Trump vs Biden: Live 2020 Election Updates

Here’s what you need to know:

Credit…Erin Schaff/The New York Times

Joseph R. Biden Jr. made his first trip to Florida as the Democratic nominee on Tuesday, facing a tight race and a challenge with some Latinos that he hoped to begin addressing with events along the diverse, vote-rich I-4 corridor that historically is home to many swing voters.

Against a backdrop of polls that showed Mr. Biden both cutting into traditional Republican constituencies and underperforming Hillary Clinton’s 2016 showing with Latino voters in Florida, he sought to engage a broad range of voters through stops in Tampa and, later, in an expected stop in Kissimmee.

Facing urgent calls from some allies to shore up his standing with Puerto Rican voters, Mr. Biden planned to attend a Hispanic Heritage Month event Tuesday evening in Kissimmee, near Orlando, to focus on the Puerto Rican community in that part of the state. But he started the trip with a veterans-focused event at a community college in Tampa.

“We owe them our thanks, our gratitude and our respect,” Mr. Biden said during the event.

He laced into Mr. Trump over a report by The Atlantic that Mr. Trump had referred to American soldiers killed in combat during World War I as “losers” and “suckers” and had repeatedly been dismissive of military service at other points in his presidency.

“Nowhere are his faults more glaring and more offensive, to me at least, than when it comes to his denigration of our servicemembers, veterans, wounded warriors,” Mr. Biden said.

Mr. Biden spoke in often-personal terms about the challenges facing military families and veterans, including mental health and childcare concerns. Mr. Biden, whose late son, Beau Biden, had previously deployed to Iraq with the Delaware Army National Guard, also suggested that Mr. Trump pays lip service at best to veterans.

“Our military is the greatest fighting force in the history of the world and that’s not hyperbole,” he said. It “deserves a commander-in-chief who respects their sacrifice, understands their service, and will never betray the values they defend.”

He went on to host a roundtable with veterans that touched on a range of issues, including Social Security and health care.

Credit…Maria Alejandra Cardona for The New York Times

As Joseph R. Biden Jr. traveled to Florida, a new poll was released offering him signs of hope there, in one of the most competitive states in this year’s presidential election.

Mr. Biden, the Democratic presidential nominee, held a wide lead over President Trump among Latino voters, according to the poll, which was conducted by Monmouth University, and he had the upper hand in the most politically competitive areas of the state.

Mr. Biden had the support of 50 percent of registered voters, while Mr. Trump attracted the support of 45 percent. That difference was within the poll’s margin of error.

Monmouth ran two likely voter projections, one accounting for high levels of voter participation and another for a lower-turnout scenario. When turnout was high, Mr. Biden’s edge remained at five percentage points, but with voter participation lower it ticked down to three points.

The Monmouth poll also showed Mr. Biden leading Mr. Trump 58 percent to 32 percent among Latino voters, who are widely seen as crucial to a Democratic victory in Florida.

The results were more auspicious for Mr. Biden than those of two other quality polls released this month, which had showed him and Mr. Trump roughly splitting the Hispanic vote in Florida. Those polls were a cause for concern among Democrats, as Hillary Clinton won among Florida’s Latino voters by 27 points in 2016, according to exit polls.

Mr. Trump won Florida that year, but only by 1.2 percentage points.

The Monmouth survey showed Mr. Biden and Mr. Trump neck-and-neck among voters 65 and older, reflecting the president’s weakened support among one of the state’s most crucial voting demographics. In 2016, exit polls showed him winning that demographic by 17 points. The Monmouth poll found that 49 percent of older voters supported Mr. Trump, while 47 percent backed Mr. Biden.

Mr. Biden was ahead by a nearly 2-to-1 margin in the seven counties, spread across the state, that were decided by under 10 points in the 2016 election, suggesting that Mr. Trump’s path to victory in Florida primarily involves turning out his base, rather than winning over persuadable voters.

The Monmouth poll, which was conducted from Sept. 10-13, had a margin of error of plus or minus 4.7 percentage points.

Credit…Bridget Bennett for The New York Times

LAS VEGAS — For the past decade, Democrats in Nevada have notched one hard-fought victory after another. In 2010, Senator Harry Reid won his hotly contested re-election campaign, even as the party lost other battles all over the country. In 2016, Hillary Clinton won the state, though with a smaller margin of victory than Democrats garnered in the previous two presidential contests. And in 2018, the Democrats managed to capture the governor’s office and the State Senate.

Nevada’s Democratic political machine was held up as a model for other states where neither party has consistently dominated. But it was a machine built for another era.

