Republican incumbent Ruais stands alone in Manchester, N.H., mayoral race — for now
That leaves lingering questions about whether the Democrats will field a viable candidate or give Ruais an unobstructed path to another two-year term.
Get N.H. Morning Report
A weekday newsletter delivering the N.H. news you need to know right to your inbox.
Enter Email
Sign Up
Although the mayoral race is nominally nonpartisan, leading contenders typically align openly with either Republicans or Democrats. The off-year contest has historically been viewed as a potential indicator for how voter sentiments might be shifting ahead of the following year's state and federal elections — so the absence of a Democratic challenger at this stage is striking.
That said, the Democratic absence won't persist much longer, according to Joshua F. Query, chairperson for the Manchester City Democrats, who said the party's preferred mayoral candidate will step forward Thursday. Who will that candidate be? Query declined to say.
It looks like Kevin J. Cavanaugh, who lost to Ruais last time, won't make the 2025 race a repeat of the 2023 matchup. Cavanaugh has instead filed to run this year for the Ward 1 aldermanic seat he used to hold.
Advertisement
Whoever jumps into the mayoral race with Ruais will have their work cut out for them. The incumbent's campaign has reported raising more than $500,000 since January, with 90 percent of that haul still sitting in his war chest.
This story appeared in Globe NH | Morning Report, a free newsletter focused on New Hampshire, including great coverage from the Boston Globe and links to interesting articles elsewhere. To receive it via email Monday through Friday,
Steven Porter can be reached at
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hill
19 minutes ago
- The Hill
Roy Cooper hints at 2026 Senate run
Former North Carolina Gov. Roy Cooper (D) hinted over the weekend that he plans to run for the open U.S. Senate seat in his state during the 2026 election cycle. The popular governor spoke at the N.C. Democratic Party's annual Unity Dinner Saturday night, amid reports that he plans to launch a Senate bid soon. 'Everybody who's planning to run for office next year, please stand up,' Cooper asked the crowd. He then added: 'I'm not sitting down, am I?' The crowd cheered and chanted, 'Run, Roy, run,' according to local reports. Many Democrats have been hoping Cooper would enter the race, after Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.) announced he would not run for reelection, after bucking the president and voting against his massive tax and spending bill. The event comes shortly after local reporting surfaced that former Rep. Wiley Nickel (D-N.C.), who launched his campaign for Senate in April, is now mulling whether to suspend his bid and instead run for an open district attorney position in Wake County. Republican National Committee (RNC) Chair Michael Whatley is running on the GOP side, with Trump's endorsement.
Boston Globe
19 minutes ago
- Boston Globe
Trump's imaginary numbers, from $1.99 gas to 1,500 percent price cuts
Trump even congratulated Veterans Affairs Secretary Douglas A. Collins for having an approval rating of 92 percent. In this polarized moment, it is unlikely any US political figure enjoys a figure close to that, and the White House provided no source for the claim. Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up Trump is hardly the first politician to toss out figures that wilt under scrutiny. But he attaches precise numbers to his claims with unusual frequency, giving the assertions an air of authority and credibility - yet the numbers often end up being incorrect or not even plausible. The bogus statistics are part of Trump's long history of falsehoods and misleading claims, which numbered more than 30,000 in his first term alone. Advertisement 'He uses statistics less as a factual statement of, 'Here is what the best data says,' and more as rhetorical construct to sell an idea,' said Robert C. Rowland, professor of communication studies at the University of Kansas, who has studied Trump's rhetoric. 'I think he uses statistics as something to make whatever he is saying look better. He will choose a statistic based on what he thinks he can credibly say, and frankly, there are not strong limits on that.' Advertisement Trump has made little secret of his disdain for research and expertise. Yet he routinely reaches for numbers or statistics, often grandiose ones, when seeking to hammer home the failures of his adversaries, the grandeur of his accomplishments or the boldness of his promises. At the July 22 reception for GOP members of Congress, the president waxed expansive about his goals for the future, including a plan to cut drug prices. 'This is something that nobody else can do,' Trump said. 'We're going to get the drug prices down - not 30 or 40 percent, which would be great, not 50 or 60. No, we're going to get them down 1,000 percent, 600 percent, 500 percent, 1,500 percent.' At the same event, Trump mocked Democrats for claiming that consumer prices were rising when, he said, they were falling precipitously. 