Economic issues dominate the list of top concerns for Pennsylvania voters ahead of the Nov. 5 presidential election, a new poll finds. A quarter of… Read More
The post Poll: Economic Issues Top Voter Concerns in This Swing State appeared first on The Daily Signal.
The Southern Poverty Law Center, a far-left smear factory on the front lines of demonizing conservatives in American public discourse, is unwittingly revealing just how… Read More
The post What Could Go Wrong? SPLC’s Latest Scandal Exposes the Insanity of Unionizing a Nonprofit appeared first on The Daily Signal.
Republican members of the House and Senate foreign affairs committees have expressed alarm over President Joe Biden’s apparent declining mental health amid a growing terror… Read More
The post ‘AMERICA AT GREAT RISK’: Foreign Affairs Committee Members Warn Biden’s Lack of Mental Fitness Puts US in Danger appeared first on The Daily Signal.
If space systems such as GPS were hacked and knocked offline, much of the world would instantly be returned to the communications and navigation technologies of the 1950s. Yet space cybersecurity is largely invisible to the public at a time of heightened geopolitical tensions.
Cyberattacks on satellites have occurred since the 1980s, but the global wake-up alarm went off only a couple of years ago. An hour before Russia’s invasion of Ukraine on Feb. 24, 2022, its government operatives hacked Viasat’s satellite-internet services to cut off communications and create confusion in Ukraine.
I study ethics and emerging technologies and serve as an adviser to the U.S. National Space Council. My colleagues and I at California Polytechnic State University’s Ethics + Emerging Sciences Group released a U.S. National Science Foundation-funded report on June 17, 2024, to explain the problem of cyberattacks in space and help anticipate novel and surprising scenarios.
Most people are unaware of the crucial role that space systems play in their daily lives, never mind military conflicts. For instance, GPS uses signals from satellites. GPS-enabled precision timing is essential in financial services where every detail – such as time of payment or withdrawal – needs to be faithfully captured and coordinated. Even making a mobile phone call relies on precise coordination of time in the network.
Besides navigation for airplanes, boats, cars and people, GPS is also important for coordinating fleets of trucks that transport goods to stock local stores every day.
Earth-observation satellites are “eyes in the skies” with a unique vantage point to help forecast the weather, monitor environmental changes, track and respond to natural disasters, boost agricultural crop yields, manage land and water use, monitor troop movements and much more. The loss of these and other space services could be fatal to people vulnerable to natural disasters and crop failure. They could also put global economics and security at serious risk.
In our report, we identified several factors that contribute to the increasing threat of space cyberattacks. For instance, it’s important to recognize that the world is at the start of a new space race.
By all accounts, space is becoming more congested and more contested. Both nation-states and private companies, which are underregulated and now own most of the satellites in orbit, are gearing up to compete for resources and research sites.
Because space is so remote and hard to access, if someone wanted to attack a space system, they would likely need to do it through a cyberattack. Space systems are particularly attractive targets because their hardware cannot be easily upgraded once launched, and this insecurity worsens over time. As complex systems, they can have long supply chains, and more links in the chain increase the chance of vulnerabilities. Major space projects are also challenged to keep up with best practices over the decade or more needed to build them.
And the stakes are unusually high in space. Orbital trash zips around at speeds of 6 to 9 miles per second and can easily destroy a spacecraft on impact. It can also end space programs worldwide given the hypothesized Kessler syndrome in which the Earth is eventually imprisoned in a cocoon of debris. These consequences weigh in favor of space cyberattacks over physical attacks because the debris problem is also likely to affect the attacker.
Moreover, given critical space infrastructure and services, such as GPS, conflicts in space can spark or add more fuel to a conflict on Earth, even those in cyberspace. For instance, Russia warned in 2022 that hacking one of its satellites would be taken as a declaration of war, which was a dramatic escalation from previous norms around warfare.
