persuasive speech year 3

Free Printable Persuasive Writing Worksheets for 3rd Year

Persuasive Writing: Discover a collection of free printable Reading & Writing worksheets tailored for Year 3 students. Enhance your lessons with these resources from Quizizz and help students develop their persuasive writing skills.

Explore Persuasive Writing Worksheets by Grades

• kindergarten

Explore Other Subject Worksheets for year 3

• Social studies
• Social emotional
• Foreign language
• Reading & Writing

Explore printable Persuasive Writing worksheets for 3rd Year

Persuasive Writing worksheets for Year 3 are an excellent resource for teachers looking to enhance their students' reading and writing skills. These worksheets focus on developing the art of persuasive writing, which is an essential component of nonfiction writing. By incorporating these engaging and interactive worksheets into their lesson plans, teachers can help their Year 3 students build a strong foundation in reading and writing. These worksheets cover various topics and techniques, such as using strong arguments, supporting evidence, and persuasive language, to help students effectively express their opinions and persuade their readers. With the help of these Persuasive Writing worksheets for Year 3, teachers can create a fun and stimulating learning environment that encourages students to develop their writing skills and become confident communicators.

Quizizz is an excellent platform that offers a wide range of educational resources, including Persuasive Writing worksheets for Year 3, to help teachers create engaging and interactive lessons. This platform not only provides access to high-quality worksheets but also offers various tools and features that can be used to create quizzes, polls, and other interactive activities to supplement the learning experience. By incorporating Quizizz into their teaching strategies, teachers can effectively monitor their students' progress in reading and writing, as well as other subjects. This platform also allows teachers to customize the content to suit the specific needs and learning styles of their Year 3 students. With Quizizz, teachers can create a dynamic and engaging learning environment that fosters the development of essential reading and writing skills in their students.

• PRO Courses Guides New Tech Help Pro Expert Videos About wikiHow Pro Upgrade Sign In
• EDIT Edit this Article
• EXPLORE Tech Help Pro About Us Random Article Quizzes Request a New Article Community Dashboard This Or That Game Popular Categories Arts and Entertainment Artwork Books Movies Computers and Electronics Computers Phone Skills Technology Hacks Health Men's Health Mental Health Women's Health Relationships Dating Love Relationship Issues Hobbies and Crafts Crafts Drawing Games Education & Communication Communication Skills Personal Development Studying Personal Care and Style Fashion Hair Care Personal Hygiene Youth Personal Care School Stuff Dating All Categories Arts and Entertainment Finance and Business Home and Garden Relationship Quizzes Cars & Other Vehicles Food and Entertaining Personal Care and Style Sports and Fitness Computers and Electronics Health Pets and Animals Travel Education & Communication Hobbies and Crafts Philosophy and Religion Work World Family Life Holidays and Traditions Relationships Youth
• Browse Articles
• Learn Something New
• Quizzes Hot
• This Or That Game New
• Train Your Brain
• Explore More
• Support wikiHow
• About wikiHow
• Log in / Sign up
• Education and Communications
• Communication Skills
• Public Speaking
• Speechwriting

How to Write a Persuasive Speech

Last Updated: December 10, 2023 Fact Checked

This article was co-authored by Patrick Muñoz . Patrick is an internationally recognized Voice & Speech Coach, focusing on public speaking, vocal power, accent and dialects, accent reduction, voiceover, acting and speech therapy. He has worked with clients such as Penelope Cruz, Eva Longoria, and Roselyn Sanchez. He was voted LA's Favorite Voice and Dialect Coach by BACKSTAGE, is the voice and speech coach for Disney and Turner Classic Movies, and is a member of Voice and Speech Trainers Association. This article has been fact-checked, ensuring the accuracy of any cited facts and confirming the authority of its sources. This article has been viewed 1,523,969 times.

A persuasive speech is a speech intended to convince the audience to do something. Whether you want to get people to vote, stop littering, or change their minds about an important issue, persuasive speeches are an effective way to sway an audience. There are many elements that go into a successful persuasive speech. But, with some preparation and practice, you can deliver a powerful speech.

Preparing to Write

• Especially if your topic is a controversial one, it's a good idea to know the arguments on all sides of the issue. [1] X Research source Whatever argument you are making, you'll be more persuasive if you can address the views of the opposing side.
• Spend some time reading books or articles about your topic. You can go to the library and ask a librarian for help finding books, or just go online and find some articles. Make sure to use reliable sources, like major news organizations, or academic books or articles.
• Opinion-oriented sources, like editorials, talk radio, or partisan cable news, can be valuable for finding out what other people think about your topic. But, don't rely on them as your only source of information. They can be very biased. If you use them at all, make sure to read a variety of viewpoints on the matter, not just one side.

• For example, if your topic is recycling, it's important to know a lot about recycling. But, your speech will need to reflect exactly what you hope the audience will do. Are you trying to get people to vote in favor of a citywide recycling program? Or are you trying to convince them to sort out their glass and cans and put them in a separate bin? These will be different speeches, so having the goal spelled out early will help you craft your message.

• An audience that knows little about your topic will need more background information and simpler language. An audience made up of experts on the topic would likely find such a simple speech boring.
• Likewise, an audience that already supports your view on a topic will be easier to persuade to take some action. You won't need to convince them you are right, but only that they need to do something. By contrast, an audience that does not agree with you will need persuasion to even consider your point of view.
• For example, imagine you want to convince your audience to support a city-wide recycling program. If they already think recycling is important, you only need to convince them of the value of this specific program. But, if they don't care about recycling or oppose it, you will need to first convince them that recycling is worthwhile.

• Ethos. These are appeals to the audience's ethics or morals. For example: "Recycling is the right thing to do. Wasting our limited resources steals from future generations, which is immoral."
• Pathos. These are appeals to the audience's emotions. For example: "Think of the animals that lose their homes every day because of trees being chopped down. If we recycled more, we could save these beautiful forests."
• Logos. These are appeals to the audiences logic or intellect. For example: "We know that there is a limited supply of natural resources. We can make this supply last longer by recycling."
• You can rely on any one or some combination.

• The number of points you can make to support your position will be determined by how much time you have to speak.
• As a rule of thumb, three to four supporting points is usually a good number. [2] X Research source
• For example, in the speech about recycling, your three main points might be: 1. Recycling saves resources, 2. Recycling reduces the amount of garbage, and 3. Recycling is cost-effective.

Writing your Speech

• An attention grabber. This could be a statement (or sometimes a visual) that gets your audience's attention. It can be a good idea to be a little startling or dramatic at the opening of your speech. For example, you might start with information (or pictures) showing how a nearby landfill is nearly full to capacity.
• A link to the audience. This is a means of showing that you have something in common with the audience. Show that you have a similar background or share an emotional connection of some kind. This will really depend on knowing your audience. For example, if you are a parent, speaking to other parents, you might emphasize the concern for your own children's future. If you share a common interest or ideological position with your audience, you can emphasize that.
• Your credentials. This is a means of showing that you are knowledgeable or an authority on the topic of the speech. Highlight the research you've done on your topic. If you have any personal or professional experience with the topic, be sure to emphasize that, too. In the recycling example, you might say "I've invested many hours studying the recycling issue and the types of programs available in other cities."
• Your goal. Explain to the audience what you hope the speech will accomplish. For example: "I hope by the end of my talk that you will agree that we need a city wide recycling program."
• A road map. Finally, tell the audience what the main points of the speech will be. For example, "I believe we must start a recycling program for these three reasons...."

• Arrange these points logically. Don't jump from one point to the next, and then back again. Instead, complete an argument, then move on to another that flows logically from it. [4] X Research source
• Use credible sources from your research to back the points you are making. Even if your point is more emotional (pathos), introducing some factual information will make your argument stronger. For example "Each year, 40,000 acres of beautiful forests are destroyed to make paper, according to a study from the American Recycling Institute."
• Use real life examples that the audience can relate to. Even an argument based on facts and logic (logos) should relate to the audience's lives and interests. For example: "In these hard economic times, I know many of you are afraid that a recycling program will mean a costly increase in taxes. But, the city of Springfield started a program like this one three years ago. So far they've seen an increase in revenue as a result of the program. Many residents have seen a decrease in their taxes as a result."

