
Voters call for more ‘transparent' NY-21 special election
SARANAC LAKE — A Saranac Lake resident, Fred Balzac, is asking local government boards to pass a resolution supporting his call for a more open special election process for the NY-21 Congressional seat, which Rep. Elise Stefanik is expected to be vacating soon.
Party chairs, who are tasked with picking the candidates to run for their parties in the special election, say they are following the law and being as fair and transparent as possible. But Balzac, a local activist and Saranac Lake resident, called the current process 'anti-democratic' and is advocating for a more transparent process.
A special election is not run like a normal election. Instead of primaries — where members of each party vote on who will represent their party on the ballot — the candidates are selected by the 15 county party chairs in the district.
Essentially, its a primary with only 15 voters.
Balzac's proposed resolution voices support for a state Assembly bill which would add primary elections to the special election process. This would not be able to be passed soon enough to impact the impending special election process. But his resolution also calls for several other changes to the current process to make them more open to the public.
It is unclear if any of these requests will be taken up by the party chairs.
Warren County Democratic Chair Lynne Boecher, who is heading up her party's 15 county chairs, said they're not being secretive. They're doing more than is legally required. By law, the chairs don't even need to solicit candidates to apply, or to interview them.
Boecher's heard from plenty of people who are frustrated by the special election process. She understands it, but said they're just following state law.
'It would be a lot easier on the 15 of us if we did have a primary,' Boecher said. 'This is the process that we're stuck with.'
The Enterprise was not able to reach Warren County Republican Chair Tim McNulty, who is heading up the GOP's process.
Balzac presented his resolution to the Saranac Lake village and town of North Elba boards. Right now, it does not appear either board will be taking the resolution up for a vote. Balzac said his resolution has been endorsed by the state Green Party, the local World BEYOND War chapter and the local NY-21 Congress Watchdogs group Balzac helped found.
He's passionate about the issue because he believes it is likely the winner of the election will be a major party candidate. The winner will be up for election again in 2026. He said incumbents typically have an easier time keeping their seat.
'The winner of this election is likely going to be somebody who could potentially be in office for a long time … and they were picked by 15 people,' Balzac said. 'The selection of a party's nominee should not be relegated to 15 county chairpersons haggling in the modern equivalent of a smoke-filled room — that is, what's likely to be a Zoom or other online session closed to the public.'
The resolution requests the party chairs to release the names and application materials of each candidate and for them to host online and in-person forums with the candidates to hear them talk side-by-side. This would provide 'maximum transparency' with the 'widest possible input,' he said.
'Democracy is at its strongest when the greatest number of citizens as possible have a say in making decisions that affect their lives,' the resolution reads.
Balzac knows the time is short to hold forums, but said it wouldn't take long to set up.
'It's not that hard to set up a Zoom meeting,' Balzac said.
A Zoom webinar fits 500 people and attendees other than potential candidates and moderators would only be viewers.
'Where there's a will, there's a way,' Balzac said.
He said the application forms could be released with personal information removed or redacted. If people want to run for Congress, he feels they should all be public.
Boecher said they could release information and hold public forums, but at the end of the day, the 15 chairs still make the call.
All the Democratic chairs agreed to not share other chair contact information with the candidates. They had to reach out on their own with a letter and resume. Boecher said this set up a couple 'hoops' to jump through in an effort to get serious candidates, and ones who knew the area well enough to apply. So far, 10 Democratic candidates have jumped through those hoops. The chairs have interviewed all 10, having them pitch to the group over Zoom calls.
Between 10 and 20 people have applied for the Republican Party's slot. All GOP chairs have met individually with each of the candidates several times.
There's not a formal way to give public input to the county chairs. But Boecher said voters are calling them 'left and right' asking who they are going to choose. They're getting campaigned to from candidates and voters alike.
Balzac's resolution calls for the prioritization of candidates having detailed positions over the ability to self-fund their campaign. Boecher said self-funding is an important part of their process. Running for office is not cheap and local political parties do not have much money. Candidates need to be able to figure out funding to win, she said.
