Politics

Nancy Mace knows her Epstein vote screwed her with Trump. She doesn’t care.

Published

5 months ago

June 6, 2026

Nancy Mace thinks she knows why she didn’t get President Donald Trump’s endorsement.

The embattled South Carolina House Republican, who’s in the midst of a bruising race for governor, has a long history of bucking — and then cozying back up to — Trump. But her leading role in releasing the Jeffrey Epstein files was likely a bridge too far for the president, who has spent significant time and energy this year to get revenge against his GOP defectors.

Trump’s recent decision to back one of Mace’s primary opponents, Lt. Gov. Pamela Evette, in the crowded field will carry monumental weight in the crimson-red state. Past elections suggest that, with the president’s endorsement, Evette has all but secured her place in a runoff, as Mace and three other Republicans continue to scramble for the second spot on the ballot.

Still, the three-term representative says she has no regrets about her Epstein vote — or its consequences.

“That’s the sole reason I didn’t get the endorsement, because I voted to release the Epstein files, and I’m okay with that,” Mace told Blue Light News. “I’ve worked very hard to expose pedophiles, and child rapists, and sex trafficking in my state, and will continue to do it regardless of the outcome of the election.”

“It’s full steam ahead, no matter what. I’m not going down without a fight,” she added. “I’m still the MAGA candidate. I support all of MAGA’s policies. I support our president. I’m also an independent conservative.”

Mace is one of the few remaining Republican Epstein files defectors left standing, after the president blitzed Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) out of Congress and turned on former Rep. Majorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.).

Unlike with the other figures, Trump has not publicly made this particular race about his personal dissatisfaction with Mace, staying relatively quiet until he announced his endorsement of Evette in the final two-week window of the primary. But the late Trump headwind is yet another obstacle for Mace’s campaign, which has been otherwise dogged by controversies and a serious primary field that’s already been difficult for her to navigate.

Mace’s run for governor is her highest-profile race yet — and one that will define the next chapter of her rollercoaster career. She’s had to overcome retributive political challenges from several influential figures in her own party and navigate public questions about her own mental health.

She bested a Trump-backed challenger in 2022, a consequence for condemning the president after the Jan. 6 riot at the Capitol. In 2024, she handily defeated a primary challenge funded by allies of former Speaker Kevin McCarthy, who Mace voted to oust the year prior. And now, she’s back on the outs with Trump again, though she’s still trying to align herself closely with the president and reiterating her respect for him.

The White House declined to comment and instead referred Blue Light News to the president’s Truth Social post explaining his endorsement of Evette, which did not mention Mace. He instead touted Evette’s closeness to GOP Gov. Henry McMaster, a Trump ally.

Observers and Mace’s opponents in South Carolina paint a complex picture of how the race and Mace’s candidacy have shaped out.

She launched her campaign in the summer of 2025, armed with sky-high name recognition and the ability to tap into grassroots online fundraising, which paid dividends at the outset of the contest. Trump even shared a poll that showed her leading the field — one that Mace told Blue Light News last year that she personally sent to the president. But in early September, she joined House Democrats and signed onto Massie’s effort to force a vote to later release the Epstein files — an open defiance of the president’s wishes.

The tide started to shift against her in November, and not only because of the Epstein files drama.

Mace got into a public entanglement with the Charleston Airport Authority over a prearranged escort from the curb to her gate, leading to embarrassing headlines locally and nationally.

Airport authorities detailed in a report that Mace, in a profanity-laced tirade, lit into law enforcement officers and TSA agents for failing to meet her at a preordained pickup location, even as they walked her to her flight.

“I think the airport thing hurt her more than the [Epstein] thing,” said Terry Sullivan, a longtime South Carolina Republican operative, who is unaffiliated in the race. “She’s had really strong debate performances, she’s articulate, she’s right on the issues for these folks, but then she just goes a little haywire.”

Mace, for her part, defended her actions at the airport a few days after it happened in a Charleston press conference, calling the report’s release a “political hit job.”

“Did I drop an f-bomb? I hope I did,” she said at the time. The incident drew harsh criticism from fellow South Carolina Republicans, including Sen. Tim Scott who published a blistering statement rebuking her language and treatment of the officials. Sen. Lindsey Graham piled on, too.

Even now, months later, Mace stands by what she did.

“I get over a thousand death threats a year, and I’m the only one that doesn’t get security when traveling. In fact, the last three times I’ve had an altercation or been accosted has been at an airport, particularly the Charleston airport, because the left has lost their mind,” she told Blue Light News.

Then, in February, she accused her ex-fiancé and several of his business partners of serious sexual crimes during a speech on the House floor. They have denied the allegations, and Mace has been representing herself in the subsequent litigation, often swapping the campaign trail for the courtroom.

