Washington, DC –Congressman Van Drew sent a letter to Mayor Parker of the city of Philadelphia demanding accountability for the city’s decision to raise the flag of the People’s Republic of China during an official ceremony on September 30th.

“The CCP is not a government to be celebrated,” said Congressman Van Drew. “It is a regime of repression and intimidation that censors its people, steals American jobs, and undermines our national security. By raising their flag in an official city ceremony, Philadelphia gave recognition to an adversary that works every day against the interests of the United States. It is a direct insult to the values that define our country. Mayor Parker owes the people a full explanation of why this ceremony was allowed to take place and the steps she is taking to ensure it does not happen again.”

Click here to read the letter.

In response to U.S. Senator Cory Booker’s appearance on NBC’s Meet the Press, where he stated, “I am not giving away my vote for a budget that’s going to hurt New Jerseyans or anybody in our nation,” anti-establishment progressive Democrat Lisa McCormick issued a direct challenge to New Jersey’s senior senator, demanding he lead the effort to fire Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer for his capitulation to the Trump-Musk agenda.

After spineless Senate Democrats betrayed our trust, McCormick said Chuck Schumer must be fired as Senate Minority Leader.

“Schumer’s leadership has failed America, and those who refuse to remove him must be recognized as collaborators in Trump’s grand design to dismantle democracy,” said McCormick. “The time for empty rhetoric is over. The time for action is now. Chuck Schumer must go. And if Senate Democrats refuse to remove him, then they too must be removed.”

McCormick had previously launched a scathing attack on “Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer and a handful of spineless Senate Democrats” for their apparent surrender to Republican demands, clearing the way for a House GOP-drafted continuing resolution (CR) that funds the federal government through September 30.

“Senator Booker’s righteous indignation on television would be more believable if he weren’t a key part of the Democratic leadership structure that enabled this disaster,” said McCormick. “Booker’s grandstanding should be called out for what it is. He wants to give an appearance that does not converge with the truth.”

“He saved Chuck Schumer by quelling a grassroots uprising with a feckless filibuster that did nothing but distract angry Democrats from the fact that their leaders threw them under the bus—a performance that netted Booker a cool $10 million in campaign donations from the same corporate donors who benefit from this surrender,” said McCormick.

McCormick pointed to the passage of a House GOP-drafted continuing resolution in March, which Senate Democrats under Schumer’s leadership allowed to clear, as the ultimate betrayal.

The bill funded the federal government through September 30 but legitimized the ongoing destruction of democratic norms and institutions by Donald Trump and his allies.

“While Booker now complains about a president ‘without the morals’ to work across the aisle, his record tells a different story,” said McCormick. “This is the same Cory Booker who openly declared that he ‘loves Donald Trump,’ defended the president’s children, and voted to confirm Charles Kushner—a convicted felon—as ambassador to France. His contrived outrage is a performance designed for the cameras, not a principle to be acted upon.”

McCormick argued that Schumer did not act alone but was propped up by cowardly enablers within the party, including Booker.

“Any Democratic official who is not aggressively working to remove Chuck Schumer as Senate Minority Leader must be considered equally responsible for allowing Donald Trump to get away with his crimes,” said McCormick. “Silence is complicity. The senators who voted against the bill are staying quiet, hoping this will all go away. It won’t. Those who elected Schumer must fire him, or admit they share his guilt.”

“The budget is indeed a moral document,” McCormick concluded. “And the moral failure of the Democratic leadership, including Senator Cory Booker and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, is written in every line of this disastrous GOP bill they allowed to pass. It’s time for Booker to put his vote where his mouth is. Fire Schumer, or stop pretending you’re fighting for us.”

About Lisa McCormick: Lisa McCormick is a progressive Democrat who challenged incumbent Senator Bob Menendez in New Jersey’s 2018 Democratic primary, earning 38% of the vote with a genuine grassroots campaign. She advocates for a Green New Deal, Medicare for All, and bold, urgent action to combat climate change and hold corporate polluters accountable, along with a $50 million cap on personal wealth based on Huey Long’s 1934 plan.