The Senate Foreign Relations Committee's vote on Stefanik's nomination is set for today. If her nomination is advanced by this committee, then it will go to the full Senate to vote on. If the Senate approves her appointment, it is likely she'll resign from the House shortly afterward.
After Stefanik submits a resignation letter, Gov. Kathy Hochul will have 10 days to issue a proclamation calling for a special election. Then, the election must be held within 70 to 80 days of the proclamation. Major party nominations must be made within 10 days of Hochul announcing the election. The party chairs' votes are weighted by the number of party members in their county. Independent candidates will have 12 days to collect signatures to be nominated.
Manhattan Democratic Assemblymember Linda Rosenthal has proposed a bill to reform special elections and add primaries at least nine times since 2009. It has never left committee. The bill would extend the special election to 90 days after the governor calls for it, instead of the 70-80 it is now, and would hold primary elections on the first Tuesday falling between 30 and 36 days before the special election.
Rosenthal recently reintroduced the bill again for the current legislative year.
Local Democratic chairs
Essex County Democratic Chair Maggie Bartley said she gets a 5% weighted vote out of the 15 party chairs.
She is amazed with the number of people who have applied and said the parade of candidate hopefuls has been a bit overwhelming. But, she added, that's a good thing. She said the candidates are all sincere, with good Democratic values and good American values.
Bartley said she understands the weight of making the candidate decision for voters of her party.
'We're trying to be very fair,' she said. 'We're trying to make sure that everyone who wants to, has the opportunity to submit and give us their sales pitch.'
There's been a lot of them.
'I'm amazed that there are so many, because so often, I can't get one candidate to run for an office,' Bartley said.
She's telling prospective candidates if they don't get picked to represent the party in the NY-21 race she'll ask them to run for another office. She's hoping this surge in candidates will be a catalyst for other positions around the area.
Bartley said the special election needs to happen this way. The state doesn't want to leave seats with long vacancies.
Franklin County Democratic Chair Kathy Fleury said she wouldn't say much before there's a vacancy in Stefanik's position, but she's looking for a candidate who can bring back services to the North Country.
Boecher said they're all ready to vote when Stefanik resigns. She just hopes Mother Nature cooperates, since they plan to meet in person to vote. She's hoping for a consensus on who her party picks.
Local Republican chairs
Franklin County Republican Chair Jason Ellis said he gets a 4.95% weighted vote out of the 15 party chairs. Ellis said with the compressed timeline, he feels there's not enough time for a primary vote. This puts a 'huge responsibility' on the chairs and he takes it seriously.
'It's a privilege to be a part of it,' he said.
He plans to pick the person he believes will represent the district and Franklin County the best, as well as someone who will be as visible as Stefanik was. She set a 'high bar,' he said.
He feels the GOP is blessed with a lot of of good candidates and is confident they'll be able to keep the seat in their party.
Essex County Republican Chair John Gereau said he wouldn't say much before there's a vacancy in Stefanik's position.
The election
This special election will be a strange one, all the chairs said. They're all curious about who their party will pick to run as a candidate, and more so, who the other party will pick. With so many people seeking nominations, it's hard for any of them to predict.
After their candidates are selected, then they'll all be starting 'get out the vote' efforts. Special elections historically have low turnout and with both major parties vying for control of the district in a House with a slim Republican majority, each group will want as many of their members to cast ballots as possible.
Bartley pointed out that many normal election practices can't happen with a special election, even down to lawn signs. The ground is frozen and they'll get covered in snow by plows, she said. Traditional methods of stirring up voters are out the window. Also, she said that many North Country residents spend winters in warmer climates down south, so she's expecting a lot of absentee voting.
With the House having a close party split after the last election, this race could also attract national attention for its importance for both parties.

