re a good person, whether they like you.” As I watched, I felt annoyed. Rogan’s [anti-vaccine](https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2022/02/joe-rogan-covid-vaccine-misinformation/622040/) rhetoric and [anti-trans](https://variety.com/2024/tv/news/joe-rogan-netflix-stand-up-comedy-special-trans-people-covid-vaccines-1236094910/) shtick—[among many other](https://variety.com/2022/digital/news/spotify-removes-joe-rogan-episodes-n-word-1235172972/) bizarre statements, such as [his claim](https://x.com/TheChiefNerd/status/1685485239479468032) that intelligence agencies provoked January 6—should make him radioactive for any politician, let alone a Democrat in 2024. And anyway, “[more podcasts](https://x.com/jpbrammer/status/1854532759877751220)” sounds like a pretty desperate response to such a monumental loss. But these are stupid times. According to [exit polls](https://www.axios.com/2024/11/07/young-men-voters-trump-2024-exit-polls), Harris did do poorly with young men. Yang was clearly correct that she had nothing to lose. As my colleague Spencer Kornhaber [wrote on Thursday](https://www.theatlantic.com/culture/archive/2024/11/right-wing-influencers-trump-rogan/680575/), Harris may have avoided Rogan’s three-plus-hour, formless interview format for fear of messing up, “but given who ended up winning the election, this … seems like an antiquated concern.” Was this _the_ difference? Definitely not. But it was _a_ difference. Next time, I would guess, Rogan and his ilk will not be snubbed; the oddball internet is mainstream enough to seriously court. Obviously, political campaigns always prioritize making their candidates [appear accessible](https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/10584609.1986.9962795), [relatable, authentic](https://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/fdr-defends-his-dog), and so on. For a useful historical parallel, I looked to 1976—another election in which a key issue was inflation, a key concern was turning out disaffected young voters and restoring faith in American institutions, and a key problem with the Democratic presidential campaign was that many people said they had no idea what it was about. Jimmy Carter, after seeing what an interview in _Playboy_ had done for California Governor Jerry Brown’s polling numbers during the primaries, agreed to sit for his own. The interviewer, Robert Scheer, wrote in the introduction: “For me, the purpose of the questioning was not to get people to vote for or against the man but to push Carter on some of the vagueness he’s wrapped himself in.” But in September 1976, when the magazine published the [12,000-word Q&A](https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-playboy-magazine), it was regarded almost immediately as a disaster. Carter [infuriated Christians](https://apnews.com/article/jimmy-carter-playboy-lust-adultery-45523cf7e2eb38a784fc999974ba9ac7) and gave satirists plenty to lampoon with his description of feeling “lust” and “adultery” in his heart at times. (Many also read parts of the interview as obliquely referring to his Democratic predecessor, Lyndon B. Johnson, as a liar.) Scheer [later said](https://apnews.com/article/jimmy-carter-playboy-lust-adultery-45523cf7e2eb38a784fc999974ba9ac7) that the idea was to use the length and intimacy of the interview to answer the questions of young voters who “wondered if he was this Southern square.” He also thought that the interview had done exactly what the campaign wanted it to, even if it had made them nervous in the process. Voter turnout in 1976 was [abysmal](https://www.census.gov/library/publications/1978/demo/p20-322.html), as expected in the aftermath of Watergate. But, although the interview was regarded by the national media as a major gaffe, apparently many voters didn’t think about it that way. Some were asked about it in polling conducted the same week it was published—of 1,168 respondents, 289 said they hadn’t heard about the interview, while 790 said they had but it hadn’t changed their minds. Carter did lose some small number of voters, at least in the moment—28 respondents said that the interview had caused them to change their vote from Carter to Gerald Ford, while only four said it had caused them to change their vote from Ford to Carter. [Read: Why Democrats are losing the culture war](https://www.theatlantic.com/culture/archive/2024/11/right-wing-influencers-trump-rogan/680575/) In the end, Carter won with a narrow margin in the popular vote and [outperformed](https://ropercenter.cornell.edu/how-groups-voted-1976) Ford with voters ages 22 to 44, while falling short with voters 45 or older as well as with those 18 to 21. Voters recorded their feelings about the _Playboy_ interview again in exit polls. They were asked whether there was anything they disliked about Carter and given eight choices of response, “I didn’t like his _Playboy_ interview" among them. Again, the respondents said that they cared little about it. (They cared more that he was too pro-union.) If you read all the critiques of the Harris campaign being written right now, you could come to the conclusion that she was both too online and not online enough. She misunderstood her youth support by looking too much at [the wrong parts of TikTok](https://puck.news/how-kamala-harris-lost-the-gen-z-vote); she [went on _Call Her Daddy_](https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2024/10/kamala-harris-call-her-daddy-podcast/680181/), a massively popular podcast that [began](https://www.newsweek.com/entertainment/celebrity-news/how-call-her-daddys-alex-cooper-go-barstool-sports-125m-star-1942541) as part of the Barstool Sports extended universe but was, I guess, [the wrong part](https://pagesix.com/2024/11/06/celebrity-news/dave-portnoy-blames-kamala-harris-loss-on-dems-arrogance-and-moral-superiority/). She won the endorsement of the two [most popular musicians](https://swifties4kamala.com/) in the world, [whose fans](https://www.usatoday.com/story/entertainment/music/2024/10/30/beyonce-kamala-harris-beyhive-call-election/75940067007/) wield a ton of online “power,” however you define it. The default political and cultural stance on the Girl Internet [is liberal to leftist](https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2022/02/tumblr-internet-legacy-survival/621419/) and was pro-Harris, so maybe she spent too much time there and not enough in unfriendly corners. There’s [a more compelling case](https://www.wired.com/story/donald-trump-manosphere-won/) this time around that online misogyny had something to do with the results than there was after Trump’s first victory, in 2016, when reporters were so quick to explain how young men were radicalized [in spaces like 4chan](https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-intersect/wp/2016/11/09/we-actually-elected-a-meme-as-president-how-4chan-celebrated-trumps-victory/)—a website that was always fairly niche, even if it did [influence](https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/09/its-not-easy-being-green/499892/) broader internet culture in certain ways. Today, discontented men are among the most popular influencers on major platforms. The next Democratic candidate will surely sit for Rogan wherever he asks them to sit. They won’t have a choice. They’ll have to take the risk and act like they have nothing to lose—right now, that’s certainly the truth.
2024-11-21
-
Photo-Illustration: WIRED Staff/Getty Images If you buy something using links in our stories, we may earn a commission. This helps support our journalism. [Learn more](https://www.wired.com/2015/11/affiliate-link-policy/). Please also consider [subscribing to WIRED](https://subscribe.wired.com/subscribe/splits/wired/WIR_SELF?source=HCL_WIR_EDIT_HARDCODED_0_COMMERCE_AFFILIATE_ZZ) It’s long been believed that Silicon Valley is a [hotbed for libertarian ideals](https://www.wired.com/story/political-education-silicon-valley/), but where did that idea come from? Aside from some high-profile tech founders and investors who either identify as [libertarian](https://www.wired.com/story/the-libertarian-logic-of-peter-thiel/) or express libertarianesque beliefs, does this set of ideologies really define the Valley? And what is libertarianism anyway? You can follow Michael Calore on Mastodon at [@snackfight](https://heads.social/@snackfight), Lauren Goode on Threads and [@laurengoode](https://www.threads.net/@laurengoode), and Zoë Schiffer on Threads [@reporterzoe](https://www.threads.net/@reporterzoe?hl=en). Write to us at [[email protected]](mailto:[email protected]). How to Listen ------------- You can always listen to this week's podcast through the audio player on this page, but if you want to subscribe for free to get every episode, here's how: If you're on an iPhone or iPad, open the app called Podcasts, or just tap [this link](https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/uncanny-valley-wired/id266391367). You can also download an app like Overcast or Pocket Casts and search for “uncanny valley.” We’re on [Spotify](https://open.spotify.com/show/11hUjoJv4FxFnw9r0mHIsC) too. Transcript ---------- _Note: This is an automated transcript, which may contain errors._ **Michael Calore:** It has long been believed that Silicon Valley is a hotbed for libertarian ideals, but where did that idea come from? What is a libertarian and does the set of ideologies really define the valley? This is WIRED’s _Uncanny Valley_, a show about the people, power and influence of Silicon Valley. I'm Michael Calore, director of consumer tech and culture here at WIRED. **Lauren Goode:** And I'm Lauren Goode. I'm senior writer at WIRED. **Zoë Schiffer:** And I'm Zoë Schiffer, WIRED's director of business and industry. **Michael Calore:** Today on the show, what is the relationship between Silicon Valley and libertarianism? OK, let's ease in today with a story. Whomst among us has read Atlas Shrugged by Ayn Rand? **Zoë Schiffer:** A bedtime story. No, I'm just kidding. I haven't read it. I honestly have very little desire to, but I am curious about it. **Lauren Goode:** I have a memory of living in a fifth-floor walk-up in the East Village that was a pretty dilapidated apartment and trying to get through Atlas Shrugged for some reason and I couldn't finish it. **Michael Calore:** Yeah, it's a doorstop. **Lauren Goode:** Yeah. **Michael Calore:** All right, well, I do want to give a quick recap of the novel because it is often cited as a defining text for libertarians. It's about a couple of industrialists trying to run their big companies, but the government keeps getting in the way with all of their pesky regulations. So eventually, the situation gets so dire that all of the creative people, the industrialists and all of the imagineers of this society, they escape to a magical valley in the west where they live in their own society and that saps the world of their genius and without them propping up society, government crumbles. **Lauren Goode:** Wasn't there something also related to architecture? **Michael Calore:** No, that's The Fountainhead, that's the other- **Lauren Goode:** Oh, that's what I tried to read. Clearly my memory from that time is not great. OK, please continue. **Michael Calore:** That's really it. At the end of the book, government is basically crumbling and society is going to be rebuilt with these new ideas about the power of the individual and low regulation and all of the themes that we now associate with libertarianism. There's a lot of characters who give very long speeches in all of Ayn Rand's books, and in this book there's a character named John Galt who gives a very long speech that could basically be read as Ayn Rand's philosophy of how government should operate, or in this case should not interfere with industry. **Zoë Schiffer:** OK. It sounds really subtle. I wonder what it's trying to say. **Michael Calore:** So Atlas Shrugged had an outsize influence on the modern libertarian movement. It was written almost 70 years ago, and in the 1970s and then again in the 1990s, and then again in the 2010s and 2020s. Libertarianism has continued to be redefined. It has split into factions. There are several different schools of thought. There are social libertarians, there are right-wing libertarians, there