Politics

Poll: Trump’s MAGA loyalists don’t think he has an affordability problem

Published

3 weeks ago

September 26, 2026

Not everyone thinks there’s an affordability crisis.

While many Americans say the cost of living is the top issue facing the U.S. more than any other, President Donald Trump’s MAGA base does not always agree, according to a new analysis of The POLITICO Poll. Just 28 percent of voters who self-identify as part of the MAGA movement say expenses have become less affordable since Trump took office.

In fact, MAGA voters are more likely to say things have gotten better rather than worse.

That’s a stark break from the rest of the country, including the voters who backed Kamala Harris in 2024 and those who voted for Trump but do not identify as part of the MAGA movement.

The Blue Light News Poll results reveal a complicated challenge for Republicans: In an election all about the economy, cost of living concerns are reinforcing partisanship divides — entrenching Democrats’ opposition to Trump — while also driving a wedge among Republicans’ own base. Now, GOP candidates are facing frustrated voters from all sides.

Harris voters are far more likely than Trump voters to say groceries, gas and other expenses have gotten more expensive since the president took office, despite facing similar increases in household costs, according to a Blue Light News analysis of cost of living data.

Democrats hope to ride that frustration to victory in November, and have made affordability their top messaging issue this fall. They’re poised to benefit from the backlash to Trump’s economic agenda — from his unpopular tariffs to an Iran war that’s raised gas prices — which politicians and strategists widely agree are helping motivate Democratic voters.

“Those Democrats are definitely going to go vote,” said Michigan-based GOP strategist Jason Roe. “And we’ve got some voters that are a little harder to get to the polls, and when they are mad, frustrated, disappointed, disillusioned, in disagreement, and we don’t have them motivated, that’s going to be a problem.”

Many of those disillusioned Trump voters, The Blue Light News Poll suggests, are the ones who don’t identify as part of the MAGA base.

Consider the 52% of non-MAGA Trump voters who say the cost of living in their area is the “worst” it has ever been: Nearly half say they either wouldn’t vote for a Republican in the midterms or are still making up their minds.

But what is a boon to Democrats today could be a problem for them later. Partisanship also shapes how Americans remember the economy in years past, the poll results show.

Harris voters have a more favorable memory toward Democratic presidents and Trump voters have a more favorable memory toward Republican presidents, each saying life was more affordable when their party held the reins.

Democrats and Republicans simply don’t share an understanding of the economic reality — and without a common frame for the past, nor whether things are improving in the present, any party in power stands to lose its grip against an increasingly frustrated opposition when the economy is the key issue.

This year, that will be a major challenge for Republicans.

MAGA vs. Non-MAGA vs. Democrats

The Blue Light News Poll asked adults across America last month about affordability in their area, including about local prices and their memory of when prices were more affordable in the past.

Across the board, Harris voters outpaced Trump voters in their pessimism about the economy. And among Trump voters, non-MAGA voters outpaced their MAGA counterparts.

For example, 70% of Harris voters and 52% of non-MAGA Trump voters say the cost of living is worse than they can “ever remember it being.” MAGA Trump voters disagreed — a 43% plurality said the cost of living today is bad, but they could “remember times when it was worse.”

The results are a warning sign about the Trump coalition: In question after question, the president’s most loyal base is still sticking with him, but among the non-MAGA voters he convinced to back him in 2024, their frustration more closely resembles how Harris voters feel.

“There will be voters who voted for Donald Trump in 2024 who know he’s made life more expensive and won’t vote for his party this time,” said longtime Democratic strategist Jesse Ferguson. “Some will vote for a Democrat, some won’t vote. But they won’t cast a ballot for a Republican who they blame for the high cost of living.”

Of the non-MAGA Trump voters who say the cost of living is the worst they’ve seen, just 53% say they would vote for a Republican if the midterms were held tomorrow. More than 25% would vote for a Democrat or third-party candidate. The rest say they would stay home or have not yet made up their minds.

Changes to family budgets are similar on average among those that voted for Trump and those who voted for Harris, according to a Blue Light News analysis of data from the Living Wage Institute, a nonpartisan public benefit corporation that produces cost of living data. Across the country, family budgets have increased by 2.5 percent on average from early 2025 to early 2026, according to the Living Wage Institute.