• Make sure that you describe opposing views fairly and objectively. Consider whether someone who actually holds that view would approve of the way you are describing their position. If you aren't sure, find someone who thinks that way and ask!
• For example, you would not want to say: "opponents of recycling just don't care if we waste our precious resources, or our money." That's not a fair description of their opinion.
• Instead, you might say: "opponents of recycling are concerned that the cost might be much higher than just using new materials," and then go on to offer an argument about why recycling might be the more cost-effective option.

• Don't just restate, verbatim, what you've already said. Instead, use this as an opportunity to reinforce the way your main points support your call to action. For example: "To sum up, I've shown you (points a, b, and c). These three undeniable facts point to a city-wide recycling program as the most sensible and ethical step we can take in helping create a more sustainable future. Please, join me in voting 'yes' on this program in November."

Delivering your Speech

• Try practicing in front of a mirror, so that you can see how you are delivering the speech. This can help you notice your facial expressions and body language. These can help or hinder your ability to get your message across.
• For example, you might notice you are slouching, or that that you fidget with your collar. These actions suggest to an audience that you aren't confident.
• Better still, record yourself with a video camera and watch the tape afterwards. This can help you see (and hear) where your delivery needs improvement. [5] X Research source It has the benefit of providing audio, and also won't distract you as much as a mirror when you're speaking.
• Once you've practiced on your own a few times, try giving the speech to a small group of friends or family members. Ask for their feedback on your message and delivery.

• Generally speaking, this will mean dressing professionally. But, the degree of formality will vary. A speech to a film club to convince them to show your film won't require the same degree of formality as speaking to the executives of a movie distribution company. For the executives, you would want to wear a suit. For the film club, that might be overdoing it.

• Be friendly and make eye contact with the audience.
• Move around, where appropriate, but don't fidget or pick at your clothes or hair.
• Don't read the speech. It's okay to use a few notes to keep yourself on track, but your speech should be mostly memorized.
• Roll with the punches. If you make a mistake, don't let it derail your whole speech. This might be an opportunity to use a little humor. Then, move on.

• For example, if you want them to contact the mayor, demanding a recycling program, don't just ask them to do it. Give them stamped, addressed envelopes to send a letter, or cards with the mayor's phone number and email address. If you do this, many more people are likely to follow through.

Patrick Muñoz

Speak from your heart and connect with your audience. Look them in the eyes and really talk to them. Make sure you're comfortable delivering your speech and that you use a warm, confident tone.

Sample Template

Community Q&A

• Look around at the audience, making eye contact, especially during pauses in your speech. If you're feeling nervous about this, pick out a single person in the audience and pretend you are speaking only to them. After a little while, pick someone else, and repeat. [6] X Research source Thanks Helpful 0 Not Helpful 0
• Speak forward, projecting your voice toward the audience with confidence. Do not speak down toward the floor. Thanks Helpful 0 Not Helpful 0
• Try to cite sources for statistics and use credible, non-biased sources. Thanks Helpful 0 Not Helpful 0

• Avoid being confrontational, when possible. Don't be sarcastic or mocking when discussing viewpoints other than your own. This can be alienating to your audience, even those who may agree with you. Thanks Helpful 55 Not Helpful 17
• Don't be pompous or arrogant during your speech. Be humble, and be open to questions, suggestions, and feedback. Thanks Helpful 1 Not Helpful 1

You Might Also Like

• ↑ http://grammar.yourdictionary.com/style-and-usage/steps-for-writing-a-persuasive-speech.html
• ↑ http://www.best-speech-topics.com/writing-a-persuasive-speech.html
• ↑ https://www.speechanddebate.org/wp-content/uploads/Tips-for-Writing-a-Persuasive-Speech.pdf
• ↑ https://www.comm.pitt.edu/structuring-speech
• ↑ https://www.leonardoenglish.com/blog/recording-yourself-in-english
• ↑ https://www.zenbusiness.com/blog/eyecontact/

About This Article

To write a persuasive speech, start with a strong opening that will make your reader want to pay attention, including an attention grabber, your credentials, the essay's goal, and a road map for the essay. Next, offer persuasive evidence or reasons why the reader should support your viewpoint. Arrange these points logically, use credible sources, and employ some real life examples. Additionally, address counter-arguments to show that you’re looking at the topic from all sides. Finally, conclude by clearly letting the audience know how to put your ideas into action. To learn how to involve your audience when you deliver your speech, keep reading. Did this summary help you? Yes No

• Send fan mail to authors

Reader Success Stories

Evan Murphree

Feb 8, 2022

Did this article help you?

Dianka Pradhan

Jun 28, 2019

Brittany Grech

Mar 27, 2017

Mavis Agyeiwaa Kyei

Oct 27, 2020

Jun 5, 2017

Featured Articles

Trending Articles

Watch Articles

• Terms of Use
• Privacy Policy
• Do Not Sell or Share My Info
• Not Selling Info

wikiHow Tech Help Pro:

Develop the tech skills you need for work and life

How to Write and Structure a Persuasive Speech

• Homework Tips
• Learning Styles & Skills
• Study Methods
• Time Management
• Private School
• College Admissions
• College Life
• Graduate School
• Business School
• Distance Learning
• M.Ed., Education Administration, University of Georgia
• B.A., History, Armstrong State University

The purpose of a persuasive speech is to convince your audience to agree with an idea or opinion that you present. First, you'll need to choose a side on a controversial topic, then you will write a speech to explain your position, and convince the audience to agree with you.

You can produce an effective persuasive speech if you structure your argument as a solution to a problem. Your first job as a speaker is to convince your audience that a particular problem is important to them, and then you must convince them that you have the solution to make things better.

Note: You don't have to address a real problem. Any need can work as the problem. For example, you could consider the lack of a pet, the need to wash one's hands, or the need to pick a particular sport to play as the "problem."

As an example, let's imagine that you have chosen "Getting Up Early" as your persuasion topic. Your goal will be to persuade classmates to get themselves out of bed an hour earlier every morning. In this instance, the problem could be summed up as "morning chaos."

A standard speech format has an introduction with a great hook statement, three main points, and a summary. Your persuasive speech will be a tailored version of this format.

Before you write the text of your speech, you should sketch an outline that includes your hook statement and three main points.

Writing the Text

The introduction of your speech must be compelling because your audience will make up their minds within a few minutes whether or not they are interested in your topic.

Before you write the full body you should come up with a greeting. Your greeting can be as simple as "Good morning everyone. My name is Frank."

After your greeting, you will offer a hook to capture attention. A hook sentence for the "morning chaos" speech could be a question:

• How many times have you been late for school?
• Does your day begin with shouts and arguments?
• Have you ever missed the bus?

Or your hook could be a statistic or surprising statement:

• More than 50 percent of high school students skip breakfast because they just don't have time to eat.
• Tardy kids drop out of school more often than punctual kids.

Once you have the attention of your audience, follow through to define the topic/problem and introduce your solution. Here's an example of what you might have so far:

Good afternoon, class. Some of you know me, but some of you may not. My name is Frank Godfrey, and I have a question for you. Does your day begin with shouts and arguments? Do you go to school in a bad mood because you've been yelled at, or because you argued with your parent? The chaos you experience in the morning can bring you down and affect your performance at school.

Add the solution:

You can improve your mood and your school performance by adding more time to your morning schedule. You can accomplish this by setting your alarm clock to go off one hour earlier.

Your next task will be to write the body, which will contain the three main points you've come up with to argue your position. Each point will be followed by supporting evidence or anecdotes, and each body paragraph will need to end with a transition statement that leads to the next segment. Here is a sample of three main statements:

• Bad moods caused by morning chaos will affect your workday performance.
• If you skip breakfast to buy time, you're making a harmful health decision.
• (Ending on a cheerful note) You'll enjoy a boost to your self-esteem when you reduce the morning chaos.