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles

Business Insider
28 minutes ago
- Business Insider
What A-list economists are saying about Trump's tax bill as Musk rebels against it
Elon Musk has departed his role as a "special government employee" in Trump's White House — and he's using his time outside the administration to hammer the GOP spending bill that's a cornerstone of the president's agenda. "This massive, outrageous, pork-filled Congressional spending bill is a disgusting abomination," Musk wrote on X earlier this week. Trump responded by saying Musk's criticism of the legislation is "disappointing." President Trump's tax bill will likely face a vote in the Senate in the coming weeks after passing the House in May. It would reduce the tax rates of lower-income workers, particularly those earning less than $107,200, and eliminate taxes on tips, social security, and overtime. The bill would also cut spending on social programs like Medicaid and SNAP benefits, which provide food assistance to low-income Americans. Like Musk, investors and economists are seemingly concerned that the bill will cause the national debt to balloon and further widen the US budget deficit. The non-partisan Congressional Budget Office said this week that it would grow the deficit by $2.4 trillion over the next decade . Trump and his allies have pushed back, arguing that higher economic growth from lower taxes would help boost government revenue. Here's what top economists are saying about the bill. Phillip L. Swagel, director of the Congressional Budget Office Despite the lower tax rates for low earners, Swagel said in a May 20 letter that the bill would negatively impact poorer Americans. "CBO estimates that household resources would decrease by an amount equal to about 2 percent of income in the lowest decile (tenth) of the income distribution in 2027 and 4 percent in 2033, mainly as a result of losses of in-kind transfers, such as Medicaid and SNAP," he wrote. "By contrast, resources would increase by an amount equal to 4 percent for households in the highest decile in 2027 and 2 percent in 2033, mainly because of reductions in the taxes they owe." William McBride, chief economist at the Tax Foundation McBride, along with several colleagues at the non-partisan Tax Foundation think tank, said in a May 23 report that while the bill would support economic growth, it wouldn't be enough to offset the revenue loss from tax cuts. "Our preliminary analysis finds the tax provisions included in the House-passed bill would increase long-run GDP by 0.8 percent," the report said. "The bill's tax and spending changes would increase the 10-year budget deficit by $2.6 trillion from 2025 through 2034 on a conventional basis before added interest costs. On a dynamic basis, accounting for economic growth, the deficit would increase by $1.7 trillion over ten years before interest costs." It continued: "The bill's tax provisions alone would reduce federal tax revenue by $4.1 trillion from 2025 through 2034 on a conventional basis before added interest costs. On a dynamic basis, accounting for economic growth, the revenue reduction would fall by nearly 22 percent to $3.2 trillion over 10 years before added interest costs." 6 Nobel Laureates Six Nobel Prize-winning economists — including Daron Acemoglu, Simon Johnson, Peter Diamond, Paul Krugman, Oliver Hart, and Joseph Stiglitz — said in a June 2 letter that the bill would worsen wealth inequality in the US. "The combination of cuts to key safety net programs like Medicaid and SNAP and tax cuts disproportionately benefiting higher-income households means that the House budget constitutes an extremely large upward redistribution of income. Given how much this bill adds to the U.S. debt, it is shocking that it still imposes absolute losses on the bottom 40% of U.S households," the letter said. "The House bill addresses none of the nation's key economic challenges usefully and exacerbates many of them," it added. Ken Rogoff, professor of economics at Harvard University Rogoff, former chief economist at the IMF, cast doubt on the notion that the bill would boost growth in a piece for Project Syndicate this week. "Trump and his acolytes argue that his "big, beautiful bill" will supercharge economic growth, generating enough revenue to make up for sweeping tax cuts. But history offers little support for such claims," he wrote. "While both Democratic-led spending sprees and Republican-backed tax cuts have fueled the growth of US debt over the past two decades, tax reductions have accounted for the lion's share of the increase. Moreover, the notion that tax cuts pay for themselves was already discredited in the 1980s, when President Ronald Reagan's tax cuts led to soaring deficits rather than self-sustaining growth." He added: "Will America's rising debt ultimately trigger a full-blown crisis? Perhaps, but a continued upward drift in long-term interest rates is more likely." Desmond Lachman, senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute Lachman, a former IMF official who currently works for a conservative-leaning think tank, said in a June 4 post that rising bond yields, a declining dollar, and appreciating gold prices could be harbingers of an economic crisis brought on by Trump-driven policy volatility. Trump's tax bill is adding to investors' fears due to its inflationary implications. But one of its clauses undermines confidence in the reliability of the returns on Treasurys, he said. "That bill includes a clause that has to be sending shivers down foreign investors' spines. According to Section 899, the US Treasury can impose additional taxes of up to 20 percent on income earned by foreign entities from countries that enact taxes deemed 'unfair' to US interests."
