Republicans’ failure to get on the same page on expiring Obamacare subsidies is creating significant rifts between GOP primary contenders and causing heartburn for some of the party’s most vulnerable incumbents heading into November’s midterms.

With just weeks left before Covid-era subsidies lapse, causing steep health insurance rate spikes for millions of people, Republicans are all over the spectrum about what to do — with many of the party’s top candidates ducking when asked about the thorny issue.

In Michigan, the subsidies have emerged as an early policy difference between President Donald Trump-backed Senate candidate Mike Rogers and his new challenger, former state GOP co-chair Bernadette Smith. Sen. Bill Cassidy’s (R-La.) proposal to replace the subsidies with federally funded health savings accounts is facing pushback from his primary opponents. In Georgia, a state with an especially high reliance on the Affordable Care Act, all three Republicans vying to take on Democratic Sen. Jon Ossoff refused to commit to any specific health care proposal when asked previously by POLITICO, but told the AJC on Wednesday before POLITICO published its story that they oppose a subsidy extension.

Out of the 24 candidates POLITICO surveyed across key GOP Senate primaries and general election battlegrounds, 10 did not respond to repeated requests for comment on their health care policy preferences, while others gave vague answers.

But as some Republicans dodge, other lawmakers in tough races are practically begging their leadership to fix the issue, which Democrats are already making a key focus of the 2026 midterm elections.

“I know my people back home care tremendously about this,” swing district Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick (R-Pa.), who is leading an effort to go against his own party leaders and force a vote on the expiring credits, said in an interview. “I would assume that’s the case in every district in America.”

There are already warning signs of political pitfalls for Republicans.

Most Americans want Congress to extend the subsidies, polls from health policy think tank KFF and Morning Consult show. And they’re already feeling the strain: Fifty-two percent of respondents to The POLITICO Poll in November reported that their health insurance premiums have risen over the past two to three years — and they’re equally as worried about being able to afford an unexpected health care bill. Nearly half of respondents who said health care is difficult to afford blamed the Trump administration for those struggles.

Health care is a flashpoint in the crowded primary Cassidy is facing back in Louisiana that was fueled in large part by his 2021 vote to impeach Trump. The former physician also chairs the Senate Health Committee and co-authored one of the GOP proposals to try to address the surging rates.

“I want people to have coverage,” Cassidy said after the failed vote on his proposal. “I spent my medical career in a hospital for the underinsured and the poor and the uninsured. My life's work is: How do you get care to those who otherwise cannot afford it? I understand where people are. The Democratic plan does not.”

His bill failed to advance Thursday afternoon — while giving his primary opponents new fodder for attacks.

St. Tammany Parish Councilmember Kathy Seiden said before the vote that the senator’s proposed health savings accounts are “out of touch” and called for a “time-limited extension” of the subsidies, while Public Service Commissioner Eric Skrmetta described Cassidy’s bill as a “step in the right direction” but said he wants the funding to be “supercharged.”

Republicans more worried about the general election than primaries sound much different on this issue, however.

Sens. Susan Collins (R-Maine) and Dan Sullivan (R-Alaska), who are both facing potentially tough races, were among the four Republicans who crossed party lines to support Democrats’ three-year subsidy extension Thursday in the Senate. It failed, alongside Cassidy’s plan.

“My state’s hurting on this,” Sullivan said after both bills tanked.

Republicans have struggled ever since Obamacare’s 2010 passage to craft a functional, politically palatable alternative, even as health insurance rates have surged under the program. Now, Covid-era subsidies are set to expire, and they’re struggling once again to respond.

The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office estimates 4 million fewer people would have health insurance by 2034 if the subsidies lapse. And premium payments would increase from an average of $888 this year to $1,904 next year if the subsidies expire, according to KFF.

Republican candidates vary widely in their suggestions for a policy fix.

In Michigan, where Republicans are looking to flