Why longtime Trump ally and former Republican Gov. Paul LePage is aiming for a political comeback
LEWISTON, MAINE - EXCLUSIVE - Former two-term Gov. Paul LePage of Maine says President Donald Trump is a major reason why he's coming out of political retirement at age 76 – and he's eyeing a campaign comeback.
"I never, ever had any aspirations to go to Washington until now," LePage said this week in his first national interview after launching his bid for the House in Maine's Second Congressional District, which is a top swing seat the GOP aims to flip in the 2026 midterm elections.
The contest will likely be one of the most closely watched House races in the country next year as the Republicans aim to hold their fragile majority in the chamber.
"Donald Trump, I think, is doing what is necessary in addressing the debt this country is facing. And I think that's a big, big thing for me," LePage said as he was interviewed in the Maine city where he was born and raised.
House Republican Campaign Chair Spells Out His Playbook To Hold The Congressional Majority
LePage highlighted, "I have a friend in the White House right now. I know President Trump. I think I can have an audience of President Trump. I know several of his secretaries very well. And so I think this is a good time. It's a good time for me to go help."
Read On The Fox News App
LePage – the brash and blunt politician who won over blue-collar workers struggling with economic woes, which helped the Republican businessman win election and re-election in the blue-leaning state – was one of the first major GOP elected officials to endorse Trump when the president first ran for the White House nearly a decade ago.
"I was Donald Trump before Donald Trump became popular," LePage joked at the time, in a line that's since become famous.
The conservative governor, who grabbed national attention with controversial comments made during his tenure, briefly moved with his wife, Ann, to Florida after finishing his second term in 2019.
"I am done with politics. I have done my eight years. It's time for somebody else," he said at the time.
Congressional Democrats Targeting These House Republicans In 2026 Midterm Battle
But LePage re-established residency in Maine five years ago and challenged his successor as governor, Democratic Gov. Janet Mills, in the 2022 election.
LePage ended up losing his bid for a third term by 13 points to Mills, but he did carry the 2nd Congressional District in that race.
Moderate Democratic Rep. Jared Golden, a U.S. Marine veteran who deployed to the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, and who often bucks his own party in Congress, has held the seat since first winning it in 2018.
But Golden won re-election by a razor-thin margin last year in the district, which is the second-most rural in the U.S. and the largest east of the Mississippi River.
And Trump, who carried the district in the 2016, 2020 and 2024 presidential elections by nine, seven and 10 points, earned an electoral vote each time, as Maine and Nebraska, are the only two states in the union to allocate their electoral votes partially by congressional district.
Maine's Golden Takes Aim At Fellow Democrats Over Policy
Golden, in a statement after LePage announced his candidacy, said, "I thought Paul was doing his best work in retirement."
But the 42-year-old Golden has yet to announce whether he'll seek re-election next year or instead run for either the state's Senate seat or the open governor's office.
Meanwhile, the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) spotlighted LePage's tenure as governor.
"Paul LePage's time in office was defined by his obsession with blocking Mainers' ability to receive quality health care, opposing Medicaid expansion at every possible opportunity," DCCC national press secretary Viet Shelton argued in a statement. "At a time when Republicans in Congress are pushing the largest cut to Medicaid in history, Mainers can't afford LePage's crusade to rip health care away from people."
In his Fox News interview, LePage reiterated that the nation's debt is a top motivation for him to return to politics. As of May 8, the national debt was $36,212,886,111,158.26, according to Fox News' National Debt Tracker.
"It's the spending and the debt that this country has, and I'm worried about my grandchildren, great-grandchildren. And I think we have a president now that's really willing to tackle it, and I'm willing to help," he said.
But LePage added that "the other thing that is really big is what's happening in our country with the woke environment. I think I want to be there to help clean that up if we can. Having boys play in girls' sports is really sad."
He also highlighted his Tuesday meeting—part of a three-day swing through the congressional district—with Maine student Cassidy Carlisle, whom he described as "the courageous young woman fighting unfair male competition in girls' sports."
Maine's 2nd Congressional District shares a long border with Canada.
When asked if he'll be spotlighting border security and immigration as major issues in his campaign, Lepage said, "Big time."
But the controversial tariffs the president placed on nations across the globe last month has strained relations with Canada.
"I'm all for the tariffs," LePage said. "The tariffs will fix our international trade and lower taxes."