Even security professionals who recognize the severity of this space cybersecurity threat face a major challenge. At least in nonclassified forums, only a couple of under-specified scenarios are typically considered: something vague about satellite hacking and something vague about signals jamming or spoofing.
But failure to imagine a full range of possibilities can be devastating for security planning, especially against hackers who are a diverse set of entities with diverse motivations and targets. These variables are vital to nail down because they reveal clues about which strategies and levers defenders may find most effective in a response. For instance, an attack by a state-sponsored hacker may require a different approach than, say, one by a criminal hacker after money or by a chaos agent.
To help with this piece of the security puzzle, our report offers a taxonomy – the ICARUS matrix – that captures these variables and can create more than 4 million unique combinations of variables, which we call scenario prompts. ICARUS is an acronym for “imagining cyberattacks to anticipate risks unique to space.”
Here are three of the 42 scenarios we included in the report.
A 3D or additive printer can be an invaluable resource for quickly creating parts on demand on space missions. A hacker could gain access to a printer on a space station and reprogram it to make tiny imperfections inside the parts it prints. Some of these built-to-fail components could be parts of critical systems.
A hacker could corrupt the data from a planetary probe to show inaccurate atmospheric, temperature or water readings. Corrupted data from a Mars rover, for example, could falsely show that an area has significant subsurface water ice. Any subsequent mission launched to explore the site further would be wasted.
In 1938, a radio drama about an alien attack instigated a panic when many listeners didn’t realize it was fictional. Similarly, a hacker could access the listening feeds of the Messaging Extraterrestrial Intelligence, or METI, project and insert something resembling alien language in METI’s transcription. They could then leak it to the media, potentially creating panic worldwide and moving financial markets.
Other scenarios in our report involve such things as insider threats, AI vulnerabilities, false flag attacks, ecoterrorism, ransomware during a launch, as well as more distant scenarios about asteroid mining, off-world colonies and space pirates.
People are hardwired to respond to stories, whether shared around prehistoric campfires or across digital platforms today. Thus, crafting novel and surprising scenarios can help bring to life the invisible threat of space cyberattacks, as well as spotlight nuances across different scenarios that may require interdisciplinary experts to tackle together.
U.S. charities may spend some of their time and money on lobbying, as long as those organizations don’t primarily exist to influence federal legislation. This rule applies to all charitable nonprofits, which run the gamut from hospitals to social service providers, museums and environmental organizations.
Charities can lobby by directly contacting lawmakers or other public officials to propose, support or oppose legislation. They may also engage in indirect – or grassroots – lobbying by encouraging their supporters and other people to contact public officials for the purpose of influencing legislation.
The Internal Revenue Service assesses charities’ lobbying activities in two ways. First, the IRS states that lobbying, including staff time and organizational expenses, cannot be a “substantial part” of what a charity does. There’s no official definition of how much lobbying is too much.
Since the concept of a “substantial part” is unclear, charities that regularly lobby can select an expenditure test called the 501(h) election. It sets specific limits on how much time and money charities can spend on lobbying, based on their size.
For example, if a charity’s annual expenses are below US$500,000, it can spend up to 20% of its budget on lobbying. Charities with budgets of $17 million or more can’t devote more than $1 million per year to lobbying.
Charities must report their lobbying activities, including any related expenses incurred by staff members or volunteers, when they file their 990 tax forms. That paperwork is mandatory for all charities except for churches and congregations.
Churches, which automatically qualify as charities, have to follow the substantial part test.
While charities may lobby to some degree, a 1954 measure called the Johnson Amendment makes political activity off-limits for charities, including churches. They cannot endorse, oppose or campaign on behalf of political candidates without jeopardizing their tax-exempt status. Nor can they make donations to lawmakers or policymakers.
But charities, including churches, can hold nonpartisan voter registration drives to register voters.
Some charities are associated with other tax-exempt organizations called social welfare organizations, which are allowed to do unlimited lobbying.
