Connect with us

Northeast

Fox News Poll: New Jersey governor’s race has tightened

Published

on

Fox News Poll: New Jersey governor’s race has tightened

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

A new Fox News survey finds Democrat Mikie Sherrill ahead of Republican Jack Ciattarelli by 5 points among New Jersey likely voters (50-45%), down from an 8-point lead in late September (50-42%). Among registered voters, she’s up by 4 points (48-44%), down from a 7-point lead (48-41%). 

Either way, the race has tightened, and Sherrill’s edge is inside the poll’s margin of sampling error.

This analysis uses registered voter results.

FOX NEWS POLL: DEMOCRAT SHERRILL LEADS NEW JERSEY GOVERNOR’S RACE

Advertisement

Key groups that give Sherrill her advantage include Black voters, those under age 35, women ages 45 and younger, those with a college degree and Hispanic voters.

Ciattarelli’s best groups include MAGA supporters, men without a college degree, White men, Catholics and those ages 55-64.

About nine in 10 of each candidate’s supporters say they are certain to back them, but more of Ciattarelli’s supporters (69%) say they are extremely or very enthusiastic about voting this year than Sherrill’s (64%). On both sides, one in 10 supporters say they could change their mind before voting.

Recent campaign attacks have taken a toll on the candidates’ favorability and honesty ratings.

Sherrill’s honesty and trustworthy marks remain positive overall — but have declined since late September. More voters now view her as more honest than not, by a 5-point margin (52–47%), down from a 16-point advantage just three weeks ago (56–40%).

Advertisement

FOX NEWS POLL: UNHAPPY WITH NYC’S DIRECTION, VOTERS FAVOR MAMDANI FOR MAYOR BY A WIDE MARGIN

A similar shift occurred in her personal ratings. Sherrill was viewed more favorably than unfavorably by 10 points last month (51-41%) — and, now, views are net positive by only 2 points (50-48%).

Views of Ciattarelli have also shifted negatively, though not as much as Sherrill’s. On honesty, his marks have gone from being in positive territory by 4 points in September to underwater by 2 points today. His favorable ratings are net negative by 3 points now vs. by 2 points last month.

“The allegations about Sherrill’s record at the Naval Academy damaged her, but the manner in which those records were obtained have left Ciattarelli open to criticism as well,” says Republican pollster Daron Shaw, who helps conduct the Fox News Poll with Democratic counterpart Chris Anderson. 

“On the whole, it seems Ciattarelli has benefited slightly, if only because he was behind and needed to change the dynamics of the race.”

Advertisement

On some traits, perceptions of the candidates are closely aligned. For instance, 54% think Sherrill, a U.S. congresswoman, is a “strong leader” and an equal number, 54%, feel the same about Ciatterelli, a former state assemblyman. Half believe the phrase “can bring needed change” applies to each. 

On other characteristics, there are modest differences — such as empathy: 55% think “cares about people like me” describes Sherrill, compared to 49% for Ciattarelli.

Voters identify taxes (34%) and the cost of living (19%) as the top two problems facing the Garden State, and a larger number trusts Sherrill to handle both of those — by 3 points on taxes and by 6 points on the cost of living. She is also favored on energy costs (+3) and healthcare (+14), while more trust Ciattarelli to handle crime (+7).

Some 92% of Republicans support Ciattarelli, and 89% of Democrats back Sherrill, while the small subgroup of independents splits. Sherrill benefits from more NJ voters identifying as Democrats than Republicans. 

The candidates are competing to fill term-limited Democratic Gov. Phil Murphy’s seat. He beat Ciattarelli by about 3 points in the last election and leaves the governor’s mansion with mixed marks: 47% of New Jersey voters have a positive view of him vs. 49% negative. 

Advertisement

In addition, while more than half, 55%, are currently unhappy with how things are going in the state, that’s an improvement from 62% who were dissatisfied in the months preceding Murphy’s first term. 

In both 2020 and 2016, President Donald Trump received 41% of the vote in New Jersey. He performed better in 2024, garnering 46%, yet still losing to former Vice President Kamala Harris (52%).

Today, 45% of New Jersey voters have a favorable opinion of Trump, while 54% view him unfavorably. That’s up from eight years ago. During his first term, it was 36% favorable vs. 62% unfavorable.

NJ: CLICK HERE FOR CROSSTABS AND TOPLINE

Conducted October 10-14, 2025 under the joint direction of Beacon Research (D) and Shaw & Company Research (R), this Fox News Poll includes interviews with a sample of 1,002 New Jersey registered voters randomly selected from a statewide voter file. Respondents spoke with live interviewers on landlines (153) and cellphones (592) or completed the survey online by following a link received via text message (257). There was a subsample of 869 likely voters. Results based on both the registered voter and likely voter sample have a margin of sampling error of ± 3 percentage points. Sampling error for results among subgroups is higher. In addition to sampling error, question wording and order can influence results. Sources for developing weight targets include the most recent American Community Survey, Fox News Voter Analysis, and voter file data. Weights are generally applied to age, race, education, and area variables to ensure the demographics of respondents are representative of the registered voter population. Likely voters are identified based on past vote history and self-reported likelihood of voting. Results among subgroups are only shown when the sample size is at least N=100.

