Politics
Chris Sununu still believes the GOP is bigger than Donald Trump
Donald Trump remade the GOP in his image. Chris Sununu doesn’t think it’ll stick.
That’s because the outgoing Republican governor of New Hampshire, who routinely oscillates between supporting Trump and criticizing him, believes his party is bigger than both its enduring standard bearer and the political movement he created.
“Trump is extremely unique. There’s no ‘Trump lite’ or ‘Trump 2.0’ that can replace or replicate what he’s brought to the table, for better or for worse,” Sununu said in an interview.
And the GOP, he insists, is still a “big tent,” ticking off varied constituencies like the Log Cabin Republicans, fiscal hawks, libertarian-leaners and social conservatives.
Sununu needs this to be true, at least if he wants a future in politics beyond punditry. The scion of a New Hampshire political dynasty whose old-school brand of Republicanism has been supplanted by hard-liners and flamethrowers in the Trump era, Sununu has been thrice reelected and consistently ranked as one of the nation’s most popular governors — even as he sometimes defies his party’s Trumpian bent.
Yet Sununu, who declined to seek a fifth term, has a mixed track record of translating his success in navigating a MAGA-fied GOP to other like-minded politicians. This year alone, he helped elect former Sen. Kelly Ayotte as his successor, but failed to get former U.N. Ambassador Nikki Haley across the finish line in the Granite State’s GOP presidential primary. And he has no obvious constituency outside of New England should he seek higher office himself.
Sununu, 50, who passed on a Senate run in 2022 and a presidential bid in 2024, insists he’s not looking at either office for at least the next few years. Instead, he says he’s content to return to the private sector and, as he often notes, “make some money.”
As he prepares to hand over the office he’s held for eight years, Sununu spoke at length with Blue Light News about his efforts to reduce opioid overdose deaths, how he plans to stay involved in politics, why he’s still largely against legalizing recreational marijuana and how Trump doesn’t have the GOP in as much of a vise grip as it seems.
This conversation has been edited and condensed for length and clarity.
What would you say is your biggest policy achievement as governor?
When I first ran for governor, the two big issues facing the state were obviously the opioid epidemic and the mental health crisis. And we just jumped right in. We really focused on rural access to care and reinvented recovery-friendly workplace programs. It was really about opening up access.
Trump has talked a lot about trying to stop the flow of fentanyl, an opioid, over the southern border. Do you think the policies he’s proposing can help do that?
The No. 1 problem with the fentanyl crisis is the open border. Closing up the border definitely makes it harder for that stuff to come in.
How do you want to see Trump and Republicans in Congress tackle the border? There was a plan on the table last year…
That plan was terrible. The key to all of this is closing the border, but making the ports of entry much more robust to handle the number of people who may want to come across in a legal and authorized and processed way. And, most importantly, the “Remain in Mexico” policy has to be reinstated. Aside from closing the illegal crossings at the border, you need to have immigration reform that deals with creating a more modernized pathway for folks to become citizens the right way.
Trump’s plans for larger-scale deportations, do you think that’s the right way to go?
Specifically for criminals, yes. These are the first folks that should absolutely be deported. Beyond that Congress and the president can kind of tackle the next phase, but I think it does have to be broken in phases.
Back to New Hampshire for a minute. I want to talk about cannabis. You’ve largely been a skeptic of legalizing recreational marijuana, which failed again this year in the state Legislature. Why should New Hampshire miss out on tax revenues from this when all the surrounding states provide access to it?
You should never legalize drugs for the money. That’s awful. If you’re legalizing marijuana because you need more money, then you have a horribly malfunctioning state. So there’s an ethics and a health issue here. I can tell you virtually every one of the governors [in the surrounding New England states] has indicated to me various problems with the legalization of marijuana, whether it’s the exacerbated mental health issues, whether it’s the black market that it fundamentally creates, whether it’s the advertising problems, the proximity to schools that creates a lot of problems for parents. There’s so many reasons not to do it. If you were going to do it here, [you would need to do so in a] responsible and controlled way that keeps it away from kids and allows the state to control the marketing messaging. I was semi-open to it if it could be controlled in the right way.
Before the election, we spoke about abortion and how Democrats were running hard on the issue in New Hampshire. You said the issue was losing salience and that voters were more concerned with the economy. The Republican won the governor’s race, so what is your assessment now?
In 2022, Roe v. Wade had just happened; it was much more of an unknown issue. This time around, two more years have passed. People in New Hampshire — no one’s denied an abortion, no one’s denied their rights [the state restricts abortions after 24 weeks of pregnancy, with exceptions]. So the fearmongering hasn’t borne true. There are some individual states and places that are more restrictive or less restrictive, but that’s up to voters [in those states] to decide. It’ll still be an issue, but it’s just not going to be the political backbreaker issue that the Democrats want it to be.
Do you think that there’s still room within the Republican Party for criticism of Trump when warranted?
Of course there is. Did [former Rep.] Matt Gaetz just get pushed right out of his nomination to be the U.S. attorney general? Yes. Look, it’s never easy criticizing the president and the standard bearer of your party, and there’s always that kind of political honeymoon period that happens when you first get elected. But there are already signs of folks that are willing to push back and criticize and say no when they feel like they have to say no. And that should give the American people a big sigh of relief that it’s not the evil dictatorship that the liberal media was telling us it was going to be.