are left-wing libertarians, but almost all of them look to this book as the foundational text for the principles of the basics of libertarian ideology. **Zoë Schiffer:** OK, and what are the basics exactly? **Michael Calore:** Well, it's hard to give a tight definition that applies to everybody who calls himself a libertarian, but very broadly you can say that there are three main concepts. The first one is individualism. The idea that individuals can and should take care of themselves. They should practice individual autonomy and have total freedom. Number two is the suspicion of centralized power. So libertarians will traditionally argue for the minimal state, a government that does the absolute bare minimum in society and is not responsible for taking care of everybody, and they're also anti-authoritarian. And then third, the importance of free markets, free trade, low taxes, all that stuff. **Lauren Goode:** So we don't have to squint too hard to see why these ideas resonate in a place like Silicon Valley. **Zoë Schiffer:** Particularly for the last two, suspicion of centralized power and the importance of free markets, those feel like tenets that have come up again and again in recent years in the tech industry for sure. **Lauren Goode:** And that's why we all coalesced around this idea of we should do a podcast episode on libertarianism because there are some high profile tech founders and investors who either identify as libertarian or they express libertarian-esque beliefs. So on the heels of this consequential president election here in the US where we saw identity politics and debates over free markets come strongly into play, we thought we would just ask, what about the libertarians? **Michael Calore:** Won't anybody think of the libertarians? So what did we find out? Lauren, what have you learned about libertarianism and its place in this economy of Silicon Valley? **Lauren Goode:** Well, I marched back to a place where Zoe and I both happened to have spent some time, Stanford University. You may have heard of it, Mike. Mike is rolling his eyes right now. We'll just refer to it as that little college down in Palo Alto. And when I say that I marched down to Palo Alto, what I really mean is I did a bunch of research online and I found something called the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy that offered a definition of libertarianism. And it's some of what you said, Mike, that libertarians take individual freedom as the paramount political value. This definition also said that while people can justifiably be forced to do certain things, most obviously to refrain from infringing the liberty of others, they cannot be coerced to serve the good of other members of society. **Zoë Schiffer:** Wait, what does that actually mean? You can't be forced to pay taxes to support someone else's social program? **Michael Calore:** Yeah, I think a lot of it has to do with taxes and just the idea of small government in general, like a minimal state that doesn't prop up the welfare state. One good example of this that libertarians often cite is the criminal justice system. We throw a lot of money into the criminal justice system in the United States, and if we did not do that and we didn't incarcerate people for their lives, then families would be more secure, people would be able to lift themselves out of poverty more easily. Another example that libertarians often cite is the education system, most of which is funded by the government and the states and in libertarian's view, and I'm sure a lot of people's view, is doing a poor job of educating our children. And if we did a better job of educating our children, then they would be less likely to commit crimes and fall into poverty and they would go on to have lucrative jobs that can provide. So it's less about just not funding programs that take care of people and more about redoing the way the government operates and props up all these systems that are fundamentally flawed. **Lauren Goode:** I also think the part about how you cannot be coerced to serve the good of other members of society from a sociological perspective, if not a high-minded philosophical perspective, I think that that means that you can do kind things for your neighbors or help them out in a pinch if you feel that that's the right thing to do, but that ultimately that should not be top-down assistance. You shouldn't be relying on the government for that. **Michael Calore:** Yeah. **Zoë Schiffer:** OK. **Lauren Goode:** So in short, libertarians typically endorse something like a free market economy, and they usually look at the way contemporary democratic states redistribute wealth as something that is unjustified. It's a form of coercion that they're not on board with. What's interesting is that this philosophy was first published online in 2002, and then there's a note that says in 2023, this was "substantially" updated, which gets to the point of this episode, the philosophy of libertarianism has changed a lot. **Michael Calore:** Yeah, and the "modern" libertarian movement of the 1970s was really a reaction to the rise of the welfare state, that idea that the government is redistributing people's wealth. And obviously the internet has changed a lot about that, but how has it changed? Where are we now in 2024, 2025? **Lauren Goode:** Well, I think in order to get to where we are in 2024, we have to go back to the mid 2010s around 2017, which is when the Mises Caucus was formed. This is a caucus that began to push the Libertarian Party further to the right. Some people have described them as edge lords, and it's a break away from the more highbrow, intellectualized, economically focused free enterprise class of libertarians. There tends to be a little bit more hostility towards the state and the Fed, but there are also some progressive issues like LGBTQ rights or supporting immigration or abortion that they feel like should get less emphasis. Basically, there are now factions of libertarianism that are a lot more anti-woke. And a lot of this I was reading in Reason Magazine, yes. **Michael Calore:** What is Reason Magazine? **Lauren Goode:** It's essentially a monthly trade mag for libertarians, so don't you worry, Mike, the libertarians have their own magazine. It's run by the Reason Foundation. It was founded back in the 60s. Its tagline is Free Minds and Free Markets. In the early 2000s it actually did this stunt that I wish WIRED had thought of. According to Wikipedia, subscribers to Reason Magazine once received a personalized issue that had their name and a satellite photo of their home or their workplace on the cover. It was like a customized cover for all of their subscribers, and the whole idea was to demonstrate the power of public databases. **Michael Calore:** Wow. **Zoë Schiffer:** Oh my God, I love that. **Lauren Goode:** So Reason has been covering this shift in libertarianism and they've gotten some pushback, too, for their coverage. But the fundamental idea is that some of the OGs, the true believers of libertarianism still believe that the individual is best suited to make their own decisions about how to live, that there should be minimal government intervention, whereas some of the new factions have adopted the messaging of nationalism and nationalism is ultimately collectivist. **Zoë Schiffer:** So I feel like I'm finally starting to see how this change has spilled over into Silicon Valley. **Lauren Goode:** How so? **Zoë Schiffer:** Not just the concept of individuals making their own decisions, but the idea that Silicon Valley should make its own decisions and definitely not the government. And also, the shift that we're talking about with libertarianism getting more conservative and embracing the anti-woke mentality, that shift has been something that Silicon Valley elites have been talking about very, very loudly for the last couple years. **Michael Calore:** Right. The other thing that I think really resonates with Silicon Valley is the idea that the individual who has the great mind and the great creative drive should not be stymied. They should not be held back from creating and building the founder mindset. That person who is just dedicating their entire life to getting rich and changing the world, they should be given free rein to do that. **Lauren Goode:** Time to build, Mike. **Michael Calore:** That's right. Time to build. And really, I think that's why Atlas Shrugged resonates with so many classic, I'm using air quotes in a capital C classic libertarians, just because it's about that drive of the individual to push society into a better place without the government stepping in and taxing them and regulating them and telling them that they can't do that. It's interesting that this anti-woke shift that you talked about, Lauren, is something that has been going on for decades because Ayn Rand, who lived until the early 80s saw this right-wing faction of libertarianism emerging and she spoke out against it. **Lauren Goode:** Oh, interesting. **Michael Calore:** Yeah, she called them hippies of the right. **Lauren Goode:** Oh, interesting. There's so much co-opting going on in these identical politics. **Zoë Schiffer:** OK, so to bring it back to today, the shifting definition of libertarianism is happening as general views of the government have been changing, right? **Michael Calore:** Yeah, and especially changing in the last election cycle, you could say. But we're going to take a quick break and when we come back, we're going to look at how many of these ideas have become concrete in Silicon Valley through concepts like cryptocurrency and seasteading and automation and universal basic income. So we'll be right back. **\[break\]** Welcome back to _Uncanny Valley_. Let's start with who we know actually identifies as libertarian and what that means to them. So we've got a few people to talk about. Zoe, I want you to go first because I want you to tell us about Peter Thiel. **Zoë Schiffer:** OK, finally a topic I do feel uniquely confident in. So Peter Thiel is one of the most well-known people in this space. In Silicon Valley, he's probably best known as the person who cofounded PayPal with Elon Musk. **Lauren Goode:** The so-called PayPal Mafia. **Zoë Schiffer:** Exactly. In the media, he's known as the person who helped sue Gawker into the ground. But to me, he'll always be the person who was riding shotgun with Elon Musk when they crashed Musk's uninsured McLaren F1 on Sand Hill Road in Palo Alto. **Lauren Goode:** I don't think there's a more Silicon Valley sentence that's ever been uttered on this podcast. **Zoë Schiffer:** Probably not. I don't think we can top that one. But Thiel is also a self-proclaimed libertarian, which has led to his embrace of things like crypto and seasteading, which is the autonomous floating communities that exist outside government jurisdiction. And more recently, his embrace of right-wing political candidates like JD Vance and Blake Masters. **Lauren Goode:** OK, not just candidates now, but our incoming VP. Seasteading, wait, we have to go off on a little tangent. Where would the boat be parked? Is that what it's called? Docked? Where is this? What does it mean? **Michael Calore:** Anchored? **Lauren Goode:** Anchored, thank you. **Zoë Schiffer:** Yeah, lest they float into government jurisdiction, which is very anti-seasteading. **Lauren Goode:** What part of the sea? **Michael Calore:** I think if you go out about 13 miles. **Lauren Goode:** OK, OK. So it's not like you would be surfing one day and you would stumble upon Peter Thiel's seasteading community. **Michael Calore:** You know when you go on a cruise and you get far enough out that they allow you to gamble? **Lauren Goode:** I've never been on a cruise, but this is good to know. OK, so it's like that. **Michael Calore:** You get far enough out and the laws don't apply anymore. **Lauren Goode:** OK, OK. Got it. Wow. **Michael Calore:** Lauren, who are some others in this crowd? **Lauren Goode:** Someone else who we should mention, Balaji Srinivasan. He's an investor who, in 2023, announced his own fund with the goal of developing new libertarian societies. And he would call these network states, which doesn't sound ominous. Also involved in this fund, Brian Armstrong, the