Controversies aside, ad spending reveals another reason why she’s struggling to break through to the front of the race.

Mace, shockingly, hasn’t spent a single dollar on television ads at all, according to an AdImpact analysis, despite her healthy fundraising throughout the campaign. She’s only dropped $50,000 on digital advertising.

Meanwhile, overall ad spending in the Republican primary has hit nearly $28 million between the candidates’ committees and aligned PACs, nearly $2 million of which has been in negative advertising targeting her specifically. Protect Freedom PAC, an outside group aligned with Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul, has spent $1.4 million in positive ads on Mace’s behalf.

One candidate in particular — millionaire and political outsider Rom Reddy, who jumped into contention at the last minute — has topped all other candidates and PACs, reaching nearly $6 million in the relatively small state. South Carolina Attorney General Alan Wilson and Rep. Ralph Norman (R-S.C.) are also in the race and spending real money.

If none of the candidates clear a 50 percent threshold — a likely scenario with five serious contenders on the ballot — the two top vote-getters will advance to a one-on-one runoff race, with a second round of voting scheduled for just two weeks later on June 23.

The weekend after Trump made his endorsement of Evette, Mace said she texted a friend who would understand her predicament: Massie. “I let him know that I didn’t get the endorsement, and we all know why,” she told Blue Light News.

But Massie had already taken to social media.

“Although virtually all Republicans eventually admitted by their votes that it was right to release the Epstein files, only three were brave enough to sign my discharge petition to force that vote. [Lauren] Boebert, [Marjorie Taylor] Greene, and Mace have paid an enormous price for doing the right thing,” he said in a post on X. Greene resigned from Congress earlier this year after clashes with Trump over Epstein and the economy, and Trump recently called for a primary challenge to Boebert after she campaigned with Massie ahead of the Kentucky primary.

Massie has already hinted that he could make some kind of comeback in 2028, whether for his old House seat in Kentucky or another federal office. Mace, should she come up short in the primary, is not so sure.

“I’m not running for Congress again,” Mace said. “I said I would do six years because I believe in term limits, and I made the promise that I would leave Congress after six years, so I won’t be running again.”

What about a political career outside of Congress? “I’m going to wait and see how Tuesday looks,” she demurred.

Politics

Trump is promising farmers $8B. Republicans are praying it will save their campaigns.

Published

12 minutes ago

October 20, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

Republicans locked in tight races this November are desperately hoping the Trump administration’s last-minute gambit to send farmers $8 billion in taxpayer money will work.

President Donald Trump announced the new round of money, aimed at farmers struggling with high diesel prices, during a Monday rally for at-risk GOP Sen. Roger Marshall in Kansas. The move comes as White House officials have scrambled to address anger in farm states from Republicans. Trump’s decisions to import more foreign beef, his tariff regime and high fuel costs amid the Iran war have riled already strained farmers and ranchers — a key GOP voting bloc.

Farmers won’t know how much money to expect for several more weeks. Even then, if approved, they won’t receive the payments until late November or early December at the earliest, according to three people close to the plans, granted anonymity to share details.

With two weeks to go before the election, the new aid may also arrive too late to convince some voters.

But top Republicans are banking on the announcement to stem GOP bleeding in farm states — especially in the Midwest, where Marshall, GOP Senate nominee Ashley Hinson in Iowa and GOP Senate nominee Mike Rogers in Michigan have been struggling in their election campaigns. In some cases, they’ve broken with Trump publicly on high prices and the war.

“This will go a long way to making sure the folks that feed us have it a bit easier when they most need it,” said Rep. Derrick Van Orden, referring to the farmers in his district. The Republican is locked in a highly competitive race in a rural-heavy stretch in Wisconsin’s 3rd District.

However, the internal USDA taxpayer-funded account Trump is tapping for the payments doesn’t actually have enough money in it right now to make the payments, meaning Congress will have to approve the new funds or the administration will have to take it from another program, according to three Trump officials who were granted anonymity to discuss private conversations.

Marshall — who’s facing a tougher-than-expected reelection campaign in deep-red territory — and Rep. Austin Scott (R-Ga.) were among the Republicans who helped push for the $8 billion, according to the three Trump officials.

Marshall requested the administration allocate money to assist farmers with spiked fuel costs in a letter to Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins in September.

“Roger Marshall is the leader who fought for that to happen,” Trump said during the Monday rally.

Spokespeople for Marshall and for Scott did not respond to requests for comment. The White House referred Blue Light News to USDA’s announcement on the money.

USDA spokesperson Harry Fones said in a statement that the aid package is Trump’s “latest action to deliver” for farmers and the department is actively reviewing the data to determine payments.

Trump’s decision also comes after administration officials realized the president’s previous step to make off-road dyed diesel more widely available had limited benefits for farm country over other options, according to two of the Trump officials and another administration official involved in the matter. Top agriculture lobbyists further warned the dyed diesel plan could actually backfire on farmers, because they could still be required to pay taxes on the product — just further down the road.