LePage acknowledged: "Is it going to hurt in the short term? Yeah, it's going to hurt a little bit in the short term, but I think it's necessary."
And he predicted that "the tariffs are going to be a short-term problem. I think they're going to settle out."
LePage spoke with Fox News at Lewiston's Franco Center, a performing arts center and historic site of Franco-American culture located in a former Gothic church built in 1907 for French Canadian immigrants in Maine, which is located alongside the city's historical mills and canals.
The former governor, who survived a troubling and often brutal upbringing, gave Fox News a tour of the many dwellings within blocks of the Franco Center, where he spent his childhood.
The eldest son of 18 children, LePage grew up speaking French in an impoverished home with an alcoholic and abusive father who was a mill worker.
At age 11, he ran away from home after his father beat him and broke his nose. He lived on the streets of Lewiston and often crashed on friends' couches for a couple of years before earning a living shining shoes, washing dishes at a restaurant, and haling boxes for a local truck driver.
"I had a very, very, rough upbringing as a youth. We were in welfare, we were in poverty," he said.
LePage, speaking in the church where he was baptized and sought refuge during his family troubles, told Fox News, "It feels good coming in this building. This was a special building. A couple of nuns and priests were really helpful in my upbringing."
He went on to graduate from high school, and with financial help from friends, attended and graduated from college.
He later enjoyed success as a businessman, including greatly expanding Marden's Surplus and Salvage, a Maine-based discount store chain.
Years later, he ventured into politics, winning election to the Waterville city council and later serving as the city's mayor before winning statewide office in 2010.
The former governor says his rough childhood has influenced his political life in a way that not many other politicians can understand.
And he lamented, "Unfortunately, the mentality in the current society is not to help people get out of poverty, but it's to keep them in poverty."
"I want to help get them out of poverty," he said. "I think there are so many programs that we can institute that will elevate people in poverty, rather than keep them."Original article source: Why longtime Trump ally and former Republican Gov. Paul LePage is aiming for a political comeback
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Bloomberg
30 minutes ago
- Bloomberg
Traders Scour for ‘Elusive' Catalyst to Push S&P 500 to Record
For stock traders there's little to fear at the moment. Corporate America keeps churning out solid earnings. The chances of a recession aren't blaring. And President Donald Trump's tariff policy is expected to become more clear before long. So what's there to worry about?


CNN
32 minutes ago
- CNN
How a Supreme Court decision backing the NRA is thwarting Trump's retribution campaign
As Harvard University, elite law firms and perceived political enemies of President Donald Trump fight back against his efforts to use government power to punish them, they're winning thanks in part to the National Rifle Association. Last May, the Supreme Court unanimously sided with the gun rights group in a First Amendment case concerning a New York official's alleged efforts to pressure insurance companies in the state to sever ties with the group following the deadly 2018 school shooting in Parkland, Florida. A government official, liberal Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote for the nine, 'cannot … use the power of the State to punish or suppress disfavored expression.' A year later, the court's decision in National Rifle Association of America v. Vullo has been cited repeatedly by federal judges in rulings striking down a series of executive orders that targeted law firms. Lawyers representing Harvard, faculty at Columbia University and others are also leaning on the decision in cases challenging Trump's attacks on them. 'Going into court with a decision that is freshly minted, that clearly reflects the unanimous views of the currently sitting Supreme Court justices, is a very powerful tool,' said Eugene Volokh, a conservative First Amendment expert who represented the NRA in the 2024 case. For free speech advocates, the application of the NRA decision in cases pushing back against Trump's retribution campaign is a welcome sign that lower courts are applying key First Amendment principles equally, particularly in politically fraught disputes. In the NRA case, the group claimed that Maria Vullo, the former superintendent of the New York State Department of Financial Services, had threatened enforcement actions against the insurance firms if they failed to comply with her demands to help with the campaign against gun groups. The NRA's claims centered around a meeting Vullo had with an insurance market in 2018 in which the group says she offered to not prosecute other violations as long as the company helped with her campaign. 'The great hope of a principled application of the First Amendment is that it protects everybody,' said Alex Abdo, the litigation director of the Knight First Amendment Institute. 'Some people have criticized free speech advocates as being naive for hoping that'll be the case, but hopefully that's what we're seeing now,' he added. 