CEO of Coinbase, AngelList cofounder, Naval Ravikant, even Fred Wilson was involved in this fund. And there are a lot of strong crypto ties here, but the whole idea is that there will be these Bitcoin based groups based on open source and peer-to-peer and internet values. And Vice did some reporting on this and wrote that the ultimate goal is to create new communities that have their own experimental versions of institutions, but once again run by private companies. **Zoë Schiffer:** We said we couldn't come up with a more Silicon Valley sentence. And then you said Bitcoin based groups based on open source and peer-to-peer, so well done to you. **Lauren Goode:** It's hard to follow in a podcast. I feel like you have to see these ideals written out and do some jumps in your mind to fully understand what's happening here. I listened to something called the Protestant Libertarian podcast ahead of this episode to try to prepare, and I kept stopping and going back 15 seconds and re-listening and truly trying to grasp what this is all about. **Zoë Schiffer:** And that's a reporter, folks. For no reason whatsoever, I'm just going to say there's a retroactive allegedly that applies to everything we just said about these men. Moving on. So my understanding is crypto is attractive to libertarians because in theory it's a way to get around government backed fiat currencies. You can trust in the blockchain versus a centralized authority figure. **Michael Calore:** Yeah, and it's also very transparent. And that's something that appeals to anybody who's interested in personal liberty. They want their systems to be fully understandable and transparent. We talked through some of the people who identify as libertarians in Silicon Valley. So let's dig a little bit deeper into how the ideology fits into Silicon Valley. **Lauren Goode:** Right, it feels like there are these ideas coming from people who aren't necessarily Libertarian with a capital L, but they espouse some of the beliefs of it. **Zoë Schiffer:** Yeah, I think to start out, we should touch on Marc Andreessen's 2023 self-published manifesto, the Techno-Optimist. Andreessen is a software engineer. He's cofounder of Netscape and also cofounder of one of the most prominent venture capital firms in the valley. Andreessen Horowitz, or a16z as it's sometimes called, at its core, this manifesto or blog post, really, is an argument for the acceleration of tech innovation and development. In this view, tech is life, tech is happiness and tech solves all of the world's problems. And the concepts in the manifesto are very libertarian. They're things like growth is progress, the things that help growth are population growth and technology naturally. And it says things like, "We believe in free markets and that they're the most effective way to organize a technological economy." And it also really links people who are interested in content moderation or sustainability or trust and safety as being anti-progress and anti-everything the manifesto stands for. **Lauren Goode:** Interesting. Zoe with something like, I don't know, just content moderation or sustainability, ESG, we report on these issues within tech companies a lot, but broadly, what do those mean and why would those be anti-growth? **Zoë Schiffer:** My understanding is that with trust and safety or content moderation, they see these groups as really standing in the way of progress and slowing down the product development cycle. When we're thinking of trust and safety in particular, those teams are the ones being like, "Wait, we need to understand how the product is going to impact users." And I think you could have the view that trust and safety is actually a core part of the product development cycle. There's a phrase that I like a lot that content moderation is a product and it's a thing you can sell that will make your company more valuable, but they really don't seem to see it that way. **Lauren Goode:** Interesting. And the a16z manifesto, it went pretty viral. **Zoë Schiffer:** Yeah, Lauren, even on Threads. People were posting about it in real time, I might add. **Lauren Goode:** I refuse to believe it went viral on Threads. **Zoë Schiffer:** It did, it did. **Lauren Goode:** Were people just copying and pasting it as like clickbait and not attributing it? **Zoë Schiffer:** They were reposting their LinkedIn posts about it, yeah. **Michael Calore:** Yeah. I think a lot of people were making fun of it just because it came across as quite pompous. A lot of the ideas were very self-important. **Zoë Schiffer:** Right. I feel like a lot of the tech CEOs honestly do agree with it and they have this mindset and then everyone else was like, "The way this is written, oh my God." **Michael Calore:** It opens with, lies, we are being lied to. **Lauren Goode:** You know how earlier in the show I said I went back to Stanford University online and opened the big book of philosophy to define libertarianism. After that, I simply took a 10-minute jaunt up the road to Sand Hill Road and opened the Bible there. And the Bible is actually Marc Andreessen's manifesto. **Zoë Schiffer:** And it just says lies, lies, lies. **Michael Calore:** The other thing about it that really rankled people was the fact that it defines who the enemy of the techno optimist is. And it's the person who is pushing for ethics. It's the person who is pushing for let's slow this down and take this carefully so that we don't screw up royally. **Zoë Schiffer:** Right, which I feel like the ethics teams do really take issue with because they're like, "We're not trying to slow it down. We're trying to be embedded in the product development cycle and help it and help you make money ultimately." **Lauren Goode:** Right, but from the perspective of some venture capitalists, they believe that having unfettered growth allows them to literally grow the economy and therefore create more jobs. And this is all good things. **Michael Calore:** Yeah. And one of the most cited parts of the manifesto is the idea that technology can solve all of the world's problems, and that if you stand in the way of technology growing, that you are actively killing people. **Lauren Goode:** Really? **Michael Calore:** Yeah. **Lauren Goode:** I don't remember that part of it. I might've blocked it out. Interesting. And these are investors who you'll sometimes hear them say they're not necessarily just investing in a company, they're putting their belief in a certain entrepreneur. They feel very confident that the leader of this startup, the person who's pitching the idea, that they can execute, they can see it through. And that, in a way, goes back to this whole idea of individualism too. **Zoë Schiffer:** Right, yeah. They also don't mention editors anywhere in the manifesto, but oh my God, I certainly feel like they would help. **Michael Calore:** Yeah, there's a lot of ideas there, a lot of beliefs. In what ways are these beliefs being put into action? **Zoë Schiffer:** I feel like UBI or universal basic income is one way. We know that Sam Altman is involved in an experiment to see what happens when you give people a fixed amount of money every month. This idea has been popularized with various political candidates who are like, "What if the government handed out a little bit of cash and allowed people to spend it on whatever they want versus having a traditional welfare state?" **Michael Calore:** Right. And it doesn't seem like a very libertarian idea for the government to just give people money. But if you think about it, you can see how it's attractive to libertarians because like you said, Zoe, it is a replacement for the welfare state. It also reduces some of the friction that happens when you have ultra wealthy people in society. If you have a widening rich poor gap, the people on the poor side of that gap, if they have all of their basic needs being met by universal basic income, then that allows the people on the rich side of that gap to accelerate their growth as much as they really want without a lot of the social pressure and laws getting in the way of redistribution of wealth. **Lauren Goode:** Scale, scale, scale. **Zoë Schiffer:** Mike, you're saying this isn't purely altruistic? **Michael Calore:** Unfortunately, no. Also, we should point out that Silicon Valley is really interested in technologies that introduce automation into business. And if you're introducing automation into business, it's going to result in people losing their jobs. Universal basic income provides a safety net for those people and, again, allows those working on automation technologies to accelerate the work that they're doing without worrying about putting millions of people out of work. **Zoë Schiffer:** You sound a little bit like a techno pessimist. **Michael Calore:** I'm not necessarily a techno pessimist. **Lauren Goode:** It feels like the techno utopian cities are part of this too. They're not explicitly libertarian ideals, but they sort of are. **Michael Calore:** Well, we should talk about those. **Lauren Goode:** Yeah. Last year, The New York Times, I think we've all read the story, they reported on this secret $800 million plan from Silicon Valley elites. This included investors like Andreessen, also Reid Hoffman, Michael Moritz, Laurene Powell Jobs, the Collison brothers, the Irish entrepreneurs who run Stripe. The whole idea was that they were going to build an entirely new city from scratch in Solano County, California. Have you been there, Mike? I've never been. It's about two hours northeast of where we are in the Bay. **Michael Calore:** I've driven through it without knowing that I was driving through it. **Lauren Goode:** OK. **Michael Calore:** There's nothing there. **Lauren Goode:** OK, OK. So their idea is that they're going to build a whole new city there from scratch and from a practical perspective, the Bay Area is very expensive. There isn't a lot of housing. We have trouble building housing, so maybe expanding this area isn't a bad idea. But as the Times pointed out, this whole thing has its roots and the time to build, free enterprise thinking. There was also a proposal by Y Combinator several years ago, which is this startup incubator here in San Francisco trying to also turn empty land into this new society. We talked about seasteading, the Seasteading Institute, basically building a new society on lily pads or concrete blocks or whatever it is. So once again, we can't say for sure how many of these folks are hardcore Ayn Rand fans, but this is the modern 2024 Silicon Valley version of this free enterprise, free thinking cyberspace will save us all type ideology. **Zoë Schiffer:** When we're talking about the utopian society and it's building more housing in the Bay Area, honestly I'm all for it. **Lauren Goode:** Yeah, I think that they've run into some road bumps with this project was the last that The New York Times reported, but I'm guessing it's not the last we'll hear of it. **Michael Calore:** Yes. And if this project doesn't get off the ground, another one will for sure. **Lauren Goode:** Eventually. And maybe we'll all be moving there. We'll be the local press. **Michael Calore:** So for a very long time, the prevailing thinking in Silicon Valley has been one that meritocracy rules. The person who earns their position through the execution of their ideas is the one who should be given more power and more resources to continue growing their ideas. So how does that concept of meritocracy in Silicon Valley overlap with libertarianism? **Lauren Goode:** Yeah, that's a good question. This goes back about a decade now, but there's this reporter, Jodi Kantor. She was working on a story about the Stanford class of 1994 and all of the bold names from that cohort who were pretty much responsible for the modern internet economy. And this included an entrepreneur and venture capitalist named David Sacks. Some of you may know who he is from recent Twitter election discourse, but he famously wrote in an email to Jodi that meritocracy is one of his "core values." He said that when he has hired and promoted women, it was because they were the top candidates, that he chooses the best person for the job. He wants to foster a culture of excellence within his companies. And that is the idea