Politics
Jay Jacobs gets his first-ever challenger for state Dem chair
JACOB’S LADDER: Otsego County Democratic Chair Caitlin Ogden is launching a bid for the top spot in the state party — the first time its current chair, Jay Jacobs, has had a challenger during his lengthy tenure.
Jacobs, who also serves as Nassau County’s Democratic chair, has led the state party under the past three governors, with stints from 2009 to 2012 and 2019 through the present.
But those stints have unfolded despite years of grumbling from the party’s progressive flank.
“I came in as Otsego County chair about five years ago, and I’ve heard since then that Jay Jacobs has helped the party get by. And he definitely has,” Ogden said. “But I think the political landscape is shifting radically, and it’s time for a new leader to guide the party through the next phase and really deliver on Gov. Hochul’s vision of statewide, year-round party organizing.”
The friendly footing toward Gov. Kathy Hochul is a bit of a shift for Ogden. She was a top supporter of Lt. Gov. Antonio Delgado’s challenge to the governor.
But expanding on Hochul’s efforts to use the party to help candidates up and down the ballot is now the focus of Ogden’s message as she attempts to win over party members. The Democratic Party has indisputably played a larger role organizing campaigns across the state in recent years, though numerous local officials have characterized this as a slapdash operation that emerges only in the run-up to congressional contests.
Ogden said that in 2022 she “had been expecting there to be a coordinated campaign structure because I had been told there would be.”
“There was not in any capacity — there was no organizational help from Albany or the state party,” she said. “We never got any literature for any of our Albany candidates; we finally got 40 signs for Kathy Hochul in the middle of October.”
The party apparatus has since been more helpful, Ogden said. But it’s still absent more often than not. It played no role as Democrats in her county had one of its best nights in history last November and has been quiet so far in the county that’s at the heart of Rep. Josh Riley’s battleground district.
“We don’t even have staff hired yet, at least to my knowledge,” she said. “And it’s so late in the game.”
“Is it something that would be helpful?” Jacobs said in response to Ogden’s call for a more regular statewide effort. “Of course.”
“But the big question is ‘where do you get the money?’ We raise millions now: This coordinated campaign is going to run through between $6 and $8 million. And that’s not easy to raise, so speculating that you’ll be able to fund not only election year coordinated campaigns, but also ongoing coordinated campaigns year-round every year, I don’t think is reasonable.”
Jacobs highlighted several accomplishments at the state party, such as a grant program that’s given $1 million to county committees and “allowing resolutions to come to the floor, where before they were always tabled to not allow for debate.” He also acknowledged that while 2022 was a “tough year” for the party, it did “very well” in 2024.
The party’s elected committee members select the chair. But historically, they’ve just gone along with whomever’s picked by the governor — a potential obstacle to the pro-Delgado Ogden, but one she thinks can be overcome.
“The conversation has been happening for a really long time now … about whether or not our leadership is on the right path,” she said.
Jacobs has faced calls for his ouster after the 2021, 2022 and 2025 elections, and easily survived a vote of no confidence six years ago. There were rumors last fall that his tenure was at an end after he declined to endorse then-mayoral nominee Zohran Mamdani, but Hochul said he was “doing a great job” and the party stuck with him.
“Since I’ve been the chair for ten years over two different tenures, I have heard repeatedly that I’m on the way out,” Jacobs said. “The only thing is, it’s never come from me.”
“It’s not that I need it for my livelihood — I like being involved in the Democratic Party and I find this a worthwhile endeavor. So as long as that remains, I’m happy to continue.”
The state Democratic Party will decide on Oct. 1 whether Jacobs stays on or not. — Bill Mahoney
FROM CITY HALL
ZO ON BIBI IN NYC: Mayor Zohran Mamdani spoke publicly for the first time today on his plans to skip the protests against Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
The Jewish head of state will be in New York City next week for the United Nations General Assembly.
