Politics

Meet the billionaires cowering to Trump

Published

1 year ago

November 11, 2024

Moral fortitude has never been a prominent character trait of the obscenely wealthy. Even so, as the White House remains up for grabs, it has been discouraging to see multiple billionaires and CEOs hedging their bets to avoid being found on a future President Donald Trump’s bad side.

In one light, trying to stay in the good graces of a president is business as usual for the corporate elite. They like to spread out donations between parties, ensuring favor from whoever comes out on top. But banking on a second Trump administration to deliver similar results this time around could prove a bad bet by America’s 1%, one that could leave them bankrupt not just morally but financially, as well.

The obsequious fanboy behavior by Tesla and SpaceX owner Elon Musk is in a category of its own among the billionaire class. But others among his financial stratum have been speaking volumes through their silence. Midwest magnate Warren Buffet and JPMorgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon, for example, are refusing to endorse either candidate publicly. Even if Trump weren’t a threat to American democracy, you’d think the threat he poses to the health of the U.S. economy would be enough for them to take sides.

The spinelessness on display is even more obvious when it comes to those billionaires who own major media outlets. Los Angeles Times publisher Patrick Soon-Shiong caused an uproar last week when he nixed his paper’s endorsement. It paled in comparison, though, to the outrage directed at Amazon owner Jeff Bezos, whose decision to spike The Washington Post’s endorsement of Harris has caused a mass exodus of the newspaper’s subscribers.

Their decisions are especially telling because of the business their companies has with the federal government.

Their decisions are especially telling because of the business their companies has with the federal government. Soon-Shiong has reason to stay on the good side of regulators with the Food and Drug Administration even if Trump mass fires civil servants to be replaced with cronies. Amazon’s cloud computing contracts with the Defense Department and the National Security Agency alone are worth around $20 billion. Trump also reportedly met with executives from Blue Origin, Bezos’ rocketry company and a rival to Musk’s SpaceX, the same day the Post announced it wouldn’t make a presidential endorsement.

Bezos wrote in an opinion piece published on Monday that he didn’t know about the meeting before it took place. But regardless of the timing, the Blue Origin meeting is an example of big business titans — especially those in Silicon Valley — attempting to ingratiate themselves with Trump in case he wins. There was plenty of discussion about the danger another Trump presidency would present at a recent meeting of the Business Council, a high-level gathering of CEOs.

Two Trump campaign advisers, who went unnamed, recently told the Post that “numerous executives” had been reaching out. One of those advisers hinted at retribution for perceived disloyalty from business leaders, all but warning that their time is running short to appease Trump:

“I’ve told CEOs to engage as fast as possible because the clock is ticking. … If you’re somebody who has endorsed Harris, and we’ve never heard from you at any point until after the election, you’ve got an uphill battle,” the Trump adviser said. “People are back-channeling, looking at their networks — they’re talking to lobbyists to see what they can do to connect with the president and his team.”

Trump has been outlandishly transparent in his promises to various business sectors about how well he’ll treat them once in office. The “quo” in this quid pro quo would be donations to his campaign, in the form of either massive outpourings of cash (as in the case of the crypto cabal) or in-kind contributions such as mailers to voters declaring Trump’s newfound love of the vaping industry.

With Trump, there is no such thing as an ironclad deal that doesn’t benefit him personally.

In one sense, this could be seen as a return to form for America. For much of the 19th century this was how politics worked. The patronage system greased the wheels for robber barons to accumulate fortunes on the backs of poor laborers. A wave of anti-corruption laws were passed in the 20th century, but lax campaign finance regulations have made it easy for tycoons to place their chips on whoever might win regardless of party. And Trump speaks to their long-standing interests in deregulation and massive tax cuts for the wealthy and corporations. But these billionaires might be putting too much faith in the continuation of the rule of law.

With Trump, there is no such thing as an ironclad deal that doesn’t benefit him personally. His appetite for retribution is well-established, and any slight or perceived disloyalty is enough to curry his disfavor. Instead, the system that Trump would preside over would likely more closely resemble how Russian President Vladimir Putin has handled his country’s oligarchs.

After the fall of the Soviet Union, the onetime party apparatchiks who seized control of formerly state-run industries were at one point more powerful than the Kremlin. But over his time in power, Putin brought them to heel, targeting his detractors for arrest and show trials, stripping them of their assets and doling them out to loyalists or pocketing them himself. Billionaires who still exist within Russia do so only through Putin’s grace.