Charities are free, however, to spend as much staff time and money as they wish on what the IRS calls “issues of public policy,” as long as these educational efforts aren’t tied to a political party, specific candidates or particular pieces of legislation.
For instance, a homeless shelter can organize community forums and publish reports on the root causes of homelessness without jeopardizing its status as a charity. It can also engage in outreach campaigns about best practices for reducing homelessness, without backing any particular legislative proposal or a specific political party.
Similarly, an environmental group can run workshops and seminars about the impact of plastic pollution. It can encourage the public to reduce plastic use without supporting specific environmental laws or political figures.
States can also regulate nonprofit lobbying. For example, the Massachusetts Secretary of State’s office requires nonprofit employees who lobby to register with the state and pay a registration fee.
In a 2023 study of nonprofit advocacy and lobbying that our research team conducted on behalf of Independent Sector – a coalition of nonprofits, foundations and corporate giving programs – we found that only 1 in 4 charitable nonprofits have ever formally lobbied the government. This is a big decline from 2000, when 3 in 4 reported doing at least some lobbying.
We believe a misunderstanding of legal regulations about lobbying is one factor that contributed to this decline.
If the IRS determines that charities are lobbying too much, those groups may be assessed fines or even lose their tax-exempt status. This is extremely rare, but when it happens, it creates a chilling effect on the nonprofit sector.
Many charities feed the hungry, protect the environment and provide legal services to low-income people. Through lobbying, charities can try to make sure that the issues important to the people they serve and the causes they embrace are reflected in government decisions and laws.
Legal experts say it is unlikely that former President Trump will face trial in his Washington election interference case before election day, given the Supreme Court’s new ruling on the issue.
The Court on Monday ruled that Trump and all former presidents enjoy presumptive immunity for “official acts” made while in office. The ruling sends Special Counsel Jack Smith’s indictment back to lower courts, where they will battle over whether Trump’s efforts to overturn the 2020 election results were “official acts.”
Jonathan Turley, a law professor and Fox News contributor, says the Supreme Court gave clear instructions to lower courts on how to separate official and private actions.
“The opinion was not the vague remand that some expected. It states clearly that the motivations of a president are not matters for litigation. It also states that presidents are expected to speak to the public on matters of great importance and specifically cited Trump’s Jan. 6th speech. It also said that conversations with executive branch officials like former Vice President Pence are part of official functions, Turley told Fox News Digital.
“The court’s descriptions of official functions and the penumbra around those functions will heavily impact these cases. Special Counsel Jack Smith has benefited from a highly favorable trial court judge. However, Judge Chutkan is no longer writing on a blank slate. The Court followed the right hook in the Fischer case with an absolute haymaker in the Trump case,” he added.
Still, debate over Trump’s actions following the 2020 election will take time. Attorney and legal commentator John Shu says a trial before Election Day is almost certainly off the table.
“Logistically, I don’t see how Jack Smith and the DOJ can start either the D.C. or Florida trials against former president Trump before November, let alone finish them by then,” he told Fox, referencing the D.C. election interference case and Florida classified documents case. “Jack Smith has a well-earned reputation of being hyper-aggressive, however, and so it is possible that he and the DOJ now feel pressure to push [Southern District of Florida] Judge Cannon even harder, which will likely backfire on them.”
SCOTUS WEIGHS MONUMENTAL CONSTITUTIONAL FIGHT OVER TRUMP IMMUNITY CLAIM
Turley agreed that the Court’s ruling will likely push Trump’s trial past November, saying Smith may be forced to retrace his steps and create another superseding indictment.
“It is unlikely that a trial can occur before the election. There was a halt on pre-trial motions during the appeal. Now the court must also address the Fischer and Trump rulings,” he said. “[D.C. District] Judge Chutkan undermined the case by yielding to Smith and pursuing a rushed calendar. The court found little record to answer these questions. To rush this again would invite a similar result.”
Trump and his allies in Congress cheered the Supreme Court’s 6-3 decision on Monday.
