Trump Is Already Obsessed With the Midterms
President Donald Trump delivers remarks in the Oval Office at the White House, on May 6, 2025. | Francis Chung/POLITICO
Rachael Bade is POLITICO's Capitol bureau chief and senior Washington columnist. She is a former co-author of POLITICO Playbook and co-author of "Unchecked: The Untold Story Behind Congress's Botched Impeachments of Donald Trump." Her reported column, Corridors, illuminates how power pulses through Washington, from Capitol Hill to the White House and beyond.
Early in Donald Trump's first term, the president received what he now views as bad advice: Don't worry about the midterms, some advisers whispered back then.
If Democrats won majorities in 2018, their thinking went, it would only help him politically — giving him a political foil down Pennsylvania Avenue and opportunity to triangulate in a gridlocked Washington ahead of a tough reelection — a la Bill Clinton.
That failed to pan out, spectacularly: Trump's agenda ground to a halt as he instead dealt with two years of nonstop investigations and a pair of impeachments. He lost to Joe Biden anyway.
This time, Trump is taking a different approach.
Not even three months into his second term, the president is already hyper-engaged in the fight to keep the GOP's majorities in Congress. Far from writing off the House or Senate, he's bullish about defying history and keeping Democrats away from committee gavels and subpoena powers, according to five Republicans I've spoken to, including several close Trump confidants.
He's rolling out early endorsements in hopes of forestalling messy primary fights that could divert precious resources from the general election campaigns. He's making recruitment calls and buttonholing other Republicans about how he can best use his political muscle. And he's continuing to raise boatloads of money to shell out in 2026.
Trump's midterm obsession is also hovering over Capitol Hill as GOP lawmakers try to write his sprawling domestic policy agenda into law. On issue after issue, Trump appears to sympathize with swing-district moderates — the 'majority makers' whose races will decide the majority.
Trump and his aides have pushed back on steep cuts to Medicaid in part because the politics stink. They've given a wide berth to blue-state Republicans who are pushing to raise the cap on the deduction for state and local taxes — a policy Trump signed in 2017 that helped sink him in suburban districts a year later.
He's even toyed with the idea of raising taxes on the wealthiest Americans — something he believes would parry Democrats' certain political attacks on a bill they say benefits the rich at the expense of the poor. (Faced with massive conservative backlash, Trump on Friday backed off, saying 'Republicans should probably not do it, but I'm OK if they do!!!)
'We think we can have four years,' one Trump adviser told me, summing up the attitude inside the presidential political shop. 'We reject the defeatist attitude of operating from the perspective that this is our only shot and we only got two years.'
Part of Trump's midterm infatuation is his love of the game — reading polls, making endorsements, playing kingmaker and otherwise moving pieces around on the political chess board. He ticks off his won-loss record in congressional races and loves to go deep on the details of his own campaigns.
But Trump is also deeply motivated by his desire to avoid suffering through dozens of new investigations and a third potential impeachment: 'He knows what happens if we lose the House,' added the adviser, noting that there's already several impeachment resolutions filed in the chamber.
Historically, of course, even the king of the political comeback would seem to have the odds stacked against him — particularly in the House, where parties in trifecta governments have tended to lose dozens of seats during the midterms of the modern era. Trump's GOP lost 40 in 2018.
'For some reason, the president — whoever the president is — the midterms are tough,' Trump himself mused at an NRCC dinner last month. 'Why would they be tough? If we're doing great, they should be easy.'
But there are in fact reasons for Trump to be optimistic: Predecessor Joe Biden managed to keep his own midterm bleeding to a relative minimum in 2022. The congressional battlefield has shrunk in recent years, leaving only a couple of dozen seats truly competitive in the eyes of most political analysts. And voter opinions of Trump might have slipped in recent months, but Democrats aren't gaining — in fact, their own voters are furious with the party.
Some of the early efforts Trump's political team have undertaken in coordination with the congressional campaign committees have fizzled. One GOP official told me Trump's political team told Rep. John James (R-Mich.) that the president wanted him to forgo a bid for governor and instead run for reelection in his swingy suburban Detroit seat. James didn't listen, and now Republicans have a costly open seat to defend.
Trump also made personal calls to onetime adversaries Chris Sununu and Brian Kemp in an effort to get the popular former GOP governors to run for Senate in New Hampshire and Georgia, respectively. Neither bit, though Trump's team remains closely engaged in vetting other alternatives for those key Democratic-held seats.
He might have more success in New York, where he intervened last week with a preemptive endorsement for GOP Rep. Mike Lawler, who has spent months telegraphing a potential challenge to Democratic Gov. Kathy Hochul. Trump's endorsement, coming after MAGA favorite Elise Stefanik announced her own gubernatorial explorations, was meant to send a clear signal: We want you to defend your precious House seat instead.