of meritocracy in a nutshell, that you're just going to hire the best people who could do the best job and you're not going to take in other considerations. Sacks, for what it's worth, also wrote for the Stanford Review, which is a conservative libertarian campus newspaper. And guess who else wrote for that? **Michael Calore:** You? **Lauren Goode:** Peter Thiel. **Michael Calore:** Oh, Peter Thiel. **Lauren Goode:** Yeah, Zoe, that's what I was going to say. **Zoë Schiffer:** That would be quite a plot twist. **Lauren Goode:** But I think we're getting back to this idea that meritocracy is a little bit of a myth, particularly in Silicon Valley. I think we all know of examples where it is not always the most talented, smartest, most hardworking person that finds their way to the top or into a better life. There's all kinds of cronyism, nepotism, you name it, that happens in Silicon Valley and in other institutions, like government where sometimes the people who are not the most qualified end up in elevated positions. **Zoë Schiffer:** I always think of the analogy, too, of if two people have won a race and they've gotten the exact same time, but one person ran against severe headwinds, that person is probably the better runner, but it looks like they got the exact same time. **Lauren Goode:** But I think we're getting back to this idea that meritocracy is great if you are a white man or a man because, statistically speaking, Silicon Valley is still largely composed of men. And now with some of those folks who are a little more are leaning now, who are fighting back against the corrective efforts like DEI, diversity, equity, and inclusion within companies. **Zoë Schiffer:** My favorite David Sacks story is that shortly after his company went public and he became like a multi, multi-millionaire, billionaire, he hosted a 40th birthday party that was Marie Antoinette themed. And the tagline for the party was Let Him Eat Cake. **Lauren Goode:** Once again, I would like to know why I am not invited to these parties along with the don't die dinners. **Zoë Schiffer:** Snoop Dogg was. **Lauren Goode:** Oh really? **Michael Calore:** So do you want to hang out with the libertarian royalists? **Lauren Goode:** Just fly on the wall. I want to hear all the viewpoints. **Michael Calore:** Sure, why not? All right, we're going to take a quick break and when we come back, we will ask the question that we have been building to, is the prevailing ideology in Silicon Valley actually libertarian? **\[break\]** Welcome back to _Uncanny Valley_. So we've been talking a lot about the ideology of libertarianism and how it's been put into effect in Silicon Valley, but of course, Silicon Valley is not a monolith. There are millions of people living and working there who have very different ideas about how involved government should be in the economy. And I just want to get to the heart of the matter. Can we call Silicon Valley libertarian? Can we put that label on the economic and social system that is at play in Silicon Valley? **Lauren Goode:** Yeah, this is a good question. Yes and no. The libertarians are a small bunch. Some of them are just also a very vocal and powerful bunch. There was this survey at Stanford, I think this is the last time we're going to mention Stanford University on the show hopefully. So in 2019, there was this Stanford survey of successful tech entrepreneurs. And the survey was about their politics, and what it revealed was this new class of political animal called—David Attenborough voice—the liberaltarian. The research basically showed that when it comes to things like taxation, social issues, trade, that a lot of wealthy tech founders are more liberal than all but the people who are really, really far left. But then when it comes to regulation, maybe unsurprisingly, these people tended to be more conservative than most Republicans, and, in fact, look a little bit more like libertarians as we originally think of them, hence the term liberaltarian. So we have this interesting combination of values here. Of course, that was 2019, and we know that politics in the valley have shifted since then. It's a little bit harder to define right now. And I think when you actually look at the voting data of the geographic areas of Silicon Valley, let's say Santa Clara County, San Mateo County, the broader San Francisco Bay, people do still tend to vote mostly democratic. **Zoë Schiffer:** Yeah. I don't even know how helpful it is to figure out if the exact label applies here. To me, it certainly seems true that the traditional libertarian ideals are still relevant today and honestly perhaps more relevant today than ever before because we just had this huge election. And among other things, it was the first time that a Republican won the popular vote since 2004. And things like tax reform and deregulation and infrastructure investment were central issues in that election. And some were being pushed by tech elites who seemed to have played an outsized role. **Michael Calore:** Yeah, for sure. I think if you look at where Silicon Valley originally got labeled as libertarian, you have to look back at the Declaration of Independence for Cyberspace, which was written in 1996 by John Perry Barlow of the Electronic Frontier Foundation, where he basically says in so many words, "Government, you are not invited into this space. We built this without you, and we built it for us, and we will govern ourselves." And that was a rallying cry for the early internet. 1996, the web was only a few years old at that point. And I think for a long time that held as the truth because the government just did not understand technology. Some of the most foundational regulations of the tech industry were written by the people in the government offices who understood it the best. But the big players in Big Tech in Silicon Valley were not as much of a part of the conversation. And as we've progressed and technology has become a bigger part of our country and our economy and our social fabric, those big tech companies are getting more and more and more involved in government. So you may have these libertarian ideals about no regulation and free markets, but there's also an understanding that if you're going to make sure that the regulation is favorable to you, then you do have to be involved in those discussions. So there's big money being spent on lobbying, cozying up to political candidates, sending out huzzahs on Twitter when they win. You see a lot of that happening from the same people who may not believe that government should be involved in their industry. **Zoë Schiffer:** So the idea of less government seems stronger today than it did before, at least in the way that people voted. I keep thinking about this quote from the libertarian writer and researcher, Greg Ferenstein. It was in an interview he did with Vox, and the quote was, "The Silicon Valley ideology thinks about government as an investor rather than a protector, arguing that government's role is to invest in making people as awesome as possible." **Lauren Goode:** So it's like, "Oh, I just raised my 40 million Series C from the Fed." **Zoë Schiffer:** Right. **Michael Calore:** I read it as support for universal basic income. The government should invest in making sure that everybody can be as awesome as possible by providing for the basic needs of everybody who is not awesome in their eyes. **Zoë Schiffer:** Yeah. **Michael Calore:** So my final question is, what's to come? How do we feel this is going to play out in the future? **Lauren Goode:** I'm going to toss that back to you, Mike. What do you think is going to happen in the future? **Michael Calore:** I hate to be the guy ... Well, no. I love to be the guy who's always talking about universal basic income, but I do think that universal basic income has a place in society, especially if we're going to keep driving towards automation. It's something that we should be seriously considering. And I do think that it's a good place for the government to step in and provide for its people, and you can do that through taxes. We've talked about how libertarians in Silicon Valley are OK with taxation if it allows their companies to keep growing. And I think this is a good safety net. And what I don't think is in the future is the dismantling of the welfare state that already exists and using universal basic income as a replacement for it. But I do think that things have gotten so dire in our society with the rich, poor gap and the balance of power that universal basic income could provide a good leveling force with the forward march of technology. **Lauren Goode:** It sounds like you're a little bit aligned with the successful tech entrepreneurs who were surveyed by the junior college in Palo Alto in terms of being a liberaltarian. **Michael Calore:** No, I go further left than that, I would say. **Zoë Schiffer:** He sounds like maybe he's Yang Gang. **Lauren Goode:** Oh, the Yang Gang. I interviewed Andrew Yang once. **Michael Calore:** Andrew Yang, he was one of the first big vocal proponents of universal basic income in the political sphere, wasn't he? **Lauren Goode:** Yes, he was indeed. **Michael Calore:** Well, I don't know anything else about him, so I can't say whether or not I'm actually Yang Gang. **Lauren Goode:** Mike's going to start another third party just for UBI. **Michael Calore:** Oh, boy. There's no government like no government, I always say. **Lauren Goode:** Do you say that? **Michael Calore:** OK, Lauren, I'm going to kick it back to you. Where do you think this is headed in the future? **Lauren Goode:** I am really struggling to say where this is all headed politically because I am so confused by what is happening in politics right now and still trying to sort it out. I do think that there are going to be more factions of self-proclaimed libertarianism and people co-opting some ideals from the left and the right. But I do think the original word is losing its meaning. **Michael Calore:** Agreed. I like this new word, liberaltarian. **Lauren Goode:** Yeah, but once again, it's from 2020 and things change fast. **Michael Calore:** Zoe, what about you? **Zoë Schiffer:** I think we're going to see more privatization than before. Right now, we have people like Elon Musk, who is supposedly going to be coleading with Vivek Ramaswamy the Department of Government Efficiency, or DOGE, and they want to get rid of the Department of Education. So I'm guessing we're going to see private-sector solutions to the things that government used to solve. **Lauren Goode:** And on our next episode of _Uncanny Valley_, we're going to unpack all of the very successful companies who have been led by two CEOs at the same time. **Michael Calore:** All right. Well, thanks to both of you for this discussion about libertarianism and liberaltarianism in Silicon Valley. **Lauren Goode:** Thanks for being our guide, Mike. See you on the seastead. **Michael Calore:** See you on the seastead. **Zoë Schiffer:** Yeah, thank you both. I'm happy to know a little bit more about Ayn Rand, I think. **Lauren Goode:** Zoe, when you get inside of DOGE, will you bring your report to this podcast first, please? **Zoë Schiffer:** Oh, yeah. I'll be reporting live from DOGE, but just for _Uncanny Valley_. **Michael Calore:** I'll be reporting live from a platform 25 miles off the coast of California where I set my own laws. **Lauren Goode:** And I'll be putting my predictions for the actual DOGE on Polymarket at the same time or something. What a time to be alive. **Michael Calore:** Indeed. Well, that is our show for today. We'll be out next week, but we'll be back the following week with an episode all about Sam Altman. Thank you for listening to _Uncanny Valley_. If you like what you heard today, or even if you didn't, make sure to follow our show and rate it on your podcast app of choice. If you'd like to get in touch with us with any questions, comments, or show suggestions, you can write to us at [[email protected]](mailto:[email protected]). Today's show was produced by Kyana Moghadam. Amar Lal at MacroSound mixed this episode. Jordan Bell is our executive producer. Thanks also to executive producer Stephanie Kariuki. Condé Nast's head of global audio is Chris Bannon.