House Majority Whip Tom Emmer, R-Minn., the No. 3 House GOP leader, said, “The Democrats have proven they will do everything in their power … to destroy [Trump]. Today’s Supreme Court decision is a positive step in the right direction of ending their senseless lawfare.”
Fox News’ Brianna Herlihy contributed to this report
President Biden’s 2024 re-election campaign and the Democratic National Committee combined brought in over a quarter of a billion dollars in fundraising the past three months, Biden’s team announced early Tuesday.
And the campaign, in showcasing the $264 million raked in during the April-June second quarter of 2024 fundraising, noted that it pulled in $127 million in June alone, which it touted was the president’s best month of fundraising since he launched his re-election bid over a year ago.
The announcement comes as the Biden campaign tries to flip the script on a negative narrative coming out of last week’s first debate with former President Trump, which has led to calls from some within the Democratic Party for the president to end his White House re-election bid.
Biden’s June fundraising was up from the roughly $85 million the campaign and the DNC brought in during May. And the campaign spotlighted that their second quarter haul was $75 million more than they brought in during the first three months of the year.
BIDEN TRIES TO FLIP THE SCRIPT ON DISASTROUS NARRATIVE COMING OUT OF FIRST DEBATE
They also touted that they had a whopping $240 million cash-on-hand as of the end of June, up from $212 million a month earlier.
A sizable chunk of June’s haul was raked in at a star-studded fundraiser in Los Angeles with former President Obama, Hollywood heavyweights George Clooney and Julia Roberts, and late night TV talk show host Jimmy Kimmel. The campaign said after the event that it set a new Democratic Party fundraising record with a $30 million haul.
DEMOCRATIC NOMINATION OF BIDEN IN VIRTUAL ROLL CALL COULD COME AS EARLY AS THIS MONTH
The president also brought in over $8 million a few days later at a fundraiser at the Northern Virginia home of former Gov. Terry McAuliffe, where Biden was also joined by former President Bill Clinton and former Secretary of State and former Sen. Hillary Clinton, who was the Democrats’ 2016 standard-bearer.
But boosting the June fundraising to higher heights was the $33 million the campaign says was raised last Thursday through Saturday, the day of the first presidential debate and the following two days. And the Biden campaign showcased that their single best hour of fundraising this cycle came during the 11pm to midnight eastern hour on Thursday, immediately after the end of the debate with Trump in Atlanta, Georgia.
The Biden campaign has been spotlighting its pre- and post-debate fundraising as it aims to alter the brutal conversation coming out of last week’s showdown. This, after the 81-year-old president’s halting delivery and stumbling answers at the debate sparked widespread panic in the Democratic Party and spurred calls from political pundits, editorial writers, and some party politicians and donors, for Biden to step aside as the party’s 2024 nominee.
The campaign also showcased its grassroots appeal, noting that nearly two-thirds of June’s haul came from small-dollar donors and that more than $30 million of the $38 million raised during the final few days of the month came from grassroots contributors.
“Our Q2 fundraising haul is a testament to the committed and growing base of supporters standing firmly behind the President and Vice President and clear evidence that our voters understand the choice in this election between President Biden fighting for the American people and Donald Trump fighting for himself as a convicted felon,” Biden campaign manager Julie Chavez Rodriguez said in a statement.
DNC chair Jaime Harrison noted that “grassroots donors across the country are chipping in every day because they know that this election will determine the course of history.”
In announcing their May fundraising figures, the Biden campaign waited until June 20, the final day the presidential campaigns had to file their monthly fundraising figures with the Federal Election Commission (FEC).
But when it came to announcing their June and second quarter figures, the Biden campaign wasted no time in showcasing their numbers, announcing them just two days after the fundraising period ended.
Biden and the DNC enjoyed a large fundraising lead over Trump and the Republican National Committee earlier this year. But Trump and the RNC topped Biden and the DNC in fundraising for the first time in April.