'Gasoline is … we hit $1.99 a gallon today in five different states,' Trump said, as the lawmakers applauded. 'We have gasoline that's going down to the low $2's, and in some cases even breaking that.' AAA maintains a website showing the average cost of gas in every state. None was significantly below $3 per gallon. The White House suggested that such numeric minutiae matter far less than Trump's sweeping accomplishments. 'The fact of the matter is that President Trump has delivered historic progress on America's economy, health care, foreign policy, and national security,' White House spokesman Kush Desai said in a statement. 'He's right to tout these victories for the American people, and no amount of pointless nitpicking by the Fake News is going to change that.' Advertisement Trump tangled with numbers again last Thursday in an appearance with Federal Reserve chair Jerome H. Powell, whom he has hinted he might fire. The president complained that a renovation of two Fed headquarters buildings was expected to cost $3.1 billion, prompting Powell to shake his head and respond, 'I'm not aware of that.' Trump handed Powell a sheet of paper, saying the $3.1 billion figure number had just come out. 'You're including the Martin renovation,' Powell said, looking at the paper. 'You just added in a third building, is what that is.' Trump said, 'It's a building that's being built,' and Powell countered: 'No, it was built five years ago. We finished Martin five years ago.' Some analysts believe the misuse of numbers is growing, a reflection of an era when Americans increasingly inhabit separate realities. Ismar Volić, a mathematics professor at Wellesley College, said people often seize on numbers offered by politicians they trust as confirmation of their preexisting worldview. 'Trump is an egregious example, but it's not limited to him, nor did he invent this,' Volić said. 'It's like absolute, final, immutable truth - when you throw out a number or graph or chart statistic, people tend to believe it.' But those numbers often do not get the scrutiny they deserve, said Volić, who specializes in algebraic topology and wrote a book called 'Making Democracy Count: How Mathematics Improves Voting, Electoral Maps, and Representation.' Advertisement 'A consequence of bad math education is we are just scared of math, and therefore not in the habit of questioning it, scrutinizing it or looking at it critically,' Volić said. 'That makes it an effective tool, because anything that scares us can be used as a tactic of manipulation, and politicians absolutely know this.' Trump was also specific in the weeks before the July 3 passage of his sweeping budget bill, which extended tax cuts from his first term. If his bill did not pass, he warned on May 30: 'You'll have a 68 percent tax increase. That's a number nobody's ever heard of before. You'll have a massive tax increase.' Financial experts were predicting taxes would go up about 7.5 percent if the legislation failed - still a substantial hike but far from the 68 percent figure. The White House has declined to comment and several fact-checkers tried unsuccessfully to determine where Trump's number was coming from, speculating that Trump was conflating it with the proportion of Americans who would see their taxes go up. Republican pollster Whit Ayres said it is important to get numbers right, but that Trump is unique. 'In many ways, Donald Trump is sui generis in the way he uses numbers,' Ayres said. 'I don't think you can use the way he uses numbers as an example for how other politicians might effectively use numbers. I will simply say that accurate numbers are a lot more compelling than inaccurate numbers.' To Trump's critics, his looseness with numbers dates to his long career as a developer and real estate mogul, when he specialized in touting his properties and, they say, often exaggerating their value and features. Advertisement In February 2024, Trump was found guilty in a civil fraud case after the New York attorney general said he had inflated his net worth by as much as $2.2 billion annually. The judge found, for example, that Trump described his luxury apartment as being 30,000 square feet when it was actually 10,996. He has appealed the verdict. Other presidents, including Joe Biden, have also been less than precise with their math on occasion, though Biden's misstatements tended to involve his personal history rather than the country's condition. He said repeatedly that he had traveled 17,000 miles with Chinese leader Xi Jinping, for example; The Washington Post Fact Checker found that figure misleading at best. Most presidents have worried that tossing out demonstrably incorrect facts or figures would hurt their credibility, Rowland, the communications professor, said. 'I was reading Reagan's speeches where he personally made notations,' Rowland said. 'You will occasionally see him write in, 'Check this data.' That is the norm for presidents … That is the opposite of what is happening now.'
