ReportWire

Category: New York, New York Local News

New York, New York Local News | ReportWire publishes the latest breaking U.S. and world news, trending topics and developing stories from around globe.

  • 4 Reasons Biden’s 2024 Odds May Be Better Than You Think

    4 Reasons Biden’s 2024 Odds May Be Better Than You Think

    [ad_1]

    Photo-Illustration: Intelligencer; Photo: SAUL LOEB/AFP via Getty Images

    Conventional wisdom holds that a president seeking reelection needs a job-approval rating at or very near 50 percent. Among recent presidents, according to Gallup, Ronald Reagan was at 58 percent, Bill Clinton was at 54 percent, and Barack Obama was at 52 percent right before their successful reelections. Conversely, Jimmy Carter’s approval rating was 37 percent immediately before he lost the presidency, and George H.W. Bush’s was even worse, at 34 percent, as voters went to the polls to eject him from the White House. H.W.’s son, George W. Bush, offers the most marginal case: he narrowly won reelection with a Gallup job-approval rating of 48 percent. Donald Trump, on the other hand, lost with a rating of 45 percent.

    Right now Joe Biden’s job-approval rating per Gallup is 41 percent; he’s lower, at 40 percent, in the RealClearPolitics polling averages, and still lower, at 38.9 percent in the FiveThirtyEight averages. Gallup notes that his average job-approval rating during the third year of his presidency was 39.8 percent, worse than losers Trump and George H.W. Bush and better only than Carter (37.4 percent).

    It’s unclear how far Biden needs to go in improving his popularity to earn a second term. But there are several reasons for guarded optimism in the Biden camp, ranging from the actual choice voters will make in November to objective conditions in the country. The president’s situation is a lot better than it looks at first glance.

    It matters a great deal that Biden’s opponent will almost certainly be Donald Trump, creating an exceedingly rare contest between two presidents, neither of them very popular. Trump’s own favorability rating (per RCP) is at 41.6 percent, not significantly higher than Biden’s job approval. And everything about the near-presumptive Republican nominee suggests Biden will be able to make this a comparative election rather than simply a referendum on his own administration. In an ideal world for Biden, his threshold for victory is like Trump’s in 2016, when the very unpopular mogul managed to defeat the almost equally unpopular Hillary Clinton in the Electoral College.

    Biden’s job-approval numbers may slightly exaggerate his unpopularity among the Americans who will actually vote in November. Most of his worst recent approval polls (e.g., Pew’s 33 percent assessment, another 33 percent showing in an ABC/Ipsos survey, and a 36 percent rating from TIPP) involve wide-net samples of “adults,” not registered voters, much less likely voters. There’s a lot of evidence that in 2024 Biden could do especially poorly among low-propensity voters. Yes, they are more likely to turn out in presidential than in midterm elections, but the unusually sour mood among Americans entering 2024 suggests a level of turnout that doesn’t match this election’s huge consequences. If so, as pollsters begin to focus more narrowly on likely voters, Biden’s numbers may automatically improve a bit.

    There are some tentative signs that voters may finally be noticing that the economy is not as bad as they thought it was during 2023, as the Washington Post’s Catherine Rampell observed last week:

    Since November … the University of Michigan’s long-running consumer sentiment index has risen a cumulative 29 percent. That’s the largest two-month increase since 1991, leaving sentiment at its highest level since mid-2021.

    A similar consumer confidence measure from the Conference Board, a corporate think tank, also ticked up. And surveys from YouGov and the Economist find that the share of Americans who believe the economy is in recession has been shrinking.

    These are all terrific developments for Biden’s reelection campaign. Though it seems unlikely that the economy will suddenly transition into a winning issue for the incumbent, it might stop being an albatross around his neck.

    Rampell suggests that the current trajectory of the economy resembles what occurred in 2012, when Obama slowly turned his reelection prospects around after the disaster of the 2010 Republican midterm landslide. The economy has not been the only voter concern holding down Biden’s popularity (the situation at the border now rivals it), but it’s always among the most important issues.