After you write three body paragraphs with strong transition statements that make your speech flow, you are ready to work on your summary.

Your summary will re-emphasize your argument and restate your points in slightly different language. This can be a little tricky. You don't want to sound repetitive but will need to repeat what you have said. Find a way to reword the same main points.

Finally, you must make sure to write a clear final sentence or passage to keep yourself from stammering at the end or fading off in an awkward moment. A few examples of graceful exits:

• We all like to sleep. It's hard to get up some mornings, but rest assured that the reward is well worth the effort.
• If you follow these guidelines and make the effort to get up a little bit earlier every day, you'll reap rewards in your home life and on your report card.

Tips for Writing Your Speech

• Don't be confrontational in your argument. You don't need to put down the other side; just convince your audience that your position is correct by using positive assertions.
• Use simple statistics. Don't overwhelm your audience with confusing numbers.
• Don't complicate your speech by going outside the standard "three points" format. While it might seem simplistic, it is a tried and true method for presenting to an audience who is listening as opposed to reading.
• How to Write a Persuasive Essay
• 5 Tips on How to Write a Speech Essay
• Tips on How to Write an Argumentative Essay
• Writing an Opinion Essay
• How To Write an Essay
• 5 Steps to Writing a Position Paper
• How to Structure an Essay
• Ethos, Logos, Pathos for Persuasion
• What Is Expository Writing?
• Audience Analysis in Speech and Composition
• Definition and Examples of Analysis in Composition
• 100 Persuasive Speech Topics for Students
• What an Essay Is and How to Write One
• How to Write a Good Thesis Statement
• How to Write a Graduation Speech as Valedictorian
• How to Write a Letter of Complaint

Improve your practice.

Enhance your soft skills with a range of award-winning courses.

75 Persuasive Speech Topics and Ideas

October 4, 2018 - Gini Beqiri

To write a captivating and persuasive speech you must first decide on a topic that will engage, inform and also persuade the audience. We have discussed how to choose a topic and we have provided a list of speech ideas covering a wide range of categories.

What is persuasive speech?

The aim of a persuasive speech is to inform, educate and convince or motivate an audience to do something. You are essentially trying to sway the audience to adopt your own viewpoint.

The best persuasive speech topics are thought-provoking, daring and have a clear opinion. You should speak about something you are knowledgeable about and can argue your opinion for, as well as objectively discuss counter-arguments.

How to choose a topic for your speech

It’s not easy picking a topic for your speech as there are many options so consider the following factors when deciding.

Familiarity

Topics that you’re familiar with will make it easier to prepare for the speech.

It’s best if you decide on a topic in which you have a genuine interest in because you’ll be doing lots of research on it and if it’s something you enjoy the process will be significantly easier and more enjoyable. The audience will also see this enthusiasm when you’re presenting which will make the speech more persuasive.

The audience’s interest

The audience must care about the topic. You don’t want to lose their attention so choose something you think they’ll be interested in hearing about.

Consider choosing a topic that allows you to be more descriptive because this allows the audience to visualize which consequently helps persuade them.

Not overdone

When people have heard about a topic repeatedly they’re less likely to listen to you as it doesn’t interest them anymore. Avoid cliché or overdone topics as it’s difficult to maintain your audience’s attention because they feel like they’ve heard it all before.

An exception to this would be if you had new viewpoints or new facts to share. If this is the case then ensure you clarify early in your speech that you have unique views or information on the topic.

Emotional topics

Emotions are motivators so the audience is more likely to be persuaded and act on your requests if you present an emotional topic.

People like hearing about issues that affect them or their community, country etc. They find these topics more relatable which means they find them more interesting. Look at local issues and news to discover these topics.

Desired outcome

What do you want your audience to do as a result of your speech? Use this as a guide to choosing your topic, for example, maybe you want people to recycle more so you present a speech on the effect of microplastics in the ocean.

Persuasive speech topics

Lots of timely persuasive topics can be found using social media, the radio, TV and newspapers. We have compiled a list of 75 persuasive speech topic ideas covering a wide range of categories.

Some of the topics also fall into other categories and we have posed the topics as questions so they can be easily adapted into statements to suit your own viewpoint.

• Should pets be adopted rather than bought from a breeder?
• Should wild animals be tamed?
• Should people be allowed to own exotic animals like monkeys?
• Should all zoos and aquariums be closed?

Arts/Culture

• Should art and music therapy be covered by health insurance?
• Should graffiti be considered art?
• Should all students be required to learn an instrument in school?
• Should automobile drivers be required to take a test every three years?
• Are sports cars dangerous?
• Should bicycles share the roads with cars?
• Should bicycle riders be required by law to always wear helmets?

Business and economy

• Do introverts make great leaders?
• Does owning a business leave you feeling isolated?
• What is to blame for the rise in energy prices?
• Does hiring cheaper foreign employees hurt the economy?
• Should interns be paid for their work?
• Should employees receive bonuses for walking or biking to work?
• Should tipping in restaurants be mandatory?
• Should boys and girls should be taught in separate classrooms?
• Should schools include meditation breaks during the day?
• Should students be allowed to have their mobile phones with them during school?
• Should teachers have to pass a test every decade to renew their certifications?
• Should online teaching be given equal importance as the regular form of teaching?
• Is higher education over-rated?
• What are the best ways to stop bullying?
• Should people with more than one DUI lose their drivers’ licenses?
• Should prostitution be legalised?
• Should guns be illegal in the US?
• Should cannabis be legalised for medical reasons?
• Is equality a myth?
• Does what is “right” and “wrong” change from generation to generation?
• Is there never a good enough reason to declare war?
• Should governments tax sugary drinks and use the revenue for public health?
• Has cosmetic surgery risen to a level that exceeds good sense?
• Is the fast-food industry legally accountable for obesity?
• Should school cafeterias only offer healthy food options?
• Is acupuncture a valid medical technique?
• Should assisted suicide be legal?
• Does consuming meat affect health?
• Is dieting a good way to lose weight?

Law and politics

• Should voting be made compulsory?
• Should the President (or similar position) be allowed to serve more than two terms?
• Would poverty reduce by fixing housing?
• Should drug addicts be sent for treatment in hospitals instead of prisons?
• Would it be fair for the government to detain suspected terrorists without proper trial?
• Is torture acceptable when used for national security?
• Should celebrities who break the law receive stiffer penalties?
• Should the government completely ban all cigarettes and tobacco products
• Is it wrong for the media to promote a certain beauty standard?
• Is the media responsible for the moral degradation of teenagers?
• Should advertising be aimed at children?
• Has freedom of press gone too far?
• Should prayer be allowed in public schools?
• Does religion have a place in government?
• How do cults differ from religion?

Science and the environment

• Should recycling be mandatory?
• Should genetically modified foods be sold in supermarkets?
• Should parents be allowed to choose the sex of their unborn children?
• Should selling plastic bags be completely banned in shops?
• Should smoking in public places be banned?
• Should professional female athletes be paid the same as male athletes in the same sport?
• Should doping be allowed in professional sports?
• Should schools be required to teach all students how to swim?
• How does parental pressure affect young athletes?
• Will technology reduce or increase human employment opportunities?
• What age should children be allowed to have mobile phones?
• Should libraries be replaced with unlimited access to e-books?
• Should we recognize Bitcoin as a legal currency?
• Should bloggers and vloggers be treated as journalists and punished for indiscretions?
• Has technology helped connect people or isolate them?
• Should mobile phone use in public places be regulated?
• Do violent video games make people more violent?

World peace

• What is the safest country in the world?
• Is planetary nuclear disarmament possible?
• Is the idea of peace on earth naive?

These topics are just suggestions so you need to assess whether they would be suitable for your particular audience. You can easily adapt the topics to suit your interests and audience, for example, you could substitute “meat” in the topic “Does consuming meat affect health?” for many possibilities, such as “processed foods”, “mainly vegan food”, “dairy” and so on.

