Gov. Bruce Rauner (R) barely hung on against an upstart conservative challenger in Tuesday’s primary, an ominous sign for the embattled governor as he turns to an uphill race for reelection.
Rauner edged out Illinois state Rep. Jeanne Ives (R) by just 52 percent to 48 percent with more than 90 percent of precincts counted in a race few thought would be competitive until its final days. The Associated Press has called the race.
Those results set off alarm bells in Illinois GOP circles, as Rauner already trails his Democratic challenger, billionaire businessman J.B. Pritzker, by double digits in public polls. Pritzker easily won his own primary.
“Tomorrow’s a new day and a win is a win. But it’s obvious the governor has a little work to do to put his party back together — all while fighting J.B. Pritzker,” said former Rauner strategist Lance Trover. “He’s got a heavy lift ahead. He’s in a Democratic-leaning state with an anti-incumbent mood hitting the nation.”
To have any shot in the general election, Rauner, who didn’t seem to realize he was in a real primary fight until weeks ago, will somehow need to woo back the conservative voters who rejected him Tuesday after he signed legislation to expand abortion access and protect undocumented immigrants in the state.
But he also needs to dramatically improve his standing with moderates in Chicago’s suburbs, who fueled his narrow win four years ago. Doing both at once is easier said than done. Rauner recently vetoed a gun control bill in an effort to solidify his standing within the GOP, infuriating many suburban moderates. And his constant fiscal battles with statehouse Democrats seem to be wearing on many swing voters who gave him a chance to shake up the struggling state four years ago.
Rauner himself seemed to acknowledge the obstacles in a less-than-victorious victory speech, imploring conservatives to rally to his side.
“To those around the state of Illinois who wanted to send me a message, let me be clear,” Rauner said. “I have heard you. I have traveled the state and I have listened to you. While we disagree on some things, let’s commit to working together on what unites us — the reforms we need to save our state.”
Even Rauner’s biggest political asset from his last race may not be much help heading into the fall. The multi-millionaire spent about $65 million to win his last race in 2014, heavily outspending his opponents in the race, and has dropped tens of millions more already in this contest. But Pritzker’s cash dwarfs Rauner’s, and the billionaire Democrat, who already spent close to $70 million to win his primary, is almost certain to have the edge in campaign spending in what observers say will likely be the most expensive statewide race in U.S. history.
“I’m not going to let Donald Trump have an inch of Illinois. And I will take every inch of Illinois back from Bruce Rauner,” Pritzker declared in his victory speech, taking aim at two lawmakers who are unpopular in the state.
And Ives wasn’t conciliatory as she conceded, calling him “the worst Republican governor in America.”
It appears for now that Rauner is the most endangered governor running for reelection in the country.
Billionaire businessman J.B. Pritzker (D) has won the nomination to be the Democratic candidate for Illinois governor this fall. But two top lawmakers in the state are clinging to narrow leads in their primaries after committing apostasies against their parties’ base voters — including the sitting governor that everyone thought would be Pritzker’s opponent.
Gov. Bruce Rauner (R) is sweating out a surprisingly strong right-wing challenge from state Rep. Jeanne Ives (R) fueled by conservative anger over his support for bills expanding abortion access and protecting undocumented immigrants in the state. It looks like Rauner will hang on, but, with nearly two thirds of the vote counted, he had just a four-point lead over Ives. That’s a major alarm bell for his ability to win the general election: He’ll somehow need to unite his base while winning back moderates in a blue state where his poll numbers with independent voters are in the toilet.
Rep. Dan Lipinski (D-IL) has the same problem in reverse: He is stridently opposed to abortion, voted against Obamacare and splits from his party on some gay rights and immigration issues. Those positions have left him vulnerable on the left, and he’s in a dogfight to hang on to his seat in the face of a challenge from former advertising executive Marie Newman. Lipinski clings to a slim two-point lead with 87 percent of precincts reporting.
Former Chicago mayoral candidate Chuy Garcia has won nomination to replace retiring Rep. Luis Gutierrez (D-IL) in a safely Democratic district, and highly touted Democratic recruit Brendan Kelly has won his primary to face Rep. Mike Bost (R-IL) this fall.
Democrats are also naming challengers to Reps. Peter Roskam (R-IL), Rodney Davis (R-IL) and Randy Hultgren (R-IL), and EMILY’s List-backed Lauren Underwood and Betsy Dirksen Londrigan have comfortable leads in those races, though they haven’t been called as of 10:15 p.m.