Yahoo
29 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Trump-Musk Alliance Unravels Over ‘Big Beautiful Bill'
(Bloomberg) -- From the moment Donald Trump and Elon Musk joined forces, betting in Washington held that the president's bond with the First Buddy who bankrolled his comeback election win wouldn't last. ICE Moves to DNA-Test Families Targeted for Deportation with New Contract Next Stop: Rancho Cucamonga! US Housing Agency Vulnerable to Fraud After DOGE Cuts, Documents Warn Where Public Transit Systems Are Bouncing Back Around the World The Global Struggle to Build Safer Cars The breakup finally arrived this week, an escalating tit-for-tat between the world's richest man and the president of the US, who spent much of Thursday sniping at one another via social media posts and cameras in the Oval Office. Speaking to reporters, Trump pronounced himself 'very disappointed' in Musk over the billionaire's harsh criticism of a Republican tax and spending bill. Posting on X, his social media platform, Musk declared that Trump wouldn't have won a second term without his help. 'Such ingratitude,' the Tesla Inc. and SpaceX CEO declared. For a rift that had seemed inevitable, the descent into public recrimination was startling, even by Trump's volatile standard, which often sees former allies and underlings cast aside without fanfare. Musk spent the early months of Trump's second term offering obsequious praise and absorbing some of the political backlash of the slashing budget cuts and employee firings that have been a pillar of Trump's agenda. Trump, meanwhile, had elevated Musk, a government novice in a temporary role, to a position of unprecedented breadth to reshape and unmake the entire federal bureaucracy, with only occasional checks from the agency heads actually confirmed by the Senate. But on Thursday, their blow-up found Trump accusing Musk of trying to tank the spending bill because its elimination of electric vehicle credits hurt Tesla's bottom line, while Musk took to social media posts to deny Trump's Oval Office comments and taunt the president with his own past postings. 'Where is this guy today??' Musk wrote. Musk went so far as to poll his social media followers about whether he should 'create a new political party in America that actually represents the 80% in the middle?' Their relationship first blossomed at the height of the 2024 presidential campaign and deepened as Musk joined the new administration to slash the federal bureaucracy — a role that aligned with the tech titan's commercial interests and his politics with the philosophy of others in the incoming administration, like Russ Vought, the director of the Office and Management and Budget. But it unraveled this week over the unavoidable task of putting the administration's rhetoric about spending into practice, via a tax bill that's the centerpiece of Trump's domestic agenda. With posts on social media urging lawmakers to reject Trump's 'Big Beautiful Bill,' Musk exposed a rupture that had been growing between him and the president for weeks, fueled at first by clashes with cabinet members over agency cuts and differences with the administration's sweeping tariff plans. Musk's public break with Trump threatens further fallout for the allies he helped to install in key positions across federal agencies during his time overseeing the Department of Government Efficiency that he prodded Trump to create. It also raises questions about whether the biggest billionaire spender of the 2024 election will remain a reliable source of campaign funding to sustain Republican control of the House in the midterm elections and to make permanent Trump's political movement. Steve Bannon, the former White House chief strategist who was deputized in 2017 to confront Musk about his demands for EV and battery mandates, said he cautioned Trump and his inner circle about the entrepreneur after the 2024 election. 'I warned people in the transition, this guy is unpredictable, immature and a narcissist, and he'd turn on anybody — including the president — when it suited him,' says Bannon, who has frequently criticized Musk on his 'War Room' podcast. Bannon says Musk's downfall from his status as 'Chief Buddy' was inevitable, because he could not produce the $1 trillion in budget cuts he claimed he could during the transition. 'He was too incompetent and lied about being able to find a trillion dollars of cuts in waste, fraud and abuse,' says Bannon. 