Republicans eagerly await Lara Trump's decision on North Carolina Senate seat
The daughter-in-law of President Trump and a former Republican National Committee (RNC) co-chair, Lara Trump has quickly become an early favorite for the GOP nomination if she chooses to run. A source close to the president said she's considering a bid; it would clear the Republican field if she chooses to go forward.
While she's turned down possible Senate bids in the past, she would bring significant name recognition and instant backing from the top levels of the GOP.
'She has, in my opinion, earned the right of first refusal if she wants to do it,' said North Carolina Republican strategist Jonathan Felts. 'And more importantly, regardless of what I think about it, the most powerful and the most popular Republican on the planet, he thinks so, too.'
A potential Senate run for Lara Trump, who is married to the president's son Eric, has been teased for years.
She was rumored as a possible candidate to succeed former Sen. Richard Burr (R-N.C.) in the state's 2022 Senate race, but she decided against it, citing the difficulty of running with young children. She endorsed then-Rep. Ted Budd (R-N.C.) in the race; he went on to win.
'I am saying no for now, not no forever,' she said at the time about her own possible candidacy.
She was also rumored last year to be an option for Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis (R) to fill the Senate seat vacated by Secretary of State Marco Rubio. She removed her name from consideration despite 'encouragement from so many.'
But speculation has been building for months that Trump would finally take the plunge for Tillis's seat in 2026, even before Tillis announced he wouldn't seek another term. A November survey from a Republican pollster found her leading Tillis in a hypothetical primary match-up by an overwhelming margin.
With Tillis out, Trump has commanded the attention in the race for the past few weeks.
The president mentioned Lara Trump when asked by reporters about who could replace Tillis, saying she's 'somebody that would really be great.' He acknowledged that she and Eric live in Florida, but he emphasized her ties to the Tar Heel State.
'She's a great person, Lara Trump. I mean, that would always be my first choice, but she doesn't live there now,' President Trump said. 'But she's there all the time, her parents are there. You know, she really knows North Carolina well.'
And one of the other top names being floated, RNC Chair Michael Whatley, signaled he would defer to her if she wants to run and would expect the party to do so as well.
'What I will say is this: If Lara Trump is going to be interested, then she is certainly going to have the entire Republican universe — myself included — that are going to coalesce behind her,' he told the Washington Examiner in an interview.
First-term Rep. Pat Harrigan (R-N.C.), another possible candidate, also said he wouldn't run if Trump does.
A GOP operative who's worked on North Carolina Senate races described Trump's choice as 'personal' and a 'family decision.'
But Republicans said a Trump candidacy would likely be their best-case scenario, particularly as former Gov. Roy Cooper mulls a bid for the seat on the Democratic side.
Felts said having Trump on the ballot could help increase turnout for Republicans, noting her father-in-law's demonstrated prowess at encouraging voters who often don't participate to come to the polls.
He said Republicans will have to maximize turnout in small rural areas to overcome Democratic strengths in other parts of the state.
Felts said no candidate could reach the level of support the president would have, but he would give a boost.
'He's just a uniquely popular figure, but having a Trump on the ballot would be helpful,' he said.
Still, Lara Trump could have some potential vulnerabilities if she runs. Despite playing an active role in campaigning for her father-in-law and other candidates previously, she has never run for office herself.
North Carolina Democratic strategist Morgan Jackson said her candidacy would solve a problem Republicans had with Tillis, who was increasingly unpopular with the Republican base. But she could turn off the critical 1 percent to 3 percent of voters who swing in the middle.
'I think Thom Tillis had a better shot at those voters than Lara Trump does because he did not come across to those voters as a partisan warrior,' Jackson said. 'And frankly, I think the last thing voters are looking for is a partisan warrior right now, and I say that as either a Democrat or Republican nominee.'
'What is clear is with Thom Tillis being run out of the race by [President] Trump is that they're going to get a partisan warrior,' he added.
Felts said he's not concerned about Lara Trump being untested as a candidate because she showed her strength while campaigning for others. He said she 'had audiences eating out of her hand' speaking at the state GOP convention in 2021, demonstrating her grassroots appeal.
'I know she's told Ted, she's all in for Ted,' Felts recalled thinking at the time. 'If she were to announce right now [she's running], I mean, the place would just go insane.'
One other attack she could face is a perceived lack of loyalty to North Carolina. Despite being born and raised there, she and her family live in Florida. Accusations of carpetbagging have been a common attack in key Senate races in recent years.
But Republicans emphasized that she still has deep ties to the state and knows it well.
One North Carolina Republican insider pointed to former Sen. Elizabeth Dole (R), who was originally from the state but hadn't lived there for years before her comfortable electoral victory to the Senate in 2002.
'She's very well known,' he said. 'She has taken time with the grassroots, speaking [at] a bunch of Lincoln-Reagan dinners across the state over the years, and so she's definitely a known commodity and considered North Carolinian by the key folks in this state.'
The insider said she would start out with an advantage in name identification that the other possible GOP candidates couldn't match and get the voters who only vote every four years.
'It's just a question of, are there voters in the middle, unaffiliated voters' who preferred President Trump to former Vice President Kamala Harris but aren't fully invested in Trump himself, he added.
'I don't know. That would be tested for sure,' he said. 'I do think that that's offset by all of the enthusiastic Trump voters that would turn out in a midterm that might not otherwise.'
Jackson stressed that the result in the battleground state will likely be close regardless of the candidates, though analysts agree candidate quality will matter considerably.
'North Carolina is a very big state. It's big. It's hard to win. I don't care which side of the aisle you're on,' he said. 'You're going to have a close race, and it's going to be a tough race.'
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
19 minutes ago
- Yahoo
How Trump became the new master of the Senate
The most eventful week to date in the midterm battle for the Senate just came to a close. The field in one of the marquee races of 2026 finally took shape in North Carolina, the lead architect of Project 2025 launched a primary challenge against South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham, Rep. Mike Collins joined the Georgia GOP Senate primary, appointed Florida Sen. Ashley Moody continued on her special election glide path when her most serious Democratic challenger dropped out, and we got a little more insight into Nebraska. But don't lose sight of the larger narrative. Whatever else is happening in these races from week to week, the single most important factor determining the outcome of the 2026 Senate election cycle is President Donald Trump. Nothing else is even close. His approval ratings are part of this equation. Trump is famously rangebound in the polls, with a low ceiling and a high floor, but his popularity next year will matter — midterm history shows there is a correlation between a president's ratings and his party's fate. But Trump's unique ability to unleash the forces of electoral chaos is what really makes him the single most influential character. No one — not Mitch McConnell, not the National Republican Senatorial Committee, not Majority Leader John Thune nor anyone else — has done as much as Trump to directly shape the Senate GOP Conference over the past decade. Since taking office in 2017, he's hounded a handful of members out of office, been the proximate cause of lost Senate seats in Georgia and blown opportunities elsewhere (just Google McConnell and 'candidate quality'). By elevating JD Vance and Marco Rubio from their Senate seats into his administration, Trump created two more new Republican senators. Most recently, Trump upended the landscape in North Carolina. The traditional presidential play would have been to cut GOP Sen. Thom Tillis some slack, recognizing the complexity of the terrain and the party's need to maximize Tillis' chances of holding his seat. Instead, Trump became the catalyst for his retirement, enhancing Democratic chances of flipping the seat in one of the most competitive states in the nation. So far, Trump has been unusually disciplined when it comes to the Senate — by his standards, at least. Surrounded by the most capable political team he's ever assembled — and tempered by the bracing experience of two unsuccessful midterm elections — the president has judiciously dished out endorsements to incumbents and strategically withheld them. He's also largely avoided trashing wayward Senate Republicans. Until now. Whether it's the pressure from the Jeffrey Epstein saga or a reversion to the mean, the cracks are beginning to show. The gravitational pull toward chaos is overtaking his strategic imperatives. In the last week alone, Trump has publicly whacked three Senate Republicans — Josh Hawley (R-Mo.), Susan Collins (R-Maine) and 91-year-old Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa), the longest-serving member of the Senate — for largely minor political offenses. [Here's a thought exercise: Try imagining Barack Obama lighting up Robert Byrd for respecting an informal Senate practice, or George W. Bush torching Strom Thurmond. The missile aimed at Collins, who has consistently vexed the president, was predictable, though not particularly productive. Dragging one of the most vulnerable GOP incumbents doesn't advance the goal of holding a Senate majority. The dig at Grassley — especially after the Senate Judiciary chair and champion of whistle-blowers fell in line on the Emil Bove nomination — was simply gratuitous. The Iowan's GOP bona fides date back to the Eisenhower era; his ticket's been punched in the Iowa Legislature, the House and nearly a half-century in the Senate. To suggest Grassley lacks political courage, or is a RINO, or that the president carried him to reelection in 2022, is to play cat's paw with him. It also served no discernable purpose, other than to remind Grassley and everyone else of Trump's dominion over the Senate, which isn't really in question anymore. Grassley's meek response was revealing: he said he was 'offended' and 'disappointed' by the insult. Welp. Trump can't seem to help himself: He delights in taking down members of the world's most exclusive club. Counting his Truth Social posts aimed at Chuck Schumer and four other Senate Democrats ('SLEAZEBAGS ALL') Trump leveled public attacks on eight different senators in recent days. The equal-opportunity disparagement helps explain his deep connection with the base of an increasingly populist GOP: The grassroots appreciates the fact that, when it comes to Trump, everyone in a position of power — senators, foreign leaders, former presidents, billionaires and Fortune 500 CEOs — is fair game. The GOP begins with a structural advantage on the 2026 Senate map: Nearly all of the Republican seats up for election are in states Trump carried easily last year, while Democrats must defend at least four seats that are more precariously perched. While the midterm political winds typically blow against the party in power, to win back the majority Democrats have to flip four Republican seats, while not losing any they currently control. It's a daunting task, but Trump looms as the great equalizer. It wouldn't take more than a few impulsive, undisciplined moves — such as endorsing slavishly loyal but unelectable candidates in key races, or creating messy primaries by torpedoing shaky GOP incumbents — to create just enough opportunities for Democrats to compete on what is otherwise an unforgiving Senate map.
The Hill
20 minutes ago
- The Hill
Trump's plan for White House ballroom sparks outrage from his critics
President Trump's plans to add a massive $200 million ballroom to the White House is angering critics, who see him moving forward with the long-sought project as part of his desire to leave a lasting mark not only on the office of the presidency but the first house as well. The construction of the ballroom, the cost of which the White House says will be covered by Trump and other donors, will begin in September. Trump is also paving the White House Rose Garden (though the rose bushes will be saved), which the White House says is necessary so people can walk more easily for events held in the space. And he's added his personal gold touch to the Oval Office. Trump says he sees the ballroom as a way to add to his legacy. And while detractors say his decorative and more substantial changes are out of touch and ostentatious, he says they are necessary. 'I always said I was going to do something about the ballroom because they should have one,' he told reporters Thursday. 'So we'll be leaving it, it will be a great legacy project. And, I think it will be special.' When asked if any government funds will be used to construct the 90,000 square foot facility, Trump replied, 'no government dollars, no.' The White House said the sprawling event space will be built adjacent to the White House where the East Wing sits. The goal is to complete construction before the end of Trump's term in January 2029. Trump's vision is for a space where he and future presidents can host state dinners, large gatherings with business leaders and other ritzy parties or functions. 'We've been planning it for a long time,' Trump said. 'They've wanted a ballroom at the White House for more than 150 years. There's never been a president that was good at ballrooms. I'm really good.' Democrats and regular Trump critics offered a sharp pushback on his plans. 'This is what DOGE was all about, folks,' Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) said in a video posted to social media hours after the White House announcement, referring to the president's Department of Government Efficiency. 'Cutting things from you, and giving it not to some place that needed it, giving it to the big shots who run the show, Donald Trump at the top of the list.' Others suggested Trump and his White House were planting an intentional distraction. 