Stay tuned for more election results as they role in.
Illinois Gov. Bruce Rauner (R) has known for months that he’d be in for a tough race in 2018. He just didn’t expect it to happen in the primary.
Rauner has suddenly found himself in a dogfight with hardline conservative Illinois state Rep. Jeanne Ives (R), who has risen from gadfly status to become a potentially serious threat to his reelection by attacking his moderate social positions in the GOP primary. The race has emerged as a late-breaking test for Rauner, topping the list of key primary races in the state (more on the rest below).
After months of concentrating his fire on his likely Democratic opponents, the deep-pocketed governor has suddenly shifted all of his TV spending to push himself through the primary. And he rushed to veto a gun control bill last week, a move that surprised many given his years-long efforts to not antagonize moderate suburban voters on social issues — and given polling that shows him trailing by double digits any of the Democrats who might win their party’s nomination on Tuesday.
All of those moves suggest a suddenly nervous candidate. And while strategists in both parties think he’ll likely hang on to win on Tuesday, some aren’t completely foreclosing the possibility that Ives could pull off a shocker.
“It appears this election is going to be a lot closer than anyone thought it would be — especially the governor,” former Rauner adviser Lance Trover told TPM on Monday.
Social conservatives are furious with Rauner, largely because of his decision to sign into law legislation expanding abortion access and protecting undocumented immigrants in the state late last year. The laws drove many hardliners to Ives — including megadonor Richard Uihlein, a one-time Rauner supporter who kicked her campaign $2.5 million for campaign ads.
Ives has used some of that money to run controversial ads that critics have called racist and homophobic — but that may just help her with the state’s small but committed activist GOP base.
The Democratic Governors Association smells blood as well. The group launched a last-minute $500,000 campaign with a pair of spots attacking Rauner’s economic record while labeling Ives as “too conservative,” highlighting her strident pro-life, pro-gun and hardline immigration views. The Democrats’ move is designed to boost Ives’ appeal with the state’s GOP base, much like Sen. Claire McCaskill’s (D-MO) campaign did in 2012 with last-minute ads that fueled Rep. Todd Akin’s (R-MO) primary win.
Rauner is promising wins in both Tuesday’s primary and the general election: “Let me be clear, we aren’t going to lose,” he said at a press conference Monday. But those around him aren’t feeling great about how the primary has moved since January, and are concerned that even if he wins he’ll have to spend a good amount of time mending fences with conservatives in the state, much like what Ed Gillespie attempted to do after a surprisingly close primary en route to his general election loss in Virginia’s gubernatorial race last fall. That’s not a great place to be in the Democratic-leaning state in a Democratic-leaning year, as he already trails in the polls.
“It’ll obviously be closer than Bruce would like to see,” one Rauner ally told TPM, predicting Rauner would win the primary. “But after the Trump election in ’16, anything can happen.”
His race tops the list of key primary results to watch out for in Illinois Tuesday — but is far from the only important contest as liberals and Democrats look to solidify their grip on the blue state.
Here’s what else to watch for:
Which Democrat will emerge against Rauner?
The Republican governor is one of the wealthiest politicians in America — but his cash pales in comparison to the man he’s most likely to face this fall, setting up a race many predict will be the most expensive statewide contest in U.S. history.
Billionaire J.B. Pritzker has saturated the airwaves with ads in his three-way primary against Chris Kennedy, the son of Robert F. Kennedy and a millionaire in his own right, and Illinois state Sen. Daniel Biss. And while Pritzker has some baggage — most notably his ties to disgraced former Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich (D) — he appears to be in the driver’s seat heading into Tuesday’s primary.
Pritzker has won the support of most of Illinois’ Democratic power brokers, and strategists say he’s surprisingly good on the stump. The handful of public polls available have him holding a double-digit lead in the primary after giving himself $63 million to date for the campaign.
Will one of Congress’s most conservative Democrats lose on Tuesday?
Rep. Dan Lipinski (D-IL) has made a career of antagonizing his own party’s leaders, and is facing the toughest primary of his seven-term congressional career from former advertising executive Marie Newman.