But it is the concept of who is to blame that creates division among each voting bloc. Though each group is concerned about affordability — the cost of living is the most common concern for each — only MAGA Trump voters remain sympathetic to the current administration.

Young voters — and young men in particular — have also grown disillusioned with the Trump administration amid cost of living concerns, a warning sign for the GOP. Among those under the age of 25 who say the cost of living is the worst it’s ever been, 56% say they trust Democrats to bring down the costs. Just 20% trust Republicans to do the same.

“Young people feel like the system isn’t working for them,” said Joe Mitchell, a Republican running for Iowa’s open and competitive 2nd District. Mitchell, who is 29, would be the second Gen Z member to join the House if elected. “You see them being attracted to some of these DSA candidates like Zohran Mamdani. And they’re going to be attracted to these candidates if we don’t figure something out for them now.”

Partisanship even drives memory

Partisanship also colors how Americans see the past, making it difficult for any incumbent party to convince voters of plans for the future.

The Blue Light News Poll asked respondents whether it was easier or harder to afford everyday items in years past compared to today in one of two ways: In one, they were asked about a specific calendar year, and in another, the presidential administration in power at the time.

For each question framed around a calendar year, Trump and Harris voters gave similar answers. But when asked to compare how easy or hard it was to afford things during a particular presidential administration compared to today, their answers split along party lines.

For example, just over a third of both Harris and Trump voters said it was “easier” to afford everyday items in 2024 compared to today. But when asked the same question about the “end of [former President] Joe Biden’s term,” 55% of Harris voters said everyday items were easier to afford, compared to 39% of Trump voters.

The results show that Americans lack a common frame of reference on the issue most people care about — the cost of living — creating a massive hurdle for politicians hoping to win over new voters who may not be willing to listen.

The same effect happens among Trump voters looking back on a Democratic administration. When asked about costs in 2010 compared to today, 63% of Trump voters said everyday items were easier to afford then compared to now. But when asked about costs during the “middle” of former President Barack Obama’s first term — or 2010 — only 36% of Trump voters said the same.

It’s only when a political party is attached that Americans’ version of the truth changes.

When Blue Light News asked whether it was easier or harder to afford everyday items “just before the Covid-19 pandemic” or in “2019,” majorities from both parties said things were easier to afford then, and in both framings.

The challenge for both parties is that voters don’t know “who has a better plan for the future,” GOP communications strategist Kevin Madden said. “Instead, what you’re seeing is a gap — or a canyon — emerge between the rest of the country and Washington.”

He added: “When you see that gap emerge, watch out if you’re an incumbent.”

Alisa Vasquez and Andrew Howard contributed to this report.

Politics

Haley Stevens is everywhere — except on the trail for El-Sayed

Published

24 hours ago

October 16, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

Haley Stevens is highly visible in the wake of her Senate primary loss: Meeting with the Dalai Lama, crashing “TMZ Live” with her new fiancee, getting spoofed on The Tonight Show with Jimmy Fallon.

One place she hasn’t been spotted: alongside her former rival Abdul El-Sayed.

Even though the representative quickly endorsed El-Sayed after their bruising Aug. 4 primary, she’s done little to help him since. That absence is becoming more conspicuous in the closing weeks of a crucial Senate contest, as some of her old supporters continue to vocally resist backing him.

In an interview, Stevens said El-Sayed is building a “new coalition” in the race against GOP former Rep. Mike Rogers — and suggested it’s not her place to push some of her more skeptical supporters into joining it.

When asked if she was encouraging her former donors to help El-Sayed, she said she believes her role this election is to “be part of the coordinated campaign, support where I can,” mentioning Michigan House races. When asked again if she would push donors to back him, she responded: “That’s Elissa’s thing,” referring to Sen. Elissa Slotkin (D-Mich.), who has been fundraising for El-Sayed. “I didn’t win a Senate primary,” she continued. “It’s not like a salty grapes deal or anything.”

Stevens said she’d checked in with El-Sayed’s team, but hadn’t met with the candidate himself recently because she’d been traveling.

“There’s changing dynamics, and there’s a new coalition that Abdul has built, and some people are a die-hard part of it, and some people are not. We’re seeing some constituent community pain coming out,” Stevens said, referencing resistance to El-Sayed among some Black and Jewish voters who backed her in the primary.

“Rogers is working the Black community harder and more successfully than we have ever seen a Republican do or at least that I can remember — ever,” Stevens said.

