Politics
After a month of grieving, Democratic leaders are torn between anger and exhaustion
SCOTTSDALE, Arizona — Exactly one month after losing to Donald Trump in every battleground on the map, Democratic Party leaders from across the country decamped to one of the states that rejected them and struggled to pull themselves out of their funk.
At a Hilton hotel outside of Phoenix, where Christmas carols piped into the lobby, state Democratic chairs gathered for their annual winter meeting. They weren’t frantic like they had been after Trump’s first stunning victory. They were exhausted. Even after Trump tapped the likes of Kash Patel and Robert F. Kennedy Jr. to staff his government, they still weren’t ready to demonstrate in the streets or tune into liberal networks.
But they were inching toward the anger phase of the grieving cycle as they huddled in ballrooms and traded theories about what went wrong. They pointed fingers at what they cast as overpaid consultants, expressed despair that working-class voters of all stripes had abandoned them, and lamented that they had lectured voters instead of listening to them.
“We need to win back the House, not fund consultants who want to buy a new house!” said Ken Martin, president of the Association of State Democratic Committees, in a speech to hundreds of attendants.
Waiting for pizza after hours of meetings, Judson Scanlon, political director of a PAC that produced “White Dudes for Harris” hats, fessed up to being one of the Democrats who has stopped watching BLN after Trump returned to power.
“Since 2016, all we’ve heard about is the crazy crap that this guy is doing when he’s president and when he’s not,” said Scanlon. “I’m fed up with that.”
This confab marked one of the first major gatherings of top Democrats since last month’s disastrous election. They had once hoped they would finally celebrate the end of the Trump era here. Instead, while the recriminations continued, they urged one another to put on a brave face despite losing the White House to a convicted felon and getting locked out of both chambers of Congress.
Liberal networks’ ratings have plummeted since Trump’s return to power, one of several signs that Democrats are in a kind of retreat as they try to get their bearings, poring through reams of data and hot takes in hopes of figuring out what led them to lose the popular vote for the first time in 20 years. Many progressives have left the social media platform X, and they aren’t planning the massive marches that took place after Trump first won.
“Why don’t you see the marches? Black women right now are tired. They are really, really tired,” said Jaime Harrison, the chair of the Democratic National Committee who announced after Trump won that he wouldn’t run for reelection. “Many of them put everything they had into this race to see one of their own be elected president of the United States.”
Perhaps because they don’t have the energy for it, Democrats in Arizona also weren’t in the mood for the kind of drawn-out ideological battle they undertook after 2016.
That much was clear from the way that the four men running to lead the Democratic National Committee tried to persuade state party leaders to vote for them in next year’s election.
In speeches, none of the DNC chair hopefuls made the case that Democrats should undergo a sweeping shift in their worldview. Unlike in some progressive parts of the Democratic ecosystem, no one argued that Trump’s win proved that they need to adopt a bold, concrete promise like Medicare for All — or, from the other end of the party’s spectrum, that they must urgently move to the center on transgender issues.
Instead, most sold themselves as competent managers and pitched technical solutions.
Martin, who heads the Minnesota Democratic-Farmer-Labor Party, said he helped pull Democrats in his state out of a slump after the 2010 midterm election that then-President Barack Obama famously called a “shellacking.” He argued that “our party doesn’t need to be torn down to the studs and rebuilt.”
He has entered the race as something of an early favorite, locking down about half of the endorsements needed to win. In Arizona, his fans sported “YES WE KEN!” buttons and he set up a makeshift war room dubbed the “Kenquarters.”
Like Martin, Wisconsin Democratic Party Chair Ben Wikler told the crowd that he righted the ship in his state, where “we’ve been able to win seven out of the last 10 statewide elections.” He called for a “permanent campaign” with omnipresent national organizing.
When DNC chair candidates did call for change, they talked more about transforming tactics than overhauling ideology.
Maryland Gov. Martin O’Malley said in his speech that the party needs to do things differently to win. But, he said, “the good news is the change is really just a return to our true selves to be a party of working people all across America.”
And O’Malley, too, said that he was a “proven operational turnaround leader,” pointing out that President Joe Biden had trusted him to revamp the Social Security Administration when he tapped him as its commissioner.