    Finally, no winning or losing presidential incumbent has ever faced an opponent saddled with multiple criminal indictments and embarrassing civil judgments. Actual Trump convictions before November remain entirely possible. While the 45th president’s legal travails may have helped him navigate the GOP nomination contest by boosting his popularity in the core MAGA base of the Republican-primary electorate, they are much more likely to hurt him than help him among general-election swing voters, as the New York Times explained last month:

    [W]e have seen the effect in several national surveys, like a recent Wall Street Journal poll. In a hypothetical matchup between Mr. Trump and Mr. Biden, Mr. Trump leads by four percentage points. But if Mr. Trump is convicted, there is a five-point swing, putting Mr. Biden ahead, 47 percent to 46 percent …

    In recent CNN polls from Michigan and Georgia, Mr. Trump holds solid leads. The polls don’t report head-to-head numbers if Mr. Trump is convicted, but if he is, 46 percent of voters in Michigan and 47 percent in Georgia agree that he should be disqualified from the presidency.

    Most recently, significant minorities of participants in the Republican Iowa caucuses and New Hampshire primary have expressed reluctance to vote for Trump if he is a convicted criminal. Maybe most of them will put on the party harness by November, but their ambiguity is another reason it would be foolish to place too much emphasis on Biden’s level of popularity.

    Last spring, my colleague Gabriel Debenedetti summarized Team Biden’s answer to concerns that the president’s age might doom him in 2024 as “Old beats crazy.” I’d say “Old beats crazy criminal” is an even stronger argument.


    See All



    [ad_2]

    Ed Kilgore

    Source link

  • Mayor’s Cup stays in Schenectady as Union men best RPI 5-3

    Mayor’s Cup stays in Schenectady as Union men best RPI 5-3

    [ad_1]

    ALBANY, N.Y. (NEWS10) — Five different players scored as the Union College men’s hockey team won its third straight Capital District Mayor’s Cup with a 5-3 win over Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute in front of a crowd of 5,968 on Saturday night at MVP Arena. 

    The win is Union’s eighth win in 11 Mayor’s Cup games against RPI, and also marks the first time that a school has won three straight games in regulation or overtime in Albany. In addition, the win improves Union’s overall unbeaten streak to five games (4-0-1), tied for the longest unbeaten stretch since a 6-0-1 streak to close out the 2017-18 regular season. 

    Senior Nathan Kelly scored his first collegiate goal to lead five different goals scorers for Union (12-11-1). Junior Cullen Ferguson led all players with three points on a goal and two assists and classmate Josh Nixon was the only other Garnet Charger with multiple points thanks to a pair of assists. At the other end of the ice, sophomore Kyle Chauvette made 22 saves to earn the victory in his first Mayor’s Cup game.

    Junior Caden Villegas got the scoring started just 2:17 into the contest with his sixth goal of the season from Nixon and sophomore John Prokop. RPI’s Tyler Hotson equalized less than seven minutes later and the teams went into the first intermission tied at one.

    The Garnet Chargers scored three times during a wild second period to a 4-3 lead into the final frame. After the Engineers grabbed their first lead of the night early in the second stanza, Ferguson tied the score at the 6:48 mark and Kelly put Union back ahead with his first collegiate tally with 9:07 remaining from sophomore Brandon Buhr and first-year DJ Hart. Rensselaer (7-16-1) knotted the score again less than three minutes later with a Dovar Tinling score, but sophomore Carter Korpi provided the go-ahead goal with 2:06 remaining in the frame, netting his team-leading ninth goal of the season from Ferguson and senior Chaz Smedsrud to give Union a 4-3 lead.

    Union added to its lead 36 seconds into a five-minute major midway through the third period, as senior Ville Immonen beat Jack Watson from Ferguson and sophomore Nate Hanley at the 8:43 mark of the third. Chauvette shut the door by stopping all five shots that came on goal the rest of the way to earn the victory.

    The Garnet Chargers finished the game with a 31-25 edge in shots. Union successfully killed off RPI’s only power-play chance of the game and went 1-for-4 on the man-advantage.

    Union will return to ECAC Hockey play next weekend, beginning with a Friday night matchup at Yale University facing off at 7 p.m.

    [ad_2]

    ​Tommy Valentine

    Source link

  • Driver charged with DWI after crash lands both cars inside Chinese restaurant on Long Island

    Driver charged with DWI after crash lands both cars inside Chinese restaurant on Long Island

    [ad_1]

    FARMINGDALE, Long Island (WABC) — A driver has been charged with DWI and assault after a crash on Long Island.

