Campaigning from behind: Lower-tier 2020ers seek comeback

As her campaign bus trundled along Interstate 80 toward the Michigan-Ohio border, Kirsten Gillibrand was offering wedding planning advice to one of her presidential campaign staffers who recently got engaged.

The New York senator recommended a Christmas wedding, preferably on a Caribbean island, until a senior aide intervened — reminding Gillibrand that the staffer will be "otherwise engaged at Christmas," which is just six weeks before the Iowa caucuses.

The good-natured exchange belied a larger doubt hanging over Gillibrand's 2020 bid: Will it really survive to the Feb. 3 caucus that kicks off the process of selecting a Democratic presidential nominee?

FILE - In this June 26, 2019, file photo, Democratic presidential candidate Washington Gov. Jay Inslee speaks during a Democratic primary debate hosted by NBC News in Miami. Plagued by anemic polling and fundraising, many 2020 Democratic presidential campaigns have fallen into a spiral of perceived struggles that become increasingly self-fulfilling. That includes New York Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand’s championing of women’s rights, Inslee’s focus on climate change and former Colorado Gov. John Hickenlooper’s pitch as a principled moderate. (AP PhotoWilfredo Lee, File)

Many of the candidates mired in the primary's lower tier have quietly begun asking similar questions. Plagued by anemic polling and underwhelming fundraising , some campaigns are falling into a spiral of perceived hurdles that are becoming increasingly self-fulfilling, making it hard to find money to build an expansive campaign organization.

The anxiety is building ahead of September's presidential debate, which impose tougher qualification rules that will winnow the field from two dozen candidates. That's a humbling prospect for senators and governors who have spent their political careers building what they hoped would be strong resumes for a White House run only to face the reality that voters aren't interested or, worse, don't know who they are.

Ohio Rep. Tim Ryan has run on bridging the divide between the party's liberal and working class wings, but is barely registering in the polls. Appearing recently at a Pizza Hut in Manchester, Iowa, there were five people on hand, three who came to see Ryan, and a woman and her son only there to eat.

FILE - In this July 15, 2019, file photo, Democratic presidential candidate John Hickenlooper speaks during a presidential candidates forum in Des Moines, Iowa. Plagued by anemic polling and fundraising, many 2020 Democratic presidential campaigns have fallen into a spiral of perceived struggles that become increasingly self-fulfilling. That includes New York Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand’s championing of women’s rights, Washington Gov. Jay Inslee’s focus on climate change and Hickenlooper’s pitch as a principled moderate. (AP PhotoCharlie Neibergall, File)

"Who is that man?" the woman asked.

Others are simply getting lost in the shuffle, especially in early voting states where White House hopefuls flock constantly. At a recent Iowa fundraiser for state Sen. Zach Wahls' birthday, even some of the most active Democrats weren't sure which White House hopefuls they'd seen.

"I think I shook (John) Hickenlooper's hand today," noted Laura Bergus, a candidate for city council in Iowa City, referring to the former Colorado governor.

Some of the most endangered candidates built their runs around signature issues that seemed sure to resonate with their party's base, but have largely fallen flat.

Washington Gov. Jay Inslee's focus on climate change hasn't gained him much traction, even as some of his better-known rivals have successfully seized on the issue as the world's most urgent threat. Hickenlooper's pitch as a principled moderate has been largely overlooked and urgent calls for gun control couldn't keep California Rep. Eric Swalwell's now-defunct presidential bid afloat.

Sen. Cory Booker of New Jersey so far doesn't have much to show for his overarching message of unity-first optimism . Former Texas Rep. Beto O'Rourke and ex-Obama administration housing chief Julián Castro haven't ridden focuses on softer federal immigration policies to polling success and Massachusetts Rep. Seth Moulton's calls to impeach President Donald Trump haven't resonated.