Its success relied on hundreds of people knocking on thousands of doors. Now, there are fewer than half as many people canvassing for Democratic voters as there were in September 2016. And some Democratic strategists warn that Nevada could be in 2020 what Wisconsin was in 2016 — a state that the Democrats assume is safely in their column but that slips away.

“I am saying every day: We are more vulnerable than you think we are,” said Annette Magnus, the executive director of Battle Born Progress, a liberal group that has struggled to raise money to get out the vote.

Joseph R. Biden Jr. maintains a slight edge over President Trump in the state, according to polling from The New York Times and Siena College: four percentage points, within the poll’s margin of error. But Democrats worry about falling short of the kind of enthusiastic turnout they need among Latinos and working-class voters.

Last week, the Cook Political Report changed its rating of the state from “likely Democrat” to “lean Democrat.” Mr. Trump, who held two rallies in Nevada over the weekend, has indicated he intends to fight for hard to take the state.


Credit…Tony Dejak/Associated Press

A judge in Ohio ruled Tuesday that counties could deploy multiple drop boxes for absentee ballots in November, a victory for Democrats in a traditional battleground state that President Trump won easily in 2016.

Secretary of State Frank LaRose of Ohio, a Republican who supports President Trump, had attempted to limit to one the number of ballot boxes at each county office, leading to a lawsuit from the Ohio Democratic Party, which argued that the practice would disenfranchise voters in the state’s 88 counties.

On Monday, Mr. LaRose moved to block the installation of six drop boxes at libraries in Cuyahoga County, home to Cleveland and a substantial percentage of the state’s Black voters; Tuesday’s decision likely clears the way for their placement.

Drop boxes have become a flash point in battles between Republicans and Democrats in several states because they provide voters with an option for casting absentee ballots without having to rely on mail delivery.

Judge Richard Frye of the Franklin County Common Pleas Court ruled that state law did not preclude the installation of multiple drop boxes per county, and that Mr. LaRose’s order was “arbitrary and unreasonable” in the midst of a pandemic.

Local boards of election are allowed to “tailor ballot drop box locations or conceivably other secure options to the needs of their individual county,” the judge wrote.

It was not immediately clear if Mr. LaRose would appeal.

A similar lawsuit was filed Monday in Iowa, where the League of United Latin American Citizens of Iowa and Majority Forward is challenging state limits on ballot drop box locations.

Guidelines issued this month by Secretary of State Paul D. Pate of Iowa, a Republican, limit drop boxes to locations in county buildings or directly outside of them. The guidance came after one county set up drop boxes at grocery stores, citing their convenience for voters.

Here are the daily schedules of the presidential and vice-presidential candidates for Tuesday, Sept. 15. All times are Eastern time.

Joseph R. Biden Jr.

1:30 p.m.: Hosts a discussion with veterans at Hillsborough Community College in Tampa, Fla.

6:30 p.m.: Attends a Hispanic Heritage Month event in Kissimmee, Fla.

President Trump

10:30 a.m.: Hosts officials from Bahrain and the United Arab Emirates at the White House.

Afternoon: Holds a 90-minute town-hall-style meeting in Philadelphia with uncommitted Pennsylvania voters, to be broadcast at 9 p.m. on ABC News.

Kamala Harris

Afternoon: Meets with emergency service personnel for an assessment of the wildfires in Fresno, Calif.

Evening: Attends a community conversation in Las Vegas on the impact of Covid-19 on working Latino families.

Vice President Mike Pence

5:30 p.m.: Hosts a “Workers for Trump” event in Zanesville, Ohio.

Credit…Erin Schaff/The New York Times

Scientific American has been in circulation since Abraham Lincoln was a humble lawyer in Springfield, Ill. But the magazine had not formally endorsed a presidential candidate until Tuesday, when it urged its readers to vote for Joseph R. Biden Jr. in a scathing editorial that condemned President Trump’s handling of the coronavirus and other science-related issues.

“The pandemic would strain any nation and system, but Trump’s rejection of evidence and public health measures have been catastrophic,” the editorial said, pointing to the president’s misleading statements downplaying the virus’s severity, his early disparagement of mask-wearing, his chastising of governors who declined to reopen businesses in their states and his administration’s well-documented testing failures.

“At every stage, Trump has rejected the unmistakable lesson that controlling the disease, not downplaying it, is the path to economic reopening and recovery,” added the editorial, which was bylined by the magazine’s editors and primarily written by Josh Fischman, a senior editor.

The editorial also criticized other actions taken by the Trump administration, such as repeatedly trying to repeal the Affordable Care Act without submitting an alternative, eliminating regulations designed to protect the environment and proposing drastic cuts in scientific research. It appears in the October issue, which went online Tuesday and will hit subscribers’ mailboxes this week.