James Skoufis, a little-known New York state senator representing a Trump-loving district, went the furthest in making the case for transforming the DNC. But he talked more about strategies than ideology, saying that he would go on Fox News and Joe Rogan’s podcast — a reference to Vice President Kamala Harris’ decision to rebuff the show whose interview with Trump boasted 52 million views on YouTube.
He also promised to end “sweetheart deals” and “contracts with vendors that have been ripping off the DNC for cycles.”
Some bigger-name Democrats who could shake up the DNC chair race, like U.S. Ambassador to Japan Rahm Emanuel or Ohio Sen. Sherrod Brown, could still decide to run.
At times, some Democrats argued they needed to stay the course on cultural issues.
In a fiery speech, Harrison lambasted critics in his party who want to walk away from “identity politics.” Democrats began their meeting on Thursday with a “land acknowledgement,” a symbolic gesture that grants that the land a person is standing on previously belonged to Native Americans, which conservatives have derided as “woke.”
As Democrats tried to figure out a path forward, there was a quiet sense among some here that they wouldn’t be out of power for long. It was a stark contrast from people elsewhere in their party who are worried that a realignment could rob them of power for years. After all, these Democrats reasoned, Americans had voted for Trump before — and then quickly grew tired of him, as evidenced by the 2018 midterms and then again in the 2020 presidential election. They took comfort in the fact that voters this year supported liberal ballot initiatives and Democratic Senate candidates in states Trump won.
“Something had to work for Ruben Gallego to win a Senate seat right here against somebody who was a Trump sycophant in terms of Kari Lake,” said Harrison. “Those mixed results don’t say that this was a landslide. It doesn’t say it’s an existential crisis for the Democratic Party.”
Peggy Grove, vice chair of the Pennsylvania Democratic Party, said they have a “good chance” at winning the House in the midterms.
“Yesterday was the bitch day,” she said. “Today started the rebuilding.”
Democrats may be discovering the political power of calling something rigged.
They’re leaning hard into anti-corruption messaging in the final weeks of the campaign as new research suggests that linking corruption to Americans’ economic struggles can boost Democrats into the home stretch.
Messaging from Democrats that tied corruption to housing, health care and the cost of living increased voter support for Democratic congressional candidates by about 3 percentage points, according to a national survey last month conducted by Blue Rose Research and Democratic-aligned Winning Jobs Narrative Action, which was obtained by POLITICO.
The findings align with a shift in how Democrats are talking about corruption — and help explain why that message has exploded on the campaign trail. From Sen. Jon Ossoff in Georgia to James Talarico in Texas and Abdul El-Sayed in Michigan, Democrats have zeroed in on a common argument: Washington is rigged to benefit the wealthy at the expense of everyday Americans.
“We have a corruption crisis in this country, and it is leading to an affordability crisis,” Iowa Democratic state Rep. Josh Turek said during his Senate debate against Rep. Ashley Hinson last week.
It’s a message that is reverberating across campaigns. In a recent presentation delivered to Democratic groups on Capitol Hill, longtime Democratic strategist Jesse Ferguson offered a succinct playbook: “Corruption is why your costs are high,” according to the presentation viewed by Blue Light News.
His presentation also encouraged Democrats to lead with the acknowledgement that costs are high and then go into corruption, acknowledge that it happens across parties and avoid making President Donald Trump the sole focus of their attacks. “Trump works as an example of corruption that raises costs, not as the whole case,” the presentation said.
Since April, Democratic candidates and outside groups in House and Senate races have spent roughly $104 million on advertising mentioning corruption, according to ad tracking firm AdImpact. Republicans, meanwhile, have spent $36 million across House and Senate campaigns over the same period.
“It’s not just like, ‘oh, look at what’s happening with the ballroom,’ or ‘boy, Donald Trump’s made a lot of money on crypto,’” Democratic strategist Chris Meagher said. “You have to be able to tie it to the impact on people’s lives.”
“The narrative works best when it’s an outsider candidate who is linking a rigged economy to a rigged political system,” longtime Democratic pollster Celinda Lake said of the anti-corruption messaging.