After choosing your topic

After you’ve chosen your topic it’s important to do the following:

• Research thoroughly
• Think about all of the different viewpoints
• Tailor to your audience – discussing your topic with others is a helpful way to gain an understanding of your audience.
• How involved are you with this topic – are you a key character?
• Have you contributed to this area, perhaps through blogs, books, papers and products.
• How qualified are you to speak on this topic?
• Do you have personal experience in it? How many years?
• How long have you been interested in the area?

While it may be difficult to choose from such a variety of persuasive speech topics, think about which of the above you have the most knowledge of and can argue your opinion on.

For advice about how to deliver your persuasive speech, check out our blog  Persuasive Speech Outline and Ideas .

The Point Conversations and insights about the moment.

• Share full article

Frank Bruni

Contributing Opinion Writer

Democrats Don’t Need to Calm Down

Democratic operatives and pundits of all stripes are undeniably obsessed with President Biden’s low poll numbers, to a degree that disregards the length of time between now and Election Day, ignores the polling failures of recent years and erases the Democratic Party’s strong performance in the 2022 midterms and in several key state referendums and contests since.

But when the nightmare before you is a second Trump term, how can you not wet the bed?

Forgive my potty mouth, but the “world of Democratic bed-wetters” was the subject of an article in The Times on Wednesday by Adam Nagourney. He interviewed Simon Rosenberg, a Democratic strategist and consultant who rightly predicted that Democrats would defy the doomsayers two years ago, confidently forecasts a Biden triumph in November and scoffs at the party’s apocalyptic histrionics. Can’t we all just calm down a bit?

No, we can’t.

While I share the concern that excessive negativity could become a self-fulfilling prophecy, projecting weakness and prompting surrender instead of a vigorous victory effort, I also recognize that panic is inevitable — and wholly warranted — when the stakes are this huge.

Donald Trump isn’t just any old major-party nominee. He isn’t even the Trump of 2016 or 2020. This time around, his autocratic aspirations are more operatic, his contempt for democratic process more firmly established and his threat to a sane and civilized American future more obvious. I’d be shocked if my inbox wasn’t lousy with emails from friends freaking out about the latest battleground-state surveys. I’d check to see if those friends were still breathing.

But Rosenberg is right to question measures of Biden’s weakness, because such measures have never been this questionable. Trump’s extreme divergence from political norms suggests that normal assessments don’t suffice — or even apply.

Right now, more than six months before ballots are cast, voting for Trump remains somewhat of an abstraction: There’s no great weight to telling a pollster that you’ll do that. But when the time actually comes? When you reckon fully with the endorsement and election of someone who has said all that he has said, done all that he has done and equates himself with Jesus Christ while doing a better impersonation of Lucifer?

There’s no predicting that moment of decision, and as Rosenberg sagely notes, there’s still ample cause for hope.

Katherine Miller

Opinion Writer and Editor

It’s Not Surprising That No Labels Could Never Find a Candidate

No Labels won’t be running a bipartisan unity ticket, the group finally said on Thursday. It’s not a huge surprise, given how many prospective candidates it approached are reported to have said no in the last few months, among them Joe Manchin, Larry Hogan, Nikki Haley, Chris Christie and at least one retired admiral.

It’s also not surprising given the weirdness of No Labels as an entity. Formed in response to the Tea Party era, the group has floated and abandoned various projects over the years, and often is attached to a corporate-friendly attempt at “bipartisan problem solving” that makes sense in Washington and isn’t popular elsewhere.

In recent weeks, Tom Davis, the former Republican congressman from Virginia who is a founder of No Labels, was talking about the possibility of a No Labels candidate winning a few states and forcing a contingent election, in which the House would decide the victor through a system not used since the 19th century. The prospect of a contingent election is a good example of the weirdness and risk of this overall project — most people would hear about that idea and worry!

But the one thing No Labels can be credited with here is realizing, early, the extent of the electorate’s unhappiness with Joe Biden and Donald Trump, and the abstract potential for a third-party candidate who drew real numbers of voters. Robert Kennedy Jr.’s candidacy, despite or because of its chaotic weirdness, keeps reaching double-digit numbers in polling. It’s still not clear if he will pull more from Biden or Trump should he make the ballot this year, as my colleague Michelle Goldberg wrote today.

Why did all these people say no to No Labels? A few of them have publicly given reasons (Haley said she was a committed Republican), and politicians can be averse to anything that might diminish their own popularity. But right now, a third-party candidacy by Haley, for example, doesn’t sound totally absurd.

So there’s also the chance that people weren’t interested in running because the odds for it to not be a total bust seemed a little too real right now — that running might peel off double-digit numbers from a major candidate, or even win a handful of states, and throw the country into something like a contingent election — and bring about unpredictable chaos.

Advertisement

Nicholas Kristof

Opinion Columnist

Will Israel Finally Listen to Biden?

President Biden threatened on Thursday to condition aid to Israel on its treatment of civilians in Gaza. But it’s not clear that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel will take Biden’s threats seriously — or that he needs to.

Biden’s warning reflected American anxiety about the catastrophic humanitarian toll in Gaza. He is under growing pressure from senators, the public and reportedly even his own wife to do more to ease the crisis — but he has consistently been reluctant to do more than ask Netanyahu for better behavior.

Even on the same day that Israel killed seven aid workers with World Central Kitchen, the Biden administration approved a major new shipment of bombs and other weapons to Israel, The Washington Post reported .

Biden has long been a staunch supporter of Israel. He belongs to a generation for which the Holocaust was a living memory and saw Israel in its days as a fragile young nation besieged by strong neighbors. He has seemed unwilling to use American leverage against Israel by slowing or stopping weapons transfers, imposing end-use restrictions on those weapons or allowing tough resolutions through the U.N. Security Council.

The Biden administration did allow one Gaza resolution to go through, after vetoing three previous ones . But it then deflected questions about whether it would oblige Israel to comply by saying that the resolution was nonbinding anyway (others disagreed).

Before Biden’s latest threat, the White House position seemed pretty clear that the pipeline for weapons to Israel would continue, and there was nothing specific to indicate that there was some new red line.

“We make no bones about the fact that we have certain issues about some of the way things are being done,” a White House spokesman, John Kirby, said Wednesday. “We also make no bones about the fact that Israel is going to continue to have American support for the fight that they’re in to eliminate the threat from Hamas.”

Jesse Wegman

Editorial Board Member

Jack Smith Finally Loses His Patience

This article has been updated to include Judge Cannon’s ruling on Thursday afternoon.

If there is a more justifiably frustrated man in America right now than Jack Smith, the federal special prosecutor on the Donald Trump cases, I’d like to meet him.

Placed in the extraordinarily delicate position of investigating Trump for potential crimes, Smith has done everything right, bringing two tightly focused indictments against the former president last year. By now, both trials should have been well underway. Neither is anywhere close.

This week Smith finally lost his patience with Aileen Cannon, the novice federal judge handling the case that involves Trump’s illegal retention of highly classified national security documents. In a bizarre order last month, Cannon called on both parties to submit proposed jury instructions, something that normally happens just before a trial starts. In the order, she also seemed not to understand either the facts of the case or the federal law governing presidential records.

In a brief filed on Tuesday , Smith said the order was based on a “fundamentally flawed legal premise,” which is the polite way lawyers ask, “Are you really this dumb?” On top of that, Smith pointed out, Trump’s argument for why the documents belong to him — essentially, that by taking them from the White House to Mar-a-Lago, he magically converted them into his property — “is not based on any facts” but “was concocted more than a year after he left the White House.”

If Cannon refuses to budge, Smith warned, he would appeal her order to the Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit, which already smacked down an earlier mistake of hers in humiliating fashion. In an order issued Thursday afternoon , Cannon pushed back against Smith’s criticism, saying she was simply trying to understand each side’s position. She also rejected Trump’s interpretation of the presidential records law and refused his demand to dismiss the case.