Newman has gotten a huge boost from national Democratic groups including NARAL Pro-Choice America, EMILY’s List and the Human Rights Campaign, and backing from the Service Employees International Union, whose ground game efforts could help neutralize Lipinski’s strong field operation, support from the Chicago Democratic machine and the AFL-CIO. Newman has had the momentum, and those watching the race say it could go either way.
Who will Democrats nominate to face top GOP congressional targets?
Democrats have crowded primaries for the right to face three of their four congressional targets in Illinois.
More than a half-dozen candidates are vying to be the nominee against Rep. Peter Roskam (R-IL) in Chicago’s western suburbs, a district that had been drawn as safely Republican but Hillary Clinton won last fall. Strategists say the front-runners are Kelly Mazeski (D), a local elected official who has the backing of EMILY’s List, clean energy entrepreneur Sean Casten, and former congressional chief of staff Carole Cheney.
A number of Democrats are also squaring off for the right to face Rep. Rodney Davis (R-IL) in a GOP-leaning downstate district, though most think Betsy Londrigan will be the nominee. A number more are running to face Rep. Randy Hultgren (R-IL) in a GOP-leaning district in exurban Chicago, where EMILY’s List-backed nurse and former Obama appointee Lauren Underwood and local mayor Matt Brolley (D) lead the pack.
Highly touted Democratic recruit Brendan Kelly, a prosecutor and Navy veteran, is expected to win his primary as he prepares to face Rep. Mike Bost (R-IL) in a GOP-leaning southern Illinois district.
Two State Department officials involved in an effort to sideline a civil servant suspected of disloyalty to the President also oversee an internal communications channel that allows department employees to question the administration’s policy decisions.
The two officials’ management of the channel likely gives them access to the names of U.S. diplomats and other agency employees who openly disagree with administration policy — information that independent watchdogs and members of Congress fear could be used in the effort to marginalize those deemed insufficiently loyal.
A trove of e-mails obtained by House Democrats reveal efforts by top State Department officials — working hand in hand with the White House, outside conservatives and right-wing media — to sideline and demote career civil servants who are seen as disloyal to President Trump.
The report on the emails set off alarm bells across Washington, D.C. and prompted Democrats on the House Oversight Committee to demand that the State Department hand over records of internal communications on the issue. Department officials have reportedly labeled certain career staffers “troublemaker,” “turncoat” and “Obama/Clinton loyalist” because of their work for past administrations.
But independent watchdog groups tracking the issue tell TPM the problem is not confined to the State Department, citing similar acts of retaliation against career staffers throughout the government.
“I think we’re seeing a pattern across a number of agencies,” Nick Schwellenbach, the Director of Investigations at the Project On Government Oversight, told TPM. “Top political leadership is working to root out people they view as insufficiently loyal to Trump’s agenda. It’s extremely troubling, because federal government employees’ loyalty should be to the Constitution, not to the political masters of the moment.”
One of the most conservative Democrats in Congress may lose his primary on Tuesday.
Rep. Dan Lipinski (D-IL) spent much of his career antagonizing his own party as an outspoken pro-life advocate who has been hostile to gay rights and has voted against Democratic priorities from the DREAM Act to Obamacare to Planned Parenthood funding. After more than a decade representing a safely Democratic seat stretching from Chicago’s Southwest Side out to largely working-class suburbs, he’s facing the toughest primary challenge of his career from former ad executive Marie Newman, a staunch liberal whose campaign has gotten a major boost from a constellation of national progressive groups seeking his ouster.
Democrats who have closely monitored the election say it could go either way, but that she has the momentum in a year where the liberal base is furious and activated and being a centrist in a safely Democratic district isn’t exactly a selling point.
“Dan Lipinski has walked away from the Democratic values that we all hold dear, particularly that relate to women and women’s health care. This is not the time for someone who’s going to champion anti-women’s positions and anti-LGBTQ positions,” EMILY’s List President Stephanie Schriock told TPM during a Thursday conference call. “We think she’s going to pull this out on Tuesday.”
Besides the pro-choice EMILY’s List and NARAL Pro-Choice America, Newman also has support from the pro-LGBTQ Human Rights Campaign and the Service Employees International Union. The groups have spent more than $1 million to back her campaign. She also has endorsements from Sens. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY) and Bernie Sanders (I-VT), as well as Reps. Luis Gutierrez (D-IL) and Jan Schakowsky (D-IL), who has dispatched a top staffer to aid Newman’s campaign. Some top local Democrats, like Cook County Board President Toni Preckwinkle (D), have gotten on board as well.