“But we’re also seeing Abdul go up to the UP [Upper Peninsula] and we’re seeing him fill venues in rural Michigan and it’s very real in terms of this coalition he’s built,” she added.

El-Sayed ran particularly strongly during the primary with young voters and in the state’s large Arab-American community, as well as in some rural, more populist parts of the state, and is working hard to expand that coalition in the general election.

Stevens’ remarks come as some of her former backers and financial boosters continue to publicly withhold support from El-Sayed and in some cases openly embrace his Republican rival. The ruptures are most visible among the Jewish and Black communities that largely broke for Stevens, and point to enduring friction within Michigan Democrats’ traditional coalition after a bitter primary that she could be in a unique position to mend.

Debbie Rosenman, the chair of Birmingham-Bloomfield Area Democratic Party Club in Stevens’ backyard and an El-Sayed supporter, said Stevens has been “absent” on the trail and said she was “very concerned” her coalition is not coalescing around El-Sayed.

“I feel that that could change with more of her public support,” Rosenman said.

El-Sayed’s campaign said the former rivals’ teams keep in close touch and noted several Stevens staffers joined the nominee’s team after the primary.

“The Abdul campaign is grateful for Congresswoman Stevens’ immediate and sustained support,” El-Sayed campaign spokesperson Roxie Richner said in a statement.

El-Sayed has worked to repair relationships with Black and Jewish leaders. He has endorsements from several of them and is campaigning with prominent Democrats from both communities, including former President Barack Obama and former Vice President Kamala Harris and Slotkin, who is Jewish. He has made more than two dozen visits to Black churches and participated in more than 100 events and meetings with Black leaders, according to his campaign. He has hired a liaison to the Jewish community, keeps in regular contact with Jewish leaders and has apologized for his controversial remark after a synagogue attack in West Bloomfield in the spring that “hurt people hurt people.”

“I take very seriously that I’m going to represent a large community of Jewish Michiganders, and I want them to know that I’m committed to their safety and their well being, even if there are points in foreign policy on which we might disagree,” El-Sayed said in an interview.

Not everyone has come around.

David Kramer, Stevens’ primary campaign chair and a vice chair of the Michigan Democratic Jewish Caucus who introduced Stevens to her fiance, is now working with Nonnegotiable Michigan, a group of Jewish leaders who have pledged to withhold their support from El-Sayed unless he adjusts his approach to Israel.

Kramer, a prominent Democratic fundraiser in the state who has also previously worked with Slotkin and Gov. Gretchen Whitmer, told Blue Light News he’s not tapping his donor network for the general election and estimated he’s left upward of seven figures on the table that he could have raised to boost El-Sayed.

Brian Hermelin, a normally Democratic donor who backed Stevens in the primary and leads the Jewish Federation of Detroit, co-hosted a fundraiser for Republican nominee Mike Rogers shortly after the primary that raised roughly $200,000.

Rogers’ campaign has attempted to capitalize on those cracks by launching a “Democrats for Mike Rogers” group and making overtures to Jewish and Black voters. Bobby Schostak, a former Michigan GOP chair who is serving as Rogers’ finance chair, estimated the Republican’s campaign has brought in roughly $3 million to $4 million since the primary from “nontraditional Republican donors” across the country, including Democrats.

“The Democratic Party is still divided,” said Democrat Mary Waters, a Black Detroit city councilor who’s met with both El-Sayed and Rogers but remains undecided. “People are still so torn about what it is that they want to do.”

Joe Tate, a Black state representative from Detroit who supported Stevens, acknowledged there has been some lingering apprehension around El-Sayed. But he said Stevens’ endorsement of El-Sayed helped convince him to back the candidate and predicted Democratic voters would largely stand by their party, too.

El-Sayed’s donor network may look different from Stevens’, but he’s still posted big numbers. He raised nearly $33 million from July through September, which included some raised before the Aug. 4 primary, compared to Rogers’ nearly $10 million, and has been outspending Rogers on the airwaves.

Some of El-Sayed’s prominent surrogates have also taken steps to court apprehensive Democrats. Jewish leaders like former Rep. Andy Levin, a former synagogue president who Stevens defeated in a 2022 primary, are holding house parties with voters coordinated by the grassroots group Michigan Jews for Democracy. Slotkin has privately pressed senators and donors to boost El-Sayed’s bid.