And in May, the Trump campaign and the RNC, fueled in part by a fundraising surge following the former president’s history-making guilty verdicts in his criminal trial, combined hauled in a stunning $141 million, easily besting Biden and the DNC.
The Trump campaign has until later this month to file its fundraising figures with the FEC and has yet to announce its June and second quarter hauls.
Fundraising, along with public opinion polling, is a key metric used to measure the strength of a candidate and their campaign. Money raised can be used to build up grassroots outreach and get-out-the-vote operations, staffing, travel and ads, among other things.
The Biden campaign has been using its funds to build up what appears to be a very formidable ground operation in the key battleground states and announced two weeks ago that they had hired their 1,000th staffer and had opened over 200 coordinated offices in the swing states. The Biden campaign enjoys a large organizational advantage over the Trump campaign when it comes to grassroots outreach and get-out-the-vote ground game efforts in the states that will likely decide the outcome of the election rematch.
“Team Biden-Harris grew its historic war chest while also significantly expanding its footprint and operations both in HQ and across the key states – the resources needed to win a close election,” the campaign highlighted in a release.
Get the latest updates from the 2024 campaign trail, exclusive interviews and more at our Fox News Digital election hub.
A highly anticipated ruling by the Supreme Court that former presidents enjoy wide-ranging immunity for their official acts while in the White House was repeatedly praised by former President Trump in the hours after the high court’s blockbuster opinion.
“BRILLIANTLY WRITTEN AND WISE,” Trump wrote in a social media post about the ruling, which likely dealt a major blow to the ongoing prosecution of Trump on charges he aimed to subvert his 2020 election loss to President Biden.
“THE SUPREME COURT DECISION IS A MUCH MORE POWERFUL ONE THAN SOME HAD EXPECTED IT TO BE,” Trump spotlighted.
The move on Monday by the conservative-dominated court – including three justices nominated by Trump – means that the trial judge in the lower court case against Trump will now have to hold hearings on whether the charges against Trump were based on official acts by the then-president or unofficial ones.
WHAT TRUMP TOLD FOX NEWS ABOUT THE SUPREME COURT RULING
That process will take time, and it’s extremely unlikely Trump will go on trial for trying to overturn the 2020 election before voters cast ballots in the 2024 rematch between the former president and his Democratic successor.
Trump called it a “big win for our Constitution and for democracy” during an exclusive interview with Fox News’ Brooke Singman.
TRUMP IMMUNITY CASE: SUPREME COURT RULES EX-PRESIDENTS HAVE SUBSTANTIAL PROTECTION FROM PROSECUTION
But Biden principal deputy campaign manager Quentin Fulks, in a conference call with reporters, charged that “this decision will give Donald Trump cover to do exactly what he’s been saying he wants to do for months, which is enact revenge and retribution against his political enemies.”
“This is a pivotal moment for our country. The conservative justices on the court, three of whom are only there because of Donald Trump, just made it easier for him to pursue a path to a dictatorship,” Fulks argued.
A major question going forward is what kind of impact the Supreme Court ruling on presidential immunity will have on the Biden-Trump rematch with just over four months to go until the November election.
The president has long charged that Trump is a threat to democracy and his argument is a central tenant of his campaign for a second term in the White House.
And in an address Monday night, Biden hammered home the point.
“The American people must decide if Trump’s embrace of violence to preserve his power is acceptable. Perhaps most importantly, the American people must decide if they want to entrust the presidency to Donald Trump once again. Now knowing, he’ll be even more emboldened to do whatever he pleases, whenever he wants to do it,” the president emphasized.
Some Biden supporters see a silver lining in the move by the Supreme Court.
Longtime Democratic strategist and presidential campaign veteran Maria Carodona said the “ruling is a shot in the arm to voters who care about our democracy, our Constitution, and the rule of law. It is a shot in the arm for them to work their butts off to elect President Biden because the Supreme Court ruling was a victory for one person, Donald Trump, and it was a huge loss for the country, and our democracy.”