Running against corruption is not new. But as Democrats looked for a way out of the political wilderness after 2024, they began turning a familiar attack — anti-corruption — into a broader message tied to voters’ economic pain. What once was an attack largely focused on Trump has become a more expansive argument for candidates trying to connect it to why Americans are struggling financially, potentially providing a blueprint for the party beyond November.
“Democrats used to talk about corruption as a crime. Now corruption is the explanation for costs,” Ferguson, the Democratic strategist, said.
The issue — and messaging around it — is also coming to the fore in a cycle when anger over the suppression of Epstein files hit a fever pitch and public pressure to ban Congress from trading stocks continues to mount.
And it’s not just the research by Blue Rose that shows the potential potency of that message.
In another recent survey from the Democratic group Navigator Research, obtained by Blue Light News, the vast majority of Americans — both Democrats and Republicans — say corruption is driving up their costs. That same survey of registered voters, conducted in August, found majorities, including roughly a quarter of Republicans, say Trump is bringing more corruption to Washington than fixing it.
And new results from the nonpartisan Center Square’s Voter Voice Poll, conducted this month by Noble Predictive Insights and shared first with Blue Light News, show 10% of voters ranking government corruption as the second most important issue facing Americans, tied with the economy and jobs, and only behind inflation and price increases.
In some instances, Democrats have wrested the word “rigged” away from Trump who has used it in the context of unproven election fraud and turned it into a mobilizing political talking point. That’s a departure from March 2024 when Democrats criticized then Rep. Katie Porter for accusing special interests of spending money to “rig” the California Senate race after she lost in the state’s primary. But now some Democrats are embracing that language as a way to rail against what they see as a corrupt system.
“They’re rigging the rules to benefit their wealthy donors and corporate special interests,” former Ohio Democratic Sen. Sherrod Brown said in a message to supporters announcing the launch of his campaign to return to office.
But the corruption resonates across parties. Republicans who spoke with Blue Light News said Democrats do not own the issue — voters everywhere are animated by it. While polling shows that voters in both major parties believe the government is corrupt, Republicans accuse Democrats of lacking credibility on the issue.
“Americans have been disgusted by the level of self-serving corruption that spread like herpes through the slimy politicians who run the Democrat Party, and now they’re suddenly changing their tune because it’s an election year,” National Republican Congressional Committee spokesperson Mike Marinella said in a statement. “Voters see through the facade, and they know Republicans are cleaning up the rot left behind by Democrat leaders.”
On the Senate side, National Republican Senatorial Committee spokesperson Bernadette Breslin pointed Blue Light News to a poll in Minnesota — a rare offensive opportunity for Senate Republicans this cycle — that shows there are just about as many voters who blame Democratic Gov. Tim Walz for widespread fraud of federally-funded government programs in the state as there are who blame the criminals. Walz’s lieutenant governor, Peggy Flanagan, is running for Senate against Republican Michele Tafoya, and corruption under Democratic rule is a key theme for Republicans in the race.
“The overwhelming majority of Minnesotans blame the Walz-Flanagan administration — and the criminals it aided and abetted — for plundering their hard-earned taxpayer dollars,” Breslin said. “They’ll vote for Michele Tafoya to right the ship this November.”
Steve Pierce, executive director at Winning Jobs Narrative Action, said one of the biggest shifts for Democrats this cycle on corruption has been a move away from a message largely rooted in concerns over democratic norms, which have struggled to break through in a way that moves voters in past cycles.
“You’ve seen Democrats, rather than connecting corruption to democracy, connecting it to affordability, connecting it to the top concern that voters have,” said Pierce. “It’s connecting it in a way that’s meaningful to voters around the things that they are thinking about every day.”
The anti-corruption message has played out across the country, and as an explanation for frustration against different economic pain points, including rising electric bills and local data center projects.
A recent memo on data centers from House Majority PAC, the main super PAC working to elect House Democrats, noted the “message environment in the 2026 election cycle has been dominated by costs, with an important secondary theme around corruption that began to emerge last year.” The group’s spokesperson, CJ Warnke, told Blue Light News that “every single poll and every single focus group shows affordability to be voters’ number one issue, and they specifically point to corrupt politicians as being responsible for driving up prices.”