Lipinski, allies say, was caught a bit flat-footed by the challenge. He told TPM a few weeks ago that he wasn’t sure “why anyone believes this is going to be a close race to begin with.” He was slow to launch TV ads slamming Newman, allowing her and her allies weeks to themselves to define the race. That allowed Newman to raise her once-nonexistent name ID and drill him for his regular breaks with his party, not an easy feat in Chicago’s expensive media market especially since it’s been saturated with heavy campaign spending from the billionaires running for Illinois governor.
A Lipinski poll taken early in the race found him with a 30-point lead; a recent survey from NARAL found Newman within two points.
“I don’t think he realized what a fight he’d be in, and the dynamic didn’t change until the SEIU and progressive groups flipped the switch and started spending,” one Chicago Democratic strategist whose job precludes them from talking on-record told TPM.
But those following the race say not to count Lipinski out just yet. He has close ties with Chicago’s still-powerful Democratic machine and its head, state party chairman and state House Speaker Mike Madigan (D). The well-organized building trade unions are firmly behind him as well, after a decades-long relationship with him and his father, former Rep. Bill Lipinski (D-IL), who installed his son in his old seat when he retired in 2004. Lipinski and Madigan made sure the current incarnation of the district had as many blue-collar white ethnic Democrats as possible in the last round of redistricting in an effort to boost his standing.
There’s no love lost between the Lipinski and Newman. Lipinski, a co-chairman of the fiscally moderate Democratic Blue Dog Coalition, regularly dismisses Newman as part of the “Tea Party of the left” in interviews, while Newman attacked him as a “full-on Republican” who is “anti-immigrant” and “on a mission against women” in a Thursday conference call with EMILY’s List.
The winner of the Democratic primary will be a lock in the general election — Hillary Clinton carried the district by 15 points and Republicans are set to nominate an actual neo-Nazi that party leaders have disavowed after failing to recruit a real candidate.
Lipinski has gotten his own cavalry in the race. The centrist group No Labels has spent close to $1 million on TV and mail pieces through a number of new super-PACs largely financed by Chicago Bulls and White Sox owner Jerry Reinsdorf, an old friend of Lipinski’s father.
But one of its attacks may end up backfiring on Lipinski. The group sent a mailer contrasting Newman to President Obama, saying he was “known for leading” while she was “known for misleading.” That incensed some of Obama’s top deputies, who were quick to point out that Lipinski not only voted against Obamacare, he publicly refused to endorse Obama in his 2012 reelection campaign. Former top Obama adviser David Axelrod lit into him on Twitter, then held a press conference with former advisers to attack Lipinski as a hypocrite.
In fact, Lipinski was one of the few Democrats who voted against the Affordable Care Act, which makes the Obama mailer even more galling.
He also got a last-minute boost from the anti-abortion Susan B. Anthony List, which is spending a small amount and sending canvassers to knock on 17,000 doors to turn out the district’s pro-life (largely Catholic) voters.
“Dan Lipinski is one of the few remaining pro-life Democrats in Congress, and he has shown extraordinary courage,” SBA List President Marjorie Dannenfelser said in a Thursday statement. “He stood firm against Obamacare’s expansion of taxpayer-funded abortion under intense pressure from party leaders to give in. Now Lipinski is under attack for his pro-life convictions again, with a primary challenger backed by the radical abortion lobby. That’s why SBA List is going all in for Lipinski.”
Lipinski’s campaign didn’t respond to multiple calls and emails to discuss the race.
Lipinski’s side has had the edge in recent spending and, though the SEIU is all-in for Newman with its ground game, his field operation has proven formidable in the past.
“It’s going to be tough, but I think he’s going to win,” said one Lipinski ally who’s helped on the race.
But others aren’t so sure, arguing her message has been a much more potent one in the current political climate.
“Her messaging on choice and gay rights is a lot stronger than his attacks on her business and working with felons,” said the Chicago-based Democratic strategist. “It’s looking like a coin flip here.”
Michael Avenatti, the lawyer representing porn actress Stephanie Clifford in her lawsuit against President Donald Trump, told TPM’s “Josh Marshall Podcast” on Friday that both he and Clifford, who uses the stage name Stormy Daniels, fear for their physical safety.