2024-12-02
-
Show key events only Please turn on JavaScript to use this feature President-elect [Donald Trump](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/donaldtrump) has pledged to pardon those convicted after storming the US Capitol in Washington on January 2021 and took the opportunity to raise the issue. “Does the Pardon given by Joe to Hunter include the J-6 Hostages, who have now been imprisoned for years? “Such an abuse and miscarriage of Justice!” Trump said in a post on his Truth Social social media platform. [Share](mailto:?subject=Joe%20Biden%20issues%20pardon%20for%20son%20Hunter%20as%20Trump%20rails%20against%20‘miscarriage%20of%20justice’%20–%20US%20politics%20live&body=https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/live/2024/dec/02/joe-biden-pardon-hunter-biden-donald-trump-us-politics-live-news-updates?CMP=share_btn_url&page=with%3Ablock-674d7a868f0816561c4a05cf#block-674d7a868f0816561c4a05cf) Show key events only Please turn on JavaScript to use this feature Coming just weeks before he leaves office, Joe Biden’s decision to pardon his son Hunter has already attracted controversy and driven debate in Washington. [](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/live/2024/dec/02/joe-biden-pardon-hunter-biden-donald-trump-us-politics-live-news-updates#img-2) US president Joe Biden hugs his son Hunter Biden -pictured in July Photograph: Evan Vucci/EPA But it isn’t first time he has exercised his power to benefit those convicted of criminal offences. He [previously pardoned](https://www.theguardian.com/society/2023/dec/22/biden-pardons-thousands-convicted-of-marijuana-possessions) thousands of people given criminal records for marijuana use and possession on federal lands and also granted clemency to 11 people serving what the White House called “disproportionately long” sentences for nonviolent drug offences. [](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/live/2024/dec/02/joe-biden-pardon-hunter-biden-donald-trump-us-politics-live-news-updates#img-3) Thousands were pardoned for marijuana offences Photograph: Miami Herald/TNS No one was freed from prison under last year’s action, but the pardons were meant to help thousands overcome obstacles to renting a home or finding a job. [Share](mailto:?subject=Joe%20Biden%20issues%20pardon%20for%20son%20Hunter%20as%20Trump%20rails%20against%20‘miscarriage%20of%20justice’%20–%20US%20politics%20live&body=https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/live/2024/dec/02/joe-biden-pardon-hunter-biden-donald-trump-us-politics-live-news-updates?CMP=share_btn_url&page=with%3Ablock-674d9e638f088c7046fe1520#block-674d9e638f088c7046fe1520) Joe Biden’s decision has split Democrats on Capitol Hill (we reported on [some Republican reaction](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/live/2024/dec/02/joe-biden-pardon-hunter-biden-donald-trump-us-politics-live-news-updates?page=with:block-674d75108f088c7046fe13a4#block-674d75108f088c7046fe13a4) in our post at 9.54am GMT). Jared Polis, the Democratic governor of Colorado, criticised Biden’s decision. “While as a father I certainly understand President Joe Biden’s natural desire to help his son by pardoning him, I am disappointed that he put his family ahead of the country,” [Polis said on X](https://x.com/jaredpolis/status/1863392145669046677), as reported by NBC News, which was the first to break the news of the presidential pardon. “This is a bad precedent that could be abused by later Presidents and will sadly tarnish his reputation.” Arizona congressman Greg Stanton, also a Democrat said he thought Biden “got this one wrong.” “This wasn’t a politically-motivated prosecution,” Stanton [said, also on X](https://x.com/RepGregStanton/status/1863401113946345599). “Hunter committed felonies, and was convicted by a jury of his peers.” However, former Democratic presidential candidate Andrew Yang, now an independent, [wrote on X](https://x.com/AndrewYang/status/1863412036744482825), “Joe Biden pardoning Hunter looks bad but most fathers would do the same thing under the circumstances.” [Share](mailto:?subject=Joe%20Biden%20issues%20pardon%20for%20son%20Hunter%20as%20Trump%20rails%20against%20‘miscarriage%20of%20justice’%20–%20US%20politics%20live&body=https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/live/2024/dec/02/joe-biden-pardon-hunter-biden-donald-trump-us-politics-live-news-updates?CMP=share_btn_url&page=with%3Ablock-674d9b678f088c7046fe150e#block-674d9b678f088c7046fe150e) If you’re just waking up, here is a round-up of developments since US president [Joe Biden](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/joebiden) announcing he was pardoning his son following his convictions for federal gun and tax offences. [Share](mailto:?subject=Joe%20Biden%20issues%20pardon%20for%20son%20Hunter%20as%20Trump%20rails%20against%20‘miscarriage%20of%20justice’%20–%20US%20politics%20live&body=https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/live/2024/dec/02/joe-biden-pardon-hunter-biden-donald-trump-us-politics-live-news-updates?CMP=share_btn_url&page=with%3Ablock-674d98468f0816561c4a0709#block-674d98468f0816561c4a0709) The US president has come under criticism for a perceived reversal over his stance on pardoning his son. As recently as November 8, days after Trump’s victory, White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre ruled out a pardon or clemency for the younger Biden, saying, “We’ve been asked that question multiple times. Our answer stands, which is no.” [](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/live/2024/dec/02/joe-biden-pardon-hunter-biden-donald-trump-us-politics-live-news-updates#img-4) White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre Photograph: Ben Curtis/AP “I said I’d abide by the jury decision, and I will do that. And I will not pardon him,” Biden also told reporters at the G7 summit in June When asked if he planned to commute Hunter Biden’s sentence, the president mouthed “no”, according to the BBC. [Share](mailto:?subject=Joe%20Biden%20issues%20pardon%20for%20son%20Hunter%20as%20Trump%20rails%20against%20‘miscarriage%20of%20justice’%20–%20US%20politics%20live&body=https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/live/2024/dec/02/joe-biden-pardon-hunter-biden-donald-trump-us-politics-live-news-updates?CMP=share_btn_url&page=with%3Ablock-674d920e8f086137725690ba#block-674d920e8f086137725690ba) President-elect Donald Trump - [as we reported in our post at 9.52am GMT](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/live/2024/dec/02/joe-biden-pardon-hunter-biden-donald-trump-us-politics-live-news-updates?page=with:block-674d7a868f0816561c4a05cf#block-674d7a868f0816561c4a05cf) - responded angrily to Joe Biden’s pardon. But he himself pardoned several allies and friends in own final days in office among the 70 people granted clemency in 2021. [](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/live/2024/dec/02/joe-biden-pardon-hunter-biden-donald-trump-us-politics-live-news-updates#img-5) Donald Trump Photograph: Brandon Bell/Reuters As [this list details](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/jan/20/trump-pardons-and-commutations-the-full-list), they included former aide Steve Bannon, rapper Lil Wayne, and his daughter’s father-in-law Charles Kushner, whom he has now nominated as ambassador for France. The use of presidential pardons have long been a feature of [US politics](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/us-politics), as my colleague Luke Harding previously reported, below. [ US presidential pardons: a potted history of a shabby convention ](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/jan/19/us-presidential-pardons-potted-history-donald-trump-white-house) [Share](mailto:?subject=Joe%20Biden%20issues%20pardon%20for%20son%20Hunter%20as%20Trump%20rails%20against%20‘miscarriage%20of%20justice’%20–%20US%20politics%20live&body=https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/live/2024/dec/02/joe-biden-pardon-hunter-biden-donald-trump-us-politics-live-news-updates?CMP=share_btn_url&page=with%3Ablock-674d8cdd8f0816561c4a0683#block-674d8cdd8f0816561c4a0683) _Executive Grant of Clemency Joseph R. Biden, Jr. President of the United States of America To All to Whom These Presents Shall Come, Greeting: Be It Known, That This Day, I, Joseph R. Biden, Jr., President of the United States, Pursuant to My Powers Under Article II, Section 2, Clause 1, of the Constitution, Have Granted Unto ROBERT HUNTER BIDEN A Full and Unconditional Pardon For those offenses against the United States which he has committed or may have committed or taken part in during the period from January 1, 2014 through December 1, 2024, including but not limited to all offenses charged or prosecuted (including any that have resulted in convictions) by Special Counsel David C. Weiss in Docket No. 1:23-cr-00061-MN in the United States District Court for the District of Delaware and Docket No. 2:23-CR-00599-MCS-1 in the United States District Court for the Central District of California. IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF I have hereunto signed my name and caused the Pardon to be recorded with the Department of Justice._ _Done at the City of Washington this 1st day of December in the year of our Lord Two Thousand and Twenty-four and of the Independence of the United States the Two Hundred and Forty-ninth._ [Share](mailto:?subject=Joe%20Biden%20issues%20pardon%20for%20son%20Hunter%20as%20Trump%20rails%20against%20‘miscarriage%20of%20justice’%20–%20US%20politics%20live&body=https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/live/2024/dec/02/joe-biden-pardon-hunter-biden-donald-trump-us-politics-live-news-updates?CMP=share_btn_url&page=with%3Ablock-674d8ab68f0816561c4a0671#block-674d8ab68f0816561c4a0671) Two