The Hill
an hour ago
- The Hill
Democrats hear some criticism as redistricting talk picks up
Outside groups are raising concerns that Democrats risk violating the Voting Rights Act with redistricting plans, creating a new problem for the party as it seeks to answer GOP efforts to redistrict its way to more power. Democrats say they have to take action to draw new House districts in states they control in response to power plays by a Trump-driven GOP in Texas and other states. But the tit-for-tat has left groups leaving the door open to litigation. They also are making a moral case, arguing Democrats are thwarting the democratic process. 'This is dead wrong from a democracy perspective, I think it's very problematic for Democrats from a political strategic perspective,' explained Dan Vicuna, director of voting and fair representation at Common Cause. California Gov. Gavin Newsom is the only Democratic governor so far to signal he's considering several ways to counter the GOP's efforts in Texas. Speaking to reporters on Friday, Newsom said any move by California 'is predicated on Texas moving forward' with its own redistricting plan, which some have seen as a way for the Lone Star State to make it more likely to hold on to five House seats. Several other Democratic governors, including Govs. Kathy Hochul of New York, Phil Murphy of New Jersey and JB Pritzker of Illinois have left the door open to possibly changing their maps. The GOP may also not be done. The White House is reportedly pushing Missouri to consider redrawing its map. Civil rights and voting groups are worried actions by both parties could undermine or weaken the political power of historically marginalized minority communities. The issue is a thorny one for Democrats, who have positioned themselves as the prodemocracy party and championed racial justice initiatives. At the same time, Democratic states just like Republican states have been sued by civil rights groups over Voting Rights Act violations. Both Democrats and Republicans have also been found guilty of creating gerrymandered maps. 'We have sued both Democrats and Republicans on these issues,' said Thomas A. Saenz, president and general counsel of Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund. 'So yes, we are concerned that when leaders of either party seek to take maximum advantage, partisan advantage of redistricting, they often neglect, if not ignore, the imperatives of the Voting Rights Act with respect to reliably Democratic voting groups.' Some groups are also frustrated given efforts by blue states to move beyond gerrymandering. 'Independent commissions like the gold standard in California were created specifically to avoid what's being considered here, which is voting maps drawn for the sole purpose of protecting incumbent politicians and political party interests to the exclusion of community needs and community feedback,' Vicuna said. California Common Cause was intimately involved in the creation of California's independent commission. It could be difficult for some Democratic-held states to answer Texas. Several would likely need to change their state constitution and work around their respective redistricting commissions. Should the Lone Star State craft new House lines, John Bisognano, president of the National Democratic Redistricting Committee and its affiliates, in a statement said they would be met 'with a wall of resistance and a wave of legal challenges.' His statement did not address Democratic-led states mulling their own midcycle redistricting. Democrats argue that if Republicans are headed down that road, nothing should be off the table for them as well. 'Republicans should be careful what they ask for,' Rep. Suzan DelBene (D-Wash.), chair of the House Democrats' campaign arm, told The Hill in a statement. 'And if they go down this path? Absolutely folks are going to respond across the country. We're not going to be sitting back with one hand tied behind our back while Republicans try to undermine the voices of the American people.' Democrats are also leaning into the issue of democracy, saying the longevity of the country is at stake if the party does not respond. Newsom painted the situation in grim terms, saying on Friday, 'I believe that the people of the state of California understand what's at stake. If we don't put a stake into the heart of this administration, there may not be an election in 2028.' 'We can sit back and act as if we have some moral superiority and watch this 249, almost 250-year experiment be washed away,' Newsom said. 'We are not going to allow that to happen. We have agency, we can shape the future.' Civil rights and voting-focused groups, however, are concerned about the ramifications midcycle redistricting could have moving forward, including the possibility of what was once considered a decennial process after each U.S. census turning into a cyclical issue. 'One of the concerns that we have is, even if blue states have power and have a majority in their legislature to redraw maps, our concern is that this could set a bad precedent, because those states could, at the same time, flip in the future,' said Jose Barrera Novoa, vice president of the far west for the League of United Latin American Citizens. 'And the same thing is going to happen where … other parties are going to look to redraw the map midcycle or even quarterly. Who knows?' he asked. 'It's all hypothetical, yet it's still very possible.' Not only could a potential redistricting tit-for-tat raise questions over whether this could be repeated in the future, experts also worry about the financial toll it could take on their resources and voters themselves. 'These are judges managing these cases, hearing these cases. Many of these people are paid out by state funds, and federal cases, of course, are also paid by voters directly,' explained Celina Stewart, CEO of the League of Women Voters, noting cases that use taxpayer funds. 'Do we really want to spend this time doing this highly unusual activity when we're all going to have to pay for it?'