The editorial also made an affirmative case for Mr. Trump’s opponent. “Joe Biden, in contrast, comes prepared with plans to control Covid-19, improve health care, reduce carbon emissions and restore the role of legitimate science in policy making,” it said.

Scientific American, founded in 1845 and published by Springer Nature, has opined on political matters before. In the 1950s, the magazine was an outspoken opponent of the hydrogen bomb, prompting the Atomic Energy Commission to censor one issue (and burn 3,000 copies of it). In the 2000s, the editors waded into the stem-cell research debate. And in 2016, they warned of Mr. Trump’s “disregard, if not outright contempt,” for science in an editorial that nonetheless stopped short of explicitly endorsing his opponent, Hillary Clinton.

As the magazine’s editors discussed its election coverage earlier this summer, they determined that the endorsement was necessary, said Laura Helmuth, who became editor in chief in March.

“He’s been so much worse than we warned,” Ms. Helmuth said of Mr. Trump in an interview. “The evidence was there already that he rejected expertise, that he embraced conspiracy theories, that he wasn’t interested in getting the right answers — just interested in projecting his own ideas. And then his administration has been just a disaster for science at every level.

“We could have gone on for pages and pages and pages,” she added.

Ms. Helmuth said the editors strove to make the editorial about President Trump rather than partisanship.

“We never use the world ‘Republican’ or ‘Democrat,’” she said. “We think and hope there are many who voted Republican in the past who this time will reject Trump.”

Credit…Alisha Jucevic for The New York Times

Rush Limbaugh told millions of radio listeners to set aside any suggestion that climate change was the culprit for the frightening spate of wildfires ravaging California and the Pacific Northwest.

“Man-made global warming is not a scientific certainty; it cannot be proven, nor has it ever been,” Mr. Limbaugh declared, disregarding the mountains of empirical evidence to the contrary, before pivoting to a popular right-wing talking point: that policies meant to curtail climate change are, in fact, an assault on freedom.

“Environmentalist wackos” — Mr. Limbaugh’s phrase — “want man to be responsible for it because they want to control your behavior,” the conservative host said on the show, adding they “want to convince you that your lifestyle choices are the reason why all these fires are firing up out on the Left Coast.”

Hours later, that message leapt to prime-time on Fox News, where the host Tucker Carlson said those who blamed the fires on climate change were merely reciting “a partisan talking point.”

Mr. Limbaugh and Mr. Carlson are two of the most prominent commentators in the right-wing media sphere, where a rich history of climate denialism has merged with Trump-era cultural warfare to generate a deep skepticism of the notion that climate change is a factor in the fires devastating the West Coast.

Like President Trump, conservative media stars dismiss climate change — which scientists say is the primary cause of the conflagration — and point to the poor management of forestland by local (and, conveniently, Democratic) officials. Fringe right-wing websites, like The Gateway Pundit, have blamed left-wing arsonists, fueling false rumors that authorities say are impeding rescue efforts.

Credit…Anna Moneymaker for The New York Times

America’s international standing under President Trump is at or near its lowest levels since the dawn of the millennium because of his mishandling of the coronavirus pandemic, the nonpartisan Pew Research Center reported Tuesday as it released a new poll.

Pew, which surveyed residents of 13 industrialized countries on four continents, found that only 15 percent believe that the United States has done a good job combating the virus.

In every country polled, respondents gave much higher marks to their home governments, the World Health Organization and China than to the U.S., despite Mr. Trump’s claims that this country is handling the crisis better than any other and his attempts to shift blame for the outbreak to the W.H.O. and Beijing.

“Since Donald Trump took office as president, the image of the United States has suffered across many regions of the globe,” the report’s authors concluded.

The country’s falling standing accelerates a downward trend that began when Mr. Trump took office in 2017 after campaigning on a platform of “America First” — foreign opinions and alliances be damned.

Before the Trump era, public opinion of the U.S. remained steadily north of 50 percent in most countries — with the exception of the early 2000s, when President George W. Bush waged an unpopular war in Iraq. In the new survey, the U.S.’s median approval rating among the 13 countries was 34 percent.

Opinion of the U.S. are tethered tightly to those about its president. Mr. Trump netted a median approval rating of 16 percent, with a low of 9 percent in Belgium and a high of only 25 percent in Japan.

Those who did admire Mr. Trump had some demographic similarities with those who approve of him at home. “Men, people with less education and those on the right of the ideological spectrum tend to have more confidence in Trump’s handling of world affairs than their counterparts,” the report’s authors wrote.