Gillibrand made advancing women's issues and championing the #MeToo movement the heart of her campaign, but more recently concentrated on showing she's strong enough to take on Trump with a two-day bus tour through Pennsylvania, Ohio and Michigan, key states for the president's re-election campaign. Gillibrand argued that the president reneged on campaign promises that won him those states in 2016 and she can accomplish what he couldn't, if elected.

But her polling has continued to hover at or below 1%, far behind the likes of former Vice President Joe Biden and Sens. Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts, Kamala Harris of California and Bernie Sanders of Vermont.

Asked in an interview during a stop in Flint if the bus tour will help her break out in a way her women's rights advocacy couldn't, Gillibrand didn't dispute the premise, but said, "I think it's more than that."

"I think I'm showing, by what I'm doing and saying and the ideas that I have, that I can beat President Trump," she said at a small-plates restaurant in a city whose drinking water crisis became a national scandal.

She insisted she's in the race for the long haul and rejects the notion that she's fallen into the Democratic primary's second tier.

"I'm different than other candidates," Gillibrand said. "I've taken on the fights that other candidates haven't."

Former Maryland Gov. Martin O'Malley, who struggled to get noticed during his 2016 Democratic presidential primary bid, said upcoming debates that exclude lower-tier candidates will necessarily trim the field. But he also said there will still be incentives for those trailing badly to hang on and hope for Iowa caucus shockers.

"The guy who's everybody's second choice can be the surprise," O'Malley said. "Iowans usually have a way of making a decision that's contrary to whatever the latest fashion is."

In the meantime, many low-polling candidates are standing by their core messages. Even amid her bus tour decrying Trump, Gillibrand noted during the interview that "both parties have been compromising on women's health for decades."

At a town hall inside the Cleveland Public Library, she went further, asking about 20 attendees, "Do we value women? Unfortunately, the answer in our society today is no."

"It's why we don't prosecute sexual assault. It's why we don't have equal pay. It's why we don't have national paid leave," Gillibrand said.

The crowd seemed moved. A short time later, though, Kittie Warshawsky, a 51-year-old who works for a nonprofit, asked Gillibrand how she would "get your name out there" given that she mostly failed to get noticed so far. Gillibrand said that was what the "Trump broken promises" bus tour was all about accomplishing.

Afterward, Warshawsky called Gillibrand "terrific" but said of her chances in the primary, "I don't have an answer yet on how she's going to get through."

Associated Press writer Alexandra Jaffe in Manchester, Iowa, contributed to this report.

UNITED NATIONS (AP) — Russia on Wednesday vetoed a U.N. resolution sponsored by the United States and Japan calling on all nations to prevent a dangerous nuclear arms race in outer space, calling it “a dirty spectacle” that cherry picks weapons of mass destruction from all other weapons that should also be banned.

The vote in the 15-member Security Council was 13 in favor, Russia opposed and China abstaining.

The resolution would have called on all countries not to develop or deploy nuclear arms or other weapons of mass destruction in space, as banned under a 1967 international treaty that included the U.S. and Russia, and to agree to the need to verify compliance.

U.S. Ambassador Linda Thomas-Greenfield said after the vote that Russian President Vladimir Putin has said Moscow has no intention of deploying nuclear weapons in space.

“Today’s veto begs the question: Why? Why, if you are following the rules, would you not support a resolution that reaffirms them? What could you possibly be hiding,” she asked. “It’s baffling. And it’s a shame.”

Russia’s U.N. Ambassador Vassily Nebenzia dismissed the resolution as “absolutely absurd and politicized,” and said it didn’t go far enough in banning all types of weapons in space.

Russia and China proposed an amendment to the U.S.-Japan draft that would call on all countries, especially those with major space capabilities, “to prevent for all time the placement of weapons in outer space, and the threat of use of force in outer spaces.”

The vote was 7 countries in favor, 7 against, and one abstention and the amendment was defeated because it failed to get the minimum 9 “yes” votes required for adoption.