Trump on Thursday rolled out a host of additional primary endorsements, backing several vulnerable Republicans in swing seats — even some he's not particularly close with — in a bid to ward off would-be primary challengers. Last cycle, for instance, Illinois Rep. Mike Bost faced a tough GOP primary — winning a Trump endorsement only after he'd been forced to burn cash to ward off a far-right challenger.
On Thursday, roughly 18 months from the general election, the president threw his support behind Bost, effectively shutting down a potential primary.
'This makes sure they can focus on their general from now on — not wasting money fending off a primary,' one GOP political operative texted me. 'Big win.'
Republicans are hoping that Trump decides to do much the same in the Senate — with a major effort underway to convince him to back Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas), who is facing a fearsome primary challenge from Attorney General Ken Paxton.
But the GOP has a bigger advantage in the Senate, and so far Trump, who is close with Paxton, has remained on the sidelines — though one prominent member of his operation has not: Trump consultant Tony Fabrizio is now polling for Team Cornyn, POLITICO reported this week.
Something else has changed for Trump since his first term: his willingness to play team ball. In 2018 and 2020, Hill Republicans privately griped to me that he was stockpiling cash and fundraising resources for his own reelection and not doing enough to help the rest of the party.
Kevin McCarthy, then serving as House minority leader, went so far as to beg Trump's son-in-law Jared Kushner, who was controlling the political pursestrings, for help. It didn't materialize.
But now that Trump is free from the burden of reelection (something he finally admitted this week), he's ready to pile his massive resources into the party. Trump-related committees are expecting to have as much as a half-billion dollars in their collective war chests by this summer, and two Trump allies said the president plans to be generous.
'I'll put it like this: It's not like he's directing people to just give to his presidential library, you know what I mean?' one of them said. 'He's not doing that. I don't think he would be actively fundraising into the political entities the way he is unless he planned on playing in the midterms.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
6 minutes ago
- Yahoo
CartCon 2025: Tariffs, turbulence and the future of resilient retail
At second-annual CartCon conference in Napa Valley, CA, the tone was electric with anticipation but also laced with urgency. Billed as a summit for the company's expansive ecosystem of brands, vendors and strategists, the event served as both a product showcase and a pressure valve. Nowhere was that tension more visible than during one of the conference's hardest-hitting panels, a deep dive into the complexities of tariff policy and its ripple effects on global sourcing, consumer pricing and retail resilience. The panel consisted of three voices with rare insight into the collision of policy and commerce: Chris Smith, president of Summit Global Strategies; Tim Manning, former White House supply chain coordinator under President Joe Biden; and Nick Stachel, logistics strategy adviser at Izba Consulting. What followed was not a high-level overview, but a granular exploration of the legal, political and operational forces shaping how, and where, products are made, moved and sold. From globalization to geo-economics Smith opened the discussion by tracing the historical arc of U.S. trade policy. For decades following World War II, American trade strategy revolved around multilateralism. The U.S. saw global trade not just as an economic imperative but as a geopolitical tool, creating allies, raising standards of living and preventing conflict. But in 2016, that long-standing consensus fractured. The bipartisan abandonment of the Trans-Pacific Partnership signaled a sharp pivot. As Smith explained, the political center collapsed under the weight of the 'China Shock,' a term describing the decimation of American manufacturing towns due to offshoring. Smith described President Donald Trump's tariff policy as a psychological reset. Before Trump, U.S. tariffs averaged around 2%. Within months, they jumped to 18% in key categories. This wasn't just an economic strategy, it was anchoring. 'It's like burger sizes,' Smith said, relating back to Wendy's psychological marketing strategies. 'Before Trump, we had singles and doubles. Now the triple is on the menu, and everything else looks small by comparison.' Tariffs, he added, have become Trump's 'cat toy' — a provocative distraction wielded without consistent strategy. Even if future administrations soften tariff policy, Smith warned, the structure of global trade has already shifted. Retailers and manufacturers alike are building permanent workarounds. Inflation, particularly in consumer goods, is the slow-burning consequence. While Smith provided the philosophical backdrop, Manning broke down the legal tools underpinning today's tariff landscape. The real disruption, Manning emphasized, has come through the use, and misuse, of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA). Originally designed as a tool for national security sanctions, IEEPA has been repurposed by the Trump administration to enact sweeping tariffs with little congressional oversight. Manning described the legal and logistical chaos for businesses from these tactics. In just six weeks, the Trump administration issued 17 executive orders using IEEPA authority, stripping trade policy of its usual predictability and process. For businesses, this has been catastrophic. Sourcing strategies built over years have unraveled in days. 