So, Trump officials settled on the $8 billion tranche of direct money for farmers, given that similar kinds of payments to farmers — dating back during the president’s first trade war in 2018 — have quelled enough farmer and rural voter anger to shore up necessary support for Republicans during election season.

Trump officials and Republican operatives in the Midwest are banking on the money shoring up support again this cycle — especially for GOP voters who are angry but also don’t want to vote for Democrats. Trump heads this Thursday to Iowa — where top Republicans have been worried about internal polling that warned several weeks ago they could lose all three Iowa House races, key Senate races and other once-safe red seats across farm states.

“It’s going to help bring farmers’ votes out,” Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) told Blue Light News of Trump’s plan on Tuesday.

“This is some way that the federal government can step in to help farmers for problems that they face through no fault of their own,” he said.

Most Hill Republicans weren’t given a heads-up about Trump’s announcement, including appropriators, and many hadn’t received any details from USDA as of Tuesday morning, according to two people familiar with the conversations who were granted anonymity to share private details.

Top agriculture groups have warned they’d need at least $50 billion in direct aid this fall to make farmers whole following the impacts of tariffs, weather-related disasters and other high costs linked to the Iran war’s chokehold on agricultural supplies. Farm-state Republicans are pushing to add at least $12 billion in direct farm aid payments to a separate year-end legislative package.

Monday’s aid rollout followed a number of other funding announcements made in swing rural districts. The White House doled out a first round of $12 billion in bailout funds earlier this year for growers of top agricultural commodities who were hit hard by Trump’s tariff agenda.

Alongside Republican Senate candidate Mike Collins in Georgia, Rollins announced a $3.3 billion loan to build a power plant last week. Rollins rolled out $180 million in funding for seed research alongside vulnerable Iowa Reps. Zach Nunn and Marianette Miller-Meeks earlier this month.

Trump also said he would approve long-derailed permanent year-round sales of ethanol during the Kansas rally — which would be a critical boon for corn growers across the Midwest. But the move has been long-stalled in Congress.

“With Roger Marshall in the Senate, we will make year-round E15 permanent. But if Adam Hamilton is in, I’m not doing it,” Trump said. “That’s a big deal for Kansas, actually.”

Rachel Shin contributed reporting.

Politics

Poll: Voters see Republicans as the party of Big Tech tax breaks

Published

3 hours ago

October 20, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

Americans are fed up with data centers and Big Tech, and Republicans are poised to take more of the political blame in the Nov. 3 midterms.

The Blue Light News Poll found last week that Americans were far more likely to associate the GOP with giving tax incentives to tech companies at a time when the public’s concerns about artificial intelligence and data center sprawl are only deepening.

Nearly half of respondents — 47% — called Republicans the party of tech tax breaks, more than double the 21% who said the same for Democrats.

Voters are also far more likely to want candidates who propose stripping away tax incentives for the data centers needed to fuel the AI boom, according to the new poll, conducted by PF Global.

About a fifth of respondents said that ending those tax breaks would be among their most important tax issues in the midterms, while only 1 in 10 wanted to offer new preferences for data centers.

The top tax priorities for voters, according to the poll, are hiking taxes on billionaires and curbing breaks for big companies.

The findings come as lawmakers in both parties have scrambled to respond to the growing voter concerns over AI and data centers — and as Americans increasingly associate Silicon Valley titans with the Republican Party.

But in both Democratic and Republican-led states alike, governors have sought to put new limits on tax incentives that were already approved for data centers.

Sen. Bernie Moreno (R-Ohio) rolled out a proposal last week that would take that a step further by imposing a 100% tax on any state or local incentive offered to AI data centers.

But it’s Democrats who have gone more on the offensive about the issue.

Former Sen. Sherrod Brown, for instance, has made data center incentives a key issue as he tries to unseat Sen. Jon Husted (R-Ohio), a former state lawmaker and lieutenant governor.

“Jon Husted’s ‘deals’ gave wealthy tech companies a windfall and left Ohioans footing the bill,” Brown recently posted on social media.

Democrats have specifically homed in on Meta, which has cut its tax liability in recent years by billions of dollars as it builds out its AI products. And they have sought to tie expanded tax breaks approved by Republicans in last year’s megabill to the increase in data center construction.

The GOP enacted incentives for companies in a broad array of industries as part of the 2025 tax cuts. But Big Tech has found those tax breaks particularly useful, helping to drive a big decrease in corporate tax payments as AI spending keeps trending upward.

Meanwhile, Democrats with 2028 ambitions have floated new taxes on AI companies, while Democratic lawmakers have teed up legislation that would keep data centers from taking advantage of incentives like Opportunity Zones and bonus depreciation, both of which Republicans expanded in 2025.