This should have been a slam-dunk case — there is a clear federal law, and Trump brazenly and willfully broke it — but Cannon has turned the litigation into a circus with one deeply strange, legally preposterous decision after another, many of which have benefited Trump.

Those looking for conspiracies have widely noted that Cannon is a Trump appointee, but that’s a red herring; other Trump appointees had no problem ruling against him in his frivolous litigation over the 2020 election. Whatever Cannon’s motives, the best argument against her is that she is incompetent.

Smith has shown a superhuman level of patience up to this point. It’s time for him to give up the charade and ask the 11th Circuit to remove her from the case and replace her with a judge who understands the job.

Jessica Grose

Opinion Writer

What Teachers Have to Say About the Great American Teacher Crisis

In September I wrote about the great American teacher crisis . The pipeline for teachers is drying up because college students no longer find the profession appealing . It makes sense. Teachers’ job satisfaction is at a 50-year nadir. In many states, teachers receive subpar pay, can’t hold students accountable for failures and feel a palpable lack of respect for their work. A new survey of over 2,000 public K-12 teachers, released on Thursday by the Pew Research Center, echoes what I heard from educators and experts last year: American teachers are deeply unhappy with nearly every aspect of their job.

In a summary of its survey, Pew wrote, “Public K-12 teachers are stressed about their jobs, and few are optimistic about the future of education; many say poverty, absenteeism and mental health are major problems at their school.” Compared with the average American worker, teachers said they were “much less satisfied,” and a staggering 77 percent described their jobs as “frequently stressful.”

Nearly half of American teachers said that “the behavior of most students at their school is fair or poor,” and it doesn’t feel like a leap to make the connection between student misbehavior and the high level of teacher stress. Unsurprisingly, while “teachers in high-poverty schools have a much more negative outlook,” teachers writ large are pretty miserable, Pew notes. The most alarming finding is that 68 percent of teachers said that “they’ve experienced verbal abuse from a student — such as being yelled at or threatened.”

Teachers are being asked to solve major social problems — poverty and mental health issues — that they are not equipped to fix. They are trained as educators, not as psychologists or social workers, and they cannot be expected to mend all of America’s ills.

This country can’t afford to have the public school system buckle under the weight of other failures. There is a lack of structural and material support for children and their mothers (especially before their children are born). Until we improve the lives of American families, America’s teachers will be left to pick up the pieces.

Michelle Cottle

Nebraska’s Plan to Change Its Electoral Rules on Trump’s Behalf

Say this for the Trump era: It continues to provide real-world civics lessons on some of the more obscure elements of our electoral system. Just think of all the Americans who know way more today than they did four years ago about voter access laws, slates of electors, the role of state secretaries of state, the vote certification process, the Electoral Count Act … I mean, what better way to teach people the importance of election integrity than to have a defeated president undermine it?

Think of it as a Machiavellian “ Schoolhouse Rock ” for our troubled times.

This is not to suggest that the Republicans’ electoral maneuverings are all shady. Sometimes they’re just cynical and self-serving but not really shady.

Take what’s going on in Nebraska . Raise your hand if you knew that Nebraska is one of only two states that do not award electoral votes on a winner-take-all basis. (Ten bonus points if you can name the other one without clicking the link in the previous sentence.) In most states, the presidential candidate who wins the popular vote gets all the electoral votes. But Nebraska divvies up its five electoral votes: Two go to the winner of the overall popular vote and one to the winner in each of its three congressional districts. Since being put in place for the 1992 election, the system has, on a couple of occasions — including in 2020 — resulted in the Democratic candidate winning an electoral vote from the district containing Omaha.

Republicans don’t much like it when that happens in this otherwise red state and have long been agitating to go back to the winner-take-all system. This year a bill to this effect was bumping around the State Legislature largely ignored until Tuesday, when the MAGA activist Charlie Kirk urged his followers to call Nebraska’s governor, Jim Pillen, in support of the change on Donald Trump’s behalf.

Several hours later, Pillen issued a statement in praise of the proposal.

Not long after that, the MAGA king himself entered the fray, voicing his support on Truth Social .

And just like that, the political world began buzzing about the issue, noting that in a close race, that one little electoral vote could make all the difference.

Can Republicans push through the change before the legislative session ends on April 18? It could be a heavy lift, as Democratic lawmakers there get out their own civics books and gear up to block the bill.

Farah Stockman

The Coming Anarchy in Gaza

If you want to make a place truly unlivable, you don’t just bomb it and starve it. You also go after the human infrastructure — the people who can keep order, get things running after setbacks and nurture hope.

I don’t want to believe that Israel is systematically targeting the human infrastructure of Gaza, but the repeated attacks on aid workers who have reported their locations to the Israeli military make it impossible not to wonder what exactly Israel is doing. There’s a pattern here, and Israel owes the world a better explanation.

The deadly attack on the World Central Kitchen aid convoy, which Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel called a tragic mistake, came after the March 8 death of Mousa Shawwa, the head of logistics for American Near East Refugee Aid, known as Anera, an aid group that has operated in Gaza for 56 years. Shawwa was killed in an airstrike just days after the Israeli military confirmed the coordinates of the organization’s warehouses and safe houses.

On Feb. 5, the Israeli military fired on a U.N. aid convoy trying to make a delivery, stopping it in its tracks, according to Philippe Lazzarini, the head of the United Nations Relief and Works Agency, even though its movements were coordinated with the Israeli military. Israel has accused the group, which operated as a de facto government, of sympathizing with Hamas, which the group denies.

The question of which institutions can keep Gaza from descending into chaos needs an immediate answer. Private aid groups like Anera appear to be the last thread keeping Gaza from falling apart; now Anera, World Central Kitchen and other groups are suspending their work.

Without food aid or any institution capable of keeping order, what will happen to two million Gazans? Once the human infrastructure of a place is gone, that place risks sinking into chaos.

One right-wing Israeli, Daniella Weiss , a settler leader, predicted that if Gazans got no humanitarian aid , other countries would take pity on them and allow them in as refugees, leaving Gaza for Israelis to resettle. That would be a crime against humanity, and I hope it’s not the playbook that Israel is using.

Kristen Cruzata

Opinion Chief of Staff

This Basketball Season, Root for the Women

One chilly evening late last month, I visited my favorite bar in Bloomington, Ind., my hometown, and the conversation turned to March Madness. Hoosiers always love college basketball, but this year everyone wanted to talk about the women: Sara Scalia of Indiana University, Angel Reese of L.S.U. and, yes, Caitlin Clark of Iowa. In Indiana, as in much of the country, fans are showing up for women’s basketball, and — crucially — they’re buying tickets.

I saw it myself just a few days earlier. I was in the stands at Simon Skjodt Assembly Hall as the Hoosiers beat Oklahoma and won their place in the Sweet Sixteen. As the players rushed the student section after the game, locals and students alike hung back to watch them revel. Though the architects of Title IX, Representative Patsy Mink and Senator Birch Bayh, are no longer around to see it, I can imagine this is exactly what they were hoping for when President Richard Nixon signed the law in 1972. But good policy takes time.

It’s thanks to Title IX that the entire country is now talking about Caitlin Clark, who deserves her obsessive following. Clark is a fantastic shooter , a disciplined player and a fierce competitor. She’s the all-time leading scorer in Division I history, men or women. And she’s not afraid to act like it . She’s very likely going to be the first pick at the W.N.B.A.’s draft on April 15. And there’s a good chance that she’ll end up playing for the Indiana Fever.

My hope is that wherever Clark ends up, her star power fuels the W.N.B.A. There’s already an indication that “ Clarkenomics ” — her unique ability to fill stadiums and even raise ticket prices — is real. She definitely sold out stadiums when Iowa was on the road.

Women’s basketball deserves devoted fans, and more of them. Professional women’s basketball is ripe for the groundswell that has come for the college teams. Whether I’m watching the Fever take on the Liberty at Barclays Center later this spring or sipping beers at a local dive with the game on TV, I’ll be cheering on the women. That’s where the real fun and, yes, drama is happening this year.

