Editorial: Is Brandon Johnson pitching Wall Streeters on moving to Chicago post-Mamdani? We thought not.
There's now audible chatter in New York from that city's numerous titans of finance about doing what would have been unthinkable until recently — fleeing.
Not that long ago New Yorkers would have rolled their eyes at such threats. Where else would a Wall Streeter want to be than the city where, er, Wall Street is located?
But it's a new day. Interconnectivity and the electronic nature of most trading have allowed traders and big-time investors to set up shop in places like Miami and Dallas (where not coincidentally taxes are much lower than in New York and Chicago).
Chicago feels your pain, New York. Our very own billionaire, Citadel founder Ken Griffin, moved the headquarters of his company (and himself) to Miami three years ago.
So, given that we live in a competitive world and New York made the unforced error of nominating a socialist threatening to tax anything that moves, it would be nice if Chicago had a mayor that would allow us to join Miami, Dallas and others in pitching the hedge fund and private-equity mavens of New York on relocating to the shores of Lake Michigan.
In many respects, there's no reason Chicago shouldn't be able to make a strong case. The city remains the global epicenter of futures and options trading and is home to Northern Trust, a member of the nation's highly exclusive club of custody banks. There's a substantial ecosystem of private-equity firms here as well, albeit not nearly at New York's scale.
So why would the suggestion of Chicago as an alternative to Mamdani-led New York likely prompt a chuckle from most New York bigwigs? Because, of course, we have our own version of Mamdani sitting on the fifth floor.
Imagine Brandon Johnson, if he were so inclined, placing a call to, say, Dan Loeb, the head of $12 billion-asset hedge fund Third Point who derisively tweeted after Mamdani's primary victory, 'It's officially hot commie summer.'
Can't imagine that? Neither can we.
It wasn't that long ago that Chicago was led by mayors who could (and would) have made that call and gotten a respectful hearing at the very least. Rahm Emanuel. Richard M. Daley. These were mayors who had their flaws, God knows, but understood the value of having extremely wealthy people live in their city and maintain businesses here. Such citizens provide outsize tax revenue. Such people create high-paying jobs filled by those who pay substantial taxes of their own. Such people donate very large sums of money to civic causes.
Instead, Chicago has a mayor who repeatedly derides people like Griffin as the 'ultra-rich' and speaks of them only in the context of how much more the ever-dwindling set of them ought to be paying in taxes to buttress bloated governmental bodies whose budgets are wheezing on the fumes of a moldering city economy.
There will be plenty of those on the left who say, 'Fine. We don't want more Ken Griffins here.'
We disagree. Pick up the phone, Mr. Mayor.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Newsweek
35 minutes ago
- Newsweek
Elon Musk's Plan for New Party Scores Polling Win
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. Elon Musk's surprise push to create a new political party is already shaking up the 2026 landscape, with fresh polling showing early momentum behind his outsider bid. A new survey conducted by Quantus Insights between June 30-July 2 among 1,000 registered voters found that 40 percent of voters—including many Republican voters—say they would consider backing the Tesla and SpaceX CEO's party over traditional GOP or Democratic candidates. The poll has a margin of error of plus or minus 3 percent. Elon Musk attends news conference with President Donald Trump in the Oval Office of the White House, Friday, May 30, 2025, in Washington. Elon Musk attends news conference with President Donald Trump in the Oval Office of the White House, Friday, May 30, 2025, in Washington. Evan Vucci/AP Why It Matters Musk, who left the Trump administration in May, touted forming a new political party, which he called the "America Party," after revealing he was fiercely opposed to President Donald Trump's One Big Beautiful Bill Act, which narrowly passed the House on Thursday. "If this insane spending bill passes, the America Party will be formed the next day," he wrote in a string of posts on Monday. "Our country needs an alternative to the Democrat-Republican uniparty so that the people actually have a VOICE." The poll suggests Musk's new party could split conservative coalitions and draw in independents. What To Know According to the survey, 14 percent of voters said they would be "very likely" to support or vote for Musk's proposed party if it were launched, while 26 percent said they would be "somewhat likely." Another 38 percent said they were not likely to support it, while 22 percent remained unsure. The