Senate Democrats' campaign chief says 'every state's on the table' in fight for majority
Democrats will have to win some red states if they have any hope of taking control of the Senate next year, and the senator tasked with leading that effort believes President Donald Trump has given them an opening after he won those states easily months ago.
'I look at the map, and every state's on the table because of this growing backlash that President Trump's decisions have created, with his cuts to Medicaid and his unwillingness to address affordability issues,' Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, D-N.Y., told NBC News in an interview at the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee headquarters on Wednesday.
Gillibrand also said she isn't ruling out taking sides in Democratic primaries as her party looks to net four Senate seats to take control of the chamber, saying that she is 'definitely not ruling out anything in any state.'
'We're going to look at every state on a case-by-case basis and make our assessment as to who's the best candidate in that state, and then make decisions based on that,' Gillibrand said.
Democrats' ripest targets in 2026 are GOP Sens. Susan Collins of Maine, which Trump lost by nearly 7 percentage points in November, and Thom Tillis of North Carolina, which Trump won by 3 points. Both incumbents are battle-tested, winning contested races in their last cycles on the ballot.
Former Democratic Rep. Wiley Nickel has already launched a run in North Carolina, while former House staffer Jordan Wood is running in Maine. But Democrats are still eyeing Maine Gov. Janet Mills and former North Carolina Gov. Roy Cooper as possible recruits.
While Cooper is weighing a run, Mills has not exactly sounded enthusiastic about challenging Collins, telling the Maine Trust for Local News in April, 'I'm not planning to run for anything. Things change week to week, month to month, but at this moment I'm not planning to run for another office.'
Asked if it has been difficult to recruit against Collins, who has a record of winning tough races, including victory in 2020 even as Trump lost Maine decisively, Gillibrand said negative reaction to Trump's policies is 'changing the thinking of a lot of potential candidates.'
'So I am certain we will have formidable candidates in North Carolina and Maine because of this growing backlash that President Trump has created,' Gillibrand said.
Even if Democrats win those two states, and hold on to their current seats in other battlegrounds, they would still need to flip two additional Senate seats in states Trump won by double digits last year to get to a majority. That could mean targeting ruby red states like Texas, Iowa, Alaska, South Carolina and others.
Democrats do not currently hold a single Senate seat in the 24 states that Trump carried in all three of his presidential runs, after several red-state losses in 2024. And Trump won each of those states by double digits last year.
Gillibrand said the 'magic formula' for Democratic success involves a combination of 'deep Republican backlash' to Trump and some of his policies, like slashing social safety net programs and imposing steep tariffs, and 'extraordinarily strong candidates who represent their states well,' as well as boosts from the DSCC to help those candidates build up their campaigns.
Contested Democratic primaries are already taking shape in Iowa, where GOP Sen. Joni Ernst is up for re-election, as well as in competitive states where Democrats are defending open seats, including Michigan and Minnesota.
Ernst has also been in the spotlight for responding to a constituent at a town hall who suggested the House Republicans' proposed Medicaid cuts could cause people to die and saying, 'Well, we all are going to die.'
Asked if such comments give Democrats a better shot at defeating Ernst next year, Gillibrand said Ernst's remarks exemplify Trump's 'very callous approach towards health care, cutting seniors, cutting people with disabilities, children, pregnant women and veterans off of their Medicaid.'
Gillibrand said those cuts are creating 'a significant backlash that certainly puts a state like Iowa in play' along with 'many other red states around the country.'
Democrats, meanwhile, are going to be focused on 'commonsense, kitchen table issues' of affordability and public safety, Gillibrand said.
The New York Democrat argued those were winning messages for successful candidates in her home state last year, where she led a coordinated campaign with Gov. Kathy Hochul and House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries to boost Democratic House candidates.
Democrats flipped three GOP-held House seats in New York even as Trump made gains throughout the state. Trump ultimately lost New York but improved on his 2020 election margin by 11 points, which was the biggest swing toward Trump of any state in the country.
Republicans are looking to capitalize on Trump's gains as they target Hochul in her re-election run next year, as well as other House Democrats. (Gillibrand said she is supporting Hochul for re-election as she faces a primary challenge from Lt. Gov. Antonio Delgado.)
Republicans are also looking to reprise attacks on Democrats over whether transgender women should be allowed to compete in female sports.