Advertisement

Fox News’s Victoria Balara contributed to this report.

Read the full article from Here

Advertisement

Boston, MA

Editorial: With Boston’s World Cup win, could we host Olympics?

Published

on

Editorial: With Boston’s World Cup win, could we host Olympics?


The World Cup economic windfall boosting Boston gives rise to a question: Could the Hub host the Olympics?

Certainly Bostonians have more than risen to the occasion in terms of welcoming international visitors to our city and showing them a good time (and vice versa, Tartan Army). But it takes more than great hosts and a convivial atmosphere to pull off an epic sporting event.

It takes money, lots of it, political transparency, and a process open to public scrutiny and feedback. In other words, no, we couldn’t.

Public reception to the 2014 Olympics bid was tepid at best, as it would entail multiple construction projects. And when big construction projects are presented in Boston, taxpayers get suspicious. Big Dig, anyone?

Advertisement

Boston 24 announced it estimated the Games would produce at least $4.8 billion in revenues from television broadcast rights, ticket sales, corporate sponsorships and other revenues, the Associated Press reported. They assumed nearly $4.6 billion in costs, including $176 million for a temporary Olympic Stadium, $90 million for the athletes’ village, about $754 million to build other Olympic venues and another $132 million to rent other locations.

They reportedly announced all this to answer critics who said the privately funded Boston 2024 withheld details of the bid to prevent the public from assessing whether the Games could be staged, as promised, without the need for taxpayer money.

We learned the answer to that soon enough.

In this case, as the Herald reported that year, details from Boston 2024’s so-called bid book indicated that plans sent to the U.S. Olympic Committee called for the Hub to fund “land acquisition and infrastructure costs” at Widett Circle, where a temporary Olympic stadium was being proposed. It came after months of promises that the group planned to run a privately funded Olympics.

“They’ve been saying for months, ‘No taxpayer (money),’ ” said Evan Falchuk, a vocal bid critic who pushed for a statewide ballot question on hosting the games. “Then you read what they told the USOC. … It’s a devastating blow to their credibility. There’s a reason why voters don’t trust what they’ve heard and (Boston 2024 has) got a lot of work to do to earn that trust.”

Advertisement

And all this talk of money came before any cost overruns made an appearance. London’s budget for the 2012 Summer Games escalated by about 300%, ending somewhere in the $14 billion range. What were the chances we’d fare any better?

No wonder Bostonians gave the Olympics idea the cold shoulder.

But what of the city’s World Cup success story? For starters, Gillette Stadium is already built, and the only large element requiring a cash infusion was the MBTA, which shelled out $35 million to upgrade Foxboro Station in advance of the Cup. They’ll make a nice chunk of that back, as the T spiked round-trip Commuter Rail ticket prices between South Station and Gillette Stadium for fútbol fans to $80.

In this case, Bostonians are on the winning side, reaping benefits from free-spending (and thirsty) visitors, and reveling in the good vibes.

It would be great for the city if megaprojects, or even minor ones, came with the guarantee of financial transparency before shovels hit the dirt. Optimists should look at White Stadium before calling it a day.

Advertisement
Editorial cartoon by Gary Varvel (Creators Syndicate)

 



Source link

Continue Reading

Pittsburg, PA

Pittsburgh among best U.S. cities in 2026 rankings. Here’s why

Published

on

Pittsburgh among best U.S. cities in 2026 rankings. Here’s why


Pittsburgh ranks among the top 25 best places to live, work and visit in the U.S., according to a new report.

The 2026 “America’s Best Cities” report from Resonance, an international business consulting company, ranks the top 100 U.S. metro areas overall based on factors such as economic data, quality of living and public perception. Pittsburgh scored in the top quarter of cities nationwide.

Here’s a breakdown of how Pittsburgh ranks.

Advertisement

Pittsburgh ranks among top U.S. cities

Overall, Pittsburgh scored at No. 25 among U.S. cities.

Top-scoring cities almost all “made the visitor and resident experience a strategic priority,” according to the report. Rankings were also further broken down based on each key scoring components.

Pittsburgh has put a focus on its cultural amenities and food scene, as well as in revitalizing its neighborhoods, the report noted. While other similarly sized cities in the ranking have fallen, Pittsburgh climbed by five spots in 2026.

Pittsburgh among best cities for livability

Pittsburgh scored at No. 24 among U.S. cities for its livability.