'He misled everybody, including the president.' Trump's Orbit Administration officials who have bristled at Musk's power and bedside manner have been moving to reassert their influence in the executive branch since he announced his departure from DOGE, people familiar with the matter said. That includes the installation of a close associate of White House Chief of Staff Susie Wiles as chief of staff at NASA – an agency that is crucial to SpaceX, a company that makes up a third of his net worth. People familiar with the matter said the withdrawal of the nomination of Jared Isaacman, a Musk ally who was poised to run the space agency, was driven by Sergio Gor – the director of the Presidential Personnel Office, with whom Musk had sparred during his DOGE tenure. 'A lot of Musk's power stemmed from the fact that he was seen as an extension of Trump,' said Stephen Myrow, who runs Beacon Policy Advisers. 'But now that there's distance between them, that power might be waning.' 'I always talk about the 'evolving orbit' around Trump – people are always drifting in and out,' Myrow added. 'I wouldn't say Musk's relationship with Trump is severed. But between Isaacman's nomination being pulled and his public criticisms of the tax bill, he looks to be in the waning phase of his orbit.' Earlier: Former NASA Nominee Suggests Ties to Musk Caused His Ouster A White House official in an email pointed to multiple past donations that Isaacman had made to Democrats, suggesting that was the reason his nomination was nixed. In a podcast interview Wednesday, Isaacman said he didn't believe that was the reason, given the information had long been publicly available. 'President Trump is the ultimate decision maker on who has the privilege of serving in his historic administration,' White House spokesperson Liz Huston said. 'Any claims to the contrary are completely false.' Musk didn't respond to a message seeking comment. On X, his social media platform, one user said Isaacman's removal was a 'gut punch for the space agency,' to which Musk responded with a '100' emoji, indicating he agreed 100%. 'At Great Personal Cost' The fissure caps a roller-coaster 11 months from Musk's endorsement of Trump in July of 2024. Musk spent hundreds of millions of dollars to elect Trump and Republicans in 2024, and when the once and future president defeated Kamala Harris in November's election, he turned to Musk to lead an effort to slash the size and scope of government. Musk scythed through the federal bureaucracy while Trump unleashed a flurry of executive actions, each seeking to dismantle the administrative state at what the White House came to call 'Trump speed.' Yet swift progress on conservative priorities came with a price tag for Musk, who has seen his own net worth plummet in part because of reputational tarnish at home and abroad from his political actions and affiliation with Trump. Musk's net worth — much of it tied to the performance of Tesla — has dropped an estimated $64.1 billion so far this year, according to data compiled by Bloomberg Billionaires Index. It's the largest on-paper loss of any of the world's 500 richest people. And now, on his top political focus point of deficit reduction, any success Musk can claim — achieved, in his own words, 'at great personal cost and risk' — may be drowned out by the president's own signature legislation. The Congressional Budget Office projected that the House-passed tax and spending bill at the center of Trump's legislative agenda would add more than $2.4 trillion to US budget deficits over the next 10 years, slashing revenues by $3.67 trillion while only cutting spending by $1.25 trillion. That's way above even DOGE's most optimistic savings estimates. Its government website listing estimated savings states that DOGE has saved taxpayers about $180 billion year-to-date. However its 'Wall of Receipts' — a line-by-line list of contracts, grants and leases canceled since Inauguration Day — only accounts for less than half of that number. Adding to the risk for Musk's bottom line, Trump's bill would wipe out some valuable tax incentives that bolster his own companies. Musk personally appealed to House Speaker Mike Johnson to save tax credits for electric vehicles, according to a person familiar with the matter, but ultimately lost that fight. In an interview with Bloomberg Television