One Nation, a nonprofit tied to the GOP super PAC Senate Leadership Fund, already launched an attack on the issue against Democratic Sen. Jon Ossoff in Georgia. Ossoff represents one of two states, along with Michigan, that Democrats are defending that Trump also carried last year.
'Each candidate will address it as they see fit,' Gillibrand said when asked how Democrats should respond to those attacks.
Gillibrand said she is 'very optimistic that Sen. Ossoff will not only win his race, but show rest of the country, you know, who he is and what Democrats stand for.'
This article was originally published on NBCNews.com
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
USA Today
31 minutes ago
- USA Today
Who would want to have babies under a Trump administration? Not me.
Who would want to have babies under a Trump administration? Not me. | Opinion The Trump administration does not care about what is medically necessary to save someone's life. They care about controlling women. Why would anybody want to have a child under that way of thinking? Show Caption Hide Caption Trump rescinds Biden-era emergency abortion care guidance The Trump administration rescinded guidance clarifying that hospitals in abortion-ban states must treat pregnant patients during medical emergencies. unbranded - Newsworthy Despite declarations that something needs to be done about the declining birth rate in the United States, neither President Donald Trump nor the Republican Party has the desire to protect pregnant people. If they did, the Trump administration wouldn't have made its latest move to restrict abortion nationwide. On Tuesday, June 3, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services rescinded a Biden-era policy that directed hospitals to provide emergency abortions if it was needed to stabilize a pregnant patient. The guidance and communications on it apparently 'do not reflect the policy of this Administration.' I, like many people who support abortion rights, know what this will lead to. It means more pregnant people will die. Does that reflect the policy of the administration? Having a baby in America is dangerous. Republicans aren't helping. The Biden policy was implemented in 2022, following the fall of Roe v. Wade, and argued that hospitals receiving Medicare funding had to comply with the Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act (EMTALA). The former administration argued that this included providing emergency abortions when they were needed to stabilize a patient, even in states that had severe abortion restrictions. Opinion: A brain dead pregnant Georgia woman is a horror story. It's Republicans' fault. This wasn't entirely a surprise. In 2024, the Supreme Court ruled that Texas could ban virtually all abortions in the state, including abortions that would have occurred under the old EMTALA guidelines. Still, it's terrifying to see this crucial policy eliminated. It's already dangerous to be pregnant in the United States. Our maternal mortality rate is much higher than in other wealthy countries. Same with our infant mortality rate. This will only exacerbate these tragedies. In states with abortion bans, the risks are even greater. A study from the Gender Equity Policy Institute found that people living in states with abortion bans were twice as likely to die during or shortly after childbirth. This is also backed by anecdotal evidence, including the 2022 deaths of two women in Georgia after the state passed a six-week ban. A different study found that infant mortality rates increased in states with severe restrictions on abortion, including an increase in deaths due to congenital anomalies. The Trump administration does not care about what is medically necessary to save someone's life. They don't care about whether the children supposedly saved by rescinding this policy will grow up without their mother. They care about their perceived moral superiority. They care about controlling women. Why would anybody want to have a child under that Republican way of thinking? Opinion: We're worrying about the wrong thing. Low birth rate isn't the crisis: Child care is. None of this is surprising from Republicans. It's just sad. I want to say I'm surprised that the Trump administration would allow women in need of emergency care to die. Yet this is clearly aligned with the Republican stance on abortion, just like it's aligned with the actions that the party has taken to make it harder for women to access necessary care. Whether you like it or not, abortion is a necessary part of health care. It saves lives. Alexis McGill Johnson, the president and CEO of Planned Parenthood, laid it out plainly. 'Women have died because they couldn't get the lifesaving abortion care they needed,' she said in a statement. 'The Trump administration is willing to let pregnant people die, and that is exactly what we can expect." Again, this is the administration that wants young women like me to have children and improve the country's birth rate. This is an administration that claims to care about women and children. I know I wouldn't want to have a child while Trump continues to make it unsafe to be pregnant and give birth. I hate that this is the reality. Follow USA TODAY columnist Sara Pequeño on X, formerly Twitter, @sara__pequeno
USA Today
31 minutes ago
- USA Today
Will Trump's big bill kill people? Here's the truth about Medicaid cuts.