Advertisement

The report’s livability scores were ranked in accordance to the quality of daily life in a city based on factors such as walkability, transit access, air quality, climate risk, green space, housing costs relative to income, broadband connectivity, healthcare access and life expectancy, as well as if the location is somewhere people would want to live.

Pittsburgh ranks in top 30 cities for lovability, prosperity

Pittsburgh ranked among the top 30 U.S. cities for both its lovability and its prosperity, scoring at No. 26 for lovability and No. 28 for prosperity.

Lovability was scored based on factors like the quality and quantity of venues such as restaurants, arts and entertainment sites, museums, outdoor experiences and nightlife. Digital data such as search trends, social media activity and other user-generated content was also considered.

Advertisement

Prosperity rankings were based on factors such as gross domestic product per capita, labor force participation, innovation capital intensity, educational attainment, unemployment and poverty rates, the presence of major corporate headquarters, university quality and the number of direct air connections.

Philadelphia ranked just a few spots above Pittsburgh at No. 20 overall.

Top 10 cities in 2026 ‘Best Cities’ ranking

The top 10 cities in the ranking are:

  1. New York, NY
  2. Los Angeles, CA
  3. Chicago, IL
  4. Miami, FL
  5. San Francisco, CA
  6. Seattle, WA
  7. Las Vegas, NV
  8. Dallas, TX
  9. Houston, TX
  10. Boston, MA

Finch Walker is the Pittsburgh Connect Reporter for the USA TODAY Network. Contact Walker at FWalker@usatodayco.com. Instagram: @finchwalker_. X: @_finchwalker.





Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Connecticut

Report: CT schools among the most segregated in the U.S.

Published

on

Report: CT schools among the most segregated in the U.S.


A nationwide study released Monday by Brown’s Promise and The Segregation Tracking Project identified Connecticut as one of the most segregated states in the country.

The study used data from the 2023-24 school year, the latest available, to measure both economic and racial segregation in each state. Researchers found Connecticut had the sixth-highest level of economic segregation and 11th-highest level of racial segregation in the U.S. It also ranked third-worst for “poverty packing,” the practice of cramming low-income students into specific districts while higher-income students attend school just across district lines.

According to those results, Connecticut in 2024 was more segregated than Alabama, home of the famous Montgomery bus boycott, or Kansas, the point of origin for Brown v. Board of Education. The numbers remain high despite a slight overall reduction in both racial and economic segregation in the Nutmeg State over the past decade.

Advertisement

Nationally, researchers said, the results reflect a troubling long-term trend: Seventy years after Brown, school segregation remains high, and little to no progress has been made in reducing it.

“This should be a wake-up call for education leaders and advocates in every state, even those with top-ranked public schools,” said Ann Owens, a sociology professor at UCLA and co-leader of the Segregation Tracking Project.

Interpreting the numbers

The study scored states according to a “segregation” index, or a number representing how student enrollment is balanced around race and income. A score of 0 means no segregation — individual schools reflect their state’s overall demographics perfectly. Conversely, a score of 1 means students of a particular demographic are only exposed to other members of that demographic in their schools — complete segregation.

Connecticut’s racial segregation index of 0.42 indicates that, on average, white students attend schools 42% whiter than schools attended by non-white students. In other words, white students are concentrated with other white students, disproportionate to state’s overall demographics — a sign of strong segregation.

Although the state’s racial segregation index steadily decreased from the late 1990s to the mid-2010s, it has plateaued over the past decade.

Advertisement

“I would hypothesize that demographic changes and student assignment policies play a role,” Owens said. “[The] expansion of charter schools, expiration of mandatory desegregation orders, reduced commitment to integration policies — all could explain stalled progress.”

The state’s immediate neighbors also showed high levels of segregation, with New York topping the list for racial segregation. The northernmost New England states fared better, with Vermont in particular standing out for having extremely low levels of both racial and economic segregation. However, Owens noted that it’s possible this is more a product of lower population density than a particular set of policies to encourage integration.

Less dense places often have fewer schools, creating fewer opportunities to segregate, Owens said.

“More choice — whether it’s a state carved up into more, smaller districts or more school options within a district — tends to lead to segregation,” she said.

And, she added, if low-scoring states like Vermont are less diverse, it could obscure segregating behaviors like white avoidance.

Advertisement

Segregation is not a new conversation in CT

Sen. Doug McCrory, D-Hartford, said nothing in the report came as a surprise to him.

“Living in Connecticut all my life, we already know … we have some of the most segregated schools in the country,” said McCrory, who co-chairs the General Assembly’s Education Committee.

McCrory said he doesn’t think the state ever responded appropriately to the principles set forth in Brown v. Board of Education. There have been efforts to integrate, but those have been voluntary — and, judging by the numbers, insufficient.