on Thursday, Johnson did not confirm whether Musk had approached him over the credits, but said the two would speak later in the day, adding that Musk seems 'pretty dug in right now, and I can't quite understand the motivation behind it.' Musk's criticism of the spending package built slowly. On Tuesday, however, Musk lashed out, posting on his social media platform, X, that the bill was 'pork-filled' and 'a disgusting abomination.' Adding insult to injury for the White House, Musk has embraced the very argument that the administration has been trying to combat, noting the bill would significantly widen the federal budget deficit. By Wednesday afternoon, Musk was posting about 'debt slavery' and sharing an image of Uma Thurman holding a samurai sword — the poster for the film 'Kill Bill.' Widening Rift The rift between the two billionaire showmen — each renowned for seeking out the spotlight, and not for sharing it — had seemed to be widening for a while. Even as Musk embraced his DOGE role and continued making periodic appearances at the White House, he broke with some of Trump's policies. Musk has criticized tariffs, the primary tool in Trump's economic agenda, but one that has shown the potential for massive disruption in markets Musk moves in, including those for batteries critical to the fate of Tesla's automotive and energy units. An outside Trump adviser said the president remained furious about an incident, reported by The New York Times, in which Musk angled to obtain a classified briefing from the Pentagon about the upshot of a war with China, where Musk has extensive economic interests, especially via Tesla. As public furor grew over DOGE's unilateral cuts to federal agencies, Trump publicly reined Musk in, asserting that cabinet officials would have final say over proposed reductions. In a May 20 appearance at the Qatar Economic Forum, Musk told Bloomberg's Mishal Husain he intended to pull back from political giving, only months after spending nearly $300 million to boost Trump's successful campaign for the White House. Sour Taste Behind the scenes, Musk's sojourn through the West Wing left a sour taste for some officials, according to the outside adviser and one person within the administration. The outside adviser particularly noted Musk's brusque treatment of Wiles, who managed Trump's victorious campaign before joining the administration. It was a longtime Wiles ally, Brian Hughes, who was sent to serve as NASA chief of staff, a position from which he could serve as a check in an agency that is central to SpaceX's fortunes. A senior White House official said Wiles and Musk had a cordial and collaborative relationship, and that the chief of staff met weekly with the tech entrepreneuer as he led DOGE. The official said Hughes had long wanted to work at NASA, and that his placement there was not an effort to keep tabs on Musk and SpaceX. A person familiar with SpaceX discounted the chance that bad blood between Musk and Trump would have an immediate negative effect on the company, because it has carved out such a dominant position in the launch business even as corporate rivals have struggled. But the person said there is frustration that the company's brand has been damaged, first with Democrats who were appalled by Musk's embrace of Trump and DOGE's tactics, and now with Trump supporters in Washington, who will likely side with the president over Musk. But Musk's time with Trump has already yielded benefits in other ways, said Myrow, especially in areas where the administration or DOGE pulled the plug on aspects of the regulatory state that had previously tangled with his companies. 'For Musk personally, the SEC stuff went away,' Myrow said, referring to Securities and Exchange Commission investigations. 'And he's long wanted to turn X into an 'everything app,' and now a lot of the regulations that would have inhibited that are going away.' --With assistance from Nancy Cook, Erik Wasson, Annmarie Hordern, Lisa Abramowicz, Michael Shepard and Derek Wallbank. (Updates with Musk, Trump remarks in paragraphs 3, 6; Bannon remarks in paragraphs 12-14) Cavs Owner Dan Gilbert Wants to Donate His Billions—and Walk Again YouTube Is Swallowing TV Whole, and It's Coming for the Sitcom Millions of Americans Are Obsessed With This Japanese Barbecue Sauce Is Elon Musk's Political Capital Spent? Trump Considers Deporting Migrants to Rwanda After the UK Decides Not To ©2025 Bloomberg L.P. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data


