Former NFL kicker Jay Feely says Stephen A. Smith should run for president
Feely, who launched a congressional bid for an open seat in Arizona, joined NewsNation's 'The Hill' on Wednesday to discuss the Trump administration and future races.
Host Blake Burman asked him about political outsider ESPN host Stephen A. Smith, who has thrown around the idea of running in the 2028 election.
'I respect his talent that he has in communicating, because he is an excellent communicator, and he has a way of making that gut value connection with people,' Feely said.
'I would revel in sitting on the opposite side of Stephen A. Smith on a debate stage and us going at it when it comes to political issues and matters that the American people really care about, rather than just sports issues,' he added.
Feely was an advocate for non-traditional people entering politics, like Smith, and those who know how to communicate well.
'It's really about being able to have a vision, communicate that vision and for American people to believe in you,' he said. 'I think what the American people want the most, they want transparency, and they want people to be honest about what they believe.'
Feely announced his congressional campaign last week. He's running to succeed Rep. Andy Biggs (R-Ariz.), who is looking to be the state's next governor.
Feely played in the NFL for more than 10 years for various teams including the Atlanta Falcons and Arizona Cardinals. He later became a sports analyst.
He's a supporter of President Trump and said Wednesday that he loves what the president has done during his first 100 days back in office. Feely highlighted the administration's efforts to secure the border and crackdown on immigration, in addition to other measures.
'What he's trying to do, to get rid of [diversity, equity and inclusion], to change … gender laws and protect our girls, should be applauded by everyone,' he said. 'And you know, I'll be one of those guys that fights for his agenda, believes in his agenda and is an advocate for him.'
Feely said he was upset by various things happening across the country but it wasn't until Trump was nearly assassinated at a campaign rally last year that he started to think about what more he could do and seriously considered running for office.
Feely has lived in Arizona for many years and valued the community in Bigg's 5th Congressional District.
'I wanted to do something that had more meaning, and I felt like running for office was the time now,' he said.
He made a case for a political outsider like him to enter the sphere because there must be fewer self-serving politicians and more civil servants.
'That what I've done my whole life. That's what I did when I was playing football, trying to use that platform. That's what I'll do when I'm in politics in Congress, is try to represent my constituents and represent this country and try to make us better,' Feely said.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Boston Globe
6 minutes ago
- Boston Globe
In his own words: Trump's comments over the past year on the jobs report
Aug. 5, 2024 'STOCK MARKETS ARE CRASHING, JOBS NUMBERS ARE TERRIBLE, WE ARE HEADING TO WORLD WAR lll, AND WE HAVE TWO OF THE MOST INCOMPETENT 'LEADERS' IN HISTORY. THIS IS NOT GOOD!!!' — Trump post on Truth Social Suggesting President Joe Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris were responsible, Trump was reacting to the news that U.S. employees had added 114,000 jobs in July — 35% fewer than expected — and that the unemployment rate was at its highest level in nearly three years. Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up Nov. 1, 2024 Advertisement 'Today's jobs report is a great embarrassment for our Nation. Kamala has lied for years about their pathetic job growth, which has never been real. Kamala killed 46,000 manufacturing jobs, while 773,000 Americans have lost employment in just the last year — all while their jobs have been taken by foreign-born workers. America is a Nation in Decline because Sleepy Joe, and Lyin' Kamala, didn't do their job. 'TRUMP' WILL FIX IT! MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN! GO VOTE!' — Trump post on Truth Social Days ahead of the presidential election, Trump blasted news that U.S. employers had added just 12,000 jobs in October, a total that economists say had been held down by the effects of strikes and hurricanes that left many workers temporarily off payrolls. Advertisement 'Nearly 250,000 people dropped out of the labor force. They dropped out because they couldn't get a job. Can you imagine that? Can you imagine? These are the numbers, and they don't want to talk about it, but that's OK. These numbers are disqualifying.' — Trump campaign rally in Raleigh, North Carolina According to Bureau of Labor Statistics data, around 220,000 people left the civilian U.S. workforce from September to October 2024 during Biden's presidency. April 4, 2025 'GREAT JOB NUMBERS, FAR BETTER THAN EXPECTED. IT'S ALREADY WORKING. HANG TOUGH, WE CAN'T LOSE!!!' — Trump post on Truth Social Trump quickly praised news that in March, U.S. employers had added a surprising 228,000 jobs, showing that the American labor market was in solid shape as he embarked on a risky trade war with the rest of the world. The hiring numbers were up from 117,000 in February and were nearly double the 130,000 that economists had expected. June 6, 2025 'GREAT JOB NUMBERS, STOCK MARKET UP BIG! AT THE SAME TIME, BILLIONS POURING IN FROM TARIFFS!!!' — Trump post on Truth Social Trump responded enthusiastically to the initial numbers on the May jobs report, which indicated that the economy added 139,000 jobs. That estimate was later revised down to 125,000 jobs, prior to the most recent revision down to just 19,000. Aug. 1, 2025 'I was just informed that our Country's 'Jobs Numbers' are being produced by a Biden Appointee, Dr. Erika McEntarfer, the Commissioner of Labor Statistics, who faked the Jobs Numbers before the Election to try and boost Kamala's chances of Victory. ... I have directed my Team to fire this Biden Political Appointee, IMMEDIATELY.' — Trump post on Truth Social Advertisement Trump ousted McEntarfer following a report showed hiring slowed in July and was much weaker in May and June than previously reported, taking issue in subsequent days to the revisions of jobs figures that are a regular occurrence with the monthly reporting.
Yahoo
21 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Trump's shoot-the-messenger tactic will only hurt the economy more
A version of this story appeared in CNN Business' Nightcap newsletter. To get it in your inbox, sign up for free here. We've all been there, in the middle of an objectively bad outcome, and had the same knee-jerk reaction: Blame someone else! Your team lost the big game? Ah, but the refs were clearly biased, and the coach should have taken a time out earlier, and didn't you see how the other team was cheating? Deflect all you want, it won't change the score. That's a lesson President Trump has been unwilling to learn. ICYMI: Trump fired the head of the Bureau of Labor Statistics on Friday because he didn't like facts on the ground it reported about the state of employment in America. And while it's tempting to see the words 'Bureau of Labor Statistics' and think, ugh this sounds boring, stay with me. Because it's hard to overstate just how crucial it is for businesses and policymakers to have reliable labor data available — and how much Trump's actions threaten to erode a century's worth of statistical credibility that the global economy relies on. 'Credible statistics and agency independence go hand in hand,' Aaron Sojourner, a labor economist and senior researcher at the W. E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research, told CNN on Monday. 'Attacking independence damages the credibility of the statistics.' Just to underline the point: US federal stats are the gold standard. They are how we keep a pulse on the giant, messy force that is the world's biggest economy. If that data were to become corrupted, that's the ballgame — businesses and policy makers would be flying blind, making it much harder to prevent (or claw our way out of) a recession. And right now, as Trump's tariffs and cuts to social spending take their toll on American consumers, we need that credible data as much as ever. Here are the facts: On Friday, the BLS showed that we're adding fewer jobs each month than previously estimated — just 106,000 total over the past three months (versus the roughly 150,000 each month that economists generally consider healthy). The past three months were, if you take out the early days of Covid-19, the weakest three months of job growth since 2010. Unemployment ticked up to 4.2% in July from 4.1% in June. The revisions to the May and June numbers were the bigger news: May's total was revised lower to 19,000, down from an initial estimate of 139,000. In June, the economy added just 14,000 jobs, down from a preliminary estimate of 147,000. Those revisions don't look good for Trump, who campaigned on a promise to both bring down prices and revive America's manufacturing sector. And while it's natural for a politician to try to spin bad news or shift the blame, Trump swerved fully into the realm of conspiracy when he claimed the BLS had cooked the books to make the labor market look worse than it is. He's not offering any evidence for that claim, because there is none. But he fired the BLS commissioner, Erika McEntarfer, anyway. 'In my opinion,' he wrote on social media Friday afternoon, the monthly jobs numbers were 'RIGGED' to make Republicans and him look bad. Later, he told reporters, 'I believe the numbers were phony.' 'My opinion' and 'I believe' are doing some heavy lifting. Because as many economists — including several who worked under Republican and Democratic administrations — have pointed out, nothing about the Friday BLS report was fishy. Even one of the White House's top economists, Stephan Miran, went on CNBC shortly after the report came out with a ho-hum analysis. The revisions to May and June numbers, Miran said, 'were not what we or anyone else wanted to see,' but the bad news could be chalked up to seasonal 'quirks' in the data. Trump and White House economic adviser Kevin Hassett have focused their complaints on the revisions the BLS made to the job numbers for May and June. Put simply: The BLS updated its previous monthly reports based on payroll surveys that employers returned late. With more data to draw from, researchers get a more accurate picture. Revisions happen all the time, and while the May and June revisions were historically large, they weren't unprecedented. Trump would rather the numbers simply say what he wants than face the reality that the US economy appears to be weaker today than it was when he took office in January. The decision to fire McEntarfer 'is closer to what one expects from a banana republic than from a major democratic financial center,' wrote Harvard economist Jason Furman over the weekend. 