Betting on presidential elections has become an intriguing way for individuals to engage with the political process. Understanding the mechanics of how to place bets, interpret odds, and analyze election trends can enhance this experience. Betting on elections involves more than just picking a candidate; it requires a grasp of the political landscape and the factors that influence odds. This article delves into the strategies and considerations necessary for betting on presidential elections, offering insights into how the latest Presidential odds can guide your decisions.

Understanding Betting Odds

Betting odds are a crucial component when wagering on presidential elections. They represent the probability of a candidate winning as perceived by the market. Odds can be presented in various formats, such as fractional, decimal, or moneyline, and understanding these is essential for making informed bets. For instance, if a candidate has odds of 2/1, it means that for every $1 wagered, you could win $2 if that candidate wins.

These odds are influenced by numerous factors, including media coverage, public opinion, and major political events. As such, they can fluctuate significantly throughout the election cycle. Staying informed about these changes and understanding the underlying reasons can help bettors make strategic decisions.

Market liquidity also plays a significant role in presidential election betting. Higher liquidity means more money is being wagered, potentially leading to more stable and reliable odds. Experienced bettors often monitor the volume of bets placed, as this can indicate the confidence level behind certain odds. Additionally, comparing odds across different betting platforms can reveal arbitrage opportunities, where discrepancies between bookmakers allow for potentially profitable positions across multiple markets.

Analyzing Polls and Market Sentiment

While betting odds provide a snapshot of market sentiment, polls offer insights into voter preferences. Analyzing both can give a more comprehensive view of the election landscape. Polls are conducted by various organizations and can vary in accuracy and methodology. They reflect the current state of voter intentions, which can be a valuable tool when combined with betting odds.

Discrepancies between polls and betting odds often occur because they measure different aspects. Polls focus on voter preferences at a given time, whereas betting odds reflect the market’s collective judgment on the likelihood of outcomes. Understanding these differences is key to making informed bets.

Historical polling data analysis can provide valuable context for current polls and betting odds. By examining how polls have traditionally tracked against actual election outcomes, bettors can better gauge the reliability of current polling data. It’s particularly important to consider factors such as margin of error, sample size, and polling methodology. Some polls may oversample certain demographic groups or regions, leading to potential biases that savvy bettors should account for in their analysis.

Strategies for Betting on Elections

Successful betting on presidential elections involves more than just following the odds. It requires a strategic approach that considers various factors influencing the election. One strategy is to follow the news closely and understand how events might impact both voter sentiment and market odds. High-profile debates, scandals, or endorsements can all lead to shifts in both polls and betting markets.

Another strategy is to diversify your bets. Instead of placing all your money on one candidate, consider spreading your bets across multiple outcomes. This approach can mitigate risks and increase the chances of a return on investment. Additionally, keeping an eye on long-term trends rather than short-term fluctuations can provide a clearer picture of the election’s trajectory.

Conclusion: Making Informed Bets

Betting on presidential elections can be both exciting and challenging. By understanding betting odds, analyzing polls, and employing strategic approaches, bettors can enhance their chances of making informed decisions. The interplay between polling data and betting odds offers a unique perspective on the electoral process, providing valuable insights into both voter behavior and market sentiment. As the election season progresses, staying informed and adaptable will be key to successful betting.

The executive order signed recently strips out key pieces of a national tech directive issued just days before Biden left office, halting instructions that would have expanded agency control over software supply tracking, digital identity frameworks, and AI system accountability.

While some post-quantum standards remain intact, most of the operational requirements tied to data verification and risk modeling have been cut, triggering confusion inside departments already preparing for compliance audits under the prior mandate.

For institutions midstream in upgrades, the sudden shift has forced a scramble, not only in technical planning but in how risk is communicated across networks that no longer follow the same federal direction.