survey also revealed clear divides across party lines and demographics. Among men who identify as Republicans, interest was especially strong: 23 percent said they are "very likely" and 34 percent say "somewhat likely" to back the America Party—a total of 57 percent expressing openness to Musk's political brand. Male independents were also a promising base, with nearly half (47 percent) saying they're likely to support it. In contrast, Democrats appeared far more skeptical. Just 7 percent of male Democrats said they would be "very likely" to support Musk's party, while 36 percent said they would not likely back it at all. Among female Democrats, only 5 percent are "very likely" supporters. The poll also revealed dissatisfaction with both main parties. When asked which party best reflects American values, nearly a third of voters said "neither." Among independents, that share was even higher, with 59 percent saying neither the Republican nor Democratic Party represents values of America. By comparison, 37 percent of voters said the Republican Party best reflects American values, while 31 percent chose the Democratic Party. In a blog post, Quantus pollster Jason Corley wrote that the results indicate an "erosion" of "institutional loyalty, of cultural cohesion, and of trust." He added: "The signal is clear: a large slice of the electorate is open to something new, something disruptive. This is not about Musk. It's about the growing sense that the existing order is failing to represent the country as it truly is, or wants to be." Musk's net favorability rating currently stands at -18 points, according to pollster Nate Silver's tracker. Musk, who left the Trump administration in May after leading the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) for four months, has said that around 80 percent of Americans lie outside the ideological extremes represented by Democrats and Republicans—a potentially appealing talking point for an alternative political movement. But experts that Newsweek has spoken to have expressed doubt that the party would be able to make an impact. What People Are Saying Quantus Insights said on X: "The poll's intent was to simply capture the idea of another option, specifically one backed my Musk. 40 percent support isn't surprising. There are many out there who are absolutely shocked by the level of support when, in fact, it shouldn't be much of a shock at all. This kind of question always polls well. In 2023, 63 percent of Americans supported a third party, the highest in Gallup's 20-year trend." Dafydd Townley, an American politics expert at the University of Portsmouth, previously told Newsweek that "third parties do not tend to have a long lifetime in American politics," adding that Musk's new party "would likely split the Republican vote, potentially resulting in a Democrat-dominated House of Representatives, at least in the short term, due to the winner-takes-all electoral system." Mark Shanahan, a political scientist at the University of Surrey, who focuses on the U.S., echoed that skepticism, telling Newsweek: "I wouldn't hold out too much hope for an 'America Party' for a number of reasons. First, history is against it. The USA is a strongly two-party political system," he noted, pointing out that "around 90 percent [of Americans] actively identify with either the Republicans or Democrats," even if formal party membership is relatively low. What Happens Next The One Big Beautiful Bill Act now heads to Trump's desk, where he is expected to sign it on Friday.
Boston Globe
36 minutes ago
- Boston Globe
Democrats hope Republicans just sealed their midterm election fates by voting for Trump's 'beautiful' bill
'We heard from Mark from the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania,' Jeffries said. 'Mark says, 'I've collected Medicaid and [Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program] benefits for over a decade now… SNAP and Social Security benefits have been life-saving for me; they literally keep me alive.' Advertisement 'Mark lives in Pennsylvania's First Congressional District,' continued Jeffries. 'I believe that district is represented by our colleague, Congressman Brian Fitzpatrick.' Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up And on and on Jeffries went, until he mentioned virtually every GOP member whom Democrats hope to defeat — an uncommon display of political name-checking by the staid standards of the House chamber. If it were not clear when Jeffries started talking, it was painfully obvious by the time he wrapped up: Democrats are treating President Trump's 'Big, Beautiful Bill' as the foundation of their case to take back majorities in Congress next year. 