On the menu: Tariffs tax approval; Dems jockey for 2028 position; Elon-gated; Biden hemmed in Harris; a wild commute
As Senate Democrats agonize over whether to help Republicans avoid a government shutdown Friday, the number that’s in the back of their minds isn’t the $1.6 trillion price tag on the House-passed spending package. It’s just two digits: 6-0.
The fight over a continuing resolution is the first time in this Congress that Democrats have had to think seriously about a world in which Senate Republicans can advance legislation outside of the procedural end-around of budget reconciliation.
With 53 Senate seats, Republicans can do a lot on taxes and spending and can, as this year has already abundantly proved, get almost anybody confirmed to a high position in the government.
But they can’t really legislate. Without anything like sufficient support in the GOP conference for abolishing the filibuster, it will continue to take 60 votes to make laws. As Democrats test their own appetites for obstruction on the continuing resolution, we know that at some point sooner or later, Republicans will get the seven Democrats they need to advance the bill.
As Democrats were wrestling with that question, one of their own provided a poignant reminder that things could get worse. Sen. Jeanne Shaheen (N.H.) announced that she would not seek a fourth term. Shaheen, 78, joins two other Democrats from similarly light-blue states, Sens. Gary Peters (Mich.) and Tina Smith (Minn.), who already announced their retirements.
But Shaheen hits a little differently. Not only has New Hampshire been among the crumbliest pieces of the “blue wall” in the Trump era, it has a solid Republican Party. If popular former Gov. Chris Sununu decided he wanted the gig, it would make it tough for Democrats to hold. At the very least, it is going to be an expensive headache for a party already playing defense.
Unlike the House, where all the seats are up for grabs, only a third of the Senate is in play every two years. And while this year isn’t as savagely brutal for Democrats as the 2024 map and its multiple incumbents in deep-red states, 2026 is going to be no picnic for the blue team.
Of the 35 seats — 33 regular elections and special elections in Ohio for the remainder of the term won by now-Vice President Vance and in Florida for that of now-Secretary of State Marco Rubio — most are on Republican turf. Looked at that way, Republicans have more on the line with 21 seats to defend compared to just 14 for Democrats.
But most of the Republican seats are in places where the risen Lord couldn’t win a statewide election if he was running as a Democrat. States like Arkansas and South Carolina may have interesting primary elections, but that’s about it. Then there’s a whole other batch in places where Democrats maybe, maybe, maybe could have a chance in a weird year. But how often can a party psych itself up to fund long-shot bids in Kentucky or Texas only to get Beto’d again?
There are just two states out of 21 where Republicans already know they’re going to have big trouble on their hands.
Maine Sen. Susan Collins defied all the odds to win another term in 2020 but now faces voters hostile to her party, but without the advantage of a quadrennial electorate. Maine splits its Electoral College votes by congressional district, and a presidential year cranks up turnout in the state’s Republican-leaning inland district. Collins is heading for a reckoning with coastal moderates who may have given her a pass in 2020 but will be more suspicious now.
North Carolina Sen. Thom Tillis is in a better place than Collins but faces a different kind of problem. His state has voted Republican on the presidential level every year since 2008. It’s been wobbly now and then, but it is still a red state. The main problem for Tillis is that his state party is a disaster and the Democrats there are not. He is certain to draw a primary challenge from the same wing of the North Carolina GOP that served up Mark Robinson, author of an embarrassing 2024 gubernatorial defeat. Tillis will be lucky to survive his primary, and if he does will likely face a top-drawer Democrat, like former Gov. Roy Cooper.
So that’s two tough ones for Republicans, but get a load of what the Democrats are dealing with.
In addition to open seat races and potentially problematic primaries to replace Shaheen, Peters and Smith, they’ve got what looks like a sitting duck down in Georgia with Sen. Jon Ossoff.
Ossoff was extraordinarily lucky in his 2020 win. In a tough year for Republicans, Ossoff managed to force a runoff with incumbent David Perdue, who fell just a quarter of a point short of winning outright in November that year because of a Libertarian candidate’s sliver of the vote. Ossoff had no reason to expect to win the runoff until Perdue and many in his state party had a collective nervous breakdown over Donald Trump’s efforts to swipe Georgia’s electoral votes. Hardcore MAGA voters were hearing about how they couldn’t trust the state’s famously well-run elections, and suburban moderates were watching the red team descend into a very dark place. All Ossoff had to do was not be crazy, and it was good enough for a win.
Could Republicans repeat their past mistakes and put a screwball candidate up in midterms? There’s always a chance. But if Senate Majority Leader John Thune (S.D.) and the GOP can convince Gov. Brian Kemp to take the plunge, Ossoff’s luck will probably have run out.