    Police say Lauren Potter, 39, was drunk when she crashed a Mercedes into a parked car on Friday night just after 9:30.

    The impact was so intense, that both vehicles ended up inside a Chinese restaurant.

    It happened while customers were waiting for their food inside Great Wall Kitchen on Boundary Ave.

    One person was taken to the hospital. She is expected to be okay.

    ALSO READ | Woman in custody after body parts found in fridge inside Flatbush apartment

    Jim Dolan is in Flatbush with the story.

    ———-

    * More Long Island news

    * Send us a news tip

    * Download the abc7NY app for breaking news alerts

    * Follow us on YouTube

    Submit a tip or story idea to Eyewitness News

    Have a breaking news tip or an idea for a story we should cover? Send it to Eyewitness News using the form below. If attaching a video or photo, terms of use apply.

    Copyright © 2024 WABC-TV. All Rights Reserved.

    [ad_2]

    WABC

    Source link

  • Judge: Lindbergh Gave Up His ‘Kidnapped’ Baby for Experiments

    Judge: Lindbergh Gave Up His ‘Kidnapped’ Baby for Experiments

    [ad_1]

    It may be the most notorious kidnapping case in American history: the baby of famous aviator Charles Lindbergh was kidnapped nearly 100 years ago in a story so sensational that it led Congress to make kidnapping across state lines a federal crime. A German-born carpenter was charged, convicted and executed for the boy’s murder.  But a retired California judge now says the criminal justice system got it wrong.

    Lindbergh is a man with a complex tagline – an accomplished aviator who lost his son to the “crime of the century” but fell from grace for his antisemitism and advocacy for eugenics.  He grew to fame in 1927 upon completing the first solo, nonstop flight across the Atlantic. His 33.5-hour flight from New York to Paris aboard the single-engine Spirit of St. Louis led to many awards, medals and parades, but tragedy afflicted TIME’s first Man of the Year when his son, Charles Augustus Lindbergh Jr., age 20 months, was kidnapped from his New Jersey home in March 1932. Eventually, his body was “accidentally found, partly buried, and badly decomposed, about four and a half miles southeast of the Lindbergh home” in May 1932. A coroner determined the boy was killed by a blow to the head and had been dead for about two months.

    After about two years of investigation, a 35-year-old suspect named Bruno Richard Hauptmann was indicted on charges of extortion and murder. Prosecutors alleged he used a ladder to climb to the second-story nursery for the abduction and was motivated by money, adding that his goal was to earn a hefty ransom from the Lindbergh family. From his apprehension to his eventual execution, Hauptmann maintained his innocence.

    “The trial of Hauptmann began on January 3, 1935, at Flemington, New Jersey, and lasted five weeks,” according to an official FBI website. “The case against him was based on circumstantial evidence. Tool marks on the ladder matched tools owned by Hauptmann. Wood in the ladder was found to match wood used as flooring in his attic. Dr. Condon’s telephone number and address were found scrawled on a door frame inside a closet. Handwriting on the ransom notes matched samples of Hauptmann’s handwriting.”

    The sensational kidnapping case of the Lindbergh baby led to kidnapping across state lines becoming a federal crime, investigated to this day by the FBI. Wikipedia Commons

    (Dr. John Condon was a concerned citizen who’d written an open letter to the kidnapper, offering to be an intermediary.)

    A jury found Hauptmann was guilty of murder in the first degree on February 13, 1935, and he was electrocuted on April 3, 1936.

    But 88 years later, Lise Pearlman – a retired judge, filmmaker and award-winning true crime author – says Hauptmann paid for a crime he didn’t commit. Her theory is that Lindbergh actually offered his son up to the Nobel Prize-winning French surgeon and biologist, Alexis Carrel, for experimentation.

    “A lot of leads weren’t followed, about a dozen state witnesses likely committed perjury, and the prosecution had 90,000 pages of investigation they didn’t let Hauptmann or his defense see,” Ms. Pearlman told the San Francisco Chronicle. “The wrong man was executed, and my hope is that Hauptmann will be posthumously exonerated. And I am certainly not the only one who wants that.”