One of Trump’s former officials, Russia expert Fiona Hill, who served on the National Security Council, noted in a recent interview with Politico that Trump “has already made an example of Jeff Bezos, who was punished for his criticisms when Trump was in power previously by Trump trying to deny Amazon major government contracts. That’s exactly a hallmark of an oligarchy or of an autocracy.”

It seems doubtful at this late stage of the game that many of the titans of industry fearful of Trump will heed Hill’s warnings about how Trump’s vision of power can be turned against them. There’s no free market in a world of kings, as there can be no fair dealings in a world where one man’s word is law. There’s likewise no guarantee that Trump will lose, which may be forcing these billionaires to make their own self-preservation paramount. But their willingness to potentially sacrifice the rest of us, and the well-being of the country, in the process is the true mark of cowardice.

Hayes Brown

Hayes Brown is a writer and editor for BLN Daily, where he helps frame the news of the day for readers. He was previously at BuzzFeed News and holds a degree in international relations from Michigan State University.

Politics

Former ICE official falls short in Ohio battleground district GOP primary

Published

1 hour ago

May 6, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

Former ICE official Madison Sheahan lost a GOP primary in a battleground Ohio House district on Tuesday, a relief to Republicans who worried she could sabotage their chances of flipping the seat.

Former state Rep. Derek Merrin won the GOP nomination in the 9th Congressional District for the second cycle in a row, and will face Democratic Rep. Marcy Kaptur in November. He lost to Kaptur by less than one percentage point in 2024.

Republicans see the seat as a prime pickup opportunity after the Ohio legislature redrew the state’s congressional map to make the district more favorable for Republicans.

Merrin’s victory comes with a sigh of relief from Republicans in the state who raised concerns about Sheahan’s background — she served as former deputy ICE director under former Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem — being a soft target for Kaptur in a general election.

Sheahan drew attacks from fellow Republicans in the primary for her role in overseeing President Donald Trump’s aggressive immigration enforcement operations in major cities, which triggered violent confrontations and protests.

Those clashes culminated in the killing of two American citizens by immigration officials in Minneapolis. Sheahan launched her campaign days after the killing of Renee Good, but before the death of Alex Pretti.

Trump didn’t endorse ahead of the primary, but the race was defined in part by candidates seeking to be the most MAGA candidate in the field. Sheahan ran TV ads touting her role at ICE and her connection to the Trump administration. Merrin went up with an ad in the race’s final days highlighting the endorsement he received from Trump during his 2024 campaign.

Kaptur starts the general election fight with a significant resource advantage over Merrin. Federal Election Commission filings from mid-April showed Kaptur with $3.1 million in cash on hand, dwarfing Merrin’s $189,000 in reserves.

Both the DCCC and the NRCC are expected to invest significantly in the race.

Politics

‘The Kamala Harris problem’: Vance’s 2028 hopes hinge on Trump, Iowa Republicans say

Published

2 hours ago

May 6, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

DES MOINES, Iowa — Vice President JD Vance was greeted warmly by Republicans in Iowa on Tuesday, with would-be caucus goers and strategists optimistically curious about his potential as a 2028 presidential contender.

But first, they’re hoping he can help turn the economy around.

Vance’s fate is unavoidably linked to President Donald Trump’s. He’ll either carry the mantle of Trump’s accomplishments all the way into his own term in the White House — or be dragged down by Trump’s dismal approval ratings, which have spiraled amid an unpopular war in Iran and voters’ economic pessimism.

During Vance’s first trip as vice president to the early caucus state — where he was campaigning for Republican Rep. Zach Nunn at a rally in a manufacturing warehouse in this battleground House district — Vance’s close ties with Trump were on full display. He credited the president repeatedly for tariffs, tax cuts and agriculture industry aid. And he avoided any mention of 2028.

But his association with Trump’s agenda presents a high-risk, high-reward proposition that could make or break his political future, operatives and rallygoers said.

“That’s the risk of being part of an administration,” Iowa GOP strategist David Kochel said. “This is the Kamala Harris problem.”

Rep. Randy Feenstra, who is running for governor, said in between shaking hands with attendees that Iowans “absolutely” associate Vance with Trump and expressed confidence that the White House can deliver outcomes that benefit the state.

“We’re all in this together,” he said. “We trust Trump and the vice president and what they’re doing, and things are going to be great.”

Republicans in Iowa are loath to turn their back on Trump, the 2024 caucus winner who remains deeply popular among the base. Faded Trump-Vance campaign signs still line the rural roads around the state, and Iowa Republicans said they remained largely optimistic that Trump, with Vance by his side, can steer the economy in the right direction.

