alex marquetti

People keep asking me: can Republicans actually win statewide in New York? Yes, and here's the math. About 30% of the vote comes from New York City, 26% from the suburbs, and 44% from upstate. To win, our ticket needs roughly: - 1 in 3 votes in the five boroughs - 56% in the suburbs: Long Island, Westchester, Rockland - 60% upstate In 2022, Lee Zeldin got about 30% in the city, 53% in the suburbs and 55% upstate, and came within 6 points. We need about 3 more points statewide. Where we are: the polls say we're behind. Don’t believe them. They said the same thing in 2022. In October 2022, Siena had Zeldin at 41% to Hochul's 52%. On Election Day, he beat that poll by 3 points. This message is for everyone who thinks New York is headed in the wrong direction and needs new leadership: Early voting starts TODAY and runs through Sunday, November 1. Election Day is Tuesday, November 3. Get out and vote. Then take 5 friends with you. Vote like the future of New York depends on it. Because it does. Find your early voting site: elections.ny.gov

Everyone who knows me knows I’m a numbers guy. So I built a simple analytical model of New York’s likely path under @KathyHochul versus @NassauExec Bruce Blakeman. I used real current data (jobs, taxes, energy prices, migration, crime) and applied realistic policy impacts, no bias in the inputs, just math. The model projects outcomes to 2030 using straightforward assumptions: - Employment growth: 0.3%/year under Hochul vs. 1.0%/year under Blakeman (+233%) - Energy cost: 32¢/kWh under Hochul vs. 22¢/kWh under Blakeman (-31%) - Tax competitiveness rank: Stays near worst (#50) under Hochul vs. improves to #38 under Blakeman (+12 spots) - Combined state + local tax load: Rises to 104 under Hochul vs. falls to 89 under Blakeman (-15 points) - Net domestic out-migration: 120,000/year under Hochul vs. 50,000/year under Blakeman (-58%) - Crime index: Modest improvement under Hochul vs. stronger gains under Blakeman (–18%) Under the current path, high energy costs and taxes keep private-sector growth weak and out-migration high. Under Blakeman, lower energy costs (more nuclear/gas, fewer mandates), tighter spending, and stronger enforcement reverse those trends. A Democratic legislature limits full change either way, but the direction differs sharply. You can check the numbers yourself. Formulas are attached. The trajectory is clear: one path continues high costs and slow growth; the other aims to reverse them. Now go to the voting booth with these scenarios in mind.