    Charles Lindbergh was most famous for his historic trans-Atlantic flight, but he was also an inventor of medical devices, an antisemite, a eugenics enthusiast and a suspected Nazi sympathizer.Graphic House/Archive Photos/Getty Images

    Ms. Pearlman’s theory is based upon medical reports on the dead baby’s body, police files, and papers written by Lindbergh and Carrel. The goal of the alleged experimentation was to see if living organs could be preserved outside of the body long enough to be transplanted. When the organ removal went badly wrong, Lindbergh staged a kidnapping to cover up his tracks, according to Ms. Pearlman.

    “My theory is that the child was operated on,” Ms. Pearlman explained. “We think at the very least that his carotid and probably his thyroid were taken out and kept viable for 30 days. We think he died on the operating table. 

    “And I think Carrel conducted the operation with Lindbergh’s permission — and Lindbergh was likely present at the operation.”

    Lindbergh and Carrel together would go on to invent the “perfusion pump,” a device that helped keep organs viable outside the body while they awaited transplantation. But was this enough motivation for a father to put his son’s life at risk for the sake of science? Ms. Pearlman says we must consider how Lindbergh, along with Carrel, was a known advocate of eugenics – the  “theory that humans can be improved through selective breeding of populations.”  Today, eugenics has been entirely discredited, but in the 1930s it still had currency, especially with the Nazis who were secretly euthanizing children with severe mental and developmental disabilities. Lindbergh has long been suspected of being a Nazi sympathizer, though to this day the matter remains in dispute.

    15th October 1934: Bruno Richard Hauptmann, later convicted of kidnapping and murdering Charles Lindbergh Jr., takes the stand in his own defense in his extortion trial at the Bronx.Hulton Archive/Getty Images

    Ms. Pearlman thinks Lindbergh might have been willing to get rid of his son because the baby was known to be sickly and had an abnormally large head.

    “The more I looked into Lindbergh, the more my suspicions were raised about his involvement and the fact that he wasn’t treated as a suspect,” she said. “He was home when it happened. He should have been a suspect.”

    Hauptmann’s involvement, according to Ms. Pearlman, was simply circumstantial. He was only apprehended after spending some of the ransom money at a gas station, and Hauptmann always said he only had the money after a friend gifted it to him.

    Plausible or not, Ms. Pearlmann’s theory has gained quite a bit of traction. One supporter of a reopening of the case is Barry Scheck, co-founder of the Innocence Project. After reading her 2020 book about the theory called “The Lindbergh Kidnapping Suspect No. 1, The Man Who Got Away,” Mr. Scheck called it a “fascinating read with surprising conclusions.”

    French surgeon Alexis Carrel (1873 – 1944, right) and Charles Lindbergh with their invention, the perfusion pump, which keeps human organs alive outside the body during surgery, circa 1938. A retired judge now believes Lindbergh gave Carrel his toddler son for medical experimentation. Pictorial Parade/Archive Photos/Getty Images

    Whether or not the case will officially be reopened is still up in the air, but a researcher in New Jersey filed a lawsuit aimed at releasing evidence from the New Jersey State Police that would, in his eyes, clear Hauptmann’s name. Even the American Academy of Forensic Sciences has effectively gotten involved after publishing Ms. Pearlman’s assertions.

    “I do think Lise Pearlman has a point,” the attorney handling the lawsuit said, adding that other theories could also be plausible. “I don’t think anybody knows what happened, and we have an opportunity to get some answers, but the state of New Jersey is refusing to let us look at the evidence. I don’t really understand why.”

    If Ms. Pearlman has her way, further DNA testing will be done on things like a ransom note and the ladder used to get into the nursery. She already had swabs of DNA that can be used for comparison from Hauptmann’s distant family – a great-great niece and her aunt.

    “It’s amazing, the research Lise has done; phenomenal,” the great-great niece, Cezanne Love, said. “Her medical theory? I totally believe that. Only God and Richard [Hauptmann] know for sure, but from everything I’ve heard, he sounds innocent. And Lindbergh didn’t sound like a nice person.”

    [ad_2]

    ABIGAIL SEABERG

    Source link

  • Rangers score 7 unanswered goals, beat Senators 7-2 heading into All-Star break | amNewYork

    Rangers score 7 unanswered goals, beat Senators 7-2 heading into All-Star break | amNewYork

    [ad_1]