“I have made very clear about my views, my thoughts, my assessments,” Mamdani said when asked why he’ll sit out. “When it comes to the UN General Assembly, my focus is ensuring that our city remains prepared to host representatives from across the world, to keep New Yorkers safe, and also to ensure that we’re able to both address the global conversation and the very local concerns New Yorkers have about traffic and their ability to get from point A to point B over the course of the next week.”
Mamdani’s nod to quotidian anxieties like gridlock is a far cry from his typically strident anti-Israel rhetoric and long history of pro-Palestinian activism. As recently as July, he was publicly railing against Netanyahu and entertaining the idea of having the NYPD arrest him on a controversial war crimes warrant issued by the International Criminal Court over Israel’s war in Gaza.
The war, launched in response to Hamas’ Oct. 7, 2023 attack that killed about 1,200 Israelis, has left more than 73,000 Palestinians dead.
Mamdani ultimately walked back his calls, saying in a social media video that his administration does not have the “independent legal authority to enforce this warrant.” Still, he has continued to condemn Netanyahu, whom he called the “architect of a horrific genocide.” And he has appeared to call New Yorkers to action, saying that, “while we cannot end the genocide on our own, we can decide whether our silence will become another weapon.”
The mayor faced accusations that he was stoking antisemitism by continuing to talk about arresting Netanyahu despite knowing he lacked the power to do so.
The mayor took a more measured tone today when answering questions about whether he would encourage critics of Israel to protest Netanyahu’s visit to the city.
“To New Yorkers — I’ve never encouraged them to protest, but I always told them they have the right to do so, and we respect that right, and this city is proud of the first amendment,” Mamdani said.
Regardless, sizable protests are expected ahead of and during Netanyahu’s Sept. 24 speech at the UN. The mayor said he has been in close contact with the NYPD and there are no expected security threats. — Molly Reinmann
SEWER SOCIALISM: Mamdani’s administration plans to install 17 free public bathrooms across the five boroughs — part of a one-year, $4 million pilot project with the modular public toilet company Throne Labs.
Each of the modular bathrooms will be climate controlled, have a toilet, a sink and a baby changing station, and will close at 10 p.m. To enter, New Yorkers can scan a QR code, use an app, send a text message, or use a physical tap card.
“These 17 formerly bathroomless locations will soon become New York City’s number one place to go number two — or number one, you don’t need to tell me,” the mayor joked today.
The pilot program is set to place five toilets in the Bronx, four in Brooklyn, three in Queens, four in Manhattan and one in Staten Island.
The initiative builds on a January announcement from Mamdani and is an attempt to solve an enduring problem that’s bedeviled city officials for decades: How to construct a simple public restroom without taking years and spending millions of dollars.
Former Council Member David Greenfield once highlighted a public restroom renovation in his district that — bogged down by municipal procurement and construction requirements — took nearly a decade and cost $2 million.
The commodes announced by Mamdani today, by contrast, are projected to come out to under $250,000 per bathroom, inclusive of maintenance, for the year-long pilot.
“We are essentially wasting taxpayer money,” Greenfield said at the time. “You can build a complete house in six months for $1 million.” — Molly Reinmann and Joe Anuta
FROM THE CAMPAIGN TRAIL
EYES ON AI: Democratic Rep. Pat Ryan and former city Comptroller Brad Lander are among the signatories on a pledge to refuse cash from the big-money, pro-AI political group Leading the Future.
Lander, who’s all but certain to serve in Congress next year after winning the June primary in a safe-blue district, said he’s “determined to pass strong safeguards into law and make sure the American people have a true say in the future of AI.”
Ryan accused the “Big Tech oligarchs behind Leading the Future” of only caring “about their profits.” — an argument he made during the primary for NY-12. In that race to succeed retiring Rep. Jerry Nadler, Ryan backed state Assemblymember Alex Bores, one of Leading the Future’s biggest targets. Bores finished in second place.