In a brief post-rally interview, Nunn said part of the benefit of the vice president’s trip was allowing Iowa Republican officials to “share what they want to see out of the next leader in 2028.”

But Americans’ patience for the administration’s economic policy to have a positive effect is wearing thin. A Washington Post/ABC News/Ipsos poll released on Sunday found 65 percent of Americans disapprove of Trump’s handling of the economy and 76 percent disapprove of Trump’s handling of cost of living issues. And even as Vance blamed former President Joe Biden’s administration for the teetering economy, an April POLITICO Poll found 46 percent of Americans feel Trump bears at least some responsibility for the state of the economy.

And the economic effects of Trump’s policies are particularly hard felt in Iowa’s vast agriculture industry. Trump’s tariff regime blocked off markets that had been reliable purchasers of U.S. agriculture goods, while the war in Iran has spiked the cost of diesel, which farmers depend on heavily.

Jake Chapman, a former president of the Iowa Senate who has advised multiple Republican presidential candidates in Iowa, said the conflict and the trade negotiations with other countries are top of mind for Iowa Republicans.

“A lot of people are thinking about foreign policy in particular, and how that impacts ag inputs and our agriculture economy,” he said.

In his speech, Vance acknowledged that the Trump administration hasn’t fully delivered on its economic promises. “We got a lot more work to do,” Vance told the crowd of hundreds. “We recognize that work. We’re excited about that work. That’s why you sent us to Washington, D.C.”

Still, those negative feelings towards Trump appear to be spilling over to Vance. That same poll found 48 percent of Americans disapprove of Vance — slightly worse than other senior Trump administration officials, including FBI Director Kash Patel, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and fellow potential 2028 candidate Secretary of State Marco Rubio.

Rubio’s ascension in the 2028 shadow primary — both in the eyes of Americans and in standing with Trump’s inner circle — further complicates Vance’s path to the nomination. Eric Branstad, the son of former Iowa Gov. Terry Branstad and adviser to Trump’s three presidential campaigns in Iowa, said Vance’s portfolio may not resonate with Iowans as much as Rubio’s in an administration juggling multiple high-profile foreign conflicts.

“They’ve watched the secretary of state completely perform. He’s been put in all of the tough spots, and he has overperformed,” Branstad said. “The vice president is performing great. It’s just not been as noticeable as the secretary of state.”

Vance, however, has gotten an early start on building a campaign infrastructure, should he so choose to activate it. He has been a frequent surrogate and fundraiser for the GOP’s midterm operation and has campaigned for Republicans in battleground seats around the country. On Tuesday, he voted in Ohio’s competitive 1st District GOP primary and headlined a fundraiser in Oklahoma before travelling to Iowa.

“He’s the man who’s leading the charge to win the midterms,” Nunn said during his remarks.

Even as Vance stayed focused on this year’s elections on Tuesday, some Republicans are ready to look beyond the midterms. GOP gubernatorial candidate Adam Steen said on the outskirts of the rally he thinks Iowa Republicans are eager to organize around the next generation of party leadership.

“I don’t know why not just start talking about 2028,” Steen said. “We need to know who we’re going to be getting behind. And if they did that now, I don’t think it’d offend anybody. I think it’d be a great thing.”

The vice president’s office declined to comment on Vance’s thinking about a future presidential campaign.

Whether or not the vice president can carry the ideological torch for Trump’s political movement may depend on how closely Vance — or any 2028 hopeful — can align with Trump. Iowa GOP Chair Jeff Kaufmann said at the rally he doesn’t believe the next Republican presidential nominee necessarily has to appeal directly to Trump’s base to be successful.

“The Republican Party is multifaceted,” Kaufmann said. “We have MAGA voters… We have Christian evangelicals, we have business, we have Libertarians. I think all of them together are going to unite around some of the basic principles that everybody shares.”

Yet being Trump’s vice president brings certain advantages with Republican voters. Even if Vance isn’t afforded the goodwill that brought the president a dominant wire-to-wire favorite in the 2024 Republican primaries, Kochel said Vance “gets one of the gold tickets” in the contest.

“[Vance] will be the front-runner going into any caucuses that we have here in Iowa,” GOP governor candidate and state Rep. Eddie Andrews said on the sidelines of Tuesday’s rally.

But Iowa caucusgoers are notoriously scrupulous when vetting future world leaders. And Nunn acknowledged that Vance will at some point need to forge his own path to leading the party.

“Nobody can walk in Donald Trump’s footsteps, because it’s Donald Trump,” Nunn said.