Next month’s midterms will offer the clearest test yet of whether Democrats can turn this message into votes. But Democratic operatives increasingly see anti-corruption messaging as more than just a short-term political weapon — as long as they try to do something about it if they win control next year.
“I think the thing for Democrats, if they do want to keep it on the radar heading into 2028, and I think they should because I think it is a really potent issue for them, they are going to have to also deliver on it,” said Pierce.
“They have to be able to show up to get caught trying,” he said.
MAGA Inc. is planning to trim the map in a homestretch bid to cling to power in November.
The President Donald Trump-aligned super PAC, with several hundred million dollars still in the bank, is planning a series of major money moves coordinated with other leading GOP super PACs in the final three weeks before Election Day. The push includes cutting off spending to a group of less attainable House races, piling in money to shore up others and training its focus on key Senate seats to salvage Republicans’ Senate majority.
Ohio, Alaska and Iowa are the Senate races that Trump officials view as increasingly critical to keep their majority in the chamber, according to three GOP officials familiar with MAGA Inc.’s strategy, granted anonymity to candidly assess the midterms.
One of the people said MAGA Inc. and a leading House GOP super PAC would pull spending out of Michigan’s 8th District by the middle of this week. The move effectively acknowledges Democratic Rep. Kristen McDonald Rivet’s strength over GOP challenger Tom Smith. They have similar plans for a group of other House races in the coming days that are trending away from Republicans.
The official stressed the tacking would amount to “re-allocating, not cutting” the total planned spend.
MAGA Inc. and its affiliates are still competing in all of the Senate battlegrounds, including Texas, where they expected to add at least $5 million and potentially more in the coming days, according to the official.
For the Senate, winning two out of those three states of Ohio, Alaska and Iowa would make it “hard” for Democrats to take the Senate, one of the senior GOP officials projected, adding that a three-state sweep would decisively put it out of reach for Democrats. That, however, would require Republicans to win Texas and a handful of other at-risk red states, while also flipping Michigan or another blue state. The same senior Republican official said there’s confidence GOP Rep. Ashley Hinson “probably pulls through” in the Iowa Senate race.
Texas, however, remains a massive headache for Republicans — and the GOP official is pointing to Ken Paxton as the problem.
The senior Republican official said MAGA Inc. would do what it can to help candidates and vowed to “unload the tank” — a promise the group has been making for months even as it’s only spent more than half of the half-a-billion-dollar war chest with three weeks to go.
But the onus for standing up a winning campaign is shifting. Ultimately, the official said, “it’s up to the candidates, not the outside groups” to “bring it home and have a reason to get a few more points of swing voters their way.” They also need to maximize their votes with Republicans, this person said.
“Over the next week to 10 days you will see a lot of moves — a lot of coordinated moves — that are around trimming the map for the home stretch,” the senior GOP official familiar with MAGA Inc.’s plans said. “It’ll be all over the place. It’ll just just be moving on from districts that we don’t think it’s the right time for, and piling in further on ones we think it is the right time for.”
That would force top House GOP groups to decide whether to shift their own cash to take over key spending from MAGA Inc. as they work to defend a host of once-safely red House seats Trump won by more than 10 points in 2024 that are now at risk. That includes key districts across the Midwest, North Carolina, Nevada, along with a seat in Kentucky, which Trump won by 15 points.
In Ohio, where Trump is traveling for a rally on Monday, Republicans have privately worried about GOP Sen. Jon Husted for months. The former lieutenant governor, who was appointed to serve out Vice President JD Vance’s Senate term, has been trailing former Democratic Sen. Sherrod Brown in public and private polling for months. The top Senate GOP super PAC, Senate Leadership Fund, has unloaded close to $100 million in Ohio and a slew of outside groups have joined, making it one of the most expensive Senate contests in the country. Just in the last week, Husted notched his first narrow lead over Brown in one recent poll.
“We want a maximum spend,” Ohio GOP Chair Alex Triantafilou, who played host to Vance on Friday in Lima and will reprise that role as the president lands in Youngstown, said in an interview. “We want as much attention. I mean, the president’s coming, the vice president. Look, I’m the chair of the Republican Party — I want full resources in this state. We welcome it very much.”
