Year: 2026

When I began my anti-Jack Schlossberg campaign in April, all polls of New York’s 12th congressional district showed Schlossberg way ahead of the pack (with Republican-in-Democratic-garb George Conway second!). I recommended that voters wait until just before the start of primary voting and see who was ahead in the polls at that time—Alex Bores or Micah Lasher—and vote for the leader between the two of them; I discounted Nina Schwalbe because she had no chance of winning. It was a modified “anyone but Schlossberg” strategy.

I had three reasons for advocating both Bores and Lasher:
1. Bores and Lasher are far more experienced and competent than Schlossberg
2. Schlossberg has often displayed a disturbing immaturity in many contexts.
3. Voting for a celebrity, especially after the Trump debacle, is harmful to democracy and Schlossberg is nothing more than a celebrity.

The polls open tomorrow, so the time has come to make my recommendation—Bores or Lasher. But over the past two months the race has turned upside down. Both Bores and Lasher are far ahead of Schlossberg (and Conway):
• An AARP/Siena College poll of voters aged 50 and older released two days ago has Lasher—32%; Bores—21%; Conway—13%; Schlossberg—9%; Schwalbe—2%; Undecided—21%
• An Emerson College/PIX11/The Hill poll released in late May of voters of all ages in the district has Lasher—22%; Bores—20%; Schlossberg—11%; Conway—10%; Undecided—32%

Even with the large numbers of undecided voters still out there, it appears certain that the race is going to come down to two very competent people, Bores and Lasher. Both were successful in their chosen career before running for office. Both have served admirably in the New York State Assembly. Both have progressive, leftwing views on virtually every issue—immigration, affordable housing, mass transit, healthcare reform, the environment, control of AI, and protecting the rights of women, minorities and the LQBTQ+ community.

My recommendation therefore is to vote for whomever you like between Alex Bores and Micah Lasher.

But my endorsement—and my vote—is going to Alex Bores, and it comes down to one issue: charter schools. As a good union supporter and true progressive, Bores has always been firmly on the side of traditional public schools and of public school unions. By contrast, Lasher once led a pro-charter school advocacy group and while serving in the Bloomberg administration, aggressively lobbied lawmakers in Albany to allow more charter schools in New York City. Lasher is in favor of charter schools and I am vehemently against them as a failed innovation whose original purpose had nothing to do with education and everything to do with union-busting.

Charter schools were created with one goal in mind—to break teachers’ unions. The big money behind the charter school movement has always been right-wing billionaires who hate unions.

The funny thing is that as an educational innovation, charter schools have been an abject failure. Studies show that about one-third of charter schools produce lower-performing students than the regular public schools in their service area; a little more than one-third of charter schools show no difference; and a little less than one third of charter school perform at a higher level. But when we take a close look at these so-called “higher-performing” charter schools, we see that they are selective in which students they allow in and that they shed students they don’t like along the way; for example, a charter run by the Tucson-based, for-profit BASIS Charter Schools—considered at one time by U.S. News & World Report to be one of the top-ten schools in the country—starts on average with 125 students in sixth grade but has a mere 21 in the graduating class. The administration assuredly weeds out low performers, who then return to their traditional public school. For more information, see my lengthy article in a 2017 issue of Jewish Currents on the superiority of public schools to private and charter schools: https://jewishcurrents.org/unionized-public-schools-do-a-better-job.

In most areas, Lasher would make a fine Congressional representative, especially when compared to the celebrity nepo baby Jack Schlossberg or the GOP retread George Conway. But I’m voting for the more union-friendly Bores and I hope you do, too.

This post is directed at voters living in New York’s 12th Congressional district. NY12, geographically the smallest Congressional district in the country, includes some of the most famous neighborhoods in the world, including Central Park, Chelsea, Garment District, Hell’s Kitchen, Lincoln Center, Theater District, Times Square, Union Square, the Upper East Side, and the Upper West Side.

Our longtime representative Jerry Nadler is retiring and there are many candidates running to replace him. Only four have made a mark with the news and social media or by running an aggressive campaign:
• NY Assembly representative Alex Bores, my preferred candidate
• NY Assembly representative Micah Lasher, who would also make a fine Congress person
• George Conway, a prominent lawyer and former Republican who used to be married to Trumpite Kellyanne Conway and whose only campaign position is to dump Trump
• Jack Schlossberg, whose self-proclaimed profession is “influencer” and whose grandfather was president of the United State some sixty years ago.

The candidates clearly fall into two categories: 1) Legitimate candidates Bores and Lasher, who have far-reaching experience and 2) Celebrities Conway and Schlossberg. While I prefer Bores, I intend to check the polls just before the primary and vote for the candidate ahead at that time—Bores or Lasher, since either would be good and both celebrity alternatives would be far inferior.

Let’s assume that only an uninformed Democrat would vote for Conway and investigate why I believe that Jack Schlossberg is a dangerous candidate and why I implore all readers of this post who live in the district to vote for whoever is ahead between Bores and Lasher in the final polls.