Trump is term limited. So that opens up the question of what happens in 2028. Do you think Vice President-elect and Ohio Sen. JD Vance has a lock on the nomination in ‘28? Or do you think there will be a real, contested primary?
There’ll definitely be a real, contested primary. I think JD is great, by the way. He’s shown himself to have overcome a lot of the early criticisms that he [faced]. He’s competent. He’s incredibly smart on his feet. He knows the issues. He’s very cordial. He gets along with the other side — that was shown through the vice presidential debate, and I think that gave strength to the entire ticket. So there’s no doubt he’s in a great position if he wanted to run in ‘28. But no one’s going to just hand it to him. You’ve got to bring him through his paces. I imagine if he wanted to be a front-runner, he would be. But no, you’re gonna have a lot of folks from all walks of life running.
You know I’m going to ask if you’re thinking about it.
No. Not for ’28, I’m definitely not thinking about it.
So are you ruling out a presidential run in 2028?
I don’t rule anything out, but there’s no story there. It’s literally zero on my list in terms of thinking about anything. I can’t see myself running in 2028. That would be, holy cow, that would be a real change of my plans. I don’t see any path to that actually happening. I’m excited to go back to the private sector.
So what are your plans? What’s next for you?
I’m going to enter the private sector and make some money, do some business-type stuff, but I’ll also be in the media a bit. I have some ideas to keep myself kind of scratching the political itch through various venues in the media and content creation around smart political content.
You’ve been making a push to support Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy’s plans for the “Department of Government Efficiency.” Tell me how that can work.
You can really look to the states to get ideas. Musk has to use — even though he’s an outsider, he has political capital — he needs to use it and make sure he’s not just putting a list of good ideas in front of Congress, a Republican Congress that is typically tepid about actually doing anything substantive. Congress just can’t help themselves about overspending, Republicans included. So he and Trump could use their combined political capital to ensure that whatever they do is lasting. It would be a huge legacy initiative for them. You gotta really push Congress to dig in for a balanced budget of some sort. Ultimately, they’re going to have to start talking about entitlement reforms or Social Security reforms that just have to come because we have the bills coming due.
Trump wants to end daylight saving time. You said in a recent op-ed that you support that. But the current push in Congress is to make daylight saving time permanent. What’s your thinking on that?
I don’t care whether you make it permanent or you get rid of it, but let’s stop changing the clock, right? That’s my point. I don’t care. Pick an hour. You get the exact same thing, whether you make it permanent or get rid [it]. The whole point is, let’s stop changing the clock.
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.
National Democrats are increasingly shifting their attention away from North Carolina’s Senate race as polls show former Gov. Roy Cooper ahead, eyeing once long-shot races as possible pickups. But a veteran Democratic strategist who helped deliver the party’s last presidential victory in the state is urging donors not to take a win for granted.
David Plouffe, who managed behind Barack Obama’s narrow 2008 victory in North Carolina, urged Democratic donors and supporters not to grow complacent in the final weeks of Roy Cooper’s Senate campaign, according to audio obtained by Blue Light News.
“I think that this race … has I think been the best run race in the country,” Plouffe said on the call. “But that doesn’t mean that we can rest easy.”
He warned about North Carolina’s relatively fixed partisan makeup as a purple state, making it difficult for a candidate to dramatically expand their base of support.
“There’s certain states that elections happen within a bound, and this one will be that way as well,” he said.
In public polling, Cooper leads Republican Michael Whatley, who has struggled to boost his name recognition against the much better-known former governor. And as Democrats grow increasingly bullish on their candidate’s chances of flipping the seat — one of four pickups they need to take control of the Senate — national groups have begun shifting their money and attention to other contests, including most recently to Kansas.
But Plouffe said North Carolina needs to remain a priority.
“We have to win the ones we have to win,” he said on the call to Cooper’s finance committee.
Just days before Plouffe’s remarks, Senate Democrats’ top super PAC pulled back some of its spending in North Carolina, following a much bigger retreat by Republicans’ top super PAC in the state.
Plouffe cautioned that North Carolina has historically been a tough state for Democrats at the federal level, especially in recent years. The party hasn’t won a Senate race there since 2008, when Obama became the last Democratic presidential candidate to carry the state, winning by fewer than 15,000 votes. He lost the state in 2012.
“Even though we carried the electoral votes back then, we only did so by I think 14,000 votes. So it was our narrowest victory,” Plouffe said. “And in 2012, we tried to win North Carolina again with the help of so many people on this phone, and we just couldn’t get it done. And that tells you how difficult the state is.”
Plouffe also cast the stakes of Cooper’s race as extending beyond November, arguing that a Cooper victory could provide a blueprint for the party’s eventual 2028 presidential nominee.
“Democrats need to compete and win in North Carolina in 28,” he said. “And it’s one thing to look how a governor can win a state. The best route, the best scout that you receive, is how someone in a federal race won in a tough state, and that can show you the way.”
Byron Donalds says he is not a ‘yes man’ to Trump
lead image
-
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