And while Texas has emerged as an unexpectedly expensive headache for Republicans, another GOP operative familiar with MAGA Inc.’s thinking suggested Ohio could end up costing Republicans more spending from all sides, despite its smaller size.
Democrats see the same final battlefield taking shape. Senate Majority PAC, the top Democratic-aliied PAC, is injecting $2.5 million in Iowa and $7 million in Ohio for television ads, according to plans shared first with Blue Light News, “injecting new resources to help close the gap in those battleground states,” a spokesperson said. They’ll also continue to back aggressive digital campaigns in each state. This comes on the heels of SMP dropping $5 million in Kansas.
Beyond Ohio, other senior Republicans are busy trying to staunch the bleeding in red states across the map.
Top Senate GOP groups have already cut off spending in North Carolina, where Republicans are struggling to defend a GOP-held seat. They have also pulled some money back in Georgia but are still planning to unload millions more in the Peach State.
Senate Leadership Fund expects to keep spending broadly across the map in the final weeks. The group plans to pour even more money into Texas as a potential lifeline to Paxton, hitting a total of nearly $200 million. They’re also dropping dough in Kansas to defend Sen. Roger Marshall, whose tough race against Democrat Adam Hamilton blindsided top Republicans in the final weeks, along with a crop of other endangered GOP incumbents, according to two Republicans with direct knowledge of the plans. And, SLF is expected to keep unloading money into the Michigan Senate race, which Senate Republicans view as their top flip opportunity.
The senior GOP official familiar with MAGA Inc.’s strategy defended the group’s spending decisions, despite waves of criticism from some Republicans who wanted it to unleash all its $400-million-plus war chest, and sooner. So far, MAGA Inc. and its affiliates have spent just over $200 million this cycle, including future ad reservations, according to data from AdImpact.
The cash the wider MAGA Inc. operation deployed last month, which was close to $100 million, shielded candidates from further losses as the environment worsened for Republicans, the official argued.
“The money’s working,” the official said. “The money stopped everybody from getting killed in September when the environment rapidly deteriorated further. The money held the line.”
The campaigns that received the September spending were able to “stay afloat,” one of the other officials said. “There are more candidates in a position that they can still win their race today that wouldn’t have been had that not happened.”
Many of those GOP candidates, however, privately argue it was Trump’s poor approval rating and his decisions around the ongoing war with Iran, tariffs and sky-high fuel prices that are sparking voter backlash.
It was during that September panic that GOP officials became increasingly worried about the growing map.
At one point, Trump officials believed they may need to start intervening to boost even Sen. Ashley Moody in ruby-red Florida as warning signs shot up across the Sunshine State, according to two Trump officials with direct knowledge of the matter.
But recent internal polling for Moody has turned a corner, alleviating many of those concerns and prompting Trump officials to stand by plans for the president to visit the state — but more as a way to boost Rep. Byron Donalds, who is running for governor, and several key House races that Republicans are worried about, according to the people.
Jessica Piper contributed to this report.
Under the political radar, the country’s food stamps program is undergoing a slow-motion transformation. The ramifications could bubble up into the midterms.
Changes to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program from Republicans’ One Big Beautiful Bill Act are rolling out in phases, from tougher work requirements to restrictions on non-citizens. Food stamp rolls already shrank by more than 5 million people nationwide as of this summer, as the hardest-hit state, Arizona, saw an outright majority of its food stamp recipients lose benefits.
The latest alteration clicked into place Oct. 1, when the share of administrative costs states and counties have to pay rose to 75% from 50%. An even bigger financial shift looms in a year, when states with high payment error rates will have to assume some benefit costs for the first time, a scenario that’s already rippling through state and local budget planning.
It all adds up to a new era in federal-state relations — and in the size and nature of the welfare state.
In a year when affordability worries top voters’ priority lists and grocery prices strain their wallets, Democrats think the SNAP shift gives them an opening to make Republicans pay politically after the GOP used social safety net cuts to food aid and Medicaid to help pay for last year’s tax cuts.
“People are getting kicked off these programs at the very moment they’re going to the polls to vote,” House Agriculture ranking member Angie Craig (D-Minn.) said. “I sure wouldn’t want to be a Republican headed into the November ballot.”