The public condemnations from Ryan and Lander come amid heightened concerns about the existential threat potentially posed by AI. New York politicians have urged the federal government to do more to address the rapidly developing technology, and Hochul vowed that the state will fill the void in the absence of action from Washington.
Leading the Future, which is backed by leaders at OpenAI and the venture capital firm Andreessen Horowitz, has pushed back against criticism that it’s anti-regulation. It previously stated that it supports “passing a national regulatory framework for AI.” — Madison Fernandez
IN OTHER NEWS
— GRACIE GATHERING: Students and teachers from two of New York City’s elite Orthodox Jewish schools will demonstrate Friday outside Gracie Mansion. (Jewish Currents)
— FLOWERY PLANS: City officials are weighing plans to put rain gardens on top of bus stops after a prototype went up in Brooklyn. (Gothamist)
— PROPERTY PAYOUT: New York City is spending $60 million to settle a 2019 lawsuit alleging a city-instituted program illegally stripped dozens of homeowners of their equity. (The New York Times)
Missed this morning’s New York Playbook? We forgive you. Read it here.
President Donald Trump’s decision to name hard-line loyalist Stephen Miller as his top aide cemented what many Republicans were already privately fearing: There will be no party-wide GOP reckoning with this week’s midterm bloodbath.
Instead, with Trump still in office for another two years, most have grown resigned to the reality that the president is going to lean in on a confrontational approach with Congress — and is not willing to change course.
Republicans on Capitol Hill and inside the Trump administration are questioning how and whether they can break with the president now after having green-lit much of his agenda, according to more than a dozen GOP lawmakers, senior aides and Trump officials interviewed for this story, some of whom were granted anonymity to speak candidly about the party’s future.
Trump’s decision Friday to elevate Miller, the architect of his unpopular mass deportation policy and an advocate of fierce partisan confrontation, crystallized the frustration.
“There needs to be some self-reflection for Republicans,” Rep. Marlin Stutzman (R-Ind.) said in an interview about the midterm losses Friday morning. “There should be some heads rolling at the White House because we lost badly.”
Hours later, heads did roll. Trump announced Miller would replace Susie Wiles as his new chief of staff.
“Horrible decision,” Stutzman said in response.
One House Republican, when informed that Trump had named Miller his chief of staff, replied: “Please tell me you’re lying to me right now, just to get a reaction.”
The immediate aftermath of the election has sharpened the GOP’s core issue for the past decade: They are struggling to navigate the man who they reshaped their entire identity around, and whose record low approval with voters helped to fuel generational losses within the party.
The Iran war is another area where some Republicans are having regrets. Vice President JD Vance identified it as the main reason for the party’s defeat in his election post-mortem.
The problem with Vance’s assessment, one senior Hill Republican said, is, “we’ve been fucking voting for the war since March — because they told us to.”
Republicans and Trump advisers expect the president to wield massive influence in the 2028 GOP primaries, another reason many are staying quiet.
“Everyone is staring at each other and wondering who will speak up and blame Trump first,” said one GOP operative who worked on a battleground race Democrats won. They, like others in this article, were granted anonymity to speak candidly. “But we’ve been here before. I’m not holding my breath. He still controls the party and its primaries, at least for now.”
The White House responded to Blue Light News’s request for comment by referring to Trump’s praise for Miller on Friday. The RNC declined to comment.
Miller wrote on social media that he is “honored beyond words to serve as [Trump’s] White House Chief of Staff” and “the mission now is more clear than ever: Fight with all of our soul to support our President.”
How much lawmakers will distance themselves will be put to the test quickly: House Republicans will have an immediate opportunity to break with Trump and the war next week, when Rep. Thomas Massie said in an interview with Blue Light News he will trigger his articles of impeachment against Secretary Pete Hegseth. “There are a lot of questions about Hegseth,” House Oversight Chair James Comer (R-Ky.) said Friday.
Some senior Republicans are privately nudging Trump officials to ditch Hegseth before the vote, according to two people with direct knowledge of the conversations. The White House is sticking by Hegseth so far, however.