'We're seeing courts apply that principle where the politics are very different than the NRA case.' The impact of Vullo can be seen most clearly in the cases challenging Trump's attempts to use executive power to exact revenge on law firms that have employed his perceived political enemies or represented clients who have challenged his initiatives. A central pillar of Trump's retribution crusade has been to pressure firms to bend to his political will, including through issuing executive orders targeting four major law firms: Perkins Coie, Jenner & Block, WilmerHale and Susman Godfrey. Among other things, the orders denied the firms' attorneys access to federal buildings, retaliated against their clients with government contracts and suspended security clearances for lawyers at the firms. (Other firms were hit with similar executive orders but they haven't taken Trump to court over them.) The organizations individually sued the administration over the orders and the three judges overseeing the Perkins Coie, WilmerHale and Jenner & Block suits have all issued rulings permanently blocking enforcement of the edicts. (The Susman case is still pending.) Across more than 200-pages of writing, the judges – all sitting at the federal trial-level court in Washington, DC – cited Vullo 30 times to conclude that the orders were unconstitutional because they sought to punish the firms over their legal work. The judges all lifted Sotomayor's line about using 'the power of the State to punish or suppress disfavored expression,' while also seizing on other language in her opinion to buttress their own decisions. Two of them – US district judges Beryl Howell, an appointee of former President Barack Obama, and Richard Leon, who was named to the bench by former President George W. Bush – incorporated Sotomayor's statement that government discrimination based on a speaker's viewpoint 'is uniquely harmful to a free and democratic society.' The third judge, John Bates, said Vullo and an earlier Supreme Court case dealing with impermissible government coercion 'govern – and defeat' the administration's arguments in defense of a section of the Jenner & Block order that sought to end all contractual relationships that might have allowed taxpayer dollars to flow to the firm. 'Executive Order 14246 does precisely what the Supreme Court said just last year is forbidden: it engages in 'coercion against a third party to achieve the suppression of disfavored speech,'' wrote Bates, who was also appointed by Bush, in his May 23 ruling. For its part, the Justice Department has tried to draw a distinction between what the executive orders called for and the conduct rejected by the high court in Vullo. They told the three judges in written arguments that the orders at issue did not carry the 'force of the powers exhibited in Vullo' by the New York official. Will Creeley, the legal director at the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education, said the rulings underscore how 'Vullo has proved its utility almost immediately.' 'It is extremely useful to remind judges and government actors alike that just last year, the court warned against the kind of shakedowns and turns of the screw that we're now seeing from the administration,' he said. Justice Department lawyers have not yet appealed any of the three rulings issued last month. CNN has reached out to the department for comment. In separate cases brought in the DC courthouse and elsewhere, Trump's foes have leaned on Vullo as they've pressed judges to intervene in high-stakes disputes with the president. Among them is Mark Zaid, a prominent national security lawyer who has drawn Trump's ire for his representation of whistleblowers. Earlier this year, Trump yanked Zaid's security clearance, a decision, the attorney said in a lawsuit, that undermines his ability to 'zealously advocate on (his clients') behalf in the national security arena.' In court papers, Zaid's attorneys argued that the president's decision was a 'retaliatory directive,' invoking language from the Vullo decision to argue that the move violated his First Amendment rights. ''Government officials cannot attempt to coerce private parties in order to punish or suppress views that the government disfavors,'' they wrote, quoting from the 2024 ruling. 'And yet that is exactly what Defendants do here.' Timothy Zick, a constitutional law professor at William & Mary Law School, said the executive orders targeting private entities or individuals 'have relied heavily on pressure, intimidation, and the threat of adverse action to punish or suppress speakers' views and discourage others from engaging with regulated targets.' 'The unanimous holding in Vullo is tailor-made for litigants seeking to push back against the administration's coercive strategy,' Zick added. That notion was not lost on lawyers representing Harvard and faculty at Columbia University in several cases challenging Trump's attacks on the elite schools, including one brought by Harvard challenging Trump's efforts to ban the school from hosting international students. A federal judge has so far halted those efforts. In a separate case brought by Harvard over the administration's decision to freeze billions of dollars in federal funding for the nation's oldest university, the school's attorneys on Monday told a judge that Trump's decision to target it because of 'alleged antisemitism and ideological bias at Harvard' clearly ran afoul of the high court's decision last year. 'Although any governmental retaliation based on protected speech is an affront to the First Amendment, the retaliation here was especially unconstitutional because it was based on Harvard's 'particular views' – the balance of speech on its campus and its refusal to accede to the Government's unlawful demands,' the attorneys wrote.