But Republicans think they have a compelling story to tell voters, trying to right-size a program that spends millions of dollars on erroneous payments. The SNAP changes align with the Trump administration’s broader push to crack down on fraud and make the government smaller or more efficient. Implementing stricter work requirements for welfare often polls well, and trying to move people toward work gets at the root causes of poverty, they argue.
“The premise is simple: Let’s make sure that this program is preserved for those truly in need, and that we aren’t squandering taxpayer dollars,” a senior USDA official told Playbook in an interview. “And let’s make sure that if folks are able-bodied, they are work training or volunteering for 20 hours per week.”
That doesn’t mean Republicans in competitive races are putting SNAP and Medicaid cuts front and center on the campaign trail. When they tout last year’s megalaw, new tax breaks typically lead the messaging. And 10 frontline GOP House campaigns didn’t respond to requests for interviews about how they can win on SNAP.
At the state and county level, some governments are scrambling to prepare for a massive cost shift, hitting at the same time as significant Medicaid changes. The resulting bureaucratic jumble has contributed to some of the SNAP losses this year, as recipients struggled to get through overtaxed call centers, some states cut staff, and others tightened their processes.
“It really sets up a change in the federal responsibility, and I view it as a slippery slope,” warned Barbara Guinn, New York’s commissioner of the Office of Temporary and Disability Assistance. Her state is staring down a possible $1 billion added burden next year, though they’re advocating for a repeal of the benefits change. “Once they implement any kind of cost shift, I think it will be easier for them to take similar actions in the future.”
Whether to delay next year’s cost shift has already generated tensions over the farm bill in the Senate, where Democrats are demanding a longer postponement than Republicans’ offer of one year. Some Minnesota counties are considering significant property tax increases to pay for the extra costs, Craig said: “We’re going to be pushing hard for a two-year delay — at the request of, frankly, many of my Republican county commissioners, not just Democrats.”
Conservatives see the new calculus as a long overdue change to improve efficiency and incentivize program integrity. Improper payment rates are high in many states (though they comprise both over-payments and under-payments, and error rates are different from fraud). Those that reduce errors enough won’t have to take on paying the benefits. And even opponents of the changes think lower error rates are a worthy goal. SNAP rolls often ebb and flow with the economy, and the recent drop could reflect the job market pulling people out of need — or the removal of people who shouldn’t have been getting food stamps in the first place.
“There needs to be some level of accountability,” the USDA official said. States with high error rates “need to start to have skin in the game.”
But at a time when many households are already squeezed by inflation, the SNAP changes have correlated with higher numbers of Americans turning to charities to ward off hunger. The surge in people losing food aid came more quickly than expected. The unemployment rate hasn’t meaningfully changed. And the vast majority of large food banks in a recent NBC survey said they were grappling with higher demand, in part due to food stamp changes. Another rule kicking in the day after the midterms could lead to many retailers being bumped out of SNAP as places where low-income people can use their benefits.
For state governments, a set of sweeping operational changes are now underway to conform to new policy demands, often requiring more money or staffing at already under-resourced offices. And the budgetary stakes to get error rates lower are sky-high.
“It’s a really complicated, nuanced and confusing time for states who are trying to administer SNAP,” said Lauren Kallins, a senior legislative director at the nonpartisan National Conference of State Legislatures, which has advocated for a delay in the benefits costs shift.
-
Politics2 years agoFormer ‘Squad’ members launching ‘Bowman and Bush’ YouTube show
-
Uncategorized2 years ago
Bob Good to step down as Freedom Caucus chair this week
-
The Josh Fourrier Show2 years agoDOOMSDAY: Trump won, now what?
-
The Dictatorship2 years agoPete Hegseth’s tenure at the Pentagon goes from bad to worse
-
Politics2 years agoFormer Kentucky AG Daniel Cameron launches Senate bid
-
The Dictatorship2 years agoLuigi Mangione acknowledges public support in first official statement since arrest
-
Politics2 years agoBlue Light News’s Editorial Director Ryan Hutchins speaks at Blue Light News’s 2025 Governors Summit
-
The Dictatorship1 year agoMike Johnson sums up the GOP’s arrogant position on military occupation with two words