New York Post
29 minutes ago
- New York Post
Andrew Cuomo and Zohran Mamdani's posture reveals how Dems really felt during tense NYC mayoral debate showdown: experts
Ex-Gov. Andrew Cuomo dodging an onslaught of jabs and socialist state Assemblyman Zohran Mamdani trying to snag a viral breakout moment were among the standouts from New York City's mayoral Democratic primary debate. Body language experts weighed in after the Democratic candidates sparred against each other Wednesday in the first debate of the 2025 primary election — as they jostled to outshine in each other in an already overcrowded race. Here's what they had to say of the top moments: Advertisement 5 The Democratic candidates for New York City mayor participating in a debate on June 4, 2025. Pool/ABACA/Shutterstock A rapidly blinking Cuomo Despite being the front-runner, Cuomo's body language clearly shifted as the NBC-Politico debate wore on as he was relentlessly attacked by his fellow candidates over more than two hours. The former governor, 67, dramatically increased his blinking when peppered with questions about his handling of COVID nursing home deaths and the sexual harassment scandal that led to his resignation, according to Washington DC-based body language expert Christopher Ulrich. Advertisement 'Initially confident and expressive, Cuomo's posture changed over time — particularly when he was under attack,' Ulrich said. 5 Former Gov. Andrew Cuomo looked uncomfortable as the attacks from other candidates continued, body language experts told The Post. 'We also saw an increase in blink rate when asked questions about COVID-19 nursing home deaths and sexual harassment.' The behavior, the expert noted, was a clear sign of 'increased psychological discomfort.' Hand in his pocket Advertisement Cuomo was also repeatedly spotted with his hand in his pocket as the going got tough, according to experts. 'While under verbal attack from the rest of the candidates, we see Cuomo keep his hand in his pocket, a self-soothing or protective gesture that often signals discomfort,' Ulrich said. At various points, Cuomo could be seen staring down at his podium as the attacks continued. 5 Cuomo kept on putting his hand in his pocket throughout the debate. NBC / YouTube Advertisement 'These unrelenting jabs, that obviously hit his sore spots, ultimately resulted in Cuomo looking down at his podium more than he looked up at the other candidates, the hosts or the camera,' brain and body language expert and psychiatrist Carole Lieberman said. 'To remove himself from the hostility directed at him, he began writing something and concentrated on it, so as not to be disturbed.' In search of a viral moment Mamdani, the 33-year-old socialist Queens Assemblyman, repeatedly used wild hand gestures in an apparent bid to steal the spotlight from Cuomo, the experts said. '[He] employed numerous attacks, including references to Cuomo's donors and the COVID report, to try to contrast and achieve one of those viral moments,' Ulrich said, adding that he often gestured toward Cuomo when delivering the attacks. 5 Assemblyman Zohran Mamdani used wild hand gestures to stand out during his clashes with Cuomo, experts say. Lieberman noted that Mamdani — who has zeroed in on young, white, ultra-left New Yorkers during his campaign — often used 'sensational, dramatic language' on stage at 30 Rockefeller Center. 'He is the wild card in the race, as his hand gestures, pointing in all directions, underscored,' she said. 'He was the most animated and determined to outshine Cuomo.' A statesmanlike performance A fired up Rev. Michael Blake came off as 'very stately' — even as the former Obama administration official consistently hammered Cuomo on stage, Lieberman said. Advertisement Ulrich added that Blake, a former Bronx Assembly member, tried to command attention with his Cuomo onslaught. 5 Rev. Michael Blake appeared 'stately' as he stood up to Cuomo. 'Mr. Blake stood out in some of the key moments by demanding Cuomo clarify several of his answers,' he said. 'Reporters often picked up on those demands and would repeat Blakes's clarifying questions. 'By interjecting assertively and keeping others quiet, Blake commanded attention. This approach mirrored techniques used by Trump in the 2016 Republican primary debates,' Ulrich said.