'You gotta hand it to MAGAs, for about a week they really did have everyone convinced they cared about kids and The Epstein Files,' journalist and pundit Seth Abramson wrote on social platform X. 'On to more important things! Did you hear Trump is building a $200M ballroom at the White House? Wowee!' The White House pushed back on those criticisms in a Friday statement to The Hill, saying 'as President Trump has said, for over 150 years, many presidents, administrations, and staff have all wanted a ballroom, and now we have a president who will accomplish building it.' 'President Trump is the best builder and developer in the entire world and the American people can rest well knowing that this project is in his hands,' a West Wing spokesperson said. 'Many future presidents and American citizens will enjoy it for generations to come.' The president, a longtime real estate mogul who is known for a hands-on approach in the design and construction of his resorts, golf courses and skyscraper office buildings, has long lamented the lack of sufficient event space at the White House. 'When it rains it's a disaster, and the tent's 100 yards, that's more than a football field away from the main entrance,' Trump said as part of his remarks to the press about the project. 'And people are shlopping down to the tent; it's not a pretty sight. The women with their lovely evening gowns, their hair all done, and they're a mess by the time they get [there].' There is longstanding precedent for presidents and first ladies putting their spin on the White House and its grounds. President Harry Truman oversaw a massive renovation from 1948 to 1952 that required he and his wife to move into the Blair House at the time and saw the White House completely gutted. Former first lady Jackie Kennedy, however, championed the historic preservation of the home and advocated that extreme renovations require oversight from the Committee for the Preservation of the White House. 'Every president and first family does make a mark on the White House — they already are a part of history and that snapshot in time,' said Anita McBride, former chief of staff to then-first lady Laura Bush. 'Since the cornerstone was laid, there have been additions, there have been changes that, at the time those happened, raised concerns.' The White House Historical Association welcomed Trump's planned ballroom. 'The history of the White House has evolved over 233 years since the cornerstone was laid in 1792. The South Portico, the North Portico, the East Wing, the West Wing, and the Truman Balcony all raised concerns at the time — but today, we can't imagine the White House without these iconic elements,' Stewart D. McLaurin, president of the association, told The Hill. He added, 'Since our founding by First Lady Jacqueline Kennedy in 1961, we have supported and partnered with every president and first lady caring for and adding to the White House and its Collection. We work to preserve the history of this remarkable museum, home, and office for generations to come.' Some agree with the president that a bigger events space at the White House is long overdue. 'I can understand why someone who thinks on a grand scale, as obviously President Trump does, would want this ballroom added,' said Barbara Perry, a presidential historian and co-chair of the Presidential Oral History Program at the University of Virginia's Miller Center. 'That being said, the optics for people who disagree with this president, it will probably have an impact on how they view this.' McBride agreed that the tents on the lawn, which have been constructed during more recent administrations, are not ideal. 'That doesn't come without challenges, putting up staging, putting up a covered structure, getting people to the actual location; dealing with inclement weather. And you're not really having your event in the White House,' she said. 'So you can see where that makes sense.' There are lingering questions about what the new ballroom location will mean for the staffers who work in the East Wing, which is where first lady's staff works. The East Wing is also where tours of the White House for the public are conducted. 'Betty Ford always called the East Wing the 'heart' of the White House,' McBride said. 'All the business and policy gets done in the West Wing, that's critically important. But the heart of the White House is the East Wing. And so what, what will be the new East Wing?' Others see the construction of an opulent addition to the president's residence as a matter of bad timing and poor optics given sluggish jobs reports and fears about how global tariffs might hurt the U.S. economy. 'This isn't something that's going to make or break another election, but it does add another page to the catalog of hypocrisy that these people read from when they want to lecture Americans about fiscal responsibility,' said Antjuan Seawright, a Democratic political strategist. 'It's a visible middle finger to working class Americans, many of whom voted for him.'
New York Post
20 minutes ago
- New York Post
Party poopers: Less than 10% of American friendships cross political lines
Only a tiny portion of friendships in the US are between a Democrat and a Republican, an eye-opening new study found. Researchers at Wellesley College looked at 971 adult friend pairs and found that most Americans are not willing to agree to disagree. The study, published July 5 in the journal Social Psychological and Personality Science, analyzed two separate friend samples, one in-person and one online. Advertisement 5 Researchers found that in real-life samples from New York and Boston, only 3% of friendships paired a Democrat and a Republican, a sign of deepening political silos. Jacob Lund – One study surveyed 537 friend pairs in deep-blue cities like New York and Boston, plus three liberal campuses — Wellesley, Amherst and Babson — and found just 3% of friendships crossed party lines. Nearly half of participants were Democrats. Only 7% were Republicans. Advertisement The second group, 434 friend pairs surveyed online, was more politically balanced — and the number of cross-party friendships more than doubled. With 42% Democrats and 31% Republicans, 8% of friendships spanned the aisle, hinting conservatives may be more willing to mix than their liberal peers. Even when friendships did cross the aisle, they scored lower on trust, emotional support and mutual understanding, the study found. 5 The study surveyed more than 970 friend pairs and found that almost all shared similar views on hot-button issues like abortion, gun control and immigration. fizkes – But there was one silver lining: the rare few who crossed party lines regarded the other side with less hostility. Advertisement 'Part of what is destroying our social fabric is that we have set an expectation that to be a good Democrat or Republican, you have to unconditionally hate the other party,' said Sean Westwood, a political scientist at Dartmouth College. 'There is evidence that this social pressure to hate makes the state of partisan conflict seem worse than it actually is.' That pressure only grows, he added, when people don't have personal ties to someone on the other side. 'If you don't know a Republican or Democrat, it is easier to assume that they are unpatriotic, evil or immoral,' Westwood told The Post. 'Without a personal connection you can get lost in the nonsense coming from social media, cable news and Washington DC.' 5 Even when friendships crossed political lines, participants rated them as less close and less satisfying compared to ideologically aligned relationships. lesslemon – Advertisement Only about a quarter of friend pairs said they disagreed on major issues like abortion, immigration or gun rights, suggesting most people befriend those who already see eye to eye. And when politics entered the chat, things got even rockier — a quarter of those who disagreed said the conversation damaged the friendship. Some simply obliterate the friendship entirely, a 2024 study found One in five adults have cut off a close relative over politics, and half said the break happened in 2024 leading up to the election, a 2024 survey from The Harris Poll found. 5 Despite the tension, those with politically opposite friends showed more tolerance toward outgroups, suggesting some benefits to bipartisan bonds. be free – Among those still in contact, a third said they felt uncomfortable at a family gathering because of someone's political views, and just as many feared future events could turn ugly. 'It is rewarding to be around people who validate your views of the world and of the moral order, and from mildly stressful to absolutely intolerable to be around people who disagree with beliefs and values that are important to us,' Dr. Peter Ditto, a psychology professor at UC Irvine, told The Post. And it's a vicious cycle. Advertisement 'The more people hear about polarization, hostility and how few Democrats and Republicans are friends, the more they become convinced that they should also keep quiet,' said University of Michigan political communications professor Yanna Krupnikov. 5 In a more balanced national sample, 8% of 434 friend pairs crossed party lines — slightly higher than the 3% found in liberal strongholds. – Ditto warned that as politics becomes more central to people's identities, it's taking a toll on their personal lives. 'I worry as I see more and more evidence that politics is getting personal … that the corrosive political polarization in contemporary U.S. politics is seeping into people's everyday lives in ways that impact their well-being,' he said.