'This bill is an attack on Americans' financial freedom and Democrats are going to make it a centerpiece of the midterms,' said Representative Jake Auchincloss of Newton, before taking a position behind Jeffries Thursday morning as his speech extended into a sixth hour. Advertisement Some believe the vote could be as catastrophic for Republicans as their move in Trump's first term to repeal the Affordable Care Act, which helped fuel a Democratic wave in the 2018 midterm elections. According to Congress' nonpartisan budget analyst, the GOP bill could result in Representative Don Beyer, a Virginia Democrat, said Jeffries likely made his stand in order to mark the vote as the most decisive of this era, much like the failed vote in 2017 to repeal portions of the Affordable Care Act or even the 2010 vote that created it. 'I'm trying to think if there's been a more consequential vote in my 10 years?' Beyer said. 'I don't think so.' Republicans largely rejected those comparisons, arguing the legislation accomplished what goals voters sent them to Washington to do: cut taxes and drastically increase money spent on immigration enforcement. Representative Tim Burchett of Tennessee said the bill would 'absolutely not' harm the GOP's midterm hopes. Referring to its proposed tightening of work requirements for public benefits, he said, 'everybody in America wants somebody able-bodied to get off their butts and get a job if they're able to and get off of welfare, and this provides that incentive.' But there were flashes of candor from GOP lawmakers that they understood the potential political peril presented by the bill — even if they voted for it. Advertisement The majority is 'always at risk in a midterm year,' said GOP Representative Don Bacon, who represents a Nebraska swing district but recently announced his retirement. While the tax cut provisions will be helpful, he admitted 'the other side's going to use Medicaid as an issue' and said the Senate version of the legislation, which makes deeper cuts to the federal program to insure low-income Americans, would make their attacks easier. 'So I think that was a mistake,' he said. (Bacon voted for the legislation.) The bill Already, the electoral environment for House Republicans heading into 2026 leaves little room for error: Democrats need to flip just three seats in the chamber to claim a majority, and the party is targeting three-dozen incumbent Republicans to reach that threshold. The House GOP, meanwhile, In the Senate, Democrats' hopes are dimmer due to the rotation of seats up for election and the GOP's larger 53 to 47 majority. Just two seats held by Republicans are considered competitive: Maine and North Carolina. Democrats will be defending seats in the tough battlegrounds of Georgia, Michigan, and New Hampshire. North Carolina Senator Thom Tillis, who was highly critical of the bill and under considerable heat from Trump, announced he would retire just before voting against the legislation. Advertisement It was a different story in the House. All The midterms may seem far off, but the election politicking around the bill began well before Jeffries stepped onto the floor for his marathon speech. As House Democrats prepared Wednesday for the final votes, dozens gathered on the Capitol steps to decry the legislation and lay the blame on vulnerable Republicans. 'Why would anyone vote for this dangerous and extreme bill?' Jeffries asked, before name-checking a freshman Republican. 'Why would Rob Bresnahan vote for this bill? More than 30,000 people would lose access to their health care in his community in Pennsylvania.' Democrats were trying to pressure those Republicans to vote against the bill, but also were laying down markers for their 2026 target list. In addition to Bresnahan, who represents a swing district in northeast Pennsylvania, Jeffries spoke of Representative Scott Perry from a nearby district. The next speaker, Representative Katherine Clark of Revere, called out two California Republicans: David Valadao and Young Kim. Finally Democratic Representative Pete Aguilar of California singled out another endangered Republican from a blue state, Gabe Evans of Colorado. Advertisement 'Today marks the culmination of Donald Trump's betrayal of working people across this country,' Aguilar said, with words that sounded straight from an attack ad. In the long lead-up to Thursday's vote, Democrats' outside political committees began laying the groundwork for the midterm battles ahead. House Majority Forward, the super PAC aligned with Jeffries, was developing TV ads before the vote took place, focusing particularly on Bresnahan and Representatives Tom Barrett of Michigan and Derrick Van Orden of Wisconsin. House Majority Forward spokesperson, CJ Warnke, said House Republicans were 'throwing away their spines and throwing their constituents under the bus' with their votes. Republicans, meanwhile, plan to go on offense against vulnerable Democrats who voted against the bill. In a statement, National Republican Congressional Committee spokeswoman Maureen O'Toole accused Representative Jared Golden, who represents a