That includes hosting a fundraiser for El-Sayed in Washington, D.C., in late September with donors who she described as initially “skeptical” of the nominee.

“I talked to them about why I thought it was important and how I don’t agree with Abdul on everything … but we agree on the really important things, and that’s putting a check and balance on this president,” Slotkin told Blue Light News in a brief hallway interview on Capitol Hill the next day. “And they donated.”

Politics

Senate Republicans are getting smoked in fundraising

Published

1 day ago

October 16, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

Republican Senate candidates are hurting for cash.

Nearly every Democratic candidate in battleground Senate races outraised their GOP opponent from July through September. And in some cases, the disparities were stark.

In Texas, Democrat James Talarico trounced Republican Ken Paxton $60.2 million to $10.2 million in their main campaign accounts.
In Georgia, Democratic Sen. Jon Ossoff raised $33.1 million to Rep. Mike Collins’ nearly $2.8 million.
In North Carolina, Democrat Roy Cooper raised $12.2 million to Michael Whatley’s $2.1 million.
In Michigan, Democrat Abdul El-Sayed hauled in roughly $33 million to former Rep. Mike Rogers’ nearly $10 million.
In Maine, Democrat Troy Jackson raised $20.5 million to GOP Sen. Susan Collins’ $5.2 million.
In Ohio, Democratic former Sen. Sherrod Brown hauled in $23.1 million to GOP Sen. Jon Husted’s $4.8 million.
In Iowa, Josh Turek raised $13.9 million to Republican Rep. Ashley Hinson’s nearly $3.3 million.
In Alaska, Democratic former Rep. Mary Peltola raked in $17 million to GOP Sen. Dan Sullivan’s nearly $2.7 million.
In New Hampshire, Democratic Rep. Chris Pappas brought in $8.1 million to Republican former Sen. John E. Sununu’s $1.5 million.
And in Kansas, Democrat Adam Hamilton raised nearly $9.9 million to GOP Sen. Roger Marshall’s just $866,000.

Across those 10 Senate races, the Democratic campaigns raised more than five times as much as the Republican ones. Put another way: Talarico alone raised more than all those Republicans combined.

Marshall and Whatley each started October with less than $1 million left in the bank. Mike Collins wasn’t much better-positioned, entering the final weeks of the election with just over $1 million cash on hand.

These numbers do not include joint fundraising committees, which allow candidates to raise money and may have some more cash that has not yet been transferred to the campaigns.

Democrats have consistently outraised Republicans on the candidate level this cycle. But the yawning gaps heading into the midterm’s home stretch stand as the latest example of the deteriorating environment for the GOP.

And while GOP outside groups have significantly more money than Democrats, this candidate cash advantage matters because candidates get TV ads for much cheaper rates, letting their dollars stretch much farther.

To underscore how lopsided some of these figures are: At least half a dozen House Democratic challengers raised over $3 million in the third quarter — a sum higher than several GOP Senate incumbents.

There are some silver linings for the GOP.

In Minnesota, Republican Michele Tafoya raised $4.9 million to Democratic Lt. Gov. Peggy Flanagan’s $4.3 million. Tafoya started the month with $2.1 million to Flanagan’s $1.5 million.

Sullivan, Husted, Hinson, Rogers and Susan Collins all entered October with millions more in cash on hand than their Democratic opponents.

And Republicans are getting air cover from GOP super PACs bankrolled by billionaire Elon Musk and President Donald Trump’s MAGA Inc. that have pumped hundreds of millions of dollars into the midterms in recent weeks.

Musk was revealed on Thursday as the primary funder of Texas PAC, which has spent $131 million so far boosting Paxton and attacking Talarico. Musk gave $158 million to Senate Republicans’ super PAC arm last quarter, the filings showed, with the group in turn transferring the funds to the pro-Paxton PAC.

Republicans are also benefitting from a recent Supreme Court ruling that allows party committees to spend unlimited sums in coordination with candidates, allowing the National Republican Senatorial Committee to offset at least some of the differences.

Since the tranche of reports filed Thursday only cover until Sept. 30, the full scope of each candidates’ coffers is unknown.

But there are other signs that some are strapped for cash in the final sprint: Whatley has gone dark on television, a clear indication of him running low on funds even as his campaign insists it’s a temporary pause.