Voters need to understand that presidents matter when it comes to the make up of the court. Today’s dangerous decision that came out of the Trump-molded MAGA court is proof of that,” Cardona, a committee member on the Democratic National Committee, argued.
Democratic strategist Joe Caiazzo, another veteran of multiple presidential campaigns, emphasized that voters will remember the ruling when they cast their ballot in the autumn.
“The stakes of the election continue to grow as this activist court has attacked reproductive rights, environmental protection and now the integrity of the ability to hold elected officials accountable for their actions. Voters will remember this in November,” Caiazzo said.
But longtime Republican consultant and communicator Ryan Williams, who served on a handful of GOP presidential campaigns, spotlighted that the ruling “makes it less likely Trump will be in courtrooms before the election. That’s a win for Trump.”
“The general consensus was that the more serious charges were in the federal cases and by moving them to after the election, they are removed as a distraction during the campaign,” Ryan added. “Trump can now continue to campaign and focus on the election rather than preparing for trial prior to Election Day. That’s a win for him.”
Get the latest updates from the 2024 campaign trail, exclusive interviews and more at our Fox News Digital election hub.
As calls for President Biden to retire have increased in the Democratic Party following Thursday night’s presidential debate against former President Donald Trump, replacing him could prove to be an uphill legal hurdle, albeit one that some political groups are already preparing for. Biden’s troubles come amid a recent series of progressive figures in Congress and the courts who have refused to retire despite pressure from liberal activists.
“The leverage is pretty much all with President Biden,” Mike Howell, executive director of the Heritage Oversight Project – a conservative watchdog group – told Fox News Digital in an interview.
“It is much more difficult to forcefully replace him than it would be for him to voluntarily withdraw, and so I expect that is the nature of the conversations. I think the only people right now that are fighting to keep President Biden on the ballot are President Biden, Jill Biden and, interestingly enough, me, because we will sue to make sure his name stays on the ballot.”
JILL BIDEN BACKS HUSBAND AFTER BRUTAL DEBATE, TELLS VOGUE ‘WE WILL CONTINUE TO FIGHT’
Howell added it’s “not easy” to fill a replacement for a presidential candidate, which would create a “massive legal and logistical nightmare for the replacement candidate.”
“There are precedents of candidates dying and other state and local races before, but this is unchartered territory, because it’s presidential and so what you have are basically 50 different steps, sets of rules, laws, procedures and political environments that they have to navigate through,” Howell said. “And so ultimately, whatever they do, it will be so fact dependent that certain states will become more important than others.”
And Biden isn’t the first Democrat politician or liberal political figure to disappoint progressives by refusing such calls to retire.
FIRST 2024 TRUMP-BIDEN PRESIDENTIAL DEBATE: TOP CLASHES OVER ISSUES FROM THE BORDER TO UKRAINE
The late U.S. Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg died in 2020 after 27 years in her seat. She was 87 years old when she died during President Trump’s term in office. Amy Coney Barrett was nominated and successfully confirmed to replace her on the bench.
Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., died in September at age 90. Just hours before her death, she cast her last Senate vote. The seat is now one of this election’s hotly contested seats, with Republican candidate and ex-MLB star Steve Garvey and Rep. Adam Schiff vying for the job.
Rep. Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., 84, also a former speaker of the House, has faced calls to retire. Instead, Pelosi has doubled down and vowed to seek re-election this year to extend her 36-year House tenure. Pelosi has long been a lightning rod who generates Republican passions and is a boon for conservative fundraising and get-out-the-vote drives.
WATCH: FOX NEWS DIGITAL FOCUS GROUP REACTS TO TRUMP SAYING HIS RETRIBUTION WILL BE SUCCESS
On the other side of the aisle, Sen. Minority Leader Mitch McConnell – the longest serving Senate party leader in history – also faced growing calls from his party to retire last year. McConnell announced he would step down from his leadership position in November.
