To the Editor:
Re “Trump and Biden Pile Up Victories on Super Tuesday” (front page, March 6):
I listened to Donald Trump’s Super Tuesday victory speech that he gave from Mar-a-Lago. True to form, the former president laced his comments with old grievances and false statements.
Perhaps the most perplexing thing Mr. Trump said was that our elections are “third-world” (as in rigged or stolen) — all the while celebrating his primary victories. Huh?
This won’t be the last time Donald Trump makes false statements about the 2020 election results specifically or the 2024 results generally. If what’s past truly is prologue, then buckle up. It’s going to be a very long eight months between now and November.
Denny Freidenrich
Laguna Beach, Calif.
To the Editor:
Why didn’t viable Democrats like Gavin Newsom and Gretchen Whitmer challenge President Biden and throw their hats in the ring for the primaries a year ago? What is the nature of the specific politics of Democrats challenging a Democratic incumbent?
Mr. Biden is terrifyingly unpopular. Shouldn’t the Democratic Party have seen this coming and headed it off at the pass so Democrats would have a better choice?
Right now, we live in fear of a Trump dystopia. The rich can leave and buy second homes in Europe. The rest of us may be forced to live in a Trump World of hate, revenge, retribution and an executive branch accountable to no one.
Patricia Caiozzo
Port Washington, N.Y.
To the Editor:
Donald Trump, President Biden and their supporters are all in denial. Both Mr. Trump and Mr. Biden think they are the person most likely to win the election and the best person to lead this country. They are both delusional.
Their respective enthusiastic supporters are perfectly willing to overlook the obvious debilities each of the candidates has. They are ostriches.
Eugene D. Cohen
Phoenix
To the Editor:
Re “Trump’s Conquest of the Republican Party Matters to Every American” (editorial, nytimes.com, March 6):
You left a gap in your analysis of why Donald Trump has so successfully come to dominate his party. Yes, cowardly politicians and a group of cultlike followers are valid reasons. However, to leave out the national media, including The Times, is to subvert an honest analysis.
Each morning I scan the headlines and Mr. Trump’s name is plastered everywhere. It doesn’t matter if the story is positive or negative, he gets bundles of unearned media every day. The media is as addicted to Donald Trump as his most fervent followers.
Mark Walters
Zionsville, Ind.
To the Editor:
Re “What Advice Would Nancy Reagan Give Jill Biden?,” by Gahl Hodges Burt (Opinion guest essay, March 6):
Daily, we are presented with discussions and questions regarding President Biden’s age and his decision to run for a second term. Clearly, the age factor is hurting Mr. Biden’s re-election hopes, regardless of the many positive actions he has taken and legislative victories he has achieved. Many feel that his achievements would place his presidency among the most successful and that he should retire and rest on his laurels.
But perhaps the most compelling reason not to do just that is the reality of what Donald Trump would do as president to those achievements, and what he would do to tarnish Mr. Biden’s name. He has threatened to appoint a special prosecutor to “go after” Mr. Biden.
For Mr. Biden, his re-election is a necessity to preserve his legacy.
Doris Fenig
Boca Raton, Fla.
A Mom, a Bike and a Pack of Older Riders
To the Editor:
Re “My Mother Got on a Bike. It Changed Her Life,” by Caroline Paul (Opinion guest essay, Feb. 18):
Thank you for publishing Ms. Paul’s article about the aging process. I love her mother’s story. As I approach 60 and continue to pursue athletic adventures, the story reinforces the importance of pushing yourself, taking risks and embracing new opportunities that provide community, fresh air and a little sweat.
Denise Rosenblum
Natick, Mass.
To the Editor:
I read Caroline Paul’s essay, and I can’t agree more. I biked from my teens through my early 30s, until work and kids made it impossible to continue. When my three boys got old enough that I could get back on the road, I was in my mid-40s, had gained about 100 pounds and felt as if I was getting “too old” to do a lot of things.
I’m 57 now, ride 150 miles a week, and feel far stronger, healthier and mentally sharper than I did in my 40s. Time on the bike is meditative and exhilarating, and it got me through the abrupt loss of my career (my small college axed maybe 15 percent of its teaching staff a few years ago).
I also get amused at having to go slow so my kids can keep up on the hills!
Peter Rothstein
Huntingdon, Pa.
To the Editor:
Caroline Paul’s mother had to give up the cycling that sustained her as she approached 80, because she was developing Parkinson’s and feeling unsteady on her bike. I can sympathize: I am a lifelong cyclist, now 81, who five years ago thought I would have to give up riding because arthritis made it just too painful. But then I bought a recumbent tricycle, which allowed me to ride painlessly.
I still ride regularly on my own, and weekly with a group of University of Montana retirees. I pretty much keep up with them — I’m slower going uphill and smoke them going down — but of course we are all going more slowly than we did 50 or 60 years ago.
By all means, do what Ms. Paul’s mother did and keep riding your bike. And when that is no longer possible, get a recumbent trike and keep on riding.
Dick Barrett
Missoula, Mont.
To the Editor:
I just have one thing readers should not take away from Caroline Paul’s great article. Her mom stopped biking because of her health as she neared 80, but I have riders in my club on the West Side of Cleveland well into their 80s who still bike every week. Ride on!
Marc Snitzer
Cleveland
Vive La France!
To the Editor:
Re “French Lawmakers Amend Constitution to Guarantee Access to Abortion” (news article, March 5):
Vive la France! And shame on the lawmakers in the U.S. who seem hellbent on trampling on the Constitution by forcing their religious beliefs on everyone and pushing women back into the era of back-street abortions and unwanted motherhood.
Mary-Ellen Banashek
New York
Shrinkflation Flaws
To the Editor:
Re “New Target for Biden: Shrinkflation” (Business, Feb. 27):
In addition to misleading consumers who are used to a certain package size, shrinkflation strikes me as both stupid and wasteful.
Changing the size of a product introduces additional costs that are passed on to the consumer: the cost of redesigning labels, the cost of changing a manufacturing line to make smaller packages or containers, and the cost of retooling to put less product in the package or to manufacture products in a different size.
It would make a lot more sense, and reduce how much companies have to raise prices, if they would just raise their prices instead of hiding the price increases and increasing their own costs.
Shaun Breidbart
Pelham, N.Y.