'We're in a volatile environment,' Manning said. The cost of doing business now includes factoring in the potential for abrupt, unexplained swings in tariff exposure. Long-term investments have become high-risk bets, and in many cases, they're simply not being made. On-the-ground retail strategy Bringing the policy talk down to the warehouse floor, Stachel outlined how brands are actually coping with this new reality. In the short term, some are fast-tracking inventory from China before new tariffs hit, relying on expedited ocean freight and cross-docking at West Coast ports to minimize delays and avoid customs bottlenecks. Others are making subtler moves — like holding prices steady on high-visibility products – say, a gaming console – while raising prices on accessories and add-ons to recoup margin. Stachel noted that many brands have moved beyond the now-familiar 'China Plus One' strategy, opting instead for a 'China Plus Three' approach. They are spreading risk across Vietnam, India and Mexico, often working with global manufacturing giants like Foxconn that can seamlessly shift production across borders without retooling or retraining labor. In essence, brands are outsourcing flexibility itself. For those planning beyond the current election cycle, geographic diversification is no longer enough. Brands are factoring in port access, transportation infrastructure, exposure to natural disasters and local workforce stability. Some are eyeing countries like Morocco, Colombia and Thailand as next-generation sourcing hubs. Nearshoring to Mexico has particular appeal, not just because of its proximity to U.S. consumers, but because of the downstream economic benefits. 'We're still benefiting from a cross border perspective, from a transportation trucking perspective, from a warehousing perspective, as these border towns are growing, the economies in the small border towns are growing as well,' said Stachel. These sourcing shifts are backed by hard data prepared by Stachel. According to a comparative analysis of emerging manufacturing markets, countries like Vietnam, Indonesia and the Philippines are increasingly viable alternatives to China, not only in terms of labor costs but also port infrastructure and U.S.-bound vessel frequency. Vietnam, for instance, operates nearly 50 seaports, including Ho Chi Minh City and Hai Phong, both of which have multiple sailings to the U.S. each week. Indonesia boasts over 100 ports, including Tanjung Priok in Jakarta. Even Cambodia, though limited in scale, has weekly direct sailings from both Phnom Penh and Sihanoukville. These figures underscore the importance of transportation fluidity and market access in sourcing decisions. As Stachel emphasized, brands are no longer optimizing solely for cost, they're optimizing for resilience. Both Smith and Manning cautioned that the real reckoning may be ahead. While tariff impacts are already being priced in at the retail level, the broader inflationary wave has yet to crest. Smith called inflation the 'other shoe,' likely to drop later this summer as new tariffs pass through the supply chain and collide with already fragile consumer sentiment. Uncertainty, they agreed, has become the greatest tax of all. With businesses unable to predict future policy, many are frozen. Manning advised attendees to monitor key macroeconomic signals, including treasury bond activity, consumer confidence indices and safety stock drawdowns. Executive orders posted on he added, are the best early indicators of a sudden policy shift. What retailers are saying – and doing The audience at CartCon also offered candid perspectives. Through real-time polling, attendees offered a rare window into how brands are navigating the chaos. Asked what recent policy had most affected their supply chains, 68% cited China tariffs, with an additional 24% naming de minimis enforcement, or stricter checks on duty-free, low-value imports. In a sign of just how volatile the environment has become, 64% said they revisit their sourcing strategies quarterly. And nearly half, 47%, have responded by raising prices. Twenty-nine percent have changed sourcing countries, while 18% are simply eating the cost. Looking ahead, most brands aren't betting on reshoring. Asked if they expect to source more from the U.S. in five years, 70% said their sourcing would remain about the same, and 30% expected an increase. No one expected to source less. It was a striking rebuke of the idea that domestic manufacturing is due for a renaissance, at least for the retail segment. Tariffs and uncertainty are already impacting consumer demand. Thirty percent of respondents said they expect a consumer slowdown by Q4 2025, while 45% said they're already feeling one. And yet, the vast majority, 82%, said they are not cutting marketing budgets in response. In today's environment, visibility is survival. In a forward-looking poll, 81% of respondents said online shopping will be the dominant channel in the next decade, compared to just 6% for stores. Even more striking, 75% believe direct-to-consumer models can still succeed, suggesting that agility, not abandonment, is the key to survival. The post CartCon 2025: Tariffs, turbulence and the future of resilient retail appeared first on FreightWaves. 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
American Military News
7 minutes ago
- American Military News
700 Marines deployed to Los Angeles amid major riots