House Republicans will also have a chance to elect new leadership next week, including a new chair of the National Republican Congressional Committee. But in a sign of what’s to come, none of the candidates — including Reps. Brian Jack (R-Ga.) and Rudy Yakym (R-Ind.) — nor any other GOP leadership candidates have publicly suggested doing more to break with Trump.
A small group of Republicans on Capitol Hill have privately declared, as of Tuesday night, that “MAGA is over,” and it’s time for a “reset,” as one House GOP aide put it — and yet it’s a sentiment no prominent Republican is willing to say publicly.
Rep. Chris Smith (R-N.J.), one of the longest-serving members of the House, said he wasn’t going to “blame” others for Tuesday’s losses, which left him as the sole GOP incumbent survivor in his home state. Asked if Republicans were dragged down by the president, Smith replied: “I don’t want to answer that.”
Rep. Warren Davidson (R-Ohio) went a step further. He declined to name Trump, but he said in an interview that he was tired of GOP leaders “ignoring” voters — a remarkable position for a party that Trump transformed into a working-class coalition.
“We had a lot of Republican leaders out there saying ‘everything’s fine.’ And you kind of had the boomer generation saying, ‘Well, yeah, back in my day, interest rates were 15%, so everything’s good,’” said Davidson, a 56-year-old former Army Ranger. “Well, you had a lot of hardworking young people who felt really ignored, and they they went to the polls and said, ‘Stop ignoring us.'”
Davidson said Republicans need to start discussing their problems quickly, or suffer the electoral consequences again.
“Bad news doesn’t get better with time. So avoiding talking about something doesn’t solve the problem,” he said. He said Vance “walked a pretty good line” by being “candid” in his election post-mortem Wednesday.
Vance and other potential 2028 presidential contenders like Sen. Ted Cruz don’t have much time to waste if they want to chart a new path away from Trump. Cruz issued his own post-mortem that included a call to focus more on voters’ economic concerns. Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis said “this midterm was a rebuke of the president and Congress.”
French Hill, the powerful Financial Services Committee Chair who narrowly survived a strong Democratic challenge in his own deep-red Arkansas seat Tuesday night, pointed to “President Trump’s unfavorability” which hit “races across the country.” Hill added: “He will be considered a lame duck, and that often has members of both political parties looking out at who will be the standard-bearers in the 2028 presidential election.”
Most others have remained silent in public.
One thing is certain: The utter devastation in deep-red seats is stirring deep anger among many Hill Republicans, who believe something needs to change.
It’s fueling private recriminations at Trump’s political operation that his advisers didn’t take early warnings seriously about the extent of the damage in states like North Carolina. Trump’s now-former chief of staff Susie Wiles will join his political operation, the president announced Friday.
Trump’s team has blamed “candidate quality” for the losses, instead of the president himself.
“Candidate quality matters. Unless you’re running for the U.S. Senate. They apparently don’t care if you would lose to a pinecone,” said a House Republican, referring to Trump’s hand-picked North Carolina Senate nominee Michael Whatley.
The National Republican Senatorial Committee declined to comment.
Sen. Tim Scott (R-S.C.), who leads the Senate campaign arm and saw Democrats flip a Senate seat in his own state, did not answer reporters’ questions on Thursday. The South Carolina Republican has a policy of not talking to reporters in the halls — and he didn’t start when Blue Light News and others asked why Republicans lost so badly.
Back in August, some Republicans in seats Trump won by double digits were already telling the White House to keep the president away from their districts. Others publicly broke from the White House on mass deportations and the Iran war.
NRCC Chair Richard Hudson had largely dismissed those concerns when Blue Light News asked him in a hallway interview on Sept. 1.
“Based on our polling, the president’s a net positive in every district. And I’ve been encouraging him to get out and do events and do rallies. I’m going to continue to do that,” Hudson said. “I think the more he talks about his record and incredible achievements he’s made over the last Congress, I think the better.”