Avenatti told MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” earlier Friday morning that Clifford has been “physically threatened,” but he emphasized to TPM later on Friday that he and his client are taking at least some of those threats seriously.
“I think she’s very concerned about her physical safety right now, and I think she has very — or a lot of reasons to be concerned. I likewise am slightly concerned about my physical safety,” Avenatti told TPM’s Josh Marshall. “There’s been a series of death threats that have been received by her and me. There’s a lot of kooky people out there. Many of those threats we laugh off, some of which we don’t laugh off. But regardless of the death threats, or threats of injury to us or our families, we’re not going home. We’re not packing up.”
Avenatti would not go into detail on the nature of the threats when Marshall followed up to ask whether any of the threats appeared to be credible. However, Avenatti said that the intimidation Clifford has faced should be addressed in her upcoming “60 Minutes” interview, set to air March 25, and he indicated that he believes viewers will find the threats serious.
“I think when the interview airs, people are going to hear in detail what happened, and they’re going to judge for themselves as to whether that was some kook, if you will, some wing-nut, that just happened to come out of the blue, or if it was more than that. And I think they’re going to conclude it was certainly more than that,” he said.
Later in the interview, Marshall asked if “surrogates” of President Donald Trump have bullied Clifford or spread false narratives about Clifford.
Avenatti replied that Trump allies have done “both,” but would not indicate who the individuals were or how closely connected they are to the President.
Republican Danny Tarkanian has agreed to drop his primary against Sen. Dean Heller (R-NV) and instead run for the House after getting a public shove from President Trump on Friday to do so, boosting Heller’s chances of reelection in the Democratic-leaning state.
Tarkanian announced he’d undertake another House run (he’s lost two previous bids for the House and six different campaigns in the state) almost immediately after Trump tweeted that he should do so and leave Heller alone, saying he’d done so because Trump asked him Wednesday night.
“I am confident I would have won the US Senate race and done a great job representing the people of Nevada in the Senate, but the president is adamant that a unified Republican ticket in Nevada is the best direction for the America First movement,” Tarkanian said in a statement.
His decision eliminates Heller’s primary rival and may give the senator some more wiggle room as he looks to burnish his moderate bona fides ahead of what looks like a very tough reelection fight against Rep. Jacky Rosen (D-NV) that has been made harder by Heller’s bear-hugging the president to block Tarkanian.
“It would be great for the Republican Party of Nevada, and it’s [sic.] unity if good guy Danny Tarkanian would run for Congress and Dean Heller, who is doing a really good job, could run for Senate unopposed!” Trump tweeted Friday afternoon.
It would be great for the Republican Party of Nevada, and it’s unity if good guy Danny Tarkanian would run for Congress and Dean Heller, who is doing a really good job, could run for Senate unopposed!
The tweet comes after Trump has privately said he’d campaign for Heller, who has become a loyal foot soldier for the president ever since he won in 2016.
Heller faces a brutal reelection campaign against Rep. Jacky Rosen (D-NV), and Tarkanian had forced him into being a loyal foot soldier by running a campaign mostly focused on bashing Heller for not backing Trump enough. Trump’s public shove of Tarkanian may be the biggest help he’s done the GOP establishment since becoming president.
But while avoiding a primary is a godsend for Heller, Trump’s seal of approval is unlikely to help in the general election in a state he narrowly lost in 2016, has large and fast-growing populations of Hispanics and Asian Americans. According to Gallup, Trump’s approval rating in the state is in line with his national average over the past year, at slightly above 40 percent.
The Reno Gazette-Journal first reported Tarkanian’s change of heart.
Amid the wrangling over the budget omnibus that must pass Congress by the end of next week to avoid a government shutdown, lawmakers are locked in a heated debate about whether to prop up or further chip away at Obamacare’s individual market.
Dueling proposals recently introduced in the Senate take aim specifically at the question of cheap, deregulated, short-term health insurance plans, which are expected to lure younger and healthier people out of the ACA market and drive up premiums for those who remain.
A Democratic bill would sharply limit those short-term plans and force them to adopt Obamacare’s protections for people with pre-existing conditions. But a Republican effort, supported by the White House, wants to go in the opposite direction. It seeks to extend the length of short-term plans and make them renewable, essentially making the short-term plans indistinguishable from regular insurance plans and creating a entire shadow health care market free from the ACA’s rules and regulations.