Ross Douthat

Scotland’s Censorship Experiment Threatens Free Expression

In 2002, the English journalist Ed West penned an essay entitled “Britain Isn’t a Free Country.” His evidence was straightforward: Through the aggressive enforcement of laws against hate speech, Britain was harassing, investigating and sometimes imprisoning its own citizens, effectively consigning the right to free expression to the dustbin of history.

West’s list of examples, which included some cases involving deeply unsympathetic racists and others that looked more like the criminalization of cultural conservatism, is worth revisiting now that Scotland has passed an especially expansive hate speech statute.

The new Scottish law criminalizes public speech deemed “insulting” to a protected group (as opposed to the higher bar of “abusive”), and prosecutors need only prove that the speech was “likely” to encourage hatred rather than being explicitly intended to do so. One can offer a defense based on the speech in question being “reasonable,” and there is a nod to “the importance of the right to freedom of expression.” But a plain reading of the law seems like it could license prosecutions for a comedian’s monologue or for reading biblical passages on sexual morality in public.

The law has attracted special attention because J.K. Rowling responded to its passage with a series of social media posts about transgender individuals that seemed to fall afoul of the law’s dictates. If they do, she wrote, “I look forward to being arrested when I return to the birthplace of the Scottish Enlightenment.”

My prediction is that neither Rowling nor any figure of her prominence will face prosecution. Rather, what you see in West’s examples is that the speech police prefer more obscure targets: the teenage girl prosecuted for posting rap lyrics that included the N-word or the local Tory official hauled in by the cops after posting to criticize the arrest of a Christian street preacher.

Which is, of course, a normal way for mild sorts of authoritarianism to work. Exceptions are made for prominent figures, lest the system look ridiculous, but ordinary people are taught not to cross the line.

Europe is often depicted as caught between an embattled liberal order and a post-liberal form of populism. But the reality is that there are two incipient European post-liberalisms, both responses to the challenges of managing aging, anxious societies being transformed by mass migration. One is the right-wing politics of national identity; the other is a more technocratic attempt to maintain social peace through a regime of censorship.

Scotland is experimenting with the second option. Both could usher out the liberal age as we have known it.

Lydia Polgreen

Ramy Youssef’s ‘S.N.L.’ Monologue Was a Love Letter to Muslim America

It is a rare thing in our rapidly secularizing country to be confronted with piety and devotion in popular culture. So it was a surprise, and a balm, to watch a man who prays daily and talks openly about his devout faith storm a bastion of earthly godlessness: “Saturday Night Live.”

I am referring, of course, to the comedian Ramy Youssef, who hosted the show on what he described in his opening monologue as “an incredibly spiritual weekend,” noting Ramadan, Easter and the arrival of a new Beyoncé album.

“I’m doing the Ramadan one,” he quipped, to peals of laughter, unspooling a very funny bit about how loving Muslims are. Youssef has mined his experience as a believer among the profane in gentle standup specials and a namesake sitcom. His entire monologue glowed with a welcoming warmth — Muslims, he seemed to say: We’re just like you.

In a country that is supposedly obsessed with diversity and inclusion, it is remarkable how rare it is to hear from a practicing Muslim in America.

Surveys by the Institute for Policy and Understanding, a nonpartisan research organization focused on Muslim Americans, have consistently found that Muslims are the most likely group to report religious discrimination in the United States. According to a Pew survey conducted in 2021, 78 percent of Americans said that there was either a lot or some discrimination against Muslims in our society. Muslims are no more likely to commit crimes than members of any other group, but crimes in which Muslims are suspects get outsized media coverage, research has shown .

It is no surprise, then, that Islamophobia is perhaps the most tolerated form of religious prejudice. Right now, Senate Republicans appear to have persuaded several Senate Democrats to vote against a Muslim judicial nominee after smearing him, with no evidence at all, as an antisemite.

Many of the skits that toyed with religion on “S.N.L.” on Saturday were funny — Ozempic for Ramadan! Genius. But part of me winced through them as well, because I saw in Youssef something that other members of minority groups have had to do to “earn” their place in the safety of the mainstream: the performance of normalcy, of being nonthreatening and sweet, the requirement to prove that your community belongs in America just like everyone else’s.

I loved Youssef’s monologue, in which he bravely pleaded, “Please, free the people of Palestine. And please, free the hostages. All of the hostages.”

“I am out of ideas,” Youssef declared toward the end of his monologue. “All I have is prayers.”

To which this nonbeliever can only say: Same, Ramy. Same.

Israel’s Attack on Aid Workers Can Only Make Hunger in Gaza Worse

The Israeli strikes that killed seven aid workers overnight as they tried to avert famine in Gaza will be much debated, but three points seem clear to me.

First, the killings reinforce the widespread criticism that Israeli forces often appear to act recklessly in Gaza, with too little concern for civilian casualties. The latest deaths were unusual in that they included foreigners, even an American, but there is nothing new about Israeli strikes killing aid workers in Gaza: At least 196 humanitarian workers have been killed in Gaza and the West Bank since the war began in October, the United Nations says.

Second, the tragedy will compound the hunger crisis in Gaza that is already leading to deaths from starvation and risking both famine and epidemics. The result is that just as famine looms and children are dying, international efforts to ease it may be reduced, not amplified.

Third, Israeli credibility will take another hit, and America’s with it. Some elements of the Israeli narrative are entirely accurate: Hamas started the latest round of fighting and uses civilians as human shields. But Israel also argues that it is doing everything possible to reduce civilian casualties, and that is hard to argue in this case — and this is also an embarrassment for the Biden administration, which provides an endless flow of weaponry for airstrikes like these (although the origin of the particular weapons that killed these seven workers is unclear for now).

The seven people worked with World Central Kitchen, a charity founded by chef José Andrés, and were in clearly marked vehicles . The nonprofit group, which has now suspended its aid efforts in Gaza, said that it had cleared its movements with Israeli forces, and The Financial Times reported that the vehicles were hit over a two-kilometer stretch, implying targeting by multiple strikes rather than a single errant missile. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel has promised an investigation.

The killing of humanitarians puts aid groups in an impossible situation. The organizations focus on easing suffering, yet they also must look after the safety of their own people. If Israel continues to kill aid workers at such a pace, it will be very difficult to distribute aid to the people who need it.

And increasingly, it may be essential to have trained aid workers to provide special emergency foods to children with severe acute malnutrition. All that is now uncertain.

The Biden administration is issuing tougher statements about the situation, but President Biden still seems unwilling to use his leverage to press Israel to ease up. Politico reported on Monday that the U.S. government is considering a major new weapons sale to Israel.

An Abortion Rights Vote May Not Be Enough for Biden in Florida

Just when you thought it was safe to ignore Florida politics, up pops the state Supreme Court with an abortion-rights decision seemingly designed to provoke electoral turmoil this year.

The court allowed a six-week abortion ban to go into effect while ruling that Floridians can vote in November on a state constitutional amendment to protect abortion access before fetal viability (around 24 weeks). The combined rulings immediately shoved reproductive rights to the political front lines. But how will things shake out in this increasingly red state ? And not to make everything about the presidential race, but how much could it help President Biden?

The issue of reproductive rights has been a boon to Democrats pretty much everywhere it has appeared on the ballot, directly or otherwise, since the death of Roe v. Wade. And there’s reason to be optimistic that Florida’s amendment will succeed as well. Though passage requires at least 60 percent support, a November poll by the University of North Florida put support at 62 percent, including 53 percent of Republicans. And that was before things got real with the court ruling.

But can this new wrinkle save Biden there? I mean, this is Florida. The state didn’t show him the love in 2020, and more generally, its Democratic Party has been a hot mess for several years. Registered Republicans now outnumber Democrats by nearly one million . In 2022, Floridians re-elected Gov. Ron DeSantis with almost 60 percent of the vote. Ron. DeSantis .