Then, Hudson lost his own reelection bid. He is the first ever NRCC chair in history to be defeated in a general election.
Mia McCarthy, Andrew Howard and Samuel Benson contributed reporting.
Even the head of House Democrats’ top super PAC didn’t fully anticipate the size of their massive midterm wave.
Heading into Election Day, House Majority PAC president Mike Smith told Blue Light News Tuesday’s results, which have netted them a whopping 252 House seats with more yet to be called, was “on the very high end” of the group’s expectations.
The group spent at least $283 million on ads this cycle, per ad-tracking firm AdImpact, making them the largest Democratic spender in House races this cycle and a significant force behind the party’s big night.
As Democrats turn their attention to 2028, Smith remains optimistic the party can hold on to its majority.
His confidence stems in part from a projection that Democrats will respond to the affordability concerns that were the core of the party’s promise to voters.
If Democrats don’t make efforts to address the rising cost of living, “then it’s a totally different story,” Smith said.
Q: How were you feeling in the final days before Tuesday?
Obviously this would have been on the very high end of what we expected. Over the last three months, overall our polling has been pretty consistent. Our whole thought was, with the right environment, if we have the right message and the right types of candidates in, not just the 50-50 districts, but like deeper in the map, that we could put those seats in play and we could potentially win.
Going into Election Day, our whole feeling was there’s a clear path to like 235-plus [seats]. We were playing in districts that, if you were to rank them from like one to 435, some of those districts were like 250, 255, right? And I would throw IN-05, CO-03, KY-06, SC-01, some of the Florida races. SC-01 wasn’t ever going to be seat 225. That was always in the 240s and maybe even 250s. But we took a chance because we saw what the national environment looked like. We saw what the data was coming back in within these individual races. So I think we were optimistic. But to be totally honest, in our heads, you have to play in seat 255 to get to seat 240. You have to spread out the map. You have to force Republicans on their heels, and then you start piecing together how you get to the 240-245 range. Once the numbers started coming back, that was the best case scenario for us. Everything came together.
You guys cut reservations in some reach districts, only to go back up in the final few days. On the outside, it appeared like cutting spending in those reach districts was a bad sign. What went into those last-minute spending decisions?
A lot of the places we made reservations back in April, and then continued to add on to that over the course of the summer. Partners and allies in a bunch of different places took over our reservations. We tried to be smart by locking in the lowest possible rates in very expensive markets, [so that] even if HMP wasn’t the entity spending, we still had partners and allies that were taking over their reservations. In doing all that we saved about $130 million that we could reinvest.
The challenge with some of the races was by a week out, our money was spent. And in some of those districts, there weren’t any partners willing to step up and do it. Florida is a good example of that.
That’s where we just had to make a decision that there weren’t the resources there, and we had to leave the reservations on the table. Around that time, Mayor Bloomberg was like, “We can’t let these races get away from us. We need to do everything we can,” and that’s where we went back into some of those places.
Did you feel the need to adjust your messaging at all once MAGA Inc. and Elon Musk’s PAC joined CLF on the airwaves?
The short answer is no. The messaging was fairly consistent. Early on, our whole feeling was we need to reframe how voters perceive Democrats. When voters think about what Democrats are fighting for, the first thing we want them to think about is cost of living, the economy. At the same time, bringing to light Republican policies that are increasing the cost of living, or focus on things that are anything but that.
Over several months, we did a bunch of battleground research looking at ‘how does corruption tie into that,’ which culminated in what we would describe as the cost of Republican corruption, and how that is impacting your day to day and your cost of living. That’s what we went into Election Day with.
Overall, we ran, I don’t know, 1300 different types of ads, whether TV, digital, direct mail, or whatnot. 76% of those ads talked about the economy. 60% of those ads focused on corruption, because in so many of them, those two things were interlinked in voters’ minds.