The U.S. opposed the amendment, and after the vote Nebenzia addressed the U.S. ambassador saying: “We want a ban on the placement of weapons of any kind in outer space, not just WMDs (weapons of mass destruction). But you don’t want that. And let me ask you that very same question. Why?”

He said much of the U.S. and Japan’s actions become clear “if we recall that the U.S. and their allies announced some time ago plans to place weapons … in outer space.”

Nebenzia accused the U.S. of blocking a Russian-Chinese proposal since 2008 for a treaty against putting weapons in outer space.

Thomas-Greenfield accused Russia of undermining global treaties to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons, irresponsibly invoking “dangerous nuclear rhetoric,” walking away from several of its arms control obligations, and refusing to engage “in substantive discussions around arms control or risk reduction.”

She called Wednesday’s vote “a real missed opportunity to rebuild much-needed trust in existing arms control obligations.”

Thomas-Greenfield’s announcement of the resolution on March 18 followed White House confirmation in February that Russia has obtained a “troubling” anti-satellite weapon capability, although such a weapon is not operational yet.

Putin declared later that Moscow has no intention of deploying nuclear weapons in space, claiming that the country has only developed space capabilities similar to those of the U.S.

Thomas-Greenfield said before the vote that the world is just beginning to understand “the catastrophic ramifications of a nuclear explosion in space.”

It could destroy “thousands of satellites operated by countries and companies around the world — and wipe out the vital communications, scientific, meteorological, agricultural, commercial, and national security services we all depend on,” she said.

The defeated draft resolution said “the prevention of an arms race in outer space would avert a grave danger for international peace and security.” It would have urged all countries carrying out activities in exploring and using outer space to comply with international law and the U.N. Charter.

The draft would have affirmed that countries that ratified the 1967 Outer Space Treaty must comply with their obligations not to put in orbit around the Earth “any objects” with weapons of mass destruction, or install them “on celestial bodies, or station such weapons in outer space.”

The treaty, ratified by some 114 countries, including the U.S. and Russia, prohibits the deployment of “nuclear weapons or any other kinds of weapons of mass destruction” in orbit or the stationing of “weapons in outer space in any other manner.”

The draft resolution emphasized “the necessity of further measures, including political commitments and legally binding instruments, with appropriate and effective provisions for verification, to prevent an arms race in outer space in all its aspects.”

It reiterated that the U.N. Conference on Disarmament, based in Geneva, has the primary responsibility to negotiate agreements on preventing an arms race in outer space.

The 65-nation body has achieved few results and has largely devolved into a venue for countries to voice criticism of others’ weapons programs or defend their own. The draft resolution would have urged the conference “to adopt and implement a balanced and comprehensive program of work.”

At the March council meeting where the U.S.-Japan initiative was launched, U.N. Secretary-General António Guterres warned that “geopolitical tensions and mistrust have escalated the risk of nuclear warfare to its highest point in decades.”

He said the movie “Oppenheimer” about Robert Oppenheimer, who directed the U.S. project during World War II that developed the atomic bomb, “brought the harsh reality of nuclear doomsday to vivid life for millions around the world.”

“Humanity cannot survive a sequel to Oppenheimer,” the U.N. chief said.

United States Ambassador and Representative to the United Nations Linda Thomas-Greenfield addresses members of the U.N. Security Council before voting during a meeting on Non-proliferation of nuclear weapons, Wednesday, April 24, 2024 at United Nations headquarters. (AP Photo/Eduardo Munoz Alvarez)

FILE - U.S. Ambassador to United Nations Linda Thomas-Greenfield speaks on Thursday, April 18, 2024, in Tokyo. The U.N. Security Council is set to vote Wednesday, April 24, 2024, on a resolution announced by Thomas-Greenfield, calling on all nations to prevent a dangerous nuclear arms race in outer space. It is likely to be vetoed by Russia. (AP Photo/Eugene Hoshiko, Pool, File)