The ripple effect is reaching sectors where system access and identity protection are foundational to day-to-day operations, especially in spaces where data exposure carries financial risk and user access has to remain uninterrupted, regardless of shifting regulations.

Security models used by casinos that allow VPN reflect the same logic, designed to insulate activity through encrypted channels without depending on external protocols to stay functional. Their approach assumes that federal alignment can change at any moment, so protection is handled directly within the system itself, treating privacy as a structural necessity in environments where oversight is unstable.

The executive order’s shift deeply unsettles internal agency plans, bringing changes that, at least on paper, promise to reorient federal cybersecurity toward targeted action.

Instead of sweeping mandates, the order pares back the Biden-era demands tied to software inventories and AI auditing, yet it retains narrow but significant elements, such as hardening defense protocols against foreign cyber threats under Executive Order 13694, and modifications to EO 14144 that keep post-quantum cryptography and secure software architecture in focus.

That recalibration places new pressure on the National Institute of Standards and Technology, which now has until August 1 to stand up an industry consortium building on its Secure Software Development Framework, and until September to update its landmark SP 800‑53 on deploying patches at scale.

Beyond that, the administration slowed—but did not stop—efforts to label IoT devices with a trusted mark and maintain digital trust. At the same time, the scope of sanctions under EO 13694 has been narrowed to “foreign persons,” drawing criticism from analysts warning this move could weaken the U.S. stance on hostile cyber campaigns.

On one front, many cloud and federal vendors remain in limbo. Firms awaiting CISA’s software attestations now face unclear deadlines, and the removal of mandates tied to the Federal Acquisition Regulation leaves their compliance engines idle.

Contracts built around digital ID systems for public services are now on indefinite hold, a change that cybersecurity attorneys say could reduce accountability in identity theft cases. Even as some AI-driven vulnerability tracking remains intact, broader implementation blueprints have been shelved, stalled within systems that resist intervention.

Gloucester’s own setups have already felt the shift. Several local departments had begun aligning upgrades with the previous federal requirements, and now find themselves stuck between half-implemented tools and no clear replacement plan.

As those adjustments stall, defensive measures are being recast as voluntary incentives. Agencies still have to submit a list of products equipped with post‑quantum cryptography and lay out how internet routing protections will be upgraded by December. Federal News Network reports that CISA is now encouraging procurement teams to embed quantum-safe standards into contracts, even as only a few have moved past pilot testing.

Industry analysts warn this voluntary shift may stall without clear deadlines: Trump’s order stops short of mandating adoption, easing budget scrutiny but also raising doubts over actual uptake.

CISA’s Post‑Quantum Cryptography Initiative, launched this summer, aims to guide offices through risk assessment, vendor surveys, and policy design—part of a broader pivot to “crypto‑agile” frameworks—but officials say the impact will depend on whether federal teams follow through.

For now, the framework exists more as a signal than a standard. In the absence of firm direction, federal cybersecurity drifts in uncertainty, with federal teams patching gaps, procurement cycles slowing, and places like Gloucester still waiting for clarity that has yet to arrive.

On Sunday, March 2, 2025, Commissioner Liaison to Veterans Affairs Denice DiCarlo, alongside Director Frank J. DiMarco and West Deptford Deputy Mayor Adam Reid, had the honor of attending the Robert H. Jordan VFW Post 7125 Community Service Award Ceremony.

The event celebrated the 2024-25 Patriot’s Pen Essay Contest winners, who shared their inspiring perspectives on this year’s theme, “My Voice in America’s Democracy.” It was a privilege to recognize their achievements and present each winner with a Certificate of Commendation for their outstanding work!

Holy Angels Catholic School Winners: 1st Place – Sophia Casibang 2nd Place – Amaryllis Arocho; 3rd Place – Liam Hedglin; West Deptford Middle School Winners: 1st Place – Hideo Caeden Woods; 2nd Place – Naoki Woods; 3rd Place – Emerson R. Lewis. Congratulations to all the winners for their hard work and d