President Donald Trump's administration deployed 700 Marines to Los Angeles and the surrounding area on Monday in response to the city's massive riots against U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) operations. In a Monday press release, U.S. Northern Command announced that it had activated the Marine infantry battalion that the Trump administration 'placed in an alert status over the weekend.' 'Approximately 700 Marines with 2nd Battalion, 7th Marines, 1st Marine Division will seamlessly integrate with the Title 10 forces under Task Force 51 who are protecting federal personnel and federal property in the greater Los Angeles area,' U.S. Northern Command stated. 'The activation of the Marines is intended to provide Task Force 51 with adequate numbers of forces to provide continuous coverage of the area in support of the lead federal agency.' According to the press release, Task Force 51 includes 700 active-duty Marines and roughly 2,100 National Guardsmen in Title 10 status. Northern Command noted that members of Task Force 51 have been trained in 'de-escalation, crowd control, and standing rules for the use of force.' 'Due to increased threats to federal law enforcement officers and federal buildings, approximately 700 active-duty U.S. Marines from Camp Pendleton are being deployed to Los Angeles to restore order,' Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth wrote in a statement on X, formerly Twitter. 'We have an obligation to defend federal law enforcement officers – even if Gavin Newsom will not.' READ MORE: Videos: 500 Marines ready to deploy to Los Angeles amid major riots Northern Command confirmed in the press release that there were roughly 1,700 soldiers from the 79th Infantry Brigade Combat Team in Los Angeles and the surrounding area as of Monday. On Monday evening, Assistant to the Secretary of Defense for Public Affairs Sean Parnell tweeted, 'At the order of the President, the Department of Defense is mobilizing an additional 2,000 California National Guard to be called into federal service to support ICE & to enable federal law-enforcement officers to safely conduct their duties.' According to The Associated Press, Trump's authorization for the Department of Defense to deploy an additional 2,000 National Guardsmen in response to the anti-ICE riots in Los Angeles brings the total number of National Guardsmen mobilized by the federal government in response to the riots to over 4,100. In a Tuesday morning statement on Truth Social, Trump said, 'If I didn't 'SEND IN THE TROOPS' to Los Angeles the last three nights, that once beautiful and great City would be burning to the ground right now, much like 25,000 houses burned to the ground in L.A. do to an incompetent Governor and Mayor.'
The Hill
11 minutes ago
- The Hill
Trump's $1,000-per-baby investment accounts: What to know
President Trump has lauded the House-approved spending bill for the 'pro-family initiative' tucked inside the legislation, which creates investment accounts for newborn babies. 'They'll really be getting a big jump on life, especially if we get a little bit lucky with some of the numbers and the economy,' Trump said at a Monday event at the White House that touted the accounts. The 'Big, Beautiful Bill' lays out rules for the Trump accounts. To qualify, a child must be a U.S. citizen, born within the next four years to at least one parent with a Social Security number. The money could be withdrawn starting at age 18. Here's what you need to know about the proposed federal program: Under the current bill text, the program would be available to families of all income levels, with babies born after Dec. 31, 2024, and before Jan. 1, 2029. A one-time $1,000 contribution would be provided by the Treasury Department and deposited into a diversified U.S. stock index fund or its equivalent. Families, guardians and private entities will be able to contribute no more than $5,000 per year to the account. An estimated 7 percent return on the $1,000 would compound to roughly $3,570 over 18 years, according to the Associated Press. The legislation does not provide a limit on the amount of money a nonprofit or company can donate to a child's investment account within the $5,000 annual contribution limit. Several businesses, including Uber, Dell, Goldman Sachs and Altimeter have committed to setting aside billions to invest in the accounts of company employees who become new parents. 'It's not just an account; it's a launchpad. It puts the unstoppable engine of compounding to work for our kids, building a future for them from day one,' Uber CEO Dara Khosrowshahi said about the initiative during a White House roundtable. Children enrolled in the investment program are eligible to withdraw half of the cash value amount between their 18th and 25th birthdays, according to CNN. Families and beneficiaries would pay a penalty for early withdrawal as there is no allowance for emergency use of the funds, the outlet reported. Funds withdrawn for anything other than 'qualified expenses,' including paying for higher education, buying a residence or starting a business, will be taxed. Researchers have said the investment accounts could widen America's wealth gap. 'Under the current proposal, every child starts with the same amount, and families can contribute up to $5,000 annually,' the Urban Institute, a think-tank focused on social policy, wrote in a late May report. 'But relatively few households hold substantial liquid wealth in the United States, meaning higher-income households are far more likely than their lower-income counterparts to have the means to contribute additional funds,' it continued. The study noted that Trump accounts are likely to only benefit those who have already maxed out existing tax-preferred savings opportunities, like 529 accounts. Instead, they suggested low income families with job insecurity are more likely to gravitate towards investing in traditional accounts that offer flexible guidelines. Trump's 'One Big, Beautiful Bill' still needs approval from the upper chamber. Senators considering potential changes or cuts to the legislation, hoping to pass the bill before July 4.