“There’s not a comparison between him and Biden because Republicans called on McConnell to step down, and McConnell is stepping down,” Howell added. “So, that is an apples to oranges thing.”
The president’s mental acuity became the center of political discourse last month after a bombshell Washington Journal report, which the White House dismissed, revealed that many lawmakers on Capitol Hill had questions about Biden’s mental acuity after many said his aging was apparent in private meetings.
Get the latest updates from the 2024 campaign trail, exclusive interviews and more at our Fox News Digital election hub.
New York has not favored a Republican presidential candidate since Ronald Reagan’s 1980 and 1984 upsets, but that trend is likely to change, state Republican Party Chair Ed Cox told Fox News Digital in a Monday interview.
President Biden’s tenure is increasingly showing parallels to that of then-President Carter, Cox said, adding that while the Empire State is a blue state, it is truly “blue-collar blue, not West-Side-Manhattan blue.”
In that regard, Cox said, while the state has high-profile pockets of progressive strongholds, New Yorkers overall are “pragmatic” and are truly having déjà vu from the run-up to the last time the state shocked the country on Election Day.
“We have a lot of independents here in New York. And they’re the ones who are going to take a look, and they’re going to say, ‘Are we going to risk [it]?’” Cox said, underlining his belief Trump can win its 28 electoral votes.
“New Yorkers take a look at what’s going on in the foreign arena and the weakness of [Biden].”
Cox said he had come to his conclusion prior to Biden’s disastrous debate performance, but added the forum did underline his case.
“It just shows again that Biden is just out of touch with what the American people want, probably because of his infirmities, whatever you want to say. But Carter was out of touch, too, if you take a look at his malaise speech,” Cox said.
“It’s not quite the same, but it still shows they’re out of touch with where the American people are while President Trump is in touch. It leads to other very interesting analogies.”
Cox noted that Reagan’s “Are you better off than you were four years ago” remark was a game-changer against Carter, drawing a parallel to Trump’s rally reminders of his four-year record and saying that messaging will again resonate in New York.
Cox noted that Hispanic and African-American voting blocs in the state are shifting in Trump’s favor. He said he attended the former president’s recent Bronx rally and saw that assertion personified in the massive crowd at Crotona Park.
In 1980, New Yorkers were feeling the weight of “stagflation” under Carter and a floundering GDP in what was and is the business capital of the world, Cox said. The chair is also the son-in-law of another president from that era: Richard Nixon.
CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP
“It was ‘It’s the economy, stupid’ then, and it’s ‘It’s the economy, stupid’ now,” Cox said.
While former Rep. Lee Zeldin, R-N.Y., came very close by New York standards to defeating Gov. Kathy Hochul, he still fell short.
Zeldin, too, was buoyed by a tough-on-crime message, while unlike the state’s last Republican governor, George Pataki, he had to prematurely expend resources in a costly primary.
When asked why 2024 would look different from 2020 in that respect, when Biden won New York by double digits, Cox returned to the pragmatism he sees in New Yorkers.
Democrats within New York also tend to support more populist candidates, he said, pointing to how New York Mayor Eric Adams trounced more progressive opponents in his primary before defeating GOP nominee Curtis Sliwa.
CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP
In making the case for Trump’s chances, Cox pointed to the state’s beginnings in present-day New York City:
“Go back to New Amsterdam. Why did people leave the Netherlands to come to the United States? Because Amsterdam was a wide-open city that judged people on their merit. Yeah, they smoked too much, they drank too much, this and that. But by golly, they were an energetic international city where people were judged on their merit,” he said.
“New York inherited that.”
In that way, New Yorkers are likely to judge Trump and Biden on their merits now that they have lived through four years of each, giving the former a better shot, Cox added.
A Republican has not held statewide federal office there since Sen. Al D’Amato preceded Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., in 1998.
Fox News Digital reached out to several New York Democrats for comment, while Hochul’s office could not be immediately reached.