More troubling, Republican state lawmakers have shown themselves happy to thwart the will of the public to tilt the field in their team’s favor. (See: voting rights of felons who have completed their sentences.) And it is the adopted — and spiritual — home of perhaps the ultimate Florida Man, Donald Trump. (When thinking of the MAGA king kicked back in his so-called Southern White House, I like to picture him with a state-appropriate mullet.)

With the proper mix of sweat and strategy, abortion rights advocates and Dems should be able to save reproductive rights in the state — not to mention force Republicans to burn time and cash there. But pry it away from Trump? That feels like a reach.

Zeynep Tufekci

A Farm Worker With Avian Flu Means a Rapid Response Is Urgent

The discovery of the country’s second human case of H5N1 avian flu, found in a Texas dairy farm worker following an outbreak among cows, is worrying and requires prompt and vigorous action.

While officials have so far said the possibility of cow-to-cow transmission “cannot be ruled out,” I think we can go further than that.

The geography of the outbreak — sick cows in Texas, Idaho, Michigan, Ohio and New Mexico — strongly suggests cows are infecting each other as they move around various farms. The most likely scenario seems to be that a new strain of H5N1 is spreading among cows, rather than the cows being individually infected by sick birds.

Avian flu is not known to transmit well among mammals, including humans, and until now, almost all known cases of H5N1 in humans were people in extended close contact with sick birds. But a cow outbreak — something unexpected , as cows aren’t highly prone to get this — along with likely transmission between cows, means we need to quickly require testing of all dairy workers on affected farms as well as their close contacts, and sample cows in all the dairy farms around the country.

It is possible — and much easier — to contain an early outbreak when an emergent virus isn’t yet adapted to a new host and perhaps not as transmissible. If it gets out and establishes a foothold, then all bets are off. With fatality rates estimated up to 50 percent among humans, H5N1 is not something to gamble with.

Additionally, H5N1 was found in the unpasteurized milk of sick cows. Unpasteurized milk, already a bad idea, would be additionally dangerous to consume right now.

Public officials need to get on top of this quickly, and transparently, telling us the uncertainties as well as their actions.

The government needs to gear up to potentially mass-produce vaccines quickly ( which we have against H5N1 , though they take time to produce) and ensure early supplies for frontline and health care workers.

It’s possible that worst-case scenarios aren’t going to come true — yet. But evolution is exactly how viruses get to do things they couldn’t do before, and letting this deadly one have time to explore the landscape in a potential new host is a disastrously bad idea.

Mike Johnson Is Trying to Explain Simple Math to the Far Right

I come today not to bury Mike Johnson, but to praise him.

No. Seriously. I mean it.

Johnson, the House speaker, sat down with Trey Gowdy of Fox News over the weekend to discuss “realistic expectations” for Republicans in this era of narrowly divided government.

Quipping that he was there as an “ambassador of hope on Easter Sunday,” Johnson offered “three simple things” his party should be focusing on: No. 1, “Show the American people what we’re for. Not just what we’re against.” No. 2, “We have to unite. We have to stand together.” And No. 3, “We’ve got to drive our conservative agenda and get the incremental wins that are still possible right now.”

Nos. 1 and 2 are the sort of meaningless boilerplate politicians are forever blathering about. But No. 3 was clearly the core message of his mission, and he really leaned in, repeatedly noting that his team’s right-wingers — with whom he has long identified, mind you — need to come to terms with the political reality of holding “the smallest majority in U.S. history.”

“We got to realize I can’t throw a Hail Mary pass on every single play,” he said, with that mild manner and beatific smile that makes him seem thoughtful and genial even when he’s speaking harsh truths. “It’s three yards and a cloud of dust. Right? We’ve got to get the next first down. Keep moving.”

Southerners do love their football metaphors.

When asked about Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene’s motion to remove him, he acknowledged that she is “very frustrated” with how certain negotiations have gone of late, especially when it comes to spending. “Guess what? So am I,” he said. But with Republicans clinging to the majority by their fingernails, “we’re sometimes going to get legislation that we don’t like.”

This kind of squish talk isn’t very MAGA. And working with Dems is what got the previous speaker kicked to the curb. (Poor Kev.) But Johnson is in some ways in a better spot than was Kevin McCarthy. A smattering of Democrats have suggested they would save Johnson from a coup attempt, especially on a key issue such as funding Ukraine. Plus, ousting another speaker so soon would only lock in House Republicans’ rep as a bunch of hopeless chaos monkeys — not a shrewd move in an election year.

This is not to say that Johnson is shaping up to be an effective or competent speaker. But it takes a certain courage to talk reality — and math — to today’s House Republicans. Kudos to him for going there.

David French

There’s Valuable Speech on Social Media, Even for Kids

Last week I wrote a rather long column arguing that blanket bans on social media for children are a bad idea, even if you are persuaded (as I am) that smartphones and social media are a significant reason for increasing childhood mental health struggles. My basic point was simple: The First Amendment rights of children and adults are too precious to diminish, especially when there are less restrictive alternatives for combating the problem.

I received an enormous amount of helpful feedback, but I want to briefly highlight one response. The American Enterprise Institute’s Brad Wilcox posted a thread on X that began like this: “Could not disagree more w/ @DavidAFrench here, partly because he doesn’t fully ack how much the teen problem w/ social media is not just about the message(s) but the *medium* itself. Social media does not function like some debating society for teens.”

I respect Wilcox greatly, and he’s got many valuable things to say about kids and social media, but he’s wrong in one key respect: Social media is, in fact, a debating society for teens, just as it is for adults. It’s often a miserable and contentious debating society, but social media is where an immense amount of our nation’s substantive debates takes place. Kids debate one another, and they read adult debates.

Protecting political speech is a core purpose of the First Amendment. As the Supreme Court held in Garrison v. Louisiana , “Speech concerning public affairs is more than self-expression; it is the essence of self-government.” One reason children enjoy First Amendment rights is that they are essentially citizens in training. They have to learn how to engage in political debate.

There are certainly issues with the medium itself, and there are ways to combat the pernicious effects of the medium without obliterating access to the content. The First Amendment, for example, permits reasonable and content-neutral restrictions on the time, place and manner of freedom of expression, and it’s easy to see a valid ban on smartphones during school hours. It’s also worth considering whether certain features of social media — such as infinite scroll — could be limited.

But it’s important to note that time, place and manner restrictions can’t function as a form of disguised content discrimination. If you’re looking for reasons to ban social media because of what’s on the platform, then you’re playing a dangerous constitutional game.

The Christians Who Aren’t Buying Donald Trump’s Sales Pitch

Last week, former President Donald Trump hawked his “God Bless the USA Bible” in a video posted to social media , stating “we must make America pray again.” In a story published today, The Times’s Michael C. Bender notes that Trump — despite a background few would call pious — “is framing his 2024 bid as a fight for Christianity, telling a convention of Christian broadcasters that ‘just like in the battles of the past, we still need the hand of our Lord.’”

A new report on religious change in the United States from The Public Religion Research Institute suggests that Trump’s attempts to tie Christianity tightly to a particular set of Republican political values may be turning some Americans away from Christianity.

P.R.R.I. surveyed Americans who left their childhood religions to become “unaffiliated,” a group that includes people who call themselves atheists, agnostics and nothing in particular. The vast majority of people who become unaffiliated are Christians. While the largest percentage say they left religion because they no longer believe the religion’s teachings, 47 percent of those who became unaffiliated say they did so because of negative treatment or teaching about L.G.B.T.Q. Americans, and 20 percent say they became unaffiliated because their church or congregation became too focused on politics.

“Among white Christian groups, the largest decline in the past decade took place among white evangelical Protestants, whose numbers saw a 3 percentage point decrease, from 17 percent in 2013 to 14 percent in 2023. In 2023, the percentages of white mainline/non-evangelical Protestants (14 percent) and white Catholics (12 percent) remain largely similar to those of 2013,” according to P.R.R.I.’s survey. Trump has frequently and closely aligned himself with white evangelical Christians.