So you get why Democrats are starting from a place not of trying to win back control of the Senate, but rather of trying to prevent Republicans from expanding their majority. If the two most vulnerable incumbents, Collins and Ossoff, were to lose, the red team would still have 53 seats.
Then, Democrats have to be thinking about what happens if Republicans only have a mild case of the midterm curse. Could the GOP maybe flip two more, say Michigan and New Hampshire, and be sitting at 55? In that world, Trump’s lame-duck status would be mitigated. Swing-state and red-state Senate Democrats facing 2028 reelection, like Mark Kelly (Ariz.), Catherine Cortez Masto (Nev.), and John Fetterman (Pa.), would be looking for ways to show their independence, i.e., vote with Republicans.
Now mind you, this is not the most likely scenario. But it is the one making Democrats in Washington feel seasick this week as they try to figure out how hard they should fight on the government shutdown.
The scenario that tantalizes Democrats, though, is probably slightly more likely. That’s the one in which the midterm curse takes hold in the same way it did in 2018 and new states come into play. In that version of events, Trump’s job approval continues to decline at the same time Republican infighting intensifies. That’s the world in which the GOP can’t get top-tier recruits to try to flip seats — or sees those recruits battered or defeated in primaries.
In that scenario, we start looking at places like Nebraska, where an independent candidate could cause trouble, or Louisiana, where incumbent Sen. Bill Cassidy is at risk of a primary defeat and former Democratic Gov. John Bel Edwards could swoop in and beat a fringy Republican nominee, or Ohio where things could get spicy in the Republican Senate primary and longtime former Democratic Sen. Sherrod Brown may try a comeback, or even Kentucky, where Sen. Mitch McConnell’s retirement could produce a similar outcome if Democrats can convince Democratic Gov. Andy Beshear to change his mind.
That’s a world in which Democrats might be able to actually pare back the GOP majority to 51 and embolden Republican senators who are already chafing under the MAGA yoke. In that world, Democrats almost certainly would have control of the House after midterms. That would be the lamest of lame duck presidencies for Trump.
That’s all a long way of saying that at this early date, it’s too soon to say what’s likely to be happening a year from now, let alone in November 2026. But it is certainly not too soon to think about how those scenarios will shape the way the Senate does business now and for the rest of 2025.
So without further ado, here’s your way-too-early Senate race ratings for next year:
Solid Republican: Alabama, Arkansas, Idaho, Mississippi, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, West Virginia and Wyoming
Likely Republican: Alaska, Florida, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Montana, Nebraska and Texas
Lean Republican: Ohio
Toss-up: Georgia, Maine and North Carolina
Lean Democrat: Michigan and New Hampshire
Likely Democrat: Colorado, Minnesota, New Jersey, New Mexico and Virginia
Solid Democrat: Delaware, Illinois, Massachusetts, Oregon and Rhode Island
Holy croakano! We welcome your feedback, so please email us with your tips, corrections, reactions, amplifications, etc. at WHOLEHOGPOLITICS@GMAIL.COM. If you’d like to be considered for publication, please include your real name and hometown. If you don’t want your comments to be made public, please specify.
NUTRITIONAL INFORMATION
Trump Job Performance
Average Approval: 45.6 percent
Average Disapproval: 49.8 percent
Net Score: Negative 4.2 points
Change from last week: Negative 1.2 points
[Average includes: Ipsos/Reuters: 44 percent approve – 52 percent disapprove; CNN/SSRS: 45 percent approve – 54 percent disapprove; Marist/NPR/PBS: 45 percent approve – 49 percent disapprove; TIPP: 46 percent approve – 43 percent disapprove; Washington Post: 48 percent approve – 51 percent disapprove]
Trump’s tariffs sink underwater
Do you approve or disapprove of the way Donald Trump is handling tariffs?
U.S. adults
- Approve: 39 percent
- Disapprove: 61 percent
Independents
- Approve: 29 percent
- Disapprove: 71 percent
[CNN/SSRS poll of 1,206 adults, March 2025]
ON THE SIDE: ‘THE OLD LEATHERMAN’
New York Times Magazine: “Sometime in the 1850s or ’60s, at a terrible moment in U.S. history, a strange man seemed to sprout, out of nowhere, into the rocky landscape between New York City and Hartford. … He was rough and hairy, and he wandered around on back roads, sleeping in caves. Above all, he refused to explain himself. … The Old Leatherman was a sort of real-life Northeastern Sasquatch. … Finally, in the mid-1880s, people realized something astonishing: The Old Leatherman was walking in a giant loop, roughly 365 miles around. It stretched from the Hudson River in the west to the Connecticut River in the east, from mountains in the north to beaches in the south. … Soon, the Old Leatherman became a full-blown media phenomenon. The Hartford Globe published a front-page article complete with a timetable of his travels. In small towns, people lined the streets to watch him pass. … Who was he? Why was he doing this? People were obsessed. But try as they might, no one could figure it out.”