1. There are better candidates than Schlossberg
The difference in experience between Schlossberg and Bores and Lasher is absolutely as awe-inspiring as the expanse across the Grand Canyon:

Alex Bores
• BS in industrial relations, Cornell; MS in computer science, Georgia Tech
• Constituent services rep for NY councilwoman Jessica Lappin
• Science project leader at Palantir until he quit because the company worked for ICE
• Senior manager at two tech firms
• Elected to NY Assembly, 2022
• Cosponsored the Responsible AI & Education Act
• Co-chair of NY chapter of the Future Caucus

Micah Lasher
• BA in Sociology, NYU
• Aide to Congressman Jerry Nadler
• Director of Legislative Affairs for Mayor Michael Bloomberg
• Chief of Staff to NY attorney general Eric Schneiderman
• Head of Policy and Communications for an urban planning subsidiary of Google
• Director of Policy for NY Governor Kathy Hochul
• Elected to NY Assembly, 2024

Jack Schlossberg
• Senate page and intern
• BA in history, Yale; graduated from Harvard Law School
• Occasional freelance writer for national media
• Low level position at Rakuten and Suntory, both in Japan while his mother was ambassador to Japan
• Staff assistant in a State Department bureau dealing with the environment.
• Social media “influencer” with 2 million followers

Note that all of the jobs Schlossberg has held have been low level positions and that he almost assuredly procured them all through family connections; a case could be made that it is the magic of the Kennedy name that has garnered him so many social media followers. By contrast, Bores and Lasher have served mostly in management positions. The trajectory of their careers—Bores mainly in the private sector and Lasher in government—both follow a clear path of ever greater responsibility, whereas Schlossberg seems to have been spinning his wheels since graduating from college.

All three hold absolutely the same progressive political positions, but when Bores or Lasher discuss affordable housing, mass transit, or the environment, they come prepared with real-world experience, facts and support for specific legislation. Schlossberg, by contrast, proffers earnest generalities that consist of the tritest of progressive homilies. Zoom or attend any Town Hall meeting and you’ll immediately recognize the difference between the issues-specific Bores and Lasher and the generalizing Schlossberg.

2. Schlossberg displays a lack of maturity
Taken as a whole, Schlossberg’s social media presence, career choices, and campaign speeches paint the picture of a flighty, immature young man. I’ll leave my readers to look through his Facebook, Instagram, and TikTok posts for his frequent silly laddie boy antics, especially prior to announcing his run for office. Let me give a few other telling examples of Schlossberg’s immaturity:
• Schlossberg graduated from Harvard Law School and passed the New York bar exam. At that point, all Schlossberg had to do to gain admission to the NY Bar was submit a document concerning his “character and fitness.” He had three years to file the form, but he never did it. He states that he decided that he didn’t really want to be a lawyer. What’s particularly comic about the situation is that Schlossberg often brags that he scored in the top one percent of exam-takers. The NY Bar does not typically give out that information, making it available only when someone files a special request. Schlossberg was motivated enough to fill out and file the form to get his bar score, but not enough to file the “character and fitness” review to become a lawyer. Sounds flighty to me.

• He constantly cites an eighth grade project as environmental experience. The simple fact is what you do in eighth grade has no bearing on your suitability for elective office.

• The one issue on which Schlossberg diverges from Bores and Lasher is affordable housing. Schlossberg keeps pushing a proposal to give people tax credit for rent, an idea that shows his political immaturity. He never fleshes out the idea, but presents it as a slogan and nothing more. I think we can assume that, as in the case of the flawed mortgage deduction. the wealthier the renter the greater the credit, so the bill would help the affluent more than the poor and thus increase inequality. Moreover, the tax might serve as a rationale for landlords to raise rents, as renters will have more money to spend. We already give tax breaks to property owners. Schlossberg’s plan thus gives the property a double tax break, which will diminish government revenues. As Bores and Lasher both point out, the answer to affordable housing is more housing. But like Mickey Rooney in a 1940s musical, the immature Schlossberg got an idea that sounded great at first blush, and he didn’t think it through as a more mature person would have.

3. Celebrity candidates hurt our democracy
The inexperienced Schlossberg is running on his celebrity, just as Trump did when he started his political career in 2015. Now Schlossberg is obviously not the monstrously evil Trump. He seems like a nice kid who hasn’t found himself but knows that whatever he does he has the Kennedy name and connections behind him. He’s smart and likeable. It’s likely that if he were willing to spend the next ten years in public service—perhaps as a legislative aide, maybe running for the NY Assembly—he would gain the seasoning needed to be a viable Congressional representative.

But the very fact that the celebrity Schlossberg is considered a serious candidate is bad for our democracy. Celebrity culture and celebrity infiltration of politics is ruining the country. Celebrity candidates weaken democratic functioning because name recognition and media influence begin to outweigh competence, accountability, and informed decision making, shifting elections from evaluations of governance to popularity contests.

Let’s stop the celebrity candidate in New York’s 12th Congressional district! A few days before primary voting begins, I’m going to check the polls and post my recommendation—Bores or Lasher, whoever is ahead at that time. Please vote for my recommendation.

Besides asking you to vote in a bloc for the most viable of the two qualified candidates, I am asking all readers of this post, wherever you vote, to share it so that we can communicate to voters in the district who may be in your Facebook network, but not mine. Finally, whenever you see a pro-Schlossberg post, please take two minutes to paste in this article or make your own anti-Schlossberg remarks in the comments section.