Will Trump's big bill kill people? Here's the truth about Medicaid cuts. | Opinion Republicans are doing what's right, morally and fiscally. They're requiring able-bodied adults to work as a condition of receiving Medicaid benefits. Show Caption Hide Caption Disabled protesters removed from House committee hearing Disabled demonstrators protesting a Republican proposal to cut benefits were forced to leave a House committee hearing and arrested. Perhaps you've heard: Republicans are about to kick millions of people off health insurance. That claim is all over the news media as Congress debates the One Big Beautiful Bill Act. Advocates on the left even say the proposed changes will kill people. Such claims have no basis in reality. The point is to frighten Republican lawmakers into giving up on necessary reforms. Instead, the GOP should double down. Congressional Budget Office is biased, and often wrong The source for this fearmongering is the Congressional Budget Office. As the Foundation for Government Accountability shows in our new research, CBO staff consists largely of registered Democrats and the agency is often wrong in its projections. Washington elites and their media allies like to hold up the CBO as an all-seeing oracle. In theory, it's a nonpartisan federal agency inside Congress that accurately predicts how legislation will play out in the real world. In reality, CBO is overwhelmingly staffed by Democrats and its findings are less than trustworthy. We painstakingly analyzed the voter registration of every CBO employee. Our finding: A staggering 79% of CBO staff are Democrats. A mere 12% are Republicans. That's actually worse than senior bureaucrats at the most liberal federal agencies, including Housing and Urban Development, the State Department and Health and Human Services. And when you look at key CBO departments, the liberal bias is even more stark. The Health Analysis Division is 93% Democrat and zero Republican. That's the department now driving the news about the dangers of the Republican bill. In other words, CBO may well be the most liberal government outfit in all of Washington. And surprise, surprise: It does Democrats' bidding. Tell us: Republicans want massive cuts to Medicaid. What do you want? | Forum Opinion That fact should persuade Republicans to ignore CBO's analysis of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act. In May, CBO asserted that about 10 million people would lose their Medicaid coverage by 2034 if the bill passed. CBO blames Republican reforms like Medicaid work requirements, more frequent eligibility checks and the removal of illegal immigrants from Medicaid. But think about what's really happening. A group of Democratic bureaucrats are criticizing Republican efforts to roll back Democratic priorities. This isn't nonpartisan policy analysis. It's political damage control. CBO projections were wrong on 'Obamacare' And wouldn't you know: The leftist CBO is frequently wrong. The agency has a long history of underestimating the benefits of Republican policies like tax cuts and health care reforms. The CBO also routinely minimizes the damage of Democratic policies, especially the soaring cost of government expansions. In 2010, when the Affordable Care Act passed, the CBO said only 13 million able-bodied adults would be covered under the law's Medicaid expansion in all 50 states. But within a decade, 50% more able-bodied adults had jumped onto Medicaid, even though only two-thirds of states had expanded the program. Opinion: GOP must cut Medicaid now. Or risk debt crisis and devastating cuts later. CBO's error made "Obamacare" look more affordable than it is, and taxpayers have spent tens of billions of additional dollars on able-bodied adults who push vulnerable Americans and individuals with disabilities back in line. For more than a decade, CBO has been consistently wrong on Medicaid expansion's real-world impact, underestimating enrollment and the cost to taxpayers. But when CBO analyzed the Republican repeal of Obamacare's individual mandate in 2017, it overestimated how many people would lose coverage. It said 4 million people would lose private health coverage and Medicaid in the first two years alone. But by 2020, about 13 million people had gained coverage. CBO could hardly have been more wrong. And the agency is still in charge of making predictions. Now, the CBO is once again warning about massive coverage losses, and their media allies are dutifully repeating the assertion. But congressional Republicans should see through the charade. Case in point: CBO's predictions about the One Big Beautiful Bill Act include 1.6 million people enrolled in Medicaid in multiple states. They won't lose coverage in the state where they live, but CBO still counts them among those losing coverage. In addition, 200,000 'losses' are people who aren't even on Medicaid. CBO just assumes they'll join in the years ahead. GOP is doing the right thing with Medicaid The truth is that Republicans are doing what's right, morally and fiscally. They're requiring able-bodied adults to work as a condition of receiving Medicaid benefits. That will allow states to focus on Medicaid's intended recipients such as individuals with disabilities. Republicans are also removing ineligible people and illegal immigrants from Medicaid rolls. CBO makes it sound like those coverage losses are wrong, but what's really wrong is letting millions of people take advantage of taxpayers. Republicans are looking out for Americans − taxpayers, individuals with disabilities and future generations. The Congressional Budget Office, on the other hand, is looking out for the Democratic agenda of growing government at any cost. Republicans in the Senate should ignore the fearmongering and move forward with the One Big Beautiful Bill Act as soon as possible. Hayden Dublois is data and analytics director at the Foundation for Government Accountability, where Addison Scherler is a data investigator.