PRIME CUTS
Pete passes on Senate seat, eyes 2028 White House bid: The Hill: “Former Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg announced Thursday he will not run for Senate in Michigan following months of speculation. … Buttigieg’s move to pass on a Senate bid keeps the door open to a potential presidential run in 2028. If Buttigieg were to launch a presidential bid, running for Senate in 2026 would have been a tight turnaround. A source familiar with Buttigieg’s thinking told The Hill the move sets him up for the strongest possible position to run in 2028, noting that running for governor and senator would have taken that off the table. … Michigan Sen. Gary Peters’s (D) decision not to seek reelection in 2026 opened up another door to a statewide run, and polling showed Buttigieg would have had strong standing in a Democratic primary. … Michigan state Sen. Mallory McMorrow (D) is expected to announce a run.”
Rahm Emanuel floats presidential run: Politico: “Since coming home in January from his stint in Tokyo — a job he repurposed to be American envoy to all of Asia — Rahm Emanuel has been as visible as any other Democrat. Never mind that he currently holds no office and hasn’t been on a ballot for a decade. … Just as striking is to talk to anybody in high-level Democratic politics who knows Emanuel — which is to say most everyone — and hear how matter of fact they are about the inevitability of his candidacy. The biggest Rahm-may-run tell, though, is that he’s already road-testing the first outlines of a stump speech, or at least an issue he can make his own. … Presidential races are about timing, and if ever there was a period where Emanuel would be viable, it’s now. Democrats are as demoralized as any time in modern history, their voters desperately want to win.”
To win his seat, Kentucky candidates ditch Mitch: The Wall Street Journal: “Daniel Cameron once said there was no political daylight between him and Sen. Mitch McConnell. Now, Kentucky’s former attorney general is keeping his distance as he vies to win his longtime mentor’s Senate seat. … Two other Republicans with past McConnell ties—Rep. Andy Barr and Nate Morris, a businessman—have expressed interest in the job and are already sparring with Cameron and each other. … The contest is turning into a political knife fight defined by how far and fast McConnell’s former supporters can distance themselves from him. Even with the primary more than a year away, they are all angling for Trump’s backing, seen as critical in the race, while faulting each other as phonies and hypocrites.”
Dems launch attacks ads linking GOP and Musk: Punchbowl: “In the opening months of Trump’s second term, Democrats are settling on a message – Republicans are looking out for Elon Musk and the mega-rich while ignoring the needs of everyday Americans. Here’s a look at what Americans are hearing from Democratic ads: Democratic group House Majority Forward is launching a new Spanish-language attack ad targeting Rep. Monica De La Cruz (R-Texas) over potential Medicaid cuts. The radio ad accuses De La Cruz of supporting the budget resolution ‘to line the pockets of billionaires like Elon Musk and big corporations.’ The radio ad comes weeks after HMF launched a nationwide TV ad campaign taking aim at vulnerable Republicans on the budget resolution. That large-scale messaging push accused GOP lawmakers of voting ‘to fund massive tax cuts for Elon Musk and billionaires.’ … Hill Democrats say they believe the constant focus on Musk will resonate with the electorate.”
Biden told Harris ‘no daylight’ ahead of her debate with Trump: The Hill: “The question facing Harris was whether she could build a sturdy platform. … She was running out of major moments to explain a vision to a broad audience. Her September 10 debate with Trump would offer another opportunity — perhaps a last chance before voters cast early ballots — to establish that key part of her narrative. But the day of the debate Biden called to give Harris an unusual kind of pep talk — and another reminder about the loyalty he demanded. … Whether she won or lost the election, he thought, she would only harm him by publicly distancing herself from him. … To the extent that she wanted to forge her own path, Biden had no interest in giving her room to do so. He needed just three words to convey how much all of that mattered to him. ‘No daylight, kid,’ Biden said.”
SHORT ORDER
Conservative Brad Schimel gunning to flip Wisconsin Supreme Court — The New York Times
Illinois Dems ready for a Durbin retirement — Politico
Poll: LA residents dissatisfied with Karen Bass’s fire response — Yahoo
GOP maintains Iowa supermajority, despite Dem overperformance — Des Moines Register
TABLE TALK
Live Free or Dye
“You didn’t hear me say this: When you write the stories, please write that he colors his hair and I don’t. I don’t know, he’s making noises. He’s not from New Hampshire.” — Sen. Jeanne Shaheen slams potential candidate Scott Brown in an interview with Semafor.
Green with Envy
“I love these socks. What’s with these socks? I’m trying to stay focused, but I’m going to ask for the VP’s socks.” — President Trump is distracted by Vice President Vance’s shamrock socks during a meeting with Irish Prime Minister Micheál Martin on Wednesday.