House Speaker Paul Ryan (R-WI) and other Republicans are downplaying their shocking loss in a deep-red Pennsylvania House district while insisting they continue to see their tax overhaul as a major winning message next fall. But their closing ads in the race — and others — suggest they’re a lot more likely to revert to culture war issues to try to save the House and win other tough races this fall.
Ryan urged his colleagues to keep selling tax reform on the campaign trail in a closed-door meeting Wednesday after their disastrous apparent loss in a heavily Republican Pennsylvania House district (there will likely be a recount), while waving off the race’s result as a fight between “two conservatives” that wouldn’t be replicated elsewhere and ignoring Democrat Conor Lamb’s attacks on the tax plan.
The Congressional Leadership Fund, the GOP’s main House super-PAC, spent millions on ads blasting Lamb for opposing the tax plan early on in the race. But the group and the National Republican Congressional Committee moved on from those ads in the race’s final weeks as Lamb gained steam, pivoting to attacks on hot-button social issues like immigration and sanctuary cities, like this one:
That follows a pattern displayed in nearly every other election over the past year: When Republicans actually bet big on closing campaign ads they keep reverting to the culture wars to try to rev up their listless base.
Republicans followed a similar playbook in the special election to fill Montana’s sole House seat last year, hammering the Democratic candidate for wanting to “grab your guns” while touting the National Rifle Association’s support for now-Rep. Greg Gianforte (R-MT). While they did that, Gianforte refused to say where he was on Obamacare repeal – and even attacked a reporter who dared push him on the issue.
While few GOP groups were on the air for Roy Moore at the end, the pro-Trump super-PAC running ads on his behalf hammered now-Sen. Doug Jones (D-AL) for his pro-choice views.
That strategy has held true even in more suburban territory, most notably in Virginia’s gubernatorial election last year. Ed Gillespie, once a paragon of big-tent conservatism and advocate of immigration reform, pivoted from early ads talking about tax cuts to brutal spots focused on MS-13 and sanctuary cities.
Republicans took a slightly different approach in the tony Atlanta suburbs to get now-Rep. Karen Handel (R-GA) across the finish line, attacking Democrat Jon Ossoff as a tax-and-spend liberal who was weak on the military. But one of their key attacks in that race, as in all other House races including Pennsylvania’s, has been tying him to House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), where the emphasis has been much more about the coded “San Francisco liberal” than any particular policy gripe. Attacks on Pelosi remain a staple of any House GOP ad campaign, strategists are happy to acknowledge– and even some early Senate ads have featured Pelosi.
They tried that red-meat strategy even in the gubernatorial race in Democratic-leaning New Jersey:
The strategy has shown mixed results. But it’s likely to pop up in force especially in Senate contests, many of which are in more culturally conservative populist states like Missouri and West Virginia. It’s unclear how effective it will be in saving House members in swing and suburban territory, however, where Republicans might be forced to look to other strategies.
Pennsylvania was the first major election since the tax plan passed, giving Republicans a chance to push hard on an issue that had been a mere abstraction in the past. They argue that while the law remains unpopular overall, it’s improved its standing since it first passed late last year.
The CLF says its own polling found 50 percent of voters in the Pennsylvania district supported the law as of the beginning of March, after their ads ran, with just 35 percent opposing it. But they didn’t provide any data showing that it was a major motivator in the race – and the 15-point edge they say they have on that race isn’t as large as the 20-point margin Trump managed in the district in 2016, and nowhere near the huge disapproval rating for Pelosi the group found in the district. National polling suggests the law has become more popular, but is still underwater.
“The most important thing for the midterms is does the middle class think we cut their taxes? We’ve made progress selling the tax plan based on the progress I’ve seen since December but there’s still more work yet to be done,” CLF head Corry Bliss told TPM.
The GOP’s promise to run on the law sounds rather familiar to Democrats’ guarantee they’d run on Obamacare in 2010, which was polling at similar levels then to the tax law now, before largely abandoning it in a number of races ahead of their electoral shellacking.
Bliss promised: “You’re going to be seeing tax ads all across the country this fall.”
He may be telling the truth – Republicans need to tout their sole major legislative achievement and hope it pays some dividends. But Pennsylvania’s results prove that it’s far from a fix-it for the GOP’s political problems, and their actual ad spending suggests nervous strategists are likely to fall back more on Trump-like culture war attacks as they try to boost their base in a brutal electoral environment.