months before Hunter arrived in court for his federal tax proceedings, he appeared in court with his mother Jill Biden and wife Melissa Cohen Biden, in Wilmington, Delaware. [](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/live/2024/dec/02/joe-biden-pardon-hunter-biden-donald-trump-us-politics-live-news-updates#img-6) Hunter Biden with his wife Melissa Cohen Biden at the federal court for his trial on criminal gun charges Photograph: Hannah Beier/Reuters After three hours of deliberation and a week long trial, jurors found him guilty on all three felony counts he faced relating to buying a handgun while being a user of crack cocaine. Biden was accused of making two false statements when filling out a form to buy a Colt revolver in October 2018: first by stating untruthfully that he was not addicted to or using drugs, and then by declaring the statement to be true. A third charge alleged that he then illegally owned the gun for 11 days, before his sister-in-law and then lover, Hallie Biden, threw it in a trash bin in a panic. The prosecution called other members of the Biden family, including his former wife, Kathleen Buhle, to whom he was married for 24 years, and Hallie Biden, the widow of his brother Beau, as it tried to show that Hunter’s drug use had continued during 2018 and 2019. The testimony painted a portrait of [Hunter Biden](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/hunter-biden) falling deeper into addiction as he struggled to cope with the death of Beau, who died from brain cancer in 2015. After the breakup of his marriage, he formed a romantic relationship with Hallie Biden, who admitted to having smoked crack with him. **Full story below** [ Hunter Biden found guilty on all three charges in federal gun case ](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/article/2024/jun/11/hunter-biden-gun-charges-verdict) [Share](mailto:?subject=Joe%20Biden%20issues%20pardon%20for%20son%20Hunter%20as%20Trump%20rails%20against%20‘miscarriage%20of%20justice’%20–%20US%20politics%20live&body=https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/live/2024/dec/02/joe-biden-pardon-hunter-biden-donald-trump-us-politics-live-news-updates?CMP=share_btn_url&page=with%3Ablock-674d87608f088c7046fe1449#block-674d87608f088c7046fe1449) As we reported [in our post at 9.19amGMT](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/live/2024/dec/02/joe-biden-pardon-hunter-biden-donald-trump-us-politics-live-news-updates?page=with:block-674d513f8f0816561c4a04c3#block-674d513f8f0816561c4a04c3), Hunter Biden was due to be sentenced for his conviction on federal gun charges on 12 December, with his sentencing on the tax case due on 16 December. The 54-year-old [pleaded guilty to nine federal tax charges](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/article/2024/sep/05/hunter-biden-guilty-plea-tax-avoidance-case) on September 5 on what was a day fraught with confrontation with prosecutors. [](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/live/2024/dec/02/joe-biden-pardon-hunter-biden-donald-trump-us-politics-live-news-updates#img-7) Hunter Biden leaves federal court in Los Angeles Photograph: David Swanson/Reuters The charges carried a possible 17 year prison sentence. Biden was accused of failing to pay his taxes on time from 2016 to 2019, as well as facing two felony counts of filing a false return and an additional felony count of tax evasion. He initially pleaded not guilty to the charges and his attorneys had indicated they would argue he did not act “willfully”, or with the intention to break the law, in part because of his well-documented struggles with alcohol and drug addiction. **Read the full details below** [Share](mailto:?subject=Joe%20Biden%20issues%20pardon%20for%20son%20Hunter%20as%20Trump%20rails%20against%20‘miscarriage%20of%20justice’%20–%20US%20politics%20live&body=https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/live/2024/dec/02/joe-biden-pardon-hunter-biden-donald-trump-us-politics-live-news-updates?CMP=share_btn_url&page=with%3Ablock-674d80b38f08613772569004#block-674d80b38f08613772569004) Joe Biden, in [his statement earlier](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/dec/02/joe-biden-hunter-pardon-statement), took aim at his political opponents for selectively targeting Hunter Biden for prosecution over gun purchase offences. Those same opponents have now responded by accusing the president of lying about his family’s activity during his political career. “Joe Biden has lied from start to finish about his family’s corrupt influence peddling activities,” said Representative James Comer, chair of the House Committee on Oversight and Accountability in a post on X. [](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/live/2024/dec/02/joe-biden-pardon-hunter-biden-donald-trump-us-politics-live-news-updates#img-8) Chairman Rep. James Comer Photograph: Ben Curtis/AP “Not only has he falsely claimed that he never met with his son’s foreign business associates and that his son did nothing wrong, but he also lied when he said he would not pardon [Hunter Biden](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/hunter-biden). “The charges Hunter faced were just the tip of the iceberg in the blatant corruption that President Biden and the Biden Crime Family have lied about to the American people.” [Share](mailto:?subject=Joe%20Biden%20issues%20pardon%20for%20son%20Hunter%20as%20Trump%20rails%20against%20‘miscarriage%20of%20justice’%20–%20US%20politics%20live&body=https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/live/2024/dec/02/joe-biden-pardon-hunter-biden-donald-trump-us-politics-live-news-updates?CMP=share_btn_url&page=with%3Ablock-674d75108f088c7046fe13a4#block-674d75108f088c7046fe13a4) President-elect [Donald Trump](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/donaldtrump) has pledged to pardon those convicted after storming the US Capitol in Washington on January 2021 and took the opportunity to raise the issue. “Does the Pardon given by Joe to Hunter include the J-6 Hostages, who have now been imprisoned for years? “Such an abuse and miscarriage of Justice!” Trump said in a post on his Truth Social social media platform. [Share](mailto:?subject=Joe%20Biden%20issues%20pardon%20for%20son%20Hunter%20as%20Trump%20rails%20against%20‘miscarriage%20of%20justice’%20–%20US%20politics%20live&body=https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/live/2024/dec/02/joe-biden-pardon-hunter-biden-donald-trump-us-politics-live-news-updates?CMP=share_btn_url&page=with%3Ablock-674d7a868f0816561c4a05cf#block-674d7a868f0816561c4a05cf)  David Smith A loving act of mercy by a father who has already known much sorrow? Or a hypocritical political manoeuvre reminiscent of his great foe? Maybe both can be true. Joe Biden’s announcement on Sunday that he had [pardoned his son Hunter](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/dec/01/joe-biden-pardons-hunter), who is facing sentencing in two criminal cases, is likely to have been the product of a Shakespearean struggle between head and heart. On the one hand, Biden is one of the last great institutionalists in Washington. “From the day I took office, I said I would not interfere with the Justice Department’s decision-making,” he said in an unusually direct and personal [statement](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/dec/02/joe-biden-hunter-pardon-statement) on Sunday. To undermine the separation of powers goes against every fibre of his political being. On the other hand, Biden is nothing without family. His speeches are peppered with references to his parents. As a senator, he [once took a train](https://www.npr.org/2024/08/19/g-s1-17885/ashley-biden-democratic-national-convention) from Washington to Wilmington, Delaware, so he could blow out the candles on a birthday cake for his eight-year-old daughter, Ashley, at the station, then cross the platform and take the next train back to work. Biden was profoundly shaped by the death of his first wife, Neilia [Hunter Biden](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/hunter-biden), and 13-month-old daughter Naomi in a car accident and, much later, the death of his son Beau from brain cancer. In that context, Hunter’s status as the first child of a sitting president to face criminal charges will have pained his father in what Ernest Hemingway called “the broken places”. **Read my full analysis below** [Share](mailto:?subject=Joe%20Biden%20issues%20pardon%20for%20son%20Hunter%20as%20Trump%20rails%20against%20‘miscarriage%20of%20justice’%20–%20US%20politics%20live&body=https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/live/2024/dec/02/joe-biden-pardon-hunter-biden-donald-trump-us-politics-live-news-updates?CMP=share_btn_url&page=with%3Ablock-674d7f178f08613772568ffc#block-674d7f178f08613772568ffc) > _Today, I signed a pardon for my son Hunter. From the day I took office, I said I would not interfere with the Justice Department’s decision-making, and I kept my word even as I have watched my son being selectively, and unfairly, prosecuted. Without aggravating factors like use in a crime, multiple purchases, or buying a weapon as a straw purchaser, people are almost never brought to trial on felony charges solely for how they filled out a gun form. Those who were late paying their taxes because of serious addictions, but paid them back subsequently with interest and penalties, are