MAILBAG
“One big reason Democrats lost Michigan in the latest election: [the party’s] unconditional support for the current extreme right-wing administration in Israel. The DNC sat on its hands and ignored pleas from Arab Americans and progressives like Bernie Sanders to stop coddling up to [Benjamin Netanyahu], and as a result many Arab Americans voted against their own interests in protest. Jewish people in the U.S. have adopted a position of ‘support Netanyahu and his thugs irrespective of the political cost’ approach. It’s time there was a serious push back to this mindset. Anyone who dared to speak out against Zionism and Israeli extremism is labelled an anti-Semite and at times, even a Nazi. While there is a critical mass of these types in the Republican Party, most Democratic voters are more rational in their position. Time for a realistic shift of support for a pro-Palestinian position in the U.S. Otherwise, Trump and his minions will play a political game that justifies how Netanyahu and thugs continue to behave.” — Guy Desrochers, Auburn Hills, Michigan
Mr. Desrochers,
Let’s start with the facts of the case. Michigan did swing from blue to red from 2020 to 2024 by a notable amount: a 4.1-point shift. That was more than Pennsylvania (2.9 points), Georgia (2.4 points), North Carolina (1.9 points) and Wisconsin (1.5 points).
But Michigan moved less than both Nevada (5.5 points) and Arizona (5.8 points). That puts Michigan in the middle of the swing states when it comes to the overall trend. The average shift fell right between Michigan and Pennsylvania.
None of the other states have Muslim or Arab American populations similar to Michigan, which has the largest percentage of residents of Arab descent of any state at something like 2 percent. Under your theory of the case, Michigan should have moved more than other similarly situated states. But it swung less than states with substantially smaller Arab American populations.
But it’s certainly possible that former Vice President Kamala Harris would have done less poorly in Michigan if she had kept the same levels of support that former President Biden had enjoyed in 2020. But what about the large number of Jewish voters whose influence you so lament? The data for both populations is somewhat unreliable, but there’s evidence that there are nearly as many Jews in Michigan as there are Arab Americans. In Pennsylvania, the most valuable swing state, the Jewish share of the vote dwarfs whatever is coming from Muslim or Arab American precincts.
Should Democrats respond to the political pressure of one group but not the other, larger voting bloc?
It’s entirely your prerogative to argue that it is morally wrong for the United States to support Israel in its conflicts, but I don’t see any evidence that it would be more politically savvy for Democrats to antagonize pro-Israel voters. Indeed, the party seems right now to be getting the worst of both worlds as Jewish support and Arab-American support both waned in 2024. Very few pro-Israel Americans would describe what Israel got from Democrats as “unconditional support” for the Netanyahu. Indeed, many complained bitterly about the frequent criticisms and occasional interruptions of aid from the Biden administration.
The more plausible argument seems to be that Democrats did worse across the board as the party in power struggled with stubborn inflation and a chaotic immigration influx, both substantially driven by post-pandemic whiplash. That happened in every swing state, but was particularly strong in the two states on or near the southern border.
Make your case to Democrats for a pro-Palestinian posture on whatever grounds you think most effective, but there’s no case to be made that Israel was a deciding issue in the election.
All best,
c
You should email us! Write to WHOLEHOGPOLITICS@GMAIL.COM with your tips, kudos, criticisms, insights, rediscovered words, wonderful names, recipes, and, always, good jokes. Please include your real name — at least first and last — and hometown. Make sure to let us know in the email if you want to keep your submission private. My colleague, the sprung forward Nate Moore, and I will look for your emails and then share the most interesting ones and my responses here. Clickety clack!
FOR DESSERT
COP Out: BBC: “A new four-lane highway cutting through tens of thousands of acres of protected Amazon rainforest is being built for the COP30 climate summit in the Brazilian city of Belém. It aims to ease traffic to the city, which will host more than 50,000 people – including world leaders – at the conference in November. … The Amazon plays a vital role in absorbing carbon for the world and providing biodiversity, and many say this deforestation contradicts the very purpose of a climate summit. … Along the partially built road, lush rainforest towers on either side – a reminder of what was once there. Logs are piled high in the cleared land which stretches more than 13km (8 miles) through the rainforest into Belém. Diggers and machines carve through the forest floor, paving over wetland to surface the road which will cut through a protected area. … Scrutiny is growing over whether flying thousands of [world leaders] across the world, and the infrastructure required to host them, is undermining the cause.”
Chris Stirewalt is the politics editor for The Hill and NewsNation, the host of “The Hill Sunday” on NewsNation and The CW, a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute and the author of books on politics and the media. Nate Moore contributed to this report.