Pew surveyed 13,273 adults from June 10 to Aug. 3 in Canada, Belgium, Denmark, France, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, Spain, Sweden, the U.K., Australia, Japan and South Korea.

Ad Watch

It is an endless debate in modern politics: Which party will better protect Social Security? A Trump campaign ad airing in Arizona and other states this week uses selective editing to make the case that Joseph R. Biden Jr. “tried to cut Social Security and Medicare for decades.”

The ad shows a clip of Mr. Biden when he was a senator giving a speech in favor of freezing Social Security.

Then, in a message that hews closely to Mr. Trump’s nationalist campaign themes, the ad falsely suggests that, as president, Mr. Biden would take away Social Security from Americans and provide it to undocumented immigrants, as the screen shows grainy footage of men emerging from a hole in the ground beneath a wall.

Unlike many of Mr. Trump’s earlier ads that were purely attacks against Mr. Biden, this ad spends its final third proclaiming that Mr. Trump “is protecting Social Security and Medicare” while headlines from Trump-friendly publications like The New York Post flash across the screen.

During his 36-year Senate career, Mr. Biden supported some actions that would slow or reduce spending on Social Security but also supported others that would protect benefits.

In 1984, he co-sponsored an amendment with two Republican senators that froze for one year nearly all military and domestic spending, including cost-of-living adjustments to Social Security benefits. In 1996, he supported raising the retirement age.

But Mr. Biden’s current plan calls for putting more resources behind both programs while increasing benefits, paid for by higher taxes on the wealthy.

Mr. Biden has also not called for taking away Social Security or Medicare from American citizens to provide it for undocumented immigrants.

Regarding the claim that Mr. Trump is “protecting Social Security,” the financial outlook for both trusts has largely worsened under his watch, partly because of Mr. Trump’s tax law, which is collecting less money from Americans and, in turn, investing less money into each program.

Arizona — where it is part of the campaign’s $926,000 ad buy this week — as well as Michigan, Georgia and Florida.

The Trump campaign has struggled to maintain the president’s support among older voters nationwide, and this ad is a clear attempt to win them back.


The three sleek American fighter jets patriotically swooping over a battlefield in a pro-Trump ad that ran around the Sept. 11 commemoration were, in fact, from Russia.

The five soldiers marching under the planes were Russian too. The whole thing was downloaded from a Shutterstock database of off-the-shelf images accessible for the site’s $29.95 monthly fee.

The Trump Make America Great Again Committee — a joint party-campaign fund-raising group whose donation page is embedded in the Trump-Pence website — ran the photo in a digital ad, urging viewers to “support our troops” on Sept. 8 with a link to send a contribution.

Politico first reported on the origin of the ad, and even managed to track down the artist who created the image, Arthur Zakirov, who said his opus was not only Russia-sourced, but faked.

Mr. Zakirov said he created the composite image five years ago from a model of a MiG-29 — an iconic Soviet fighter from the 1970s — along with models of Russian soldiers set against a backdrop comprising cut-and-paste fragments of sky and land taken from photographs of Greece, France and, inevitably, Russia.

An email to a spokesman for the committee was not immediately returned.

Credit…Pool photo by Erin Schaff

Shortly after the 2018 midterm elections, progressive groups looking at the 2020 Senate map alighted on one state where they had a chance to contest a safely Democratic seat against a centrist incumbent: Delaware.

But a bid to oust Senator Chris Coons never became a cause célèbre on the left. Liberal groups instead focused on House races, where they won key primary victories over veteran congressmen in Chicago, St. Louis and the Bronx.

And today Mr. Coons, a 10-year incumbent, is the clear favorite in a primary against a progressive challenger, Jessica Scarane. A poll found him leading by 40 percentage points, a margin sufficient to dissuade groups from spending money to help Ms. Scarane.

Still, Mr. Coons has used an enormous fund-raising advantage to blanket Delawareans with television ads, spending nearly $800,000, compared with Ms. Scarane’s $65,000. The only third-party organization to devote significant resources to the race has been the American Chemistry Council, which aired more than $200,000 in ads backing Mr. Coons.

Ms. Scarane, who moved to Delaware from New York 10 years ago, does not have the profile of other left-wing upstarts who have toppled incumbent centrist Democrats. Progressive organizations had first sought to recruit a woman of color to support in the race.

In down-ballot Delaware contests, Sarah McBride, a Democratic candidate for an open seat in the State Senate, is on track to become the nation’s highest-ranking openly transgender elected official.

Ms. McBride was the first transgender person to work at the White House when she served as an intern during President Barack Obama’s administration. There are currently four openly transgender elected officials serving in lower chambers of state legislatures in Colorado, New Hampshire and Virginia.

Source link