In fact, Sen. Jon Ossoff (D-Ga.) recently gave last year’s megabill another new name in a recent debate with his opponent, Rep. Mike Collins (R-Ga.).

“I want to know if you will commit to voting to repeal that data center tax scam that you voted for,” Ossoff said.

It’s not clear how much the current anti-AI energy will lead to new legislative limits in the coming months. But the new poll found Americans have a real fear of the unknown with artificial intelligence.

A majority of respondents said that tech chief executives had been secretive about the potential risks of AI, while a plurality of Americans believe both that the risks of artificial intelligence development outweigh the benefits and that the government should strictly regulate the emerging technology.

Politics

Two Dans, four choices, one big headache for GOP in Alaska Senate race

Published

5 hours ago

October 20, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

ANCHORAGE — Alaska Republicans have railed for years against ranked-choice voting. Now some worry it could cost them in a critical Senate race.

GOP Sen. Dan S. Sullivan is facing not only well-known former Democratic Rep. Mary Peltola in the four-way general-election field, but a same-name challenger who Republicans think could siphon votes from him in the close contest.

Some GOP operatives fear the senator will lose first-choice votes to retired teacher Dan J. Sullivan Jr. — and that supporters of his longshot rival might not rank the incumbent at all in the state’s unusual election system where voters can pick backup options that get counted if no candidate clears 50% of the initial vote. Two recent polls that simulated ranked-choice tabulations showed Peltola as the victor.

Art Hackney, a Sullivan ally who runs a super PAC boosting the senator, said Dan J. Sullivan is “going to get a percent of the vote” and warned it could be “potentially” be “significant in terms of impacting” the result of the race.

“Sullivan can win … but it makes it a heck of a lot harder,” added a Republican operative working on other Alaska races. “It’s what the race is going to come down to: If he loses, it’ll for sure be because of that. And if he wins, it’ll be in spite of that.”

Republicans have for years bemoaned the system that allows voters to rank their preference and eliminates candidates until one reaches a majority as “costly” and “confusing,” and argue it has undercut their party. Top Republicans like outgoing GOP Gov. Mike Dunleavy and President Donald Trump have urged voters to repeal the system via a ballot measure this fall after a previous effort failed two years ago.

“Even if he gets a percent or 2% or 3% percent with the phony ranked choice stuff, you never know what they’re going to do with it,” Trump said of Dan J. Sullivan in a rally in Wasilla last week, adding that it “could be the difference.”

It’s happened before: Peltola benefitted in her House win from a split GOP field, while Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) warded off a Trump-backed challenger in 2022 partly because of ranked-choice voting. Alaska Republicans are also fretting about the governor’s race this year, where three GOP candidates are competing, urging voters to “rank the red.”

Dan J. Sullivan, Heikes and Peltola’s campaign did not respond to requests for comment.

The similarly named Sullivans are separated on the ballot by their middle initials and party affiliation (the incumbent is listed as a Republican, the challenger without a party).

But the senator and his allies aren’t taking any chances.

They’re employing several of the tactics Murkowski used during her successful 2010 write-in campaign, including giving out rubber wristbands branded with the senator’s name and party affiliation, and airing a radio jingle with the NRSC.

“Dan S. is your No. 1,” the jingle goes. “If he’s not, rank him second, don’t throw your vote away. Dan S., Daniel, Gerry — just don’t rank Mary.”

“Dan S. Sullivan has two opponents in this race: Democrat Mary Peltola, and the ranked choice system she and her allies have deceptively manipulated to her advantage,” said Nate Adams, a spokesperson for the senator. “But our campaign is confident that Alaskans aren’t confused. They know the real Dan, and we’re making sure every voter can find him: ballot facsimiles on every mailer, voters reached at the door and on the phone, and even a jingle.”

Those pushing to keep ranked-choice voting in Alaska argue the system helps mitigate the so-called spoiler effect. The group behind this year’s repeal measure said in an email that it’s a nonpartisan effort focused solely on eliminating the system.

Outside GOP groups boosting Sullivan like Americans for Prosperity Action and Club for Growth Action have been urging voters at doors and via mailers to rank the incumbent first, a slightly different approach than Sullivan’s campaign. “Make Republican Incumbent DAN S. SULLIVAN your 1ST CHOICE and ONLY CHOICE,” read one Club for Growth Action mailer seen by Blue Light News, a slightly different approach than Sullivan’s campaign.

“In a tight election, it doesn’t take a ton of people to get confused to possibly change the trajectory and the outcome,” said Kevin Greene, senior adviser for AFP Action in Alaska.

A version of this article first appeared in Blue Light News Pro’s Morning Score. Want to receive the newsletter every weekday? Subscribe to Blue Light News Pro.