Yahoo
33 minutes ago
- Yahoo
2 Reasons AMC Stock Is Soaring in June
Memorial Day weekend set moviegoing records, and a lot of the sales went to AMC as the largest theater chain. With many expected hit movies slated for release, management thinks it's turned a corner. AMC stock is still down year to date and the company has a lot to prove. 10 stocks we like better than AMC Entertainment › AMC (NYSE: AMC) is the largest movie theater operator in the world, but being the leader in a troubled industry hasn't done much for the company over the past few years. With the advent of streaming and residual fears from the pandemic, moviegoing just isn't what it once was and AMC continues to struggle. However, Memorial Day weekend was a boon for the company and AMC stock has been climbing. Let's see why and what it means for the future. Streaming from home has taken a toll on the box office, but there is still life left in theaters. Four of the top 10 highest-grossing films ever were released since the pandemic started, including Avatar: The Way of Water in the No. 3 spot and last year's Inside Out 2. People are still going to the movies. That fact was reinforced with a record Memorial Day weekend in May. Disney's live-action remake of Lilo & Stitch had the highest-ever four-day Memorial Day opening, and it was buttressed by a strong showing for Paramount's Mission: Impossible -- The Final Reckoning. Altogether, these two topped a blowout weekend with $326.7 million in domestic ticket sales, and Lilo & Stitch is already the second-highest-grossing domestic film of the year. Of course, that success trickled down to generate incredible financial results for AMC. Management said it set an all-time record for admissions revenue, food and beverage revenue, and total revenue for a weekend Memorial Day opening, and that the five-day stretch was the third-highest revenue for any five-day slot in more than 10 years. As for attendance, this was the highest-attended weekend and highest-attended five-day period of the year, both domestically and globally. Management didn't provide specific financial metrics for the weekend, so investors aren't likely to hear the nitty-gritty details until the second-quarter earnings release sometime in July or August. But management's update and optimism are boosting investor confidence. It's nice for the company to have a solid, record-breaking opening, but can it last? Management thinks so, and the market may be pricing that in. CEO Adam Aron said that after this weekend, AMC has turned a corner. "With many more potentially huge movies coming in June all the way through the end of 2025, and beyond that deeply into 2026 as well," he said, "we firmly expect to be enjoying a robust theatrical box office as we look ahead." Here's what to be excited about. Disney has a full slate of films coming out over the next few years, including the third film in the Avatar series. The first two are the highest-grossing and third-highest-grossing films ever, and the next film is slated for release this coming December. It also has the next Frozen film and other top franchises coming out soon. Warner Bros. has its own expected hits coming out, including a new Superman, and Comcast's Universal Studios has the next installment of Wicked and a new Shrek. Sequels to popular franchises can be big business. But the company is still reporting revenue declines and losses as of the 2025 first quarter. It will take some time to see if AMC has indeed turned a corner. As the price has increased in June, so has the short interest in AMC, hitting almost 15% of all outstanding shares. These investors are betting on this being a short-term boost and that the price will fall from this surge. Even though AMC stock is up 29% over the past month, it's still down 15% year-to-date. Unless the company releases incredibly strong earnings for the second quarter and keeps up its performance, the price jump may not last. Part of what's frustrating about that for investors is that many variables are beyond the company's control. It's up to film producers to create hit movies that bring viewers into theaters and to make the decision to keep them there long enough before they hit streaming services. That can be quite lumpy. You need to have real confidence in the future of the film industry and the resilience of theaters as a beckoning call for die-hard fans to want to invest in AMC's future, and for most investors, that time isn't now. Before you buy stock in AMC Entertainment, consider this: The Motley Fool Stock Advisor analyst team just identified what they believe are the for investors to buy now… and AMC Entertainment wasn't one of them. The 10 stocks that made the cut could produce monster returns in the coming years. Consider when Netflix made this list on December 17, 2004... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you'd have $674,395!* Or when Nvidia made this list on April 15, 2005... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you'd have $858,011!* Now, it's worth noting Stock Advisor's total average return is 997% — a market-crushing outperformance compared to 172% for the S&P 500. Don't miss out on the latest top 10 list, available when you join . See the 10 stocks » *Stock Advisor returns as of June 2, 2025 Jennifer Saibil has positions in Walt Disney. The Motley Fool has positions in and recommends Walt Disney. The Motley Fool recommends Comcast. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy. 2 Reasons AMC Stock Is Soaring in June was originally published by The Motley Fool Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data