P.R.R.I.’s findings align with what I learned last year when reporting on those leaving religion. As one woman I spoke to put it, she became less religious “because evangelicals became apostates who worship Trump, nationalism and the Republican Party.” Trump promoting a Bible is just another example of his modus operandi: He may make a quick buck, but at what cost to the institution in the long run?

Whether it’s a political or religious institution, the outcome always appears to be the same.

Patrick Healy

Deputy Opinion Editor

Have Swing Voters Stopped Listening to Joe Biden?

Every Monday morning on The Point, we kick off the week with a tipsheet on the latest in the presidential campaign. Here’s what we’re looking at this week:

One of the worst things that can happen to a president seeking re-election is to have voters stop listening to you. As the campaign unfolds this week, I’m curious whether President Biden says or does things that really command attention from voters, and in particular might be persuasive to swing voters.

My curiosity stems from reading the latest polls and my colleague Nate Cohn’s article on Saturday. This is how Nate summed up Biden’s standing in the race since his strong State of the Union speech on March 7: “It has gotten harder to see signs of any Biden bump. Taken together, new polls from Fox , CNBC and Quinnipiac suggested that the presidential race was essentially unchanged, with Mr. Trump still holding a narrow lead nationwide. The president’s approval rating doesn’t seem discernibly higher, either.”

Now, State of the Union speeches themselves rarely produce a bump. But Biden was a new man in March, with a sharper message, lots of campaigning, strong ads and any number of Trump comments to whack. Yet we enter April with Trump in a narrow lead.

Something is not working for Joe Biden right now. Trump is behind him in campaign money , tied up in court, making crazy comments and posting videos showing Biden hogtied. For all that, Biden doesn’t seem to have changed large numbers of minds. Are voters still listening to the president?

Previous presidents who lost re-election, including Trump, George H.W. Bush and Jimmy Carter, struggled to persuade voters they were effective and sympathetic. In their own ways, the three men were seen as all talk, no action, and that’s what some progressive Democrats and young voters think about Biden’s handling of the war in Gaza. While his administration is talking tougher about Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel, the bombs keep falling on Gaza (and more American bombs are on the way) and the aid keeps being blocked from reaching starving people.

And it’s not just Gaza: It’s immigration, abortion rights and, especially, the economy. Nate Silver had a striking chart last week showing how “even as consumer and investor sentiment has improved, President Biden’s approval rating hasn’t , or at least it hasn’t by much .”

Right now, Biden doesn’t have the same galvanizing, persuasive political narrative for swing voters that he had in 2020 — I think Trump nostalgia is very real — nor does he have the results enough voters want. Some voters have already written him off because of his age. But I think the bigger threat to re-election is that more voters will stop listening to him if he doesn’t offer a stronger narrative and stronger results.

Speech: Gender equality – just, prudent, and essential for everything we all aspire to

Closing remarks by un under-secretary-general and un women executive director sima bahous to the 68th session of the commission on the status of women, un headquarters, 27 march 2024..

• Share to Facebook
• Share to Twitter
• Share to LinkedIn
• Share to E-mail

[As delivered.]

You have arrived at Agreed Conclusions for CSW68 [the 68th session of the Commission on the Status of Women] —congratulations! As the world was watching, you showed the very best of the multilateral system, and you came together to advance critical normative work for women and girls everywhere. You have recognized the inequalities that impact the lives of women and girls living in poverty and the solutions we have and we need to address them.

And you agreed that these inequalities do not define us, but that we are defined by wanting to urgently overcome them.

You adopted robust Agreed Conclusions [advance unedited version] , a blueprint that envisages a world with greater financial inclusion, increased spending on social protection, increased stability, equal opportunities, and great hope, rights, and freedoms for women and girls everywhere. A world that will no longer accept that one in ten women lives in poverty. A world that will accelerate the investment in women and girls and that urgently pursues the realization of the fundamental rights of all women and girls to live in peace and prosperity everywhere.

This is a special moment. I thank you all for your dedication and determination to bring this CSW68 to a successful close.

I thank His Excellency Ambassador Antonio Manuel Revilla Lagdameo of the Philippines for his able leadership as Chair of the Commission, together with the very able Vice Chairs, their Excellencies Ms. Yoka Brandt of the Netherlands, Ms. María Florencia González of Argentina, Mr. Māris Burbergs of Latvia, and Ms. Dúnia Eloisa Pires do Canto from Cabo Verde.

A special deep appreciation goes to Her Excellency Ms. Yoka Brandt of the Netherlands for her most skilful facilitation. Her Excellency, you would agree, shepherded you with grace and determination to reach the Agreed Conclusions. I also would like to thank her able team, in particular Robin De Vogel, for their support.

The Agreed Conclusions will only have value in as much as their implementation in countries makes a difference in the lives of women and girls, and in as much as they contribute to accelerating progress on the SDGs [Sustainable Development Goals] . We are a mere six years away from 2030. Gender equality remains our best chance to reach them.

I hope that you will use the Agreed Conclusions as you discuss the Pact for the Future , and that you will be bold and ambitious in advancing them, as we head to the Summit of the Future in September, to the Fourth International Conference on Financing for Development in 2025, and, of course, the 30th anniversary of the adoption of the Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action next year.

This year’s CSW had two heads of state, three vice-presidents, and more than 100 ministers in attendance. Nearly 4,000 delegates in total contributed to the different deliberations.

We had a record number of close to 5,000 civil society representatives, the second highest number we have ever recorded. We saw more than 1,000 side events and parallel events. Partners came together to share experiences and dreams, and also to recommit.

And we benefitted from the creativity, energy, and substantive contributions from the youth delegates, including adolescent girls, who brought a fresh perspective to this year’s CSW . Upholding the Youth Forum and youth space is integral to our work here, which should be strengthened as part of the official Programme of Work of this Commission.

We also welcomed the adoption of the Resolution on women, the girl child, and HIV and AIDS , led by SADC [the Southern African Development Community], and commend Member States’ commitment to increase investment in gender equality and the empowerment of women in the HIV response.

It is not my wish to dampen this moment. Yet, in a world of cascading crises, de-democratization, gender equality backlash, and restricted civic spaces, women and girls will continue to be disproportionately impacted.

It makes the work you have done here all the more important.

I opened this CSW calling for a ceasefire in Gaza . I close it by reiterating this call and the call of the Security Council two days ago, for an immediate ceasefire, unhindered access to humanitarian assistance, the release of all hostages, and for peace. Sustainable, just peace for all women and girls everywhere must be our collective priority. In Gaza, in Sudan, in Haiti, in Ukraine, and elsewhere in the world.

UN Women stands with every woman and girl everywhere who is facing the scourge and the consequences of war and conflict.

We stand with all women peacebuilders, negotiators, human rights defenders who continue to pursue justice for women and girls—often at high personal cost.

As we close this session, we begin to turn our attention to next year when you will discuss 30 years since the adoption of the Beijing Platform for Action .

The scale of our ambitions, your ambitions for Beijing plus 30, must match the scale of our and your responsibility to achieve equality for every woman and girl, in all their diversity, not in 300 years, not in 100 years, not in 50 years, but urgently—now. There is much work to be done and much reward in doing it.

I look forward to working with the new CSW Bureau who will take this forward.

So, let us leave this room as collective champions for gender equality. Let us find new ways to do more, together, to accelerate progress and strengthen our partnerships.

And let us make the case, powerfully, for equality. Let the world hear what we have asserted over the past two weeks: that gender equality is just and prudent, and essential for everything we all aspire to.

I thank you.

• 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development
• Executive Director
• Commission on the Status of Women
• Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)
• Financing for gender equality
• Women’s rights
• Economic empowerment
• Gender equality and women’s empowerment
• Governance and national planning
• Human rights
• Intergovernmental processes
• UN Women administration

Related content

Op-ed: Improving women’s access to decent jobs

Pushing forward for gender equality: CSW68 event showcases strategies for countering pushback and advancing women’s rights around the world

UN Women welcomes the adoption of robust blueprint to end women’s poverty