“People don’t decide to place their children in a, quote-unquote, integrated setting. They’re not required to, so we have what we continue to have today,” McCrory said.

Connecticut Association of Public School Superintendents Executive Director Fran Rabinowitz said she also wasn’t surprised about the results of the report. Part of the issue, she said, is that the state has a different school district for each town.

Advertisement

“We’re not regionalized in any way, shape or form, which many states are,” Rabinowitz said. “You pull together maybe seven or eight or 10 of those districts … you would certainly cut down” on the lack of integration.

But both Rabinowitz and McCrory said that idea has proven politically radioactive in Connecticut.

“Those conversations get shut down immediately,” McCrory said. “This is a Connecticut issue where people just feel their local rights will be hampered if you have to work in a collaborative space … If you bring in the concept of race and income, it gets even more complicated.”

Rabinowitz said she remembers a 2019 effort by the General Assembly to merge the Norwalk and Wilton school districts. It did not go over well.

To address segregation, Connecticut has instead favored policies to promote voluntary integration, as in the landmark Sheff v. O’Neill case. In Sheff, the state Supreme Court found that predominantly Black and Hispanic students living in Hartford enjoyed far fewer educational resources and opportunities than their white peers in neighboring towns. The case led to the creation of a new magnet school system to encourage voluntary integration across district lines. 

Advertisement

As it happens, Brown’s Promise cites the Sheff agreement as an example of a potential policy solution to segregation nationwide. However, the organization also acknowledges the drawbacks of Sheff: namely, that there aren’t enough seats for every student to attend the school of their choice, and that Hartford’s neighborhood schools — which still serve hundreds of students each — remain severely under-resourced.

The way to avoid that, the organization suggests, is “to instead redraw district lines altogether.” But that would mean imposing the very regionalization Connecticut residents so vehemently oppose.

Rabinowitz said one possible remedy to segregation is the effort in Connecticut to build more affordable housing. In theory, that will bring more lower-income residents to wealthier areas, increasing economic diversity.

There is another strategy that recently received strong bipartisan support: Increasing state funding for schools that can’t get what they need through local property taxes. Both Democrats and Republicans pushed for that in the recent legislative session, resulting in a school funding boost of about $192 million (though many feel schools are owed around $800 million). 

In theory, state money can reduce the resource gap between the wealthiest and least wealthy districts. That’s why it’s also one of the solutions to segregation that Brown’s Promise proposes. The organization argues enhanced state-level funding dramatically increases resources for underserved students and makes their schools look more attractive.

Advertisement

But although McCrory said he supports increasing state funding for Connecticut schools, he’s not optimistic that this alone would promote integration.

“We tried multiple times to direct more resources into those communities [that are] financially behind. That doesn’t always equate to better outcomes for students,” McCrory said.

Rabinowitz, who spent much of her career working in Bridgeport and served as the district’s superintendent, disagreed.

“Yeah, you know, they increased the funding, but it never was enough,” Rabinowitz said. “It was never the amount of funding that was predictable and enough to let me lower class size and provide reading interventionists and to provide behavior interventionists, et cetera.”

Rabinowitz said many teachers who left the district told her they weren’t doing so for a better salary elsewhere.

Advertisement

“They were leaving because I did not have the systems in place to make them feel successful. And they were right. I didn’t, because I didn’t have the resources,” Rabinowitz said.

She said she’s hopeful that Gov. Ned Lamont’s Blue Ribbon Commission on K-12 Education Funding and Affordability will lead to meaningful reforms.

“More than 40 years ago, I was fighting the same battles. And I hope that before I finish my career, we can have a significant impact,” Rabinowitz said. “And I do believe this funding commission might be significant. I’m hoping it is.”

This <a target=”_blank” href=”https://ctmirror.org/2026/06/23/report-ct-schools-among-the-most-segregated-in-the-u-s/”>article</a> first appeared on <a target=”_blank” href=”https://ctmirror.org”>CT Mirror</a> and is republished here under a <a target=”_blank” href=”https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/”>Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License</a>.<img src=”https://ctmirror.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/02/cropped-CTMirror_bug_rgb-180×180.jpg” style=”width:1em;height:1em;margin-left:10px;”>

<img id=”republication-tracker-tool-source” src=”https://ctmirror.org/?republication-pixel=true&post=1172085&amp;ga4=G-9GVNVL530Q” style=”width:1px;height:1px;”><script> PARSELY = { autotrack: false, onload: function() { PARSELY.beacon.trackPageView({ url: “https://ctmirror.org/2026/06/23/report-ct-schools-among-the-most-segregated-in-the-u-s/”, urlref: window.location.href }); } } </script> <script id=”parsely-cfg” src=”//cdn.parsely.com/keys/ctmirror.org/p.js”></script>

Advertisement



Source link

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending