Opinion - Democrats could lose New York in 2026, thanks to Kathy Hochul
One year from now, New York Gov. Kathy Hochul (D) is likely to be entering the final stretch of a hotly contested Democratic primary. If recent polling and political developments are any indication, she won't be doing so from a position of strength.
Despite the built-in advantages of incumbency and her party's sizable enrollment edge, Hochul appears to be one of the most politically vulnerable governors in the country.
The fundamentals should favor her. New York is, by any measure, a Democratic state — no Republican has won statewide since George Pataki won his third term as governor in 2002. But the data tell another story. A recent Siena College poll shows that a majority of New Yorkers would prefer someone else in the governor's office.
Among independents, Hochul's favorability remains underwater. Even among Democrats, her standing is underwhelming. Lt. Gov. Antonio Delgado, who recently announced he would challenge Hochul in 2026, and Rep. Ritchie Torres (D), another potential 2026 contender, already post stronger favorable-to-unfavorable numbers than the incumbent. In a three-way primary with Delgado and Torres, the Siena poll suggests that although Hochul leads her rivals, she would fall short of 50 percent.
This is not the profile of a governor cruising toward an easy reelection.
Hochul's problem is not ideological incoherence but institutional weakness. She occupies what is arguably the most powerful state executive office in the country. The New York Constitution grants the governor sweeping authority over the budget, including the power to insert policy changes and force the legislature's hand through extender bills that allow the state to continue functioning while budget negotiations continue. And yet, in the spring of 2025, Hochul's budget was delayed by more than five weeks — not because Republicans stood in her way, but because her fellow Democrats did.
Rather than use the tools of her office to shape the process, Hochul appeared to shrink from conflict with Democratic state legislators. Legislative leaders extracted key concessions, and the final budget satisfied few. Seasoned Albany observers were left marveling at how thoroughly the governor had been rolled by legislators in her own party.
Such ineffectiveness would have been unthinkable under Hochul's predecessor, Andrew Cuomo. Cuomo, a master political operator, understood how to wield the tools of executive power to achieve his goals. Hochul, by contrast, has projected indecision and incompetence. Democratic insiders, including state legislators, labor leaders and other elected officials, have taken note. There is even open discussion in Albany of amending the state constitution to rein in the governor's budgetary powers. That such a proposal is even being entertained by members of her own party signals how little authority Hochul commands within New York's Democratic political establishment.
The deterioration is not merely procedural — it is also philosophical. The 2025 budget battle exposed growing rifts between Hochul and progressive Democrats in the state legislature. Her push for a 'bell-to-bell' cellphone ban in schools and a rollback of the state's 2019 criminal discovery reforms were framed as commonsense responses to real problems. But to the legislature's increasingly progressive membership, they looked like symbolic, regressive intrusions on hard-won reforms. Hochul ultimately secured partial, but costly, victories: key political players in her own party no longer view her as a reliable or competent leader.
There is also the matter of her repeated and consistent electoral underperformance.
In 2014, running for lieutenant governor alongside Andrew Cuomo, Hochul, while ultimately victorious, lost key Democratic counties — including Manhattan, Albany and Schenectady — to her little-known opponent, Tim Wu. Four years later, she barely fended off Jumaane Williams, then a member of the New York City Council, in the lieutenant governor's primary, even as Cuomo coasted to victory over actress and activist Cynthia Nixon. And in 2022, Hochul won a full term as governor by a mere 6-point margin over Long Island's Rep. Lee Zeldin (R-N.Y.) — the narrowest victory for a Democrat running for governor of New York in four decades.
In more than a decade on the statewide political stage, Hochul has never shown the capacity to excite her base, grow her party or expand her coalition. The numbers don't lie: Hochul wins, but always by a much closer margin than seasoned political observers would expect.
Her weakness offers Republicans an opportunity. If the GOP can field a credible, well-funded candidate in 2026 — particularly one who can energize the Republican base, speak to concerns about crime and affordability, and exploit Democratic dissatisfaction with Hochul — the party could make a real play for the governorship.
The road is steep but not implausible. New York remains, by the numbers, one of the bluest states in the nation. But even in the bluest of states, governors must perform. Kathy Hochul has yet to prove she can lead her own party, let alone the state. These ongoing political problems might cause her political career to come to an abrupt end in 2026.
Joe Burns is a partner with the Holtzman Vogel law firm, with a focus on election cases in New York State. He previously served as deputy director of election operations at the New York State Board of Elections.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Hashtags

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


Los Angeles Times
29 minutes ago
- Los Angeles Times
The gift Trump never meant to give: the spotlight to Democratic adversary Gavin Newsom
SACRAMENTO — President Trump craves attention and will stoop to any depth to grab it — even pour gasoline on a kindling fire in Los Angeles. But this time he unwittingly provided priceless attention for an adversary. Because Trump needlessly deployed National Guard troops and — more ridiculous, a Marine battalion to L.A. — California Gov. Gavin Newsom was granted a prime-time speaking slot on national cable television to respond. 'We honor their service. We honor their bravery,' Newsom said of the troops. 'But we do not want our streets militarized by our own armed forces. Not in L.A. Not in California. Not anywhere … . 'California may be first — but it clearly won't end here. Other states are next. Democracy is next. Democracy is under assault right before our eyes. The moment we've feared has arrived.' I'm not sure the 'democracy is under assault' message has much traction, but keeping armed combat forces off our streets must be a salable pitch. Regardless, governors almost never get national TV time to deliver entire speeches, even as brief as Newsom's. You've practically got to be nominated for president. But the publicity-thirsty sitting president provided the cameras for California's governor. Newsom's strong address probably boosted his stock within the Democrat Party and revived dormant speculation about a 2028 presidential bid. No longer was the Democratic governor playing respectful nice guy and tempering criticism of the Republican president. Now he was standing up to the bully who loves to use California, Newsom and our progressive politics as a punching bag. Trump's red-state supporters love every swipe at this 'left coast' state. Newsom rose to the occasion, using his greatest asset: invaluable communication skills coupled with telegenic looks. He laid out his version of what happened to turn relatively peaceful protests against federal immigration raids into destructive street violence. And it's the correct version by objective accounts. On Saturday, Newsom said, federal immigration agents 'jumped out of an unmarked van' near a Home Depot parking lot and 'began grabbing people. A deliberate targeting of a heavily Latino suburb … . In response, everyday Angelenos' exercised their constitutional right to protest. Police were dispatched to keep the peace and mostly were successful, the governor continued. But then tear gas, rubber bullets and flash-bang grenades were used — by federal agents, Newsom implied. Then Trump deployed 2,000 California National Guard troops 'illegally and for no reason,' the governor asserted. 'This brazen abuse of power by a sitting president inflamed a combustible situation … . Anxiety for families and friends ramped up. Protests started again … . Several dozen lawbreakers became violent and destructive.' Newsom warned: 'That kind of criminal behavior will not be tolerated. Full stop.' And hundreds have been arrested. But he emphasized: 'This situation was winding down and was concentrated in just a few square blocks downtown. But that's not what Donald Trump wanted … . He chose theatrics over public safety.' In Trump's twisted view, if he hadn't sent in the National Guard, 'Los Angeles would be completely obliterated.' Never mind that the violence was confined to a few downtown blocks, a fraction of a city that spreads over 500 square miles. 'We will liberate Los Angeles and make it free and clean again,' the president promised. Veteran Republican strategist Mike Murphy had it right, telling CNN: 'He's lighting the fire as an arsonist, then claiming to be the fireman.' It reminded me of President Lyndon B. Johnson's manufactured Gulf of Tonkin resolution in 1964 that Congress passed, enabling him to vastly escalate U.S. involvement in the Vietnam War. Johnson reported a North Vietnamese attack on U.S. destroyers that many experts later concluded never happened. But I think Trump mainly is obsessed with attracting attention. He knows he'll get it by being provocative. Never mind the accuracy of his words or the wisdom of his actions. Sending in the Marines certainly was an eye-opener. So is staging a military parade on his birthday — an abuse of troops for attention, personal glorification and exercise of his own power. He'll say anything provocative without thinking it through: Tariffs one day, suspended the next. He'll boast of sending San Joaquin Valley water to L.A. for fighting fires when it's physically impossible to deliver it. While Trump was playing politics with immigrants and L.A. turmoil, a poll finding was released that should have pleased him. Californians no longer support providing public healthcare for immigrants living here illegally, the independent Public Policy Institute of California reported. Adult state residents were opposed by 58% to 41% in a survey taken before the L.A. trouble erupted. By contrast, a PPIC poll in 2021 found that Californians favored providing state healthcare for undocumented immigrants by 66% to 31%. Polling director Mark Baldassare concluded the public opposition stems mostly from the view that California taxpayers can't afford the costly program — not that they agree with Trump's anti-immigrant demagoguery. In fact, Newson has proposed paring back the state's multibillion-dollar program of providing Medi-Cal coverage for undocumented immigrants because the state budget has been spewing red ink. Given all the rhetoric about the L.A. protests, the statement that particularly impressed me came from freshman Assemblyman Mark Gonzalez (D-Los Angeles), whose downtown district stretches from Koreatown to Chinatown. 'Rocks thrown at officers, CHP cars and Waymo vehicles set on fire, arson on the 101 freeway — have nothing to do with immigration, justice or the values of our communities,' he said in a statement Sunday. 'These are not protesters — they were agitators. Their actions are reckless, dangerous and playing into exactly what Trump wants.' Gonzalez is a liberal former chairman of the L.A. County Democratic Party who stuck to his point: Hoodlums can't be tolerated. And, thanks to Trump, Newsom was able to make a similar point about the president on national TV: His dangerous, self-serving actions can't be tolerated either.

Yahoo
34 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Mat-Su mayor files to run as a Republican for Alaska governor
Jun. 12—Edna DeVries, mayor of the Mat-Su Borough, announced on Thursday that she is running as a Republican to be Alaska's next governor. DeVries, 83, has been mayor of the Mat-Su since 2021. She moved to Palmer in 1969 and was mayor of the city for over five years. She served two years as a state senator in the 1980s. In a Thursday interview, DeVries said there are many issues facing Alaska and that she wants to focus on "listening to people, transparency in government and limited government." DeVries, a conservative, said that she feels "very strongly" about election integrity and touted a 2022 ban on voting machines in the Mat-Su borough. She said that she supports following a statutory Permanent Fund dividend, and said Alaska needs to "rein in spending" to address its fiscal challenges. "We need to live within our means. And I don't see the state doing that right now," she said. DeVries said that she is a supporter of school choice. She was critical of a substantial education funding boost approved by the Legislature this year. She said that "we need to have some accountability." DeVries on Thursday filed a letter of intent with the Division of Elections to run as governor next year. That is the first step in launching a campaign, allowing the candidate to raise and spend money. DeVries said filing that letter is "sort of a testing of the waters." "Let's see what the response is out there, and get out and talk to the people to see if they see the same needs in our state as I do," she added. Alaska Gov. Mike Dunleavy, a Republican, is in the penultimate year of his second term. The Alaska Constitution forbids governors from holding office for a third consecutive term. Three other Republicans have filed letters of intent to run for governor in the November 2026 election: Lt. Gov. Nancy Dahlstrom, former Fairbanks Sen. Click Bishop, and business owner Bernadette Wilson.


American Press
36 minutes ago
- American Press
Lawmakers approve budget and teacher pay push as session wraps up
Lawmakers approve budget and teacher pay push as session wraps up Published 5:12 pm Thursday, June 12, 2025 By Anna Puleo | LSU Manship School News Service BATON ROUGE — The Louisiana House voted 98-1 Thursday to give final legislative approval to $53.5 billion budget package for the upcoming fiscal year without objecting to any of the major changes that the Senate had made earlier this week. With three hours to go in the session, lawmakers also agreed to ask voters to approve a constitutional amendment in a new attempt to fund permanent salary raises for K-12 public school teachers and support staff. Email newsletter signup Voters had rejected a long and complicated amendment in March that could have provided funding for permanent raises. Under the latest plan, voter approval could lead to salary increases of $2,250 for teachers and $1,225 for staff members. The proposed constitutional amendment would dissolve three state education trust funds and used $2 billion to pay down debt on teacher retirement plans. That would save parishes enough money to provide the raises. While waiting to see if voters approve the amendment, the state will pay stipends of $2,000 to teachers and $1,000 to support staff at K-12 schools for a third year in a row. The state budget and the new teacher pay plan both passed on the final day of a legislative session that also saw significant changes in car insurance regulation designed to lower some of the highest annual premiums in the nation. Other high-profile legislation stalled during the session. A bill to reinforce President Donald Trump's ban on diversity, equity and inclusion programs at public agencies and colleges failed after the Senate declined to take it up, even as similar bans gained traction in other Republican- led states. The bill had narrowly passed the House after a lengthy debate during which Black lawmakers called it 'racially oppressive.' Gov. Jeff Landry's push to more than double funding for his LA GATOR private school voucher program also failed. The House had approved the $93.5 million that Landry sought to sharply increase the number of families that could use public funds to send their children to private schools. During the session, the Senate limited funding on the vouchers to $43.5 million, and the House acquiesced. That funding will allow students already enrolled in private schools under the similar program to stay there, but there will not be any money for new families to join, as Landry had envisioned. Lawmakers approved another national conservative priority — the 'Make America Healthy Again' efforts led by Trump and health secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. The bill bans ultra-processed ingredients, such as artificial dyes and synthetic additives, in meals served in schools that receive state funding, starting in the 2027-28 school year. All bills that passed now go to Landry for his approval or veto. The budget bill would take effect on July 1. The governor has the power to veto individual items in it. As part of the budget, lawmakers agreed to spend $1.2 billion in one-time money from the state's Revenue Stabilization Trust Fund–which collects corporate and severance taxes — on transportation projects, economic development, water system upgrades, college maintenance and criminal justice infrastructure. They also approved using $1.1 billion in extra cash for short-term needs like infrastructure projects, debt payments and deposits into state savings accounts. That total includes last year's surplus, additional general fund dollars recognized by the state's revenue forecasting panel, and unspent agency money, either because fewer people used certain programs or agencies found other ways to cover costs. The stipends for the K-12 teachers and support workers will cost $199 million. The Senate also restored $30 million for high-dose tutoring programs that had been cut in the House's version. Legislative leaders were reluctant to expand spending in other areas, like for Landry's signature voucher plan to pay for more students to go to private schools. Some lawmakers are concerned that potential cuts in federal Medicaid spending and federal disaster-relief could force the state to absorb hundreds of millions in additional costs. The House approved a resolution on Thursday by Appropriations Chair Jack McFarland, R-Jonesboro, urging Congress not to cut Medicaid funding in a way that would hurt the state. Legislators from rural areas also expressed concern that expanding private school vouchers could eventually cut into support for public school district. Some lawmakers noted that the final level of spending on the LA GATOR program was not a cut but rather keeping funding flat. 'We always use the word cut,' Rep. Eric Tarver, R- Lake Charles, said. 'When really we mean it just isn't an increase.' The Legislature also passed a supplemental spending bill for the current fiscal year with about $130 million, mostly in lawmakers' earmarks for projects in their districts. Taking steps to try to bring down auto insurance rates was another major focus during the session. Landry signed a package aimed at lowering premiums by limiting certain lawsuits and increasing oversight of insurers. However, on Wednesday, he vetoed Senate Bill 111, which would have restricted when policyholders can sue insurers for bad faith. Landry said the bill risked making it easier for companies to deny claims, leaving policyholders with fewer options to challenge delays, especially after major disasters. Landry had said at the start of the session that he was seeking a balanced approach in trying to cut rates. He also persuaded lawmakers to give the insurance commissioner more power to block companies from charging auto insurance rates that appeared excessive. Featured Local Savings