Republican-leaning Maine district, of voting to 'raise taxes, kill jobs, and gut national security. Voters won't forget it, not now, not next November.' (Golden has been outspoken about his opposition to the bill, saying it provides 'huge tax breaks' for the wealthy, 'paid for by cutting health care for the working poor.') An NRCC campaign memo shared with the Globe previewed its campaign messaging around the bill, arguing it prevented a massive tax hike and delivered on promises to secure the border. It also framed the changes to Medicaid as moves to 'crack down on welfare fraud and restore integrity.' Many Republicans emphasized the extension of Trump's first-term tax cuts, which account for trillions of dollars of the cost of the legislation, or smaller-scale new tax breaks, such as one to let taxpayers deduct a limited amount of tipped wages from their taxable income. Advertisement 'The economy is going to do well, and people are going to be happy,' said Representative Jeff Van Drew, a New Jersey Republican. 'They really are.' As Jeffries closed his speech before the ultimately successful vote, however, a new slogan emerged to add a layer of ominousness to GOP plans. 'After Project 2025,' the Democratic leader said, referring to the conservative-backed plan to scale back government under Trump, 'comes Project 2026.' Tal Kopan of Globe staff contributed to this report. Sam Brodey can be reached at
Axios
41 minutes ago
- Axios
Trump's crowning moment is ammo for Dems in '26
With B-2 bombers booming above, President Trump will deliver a motherlode of campaign promises for his supporters Friday, decimate his predecessor's priorities and demonstrate his total dominance over the Republican Party. Why it matters: The MAGA mega bill is more than just an indisputable victory for the president and the party he has remade in his image. It's also a stinging defeat for Democrats — but has given them fodder for the 2026 midterms. With the stroke of his signature, Trump will undo the solar, wind and electric vehicles tax cuts that were at the core of President Biden's signature Inflation Reduction Act. Trump will sign into law some long-term GOP goals, like making business tax credits permanent, changing how Congress counts tax cuts, pouring billions into border security, and slowing the growth of Medicaid and SNAP spending. The big tax cuts will apply this year. Most of the spending cuts will hit after the midterms. "It's going to make this country into a rocket ship," Trump said. Zoom out: The country will little note, nor long remember how Congress passed this bill: the all-nighters, the nail-biters and the GOP false fighters, who ultimately tapped out for Trump. But Democrats will make it their mission to ensure that voters don't forget what Trump and congressional Republicans did in the bill. The tax cuts, they say, will benefit the already-wealthy the most — and the Medicaid cuts that target the poor could devastate health care options for millions. Democrats will concede they lost on policy, but convinced they'll win — eventually — on the politics. For eight hours and 45 minutes Thursday, House Democratic leader Hakeem Jeffries held up the GOP-led chamber's vote in favor of Trump's big bill, energizing his party (and his donors) by previewing attack lines certain to be distilled to 30-second TV ads for the 2026 campaign. "This is a crime scene," he thundered from the House floor. The intrigue: Democrats will mischievously borrow some Republican lines that were dropped along the way amid GOP anxiety over the bill's impacts. "The Medicaid stuff in here is bad," said Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.). "Garbage," declared Rep. Chip Roy (R-Texas) earlier this week. "It's a good bill overall," he said after voting for it. Expect those comments — along with Sen. Joni Ernst's " we are all going to die" shrug when the Iowa Republican was asked about Medicaid cuts — to be featured on local TV stations. By the numbers: In all, the tax cuts total $4.5 trillion over a decade, leading to $3.3 trillion in deficit spending, according to the Congressional Budget Office. Republicans will say the real winners are the 83% of households that would have been hit with a tax increase if Trump's 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act had expired at the end of the year. Democrats will focus on the more than $1 trillion in cuts to Medicaid, which is projected to put nearly 12 million Americans at risk of losing their health care and threaten rural hospitals across the country. Trump is giving his MAGA faithful $170 billion in border and immigration funds and $150 billion for defense spending. The oil and gas industry got many of its priorities. Also tucked into the bill: a rise in the nation's debt ceiling by $5 trillion. Then there are the Trumpian touches to the bill, such as no taxes on tips, a suggestion he got from a Las Vegas waitress.