Republicans continued to focus on the same thing. It was trying to paint Democrats as out of touch or extremists. And again, the theory of the case from the beginning was us focusing on economic concerns, especially when we figured out we could tie that corruption lens into it. That’s going to be more important to voters than folks talking about socialism or anything else.
Democrats were able to prevent Republicans from capitalizing on their redistricting gains. Are you worried about those gains bearing fruit in a less favorable environment, maybe as soon as 2028?
In a different environment, these races are going to come together in a much different way. So I do think it’s something that we need to be hyper-focused on. That said, I don’t think redistricting is going to go away.
I’m actually pretty hopeful that these huge shifts across every demographic group that we just saw, as long as Democrats continue to focus on the issue that matters most to voters.
If we don’t, then it’s a totally different story.
Are you saying the fate of Democrats’ House chances in 2028 to keep these seats is predicated on Congress passing something, even with the current president still in the White House, that addresses affordability issues?
I wouldn’t say passing. Soon-to-be Speaker Hakeem Jeffries, since we won, his message is that Democrats are focused on three things: costs, care and corruption.
When we come into power, we are going to be hyper-focused on fighting to bring down the cost of living for voters. I think Donald Trump is still this outsized X-factor in everything. He’s still the sitting president in the White House. So I wouldn’t say it’s like, “Oh we have to pass 300 bills. That’s the only way we’re going to be successful.” I think we just need to show voters that we are willing to get stuff done, and in instances where we need to, work across the aisle to pass stuff that’s going to be helpful to voters. I think if we do that, then I think we’re setting ourselves up for success going into ‘28, both with the White House and the House and the Senate. Donald Trump is still going to be this huge factor in all of this, and I don’t think voters are going to be like, “Democrats weren’t able to accomplish this,” and think that that was us. They’re going to continue blaming Donald Trump going into Election Day 2028.
To go back to redistricting, do you want Democrats in these states where they have newly-won trifectas to take up redistricting even if Republicans don’t push for it again?
I think Democrats need to do everything that it will take to win, and if that means that in states where we control the state house, the state senate, a governor’s race, we have an opportunity to redraw the map, I think we need to do it.
What were the seats Democrats flipped that surprised you the most?
I would say NJ-02 [Rep. Jeff Van Drew’s seat], It was a district where we had looked at it — we did not think that it was credibly possible, to be totally honest.
I’d say North Carolina as a whole, probably. We felt good about NC-01, NC-11 for a while…. [NRCC Chair and North Carolina Rep.] Richard Hudson, we looked at that district. There was a clear path to winning it. There just wasn’t money, at the end of the day. NC-13, NC-14, same thing. The makeup of the districts, they’re not bad targets for Democrats. It was just, how much can we spread resources out? But the total implosion in North Carolina by Republicans at the federal level, at the state level — that was probably one of the biggest surprises.
A version of this article first appeared in Blue Light News Pro’s Morning Score. Want to receive the newsletter every weekday? Subscribe to Blue Light News Pro. You’ll also receive daily policy news and other intelligence you need to act on the day’s biggest stories.
The Clyburn test
lead image
-
Politics1 year agoJohn Legend advises Trump to drop the ‘dictator s‑‑‑’ if he wants Nobel Peace Prize
-
Politics2 years agoFormer ‘Squad’ members launching ‘Bowman and Bush’ YouTube show
-
Uncategorized2 years ago
Bob Good to step down as Freedom Caucus chair this week
-
The Josh Fourrier Show2 years agoDOOMSDAY: Trump won, now what?
-
The Dictatorship2 years agoPete Hegseth’s tenure at the Pentagon goes from bad to worse
-
Politics2 years agoFormer Kentucky AG Daniel Cameron launches Senate bid
-
The Dictatorship2 years agoLuigi Mangione acknowledges public support in first official statement since arrest
-
Politics2 years agoBlue Light News’s Editorial Director Ryan Hutchins speaks at Blue Light News’s 2025 Governors Summit