USA Today
31 minutes ago
- USA Today
'Elon is going to get decimated:' How Trump's feud with the world's richest man might end
'Elon is going to get decimated:' How Trump's feud with the world's richest man might end Show Caption Hide Caption President Trump gives his thoughts on Elon Musk amid clash on bill President Donald Trump responded to Elon Musk's criticism of his "big, beautiful bill" with disappointment as Musk responded on X. WASHINGTON — If history is any guide, and there is a lot of history, the explosive new falling out between President Donald Trump and Elon Musk is not going to end well for the former White House advisor and world's richest man. The political battlefield is littered with the scorched remains of some of Trump's previous allies who picked a fight with him or were on the receiving end of one. Lawyer Michael Cohen. Political advisor Steve Bannon. Attorney General Jeff Sessions, Defense Secretary James Mattis and Secretary of State Rex Tillerson. John Bolton, John Kelly and Chris Christie, to name just a few. 'If what happened to me is any indication of how they handle these matters, then Elon is going to get decimated,' said Cohen, the former long-term Trump lawyer and fixer who once said he'd 'take a bullet' for his boss. Musk, he said, "just doesn't understand how to fight this type of political guerilla warfare." 'They're going to take his money, they're going to shutter his businesses and they're going to either incarcerate or deport him,' Cohen said of what he thinks Musk will suffer at the hands of Trump and his administration. 'He's probably got the White House working overtime already, as we speak, figuring out how to close his whole damn thing down.' Cohen had perhaps the most spectacular blow up, until now, with Trump. He served time in prison after Trump threw him under the bus by denying any knowledge of pre-election payments Cohen made to a porn actress to keep her alleged tryst with Trump quiet before the 2016 election. More: President Trump threatens Elon Musk's billions in government contracts as alliance craters Cohen felt so betrayed by Trump that he titled his memoir 'Disloyal,' but the Trump administration tried to block its publication. Cohen ultimately fought back, becoming a star witness for the government in the state 'hush money' case and helped get Trump convicted by a Manhattan jury. Some suffered similar legal attacks and other slings and arrows, including Trump taunts and his trademark nasty nicknames. Trump vilified others, casting them into the political wilderness with his MAGA base. When Sessions recused himself from the Justice Department's investigation of Russian meddling in the 2016 election, Trump savaged him, calling his appointment a 'mistake' and lobbing other epithets. Sessions resigned under pressure in 2018. When he tried to resurrect his political career by running for his old Senate seat in Alabama, Trump endorsed his opponent, who won the GOP primary. After firing Tillerson, Trump called the former ExxonMobil chief lazy and 'dumb as a rock.' Trump still taunts Christie, an early supporter and 2016 transition chief, especially about his weight. Trump also had a falling out with Bannon, who was instrumental in delivering his presidential victory in 2016 and then joined the White House as special advisor. 'Steve Bannon has nothing to do with me or my Presidency,' Trump said in 2018, a year after Bannon's ouster from the White House. 'When he was fired, he not only lost his job, he lost his mind.' Trump's Justice Department even indicted Bannon in 2020 for fraud, though the President pardoned him before leaving office. One of Trump's biggest feuds was with Bolton, whom he fired as his national security advisor in 2019. Trump used every means possible to prevent his book, 'The Room Where it Happened,' from being published, Bolton told USA TODAY on Thursday. That included having the U.S. government sue his publisher on the false premise that Bolton violated a nondisclosure agreement and was leaking classified information, Bolton said. Bolton said Musk is unlike most others who have crossed swords with Trump in that he has unlimited amounts of money and control of a powerful social media platform in X to help shape the narrative. Musk also has billions in government contracts that even a vindictive Trump will have a hard time killing, as he threatened to do on Thursday, without significant legal challenges. Even so, Bolton said, "It's going to end up like most mud fights do, with both of them worse off. The question is how much worse the country is going to be off."