typically given non-criminal resolutions. It is clear that Hunter was treated differently._ > > _The charges in his cases came about only after several of my political opponents in Congress instigated them to attack me and oppose my election. Then, a carefully negotiated plea deal, agreed to by the Department of Justice, unraveled in the court room – with a number of my political opponents in Congress taking credit for bringing political pressure on the process. Had the plea deal held, it would have been a fair, reasonable resolution of Hunter’s cases._ > > _No reasonable person who looks at the facts of Hunter’s cases can reach any other conclusion than Hunter was singled out only because he is my son – and that is wrong. There has been an effort to break Hunter – who has been five and a half years sober, even in the face of unrelenting attacks and selective prosecution. In trying to break Hunter, they’ve tried to break me – and there’s no reason to believe it will stop here. Enough is enough._ > > _For my entire career I have followed a simple principle: just tell the American people the truth. They’ll be fair-minded. Here’s the truth: I believe in the justice system, but as I have wrestled with this, I also believe raw politics has infected this process and it led to a miscarriage of justice – and once I made this decision this weekend, there was no sense in delaying it further. I hope Americans will understand why a father and a President would come to this decision._ [Share](mailto:?subject=Joe%20Biden%20issues%20pardon%20for%20son%20Hunter%20as%20Trump%20rails%20against%20‘miscarriage%20of%20justice’%20–%20US%20politics%20live&body=https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/live/2024/dec/02/joe-biden-pardon-hunter-biden-donald-trump-us-politics-live-news-updates?CMP=share_btn_url&page=with%3Ablock-674d7c4f8f088c7046fe13e6#block-674d7c4f8f088c7046fe13e6) Hunter Biden issued a statement following his father’s announcement [](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/live/2024/dec/02/joe-biden-pardon-hunter-biden-donald-trump-us-politics-live-news-updates#img-9) Hunter Biden said he will never take the clemency he has been given for granted Photograph: Michael Reynolds/EPA “I have admitted and taken responsibility for my mistakes during the darkest days of my addiction - mistakes that have been exploited to publicly humiliate and shame me and my family for political sport,” Hunter Biden said in a statement on Sunday, adding he had remained sober for more than five years. “In the throes of addiction, I squandered many opportunities and advantages ... I will never take the clemency I have been given today for granted and will devote the life I have rebuilt to helping those who are still sick and suffering.” [Share](mailto:?subject=Joe%20Biden%20issues%20pardon%20for%20son%20Hunter%20as%20Trump%20rails%20against%20‘miscarriage%20of%20justice’%20–%20US%20politics%20live&body=https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/live/2024/dec/02/joe-biden-pardon-hunter-biden-donald-trump-us-politics-live-news-updates?CMP=share_btn_url&page=with%3Ablock-674d6f5b8f08613772568f80#block-674d6f5b8f08613772568f80) Hello and welcome to our live coverage of [US politics](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/us-politics). On Sunday night, before boarding a plane to Angola, US president [Joe Biden](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/joebiden) issued a pardon to his son Hunter – something he had repeatedly said he would not do. Biden said he hoped the American people would understand his decision to issue the pardons over convictions on federal gun and tax charges. “No reasonable person who looks at the facts of Hunter’s cases can reach any other conclusion than Hunter was singled out only because he is my son – and that is wrong,” he said. Hunter Biden was scheduled to be sentenced for his conviction on federal gun charges on 12 December. He was scheduled to be sentenced in the tax case four days later. Joe Biden is just weeks away from leaving office. [Share](mailto:?subject=Joe%20Biden%20issues%20pardon%20for%20son%20Hunter%20as%20Trump%20rails%20against%20‘miscarriage%20of%20justice’%20–%20US%20politics%20live&body=https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/live/2024/dec/02/joe-biden-pardon-hunter-biden-donald-trump-us-politics-live-news-updates?CMP=share_btn_url&page=with%3Ablock-674d513f8f0816561c4a04c3#block-674d513f8f0816561c4a04c3)
2024-12-16
-
The Duke of York is to stay away from the royal family’s traditional Christmas gathering at Sandringham this year amid the controversy surrounding his links to an alleged Chinese spy. Andrew, 64, will miss the festivities at the private Norfolk estate of his brother, King Charles, where 45 members of their family had been expected to spend Christmas Day. Last week, a high court hearing revealed that the [alleged Chinese spy Yang Tengbo](https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2024/dec/16/alleged-chinese-spy-linked-to-prince-andrew-named-as-yang-tengbo), who was banned from the UK, was said to have been a “close” confidant of Andrew. Yang, a businessman whose identity was previously protected by an anonymity order, was named after a judge lifted the ban on Monday. [ How did Yang Tengbo become close confidant of Prince Andrew? ](https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2024/dec/16/how-did-yang-tengbo-become-close-confidant-of-prince-andrew) In a statement, Yang denied suggestions he was involved in espionage and said he had “done nothing wrong or unlawful and the concerns raised by the Home Office against me are ill-founded”. The businessman had visited the UK regularly, attending events at a series of royal residences, including Andrew’s birthday party at his home. According to court documents, Yang was so close to the duke that he was authorised to act on his behalf in an international financial initiative with potential partners and investors in China. Andrew’s office said last week he had stopped all contact with the man, whom he had met through “official channels” with “nothing of a sensitive nature ever discussed”. The prince’s ex-wife, Sarah, Duchess of York, will also miss Christmas at Sandringham, in what will be seen as a show of solidarity for her former husband. The pair are said to be preparing to spend the day together at Royal Lodge, the home they share in Windsor Great Park, Berkshire. It is not yet known whether Andrew will attend Charles’s traditional pre-Christmas lunch for the extended family at Buckingham Palace on Thursday. Princess Beatrice and Princess Eugenie, who have young families, had already planned to spend Christmas with their respective in-laws this year for the first time, sources said.
2024-12-18
-
The Duke of York will not attend the royal family’s traditional pre-Christmas lunch at Buckingham Palace on Thursday amid controversy over his links with an alleged Chinese spy. Prince Andrew is said to have decided to pull out of the occasion after speaking to his ex-wife and close friend, Sarah, Duchess of York. He had already [withdrawn from joining senior royals at Sandringham](https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2024/dec/16/prince-andrew-to-miss-royal-family-christmas-after-links-to-alleged-chinese-spy-emerge) for the festive period. The Buckingham Palace lunch is a private event for senior royals and their wider family who will not be attending Christmas celebrations at King Charles’s Sandringham home. It was alleged at a high court hearing last week that the [businessman Yang Tengbo,](https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2024/dec/17/the-rise-of-yang-tengbo-what-were-his-uk-businesses) who has been banned from entering the UK, was said to have been a close confidant of Andrew. Yang has insisted it is “entirely untrue” to claim he was involved in espionage and that he has “done nothing wrong or unlawful”. The businessman was the founder-partner of the Chinese arm of the duke’s Pitch@Palace initiative, and visited Buckingham Palace twice in 2018 to meet him. He is also said to have entered St James’s Palace and Windsor Castle at Andrew’s invitation. Andrew ceased all contact with Yang when concerns were first raised about him, according to a statement from his office last week. It said the prince met Yang through official channels with “nothing of a sensitive nature ever discussed”. Andrew and the Duchess of York were reportedly on the guest list for Thursday’s lunch for about 70 members of the extended royal family, which is seen as a family rather than official occasion. [skip past newsletter promotion](https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2024/dec/18/prince-andrew-to-miss-royal-familys-traditional-pre-christmas-lunch#EmailSignup-skip-link-7) Sign up to First Edition Our morning email breaks down the key stories of the day, telling you what’s happening and why it matters **Privacy Notice:** Newsletters may contain info about charities, online ads, and content funded by outside parties. For more information see our [Privacy Policy](https://www.theguardian.com/help/privacy-policy). We use Google reCaptcha to protect our website and the Google [Privacy Policy](https://policies.google.com/privacy) and [Terms of Service](https://policies.google.com/terms) apply. after newsletter promotion Sources told the Daily Mail that Buckingham Palace was unsure if the couple would attend until Wednesday. Senior royal aides are said to have been optimistically operating on the working assumption the duke would “see sense” and decide to “keep his head down”.