'This is even more senseless than his other threats to fire officials like Jerome Powell, the chairman of the Federal Reserve.' More senseless, that is, because McEntarfer doesn't directly influence US economic policy the way Powell does. Her job was to manage a team of 2,000 people who send out surveys, compile the answers, and generally take the temperature of the labor market at a steady cadence. Their job is to hold a mirror up to the economy, and report back what they see, without any spin on the ball. If you ask a staffer at BLS whether a glass of water is half full or half empty, they'll tell you 'it's an eight-ounce glass containing four ounces of water.' It's an old quip so foundational to the bureau's mission that they included it in the 'about us' section of its official government website. The folks working at the bureau are not jokers or partisan hacks — they're the kids who finished statistics class in high school and thought, yeah, I'm going to do that as a job, while the rest of us let words like sine and cosine fade into the recesses of our minds along with the quadratic equation and the proper conjugations of the Spanish subjunctive tense. That may be part of the reason Wall Street isn't freaking out (yet) over McEntarfer's firing. The BLS is a 2,000-strong technocratic institution with decades-old processes and procedures that make it hard to singlehandedly skew the data. But, as my colleague Stephen Collinson notes, the real problems is the message her firing sends to other civic-minded bureaucrats. 'The message is that you might want that data and those conclusions to be to Trump's liking, or else.' 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
29 minutes ago
Texas dispute highlights nation's long history of partisan gerrymandering. Is it legal?
When Democratic lawmakers fled Texas to try to prevent the Republican-led Legislature from redrawing the state's congressional districts, it marked the latest episode in a long national history of gerrymandering. The word 'gerrymander" was coined in America more than 200 years ago as an unflattering means of describing political manipulation in legislative map-making. The word has stood the test of time, in part, because American politics has remained fiercely competitive. In many states, like Texas, the state legislature is responsible for drawing congressional districts, subject to the approval or veto of the governor. District maps must be redrawn every 10 years, after each census, to balance the population in districts. But in some states, nothing prevents legislatures from conducting redistricting more often. In an effort to limit gerrymandering, some states have entrusted redistricting to special commissions composed of citizens or bipartisan panels of politicians. Democratic officials in some states with commissions are now talking of trying to sidestep them to counter Republican redistricting in Texas. If a political party controls both the legislature and governor's office — or has such a large legislative majority that it can override vetoes — it can effectively draw districts to its advantage. One common method of gerrymandering is for a majority party to draw maps that pack voters who support the opposing party into a few districts, thus allowing the majority party to win a greater number of surrounding districts. Another common method is for the majority party to dilute the power of an opposing party's voters by spreading them among multiple districts. The term dates to 1812, when Massachusetts Gov. Elbridge Gerry signed a bill redrawing state Senate districts to benefit the Democratic-Republican Party. Some thought an oddly shaped district looked like a salamander. A newspaper illustration dubbed it 'The Gerry-mander' — a term that later came to describe any district drawn for political advantage. Gerry lost re-election as governor in 1812 but won election that same year as vice president with President James Madison. Not under the U.S. Constitution. The Supreme Court, in a 2019 case originating from North Carolina, ruled that federal courts have no authority to decide whether partisan gerrymandering goes too far. Chief Justice John Roberts wrote: 'The Constitution supplies no objective measure for assessing whether a districting map treats a political party fairly.' The Supreme Court noted that partisan gerrymandering claims could continue to be decided in state courts under their own constitutions and laws. But some state courts, including North Carolina's highest court, have ruled that they also have no authority to decide partisan gerrymandering claims. Yes. Though it's difficult to challenge legislative districts on political grounds, the Supreme Court has upheld challenges on racial grounds. In a 2023 case from Alabama, the high court said the congressional districts drawn by the state's Republican-led Legislature likely violated the Voting Rights Act by diluting the voting strength of Black residents. The court let a similar claim proceed in Louisiana. Both states subsequently redrew their districts. Statisticians and political scientists have developed a variety of ways to try to quantify the partisan advantage that may be attributable to gerrymandering. Republicans, who control redistricting in more states than Democrats, used the 2010 census data to create a strong gerrymander. An Associated Press analysis of that decade's redistricting found that Republicans enjoyed a greater political advantage in more states than either party had in the past 50 years. But Democrats responded to match Republican gerrymandering after the 2020 census. The adoption of redistricting commissions also limited gerrymandering in some states. An AP analysis of the 2022 elections — the first under new maps — found that Republicans won just one more U.S. House seat than would have been expected based on the average share of the vote they received nationwide. That was one of the most politically balanced outcomes in years.