2024-12-21
-
Princess Beatrice will be joining the royal family at Sandringham this Christmas after changing her travel plans due to medical advice, it is understood. Beatrice and her husband, Edoardo Mapelli Mozzi, are expecting their second child in early spring and were planning on spending the festive period overseas with his parents. But Beatrice, 36, has been advised not to travel long distances, the PA news agency reported. The royal baby will be a little brother or sister for the couple’s three-year-old daughter, Sienna, and Mapelli Mozzi’s son and Beatrice’s stepson, eight-year-old Wolfie. A large number of the royal family will be guests of King Charles and Queen Camilla at Sandringham on Christmas Day. The Prince of Wales revealed recently that 45 people will be “all in one room” at the private Norfolk estate. However, Beatrice’s father, the Duke of York, is staying away amid the controversy surrounding [his links to an alleged Chinese spy](https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2024/dec/16/prince-andrew-to-miss-royal-family-christmas-after-links-to-alleged-chinese-spy-emerge). Last week, a high court hearing revealed that the [alleged spy, Yang Tengbo](https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2024/dec/16/alleged-chinese-spy-linked-to-prince-andrew-named-as-yang-tengbo), who was banned from the UK, was said to have been a “close” confidant of Prince Andrew. Yang, a businessman whose identity was previously protected by an anonymity order, was named after a judge lifted the ban on Monday. In a statement, Yang denied suggestions he was involved in espionage and said he had “done nothing wrong or unlawful and the concerns raised by the Home Office against me are ill-founded”. [skip past newsletter promotion](https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2024/dec/21/princess-beatrice-to-spend-christmas-with-royal-family-due-to-pregnancy#EmailSignup-skip-link-10) Sign up to First Edition Our morning email breaks down the key stories of the day, telling you what’s happening and why it matters **Privacy Notice:** Newsletters may contain info about charities, online ads, and content funded by outside parties. For more information see our [Privacy Policy](https://www.theguardian.com/help/privacy-policy). We use Google reCaptcha to protect our website and the Google [Privacy Policy](https://policies.google.com/privacy) and [Terms of Service](https://policies.google.com/terms) apply. after newsletter promotion Last week, Andrew’s office said he had stopped all contact with the man, whom he had met through “official channels” and with whom “nothing of a sensitive nature ever discussed”. The prince’s ex-wife, Sarah, Duchess of York, will also miss Christmas at Sandringham, in what will be considered as a show of solidarity for her former husband. The pair are said to be preparing to spend the day together at Royal Lodge, the home they share in Windsor Great Park, Berkshire. Beatrice’s sister, Princess Eugenie, and her family are planning on spending Christmas with her in-laws.
2025-01-09
-
Rachel Reeves will fly with a delegation of City grandees to China this week as Labour seeks closer economic links with Beijing as part of its quest for growth. With the [outlook increasingly rocky at home](https://www.theguardian.com/business/2025/jan/07/uk-long-term-borrowing-costs-at-highest-since-1998-amid-fears-over-weak-growth) after a run of soft economic data, the chancellor is sorely in need of a positive story to tell. She appears determined to normalise the UK’s relationship with the communist superpower, despite mounting security concerns and a backdrop of growing geopolitical tension. In the past few weeks alone, the UK [has expelled an alleged Chinese spy](https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2024/dec/16/alleged-chinese-spy-linked-to-prince-andrew-named-as-yang-tengbo) and friend of Prince Andrew, Yang Tengbo, while the US Treasury has accused Beijing of [hacking into staff computers](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/dec/30/china-treasury-cyberattack). Meanwhile, a lawyer for Shein – the online retailer founded in China and which is [lobbying over a potential £50bn London float](https://www.theguardian.com/business/article/2024/jun/03/shein-fashion-group-london-listing-ipo) – was [accused of “wilful ignorance”](https://www.theguardian.com/business/2025/jan/07/shein-lawyer-accused-of-wilful-ignorance-over-cotton-linked-to-forced-uyghur-labour) over its supply chain practices by British MPs. At the same time, Beijing is expected to be at the sharp end of Donald Trump’s aggressive trade policy, which could result in tariffs of up to 60% being slapped on all Chinese goods. Policymakers are already contending with a [rapidly declining yuan](https://www.theguardian.com/business/live/2025/jan/08/bond-market-selloff-government-borrowing-costs-yields-china-currency-falls-us-jobs-business-live?filterKeyEvents=false&page=with%3Ablock-677e28238f0821528891029f#block-677e28238f0821528891029f) and a stock market selloff. Notwithstanding this inauspicious backdrop – and Beijing’s deeply problematic human rights record – Labour is making a concerted effort to build bridges with [China](https://www.theguardian.com/world/china). The foreign secretary, David Lammy, visited the country in October, and Keir [Starmer had a face-to-face meeting with the Chinese president](https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2024/nov/18/keir-starmer-discusses-human-rights-concerns-with-xi-jinping-at-g20), Xi Jinping, on the sidelines of November’s G20 summit in Rio de Janeiro. In its manifesto, Labour promised to reverse what it called “14 years of damaging Conservative inconsistency over China”, with a new approach: “We will cooperate where we can, compete where we need to, and challenge where we must.” Speaking last month, Reeves said she sought a “pragmatic” relationship with China, which is the UK’s fifth-largest trading partner, [worth £32bn in exports](https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/6762c99bcdb5e64b69e30769/china-trade-and-investment-factsheet-2024-12-20.pdf) last year. She acknowledged security concerns, but insisted “we should trade and seek investment when it is in our national interest to do so”. City businesses have urged Reeves to help ensure China is not placed on the higher, more stringent, tier of a new “foreign influence registration scheme” – a decision ultimately to be made by the Home Office. Lobbyists for overseas governments will have to declare their role under this new regime, but the “enhanced” tier will force companies carrying out any activity on behalf of another state to make themselves known – something business groups fear could prevent closer ties. The chancellor will take the Bank of England governor, Andrew Bailey, with her on the visit to Beijing and Shanghai, as well as the FCA chief executive, Nikhil Rathi, and a string of senior banking figures, including HSBC’s chair, Mark Tucker. Reeves will meet China’s vice-premier, He Lifeng, in Beijing before flying to Shanghai for discussions with UK firms operating in China. Enhanced cooperation on financial services is at the heart of the Treasury’s hopes for the trip. Reeves lavished praise on the sector in her Mansion House speech last year, calling it [the “crown jewel” of the UK economy](https://www.theguardian.com/business/2024/nov/14/rules-imposed-after-financial-crisis-have-gone-too-far-reeves-tells-city-bankers). The economist Gerard Lyons, who is on the board of the state-owned Bank of China, says: “From the Chinese perspective, they’re moving up the value curve in terms of the economy and the UK, given its expertise in services and financial services, would be able to provide some assistance there. “And naturally, from the UK perspective, we want to see more inward investment from China and more trade with China – so it suits both sides.” Reeves has been clear that the UK hopes to fly the flag for “free and open trade” in the face of Trump’s “America first” protectionism. [skip past newsletter promotion](https://www.theguardian.com/business/2025/jan/09/rachel-reeves-heads-to-china-to-build-bridges-but-a-new-golden-era-of-relations-is-impossible#EmailSignup-skip-link-18) Sign up to Business Today Get set for the working day – we'll point you to all the business news and analysis you need every morning **Privacy Notice:** Newsletters may contain info about charities, online ads, and content funded by outside parties. For more information see our [Privacy Policy](https://www.theguardian.com/help/privacy-policy). We use Google reCaptcha to protect our website and the Google [Privacy Policy](https://policies.google.com/privacy) and [Terms of Service](https://policies.google.com/terms) apply. after newsletter promotion The chancellor’s trip is expected to mark the resumption of the UK-China Economic and Financial Dialogue (EFD), a formal arrangement between the two countries. This structure of regular meetings was introduced under Tony Blair’s government, but the last one was held in London in 2019. After that, relations soured as the draconian security law was passed in Hong Kong, prompting Boris Johnson’s government to [open a visa scheme](https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/jun/03/britain-could-change-immigration-rules-for-hong-kong-citizens) for British passport holders in the territory that has since brought more than 150,000 people to the UK. Over recent years, China and the US have been locked in an increasingly fractious battle for economic supremacy, and hopes have long faded that Beijing’s induction into the global trading system a quarter of a century ago would lead it in a more liberal direction. While Trump’s anti-China rhetoric has been vehement, Joe Biden retained the swingeing tariffs imposed in Trump’s first term. Biden has also used export restrictions to try to restrict China’s access to key technologies, on security grounds. Neil Shearing, chief economist at consultancy Capital [Economics](https://www.theguardian.com/business/economics), who is writing a book about the US-China clash and its influence on the rest of the world, says the UK is unlikely to be able to resist taking sides, whatever Reeves’s intentions. “Given the UK is trying to find a place for itself in the world post-Brexit, trying to build some bridges is not necessarily a bad idea,” he says. But, he adds: “This post-Covid era is about the geopolitical rivalry between the US and China – they are the pre-eminent global superpowers, and increasingly other countries will be forced to pick a side. And in that instance it’s pretty clear which way the UK will break, Trump or no Trump: they’re going to break for the US. We saw this with [Huawei](https://www.theguardian.com/technology/huawei).” Huawei, the Chinese telecoms operator, [was banned from the UK’s 5G network in 2020](https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2020/nov/30/huawei-uk-bans-new-5g-network-equipment-from-september) by Johnson. The UK government had initially sought to take a different line from the Trump administration, but eventually caved in to intense US pressure. Shearing says: “Countries don’t get to decide where they align: the US and China get to decide the contours of this fracturing.” Because of this darker geopolitical backdrop, there will be no resumption of the [“golden era” for UK-China relations](https://www.theguardian.com/business/2015/sep/20/osborne-china-visit-beijing-best-partner) touted by George Osborne in 2015 – the same year that, improbably, saw President Xi [sipping a pint of IPA in David Cameron’s local pub](https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/oct/22/david-cameron-xi-jinping-village-pub-drink-pint) during a state visit. But with GDP at home stagnating, Reeves clearly hopes to underline the distance she is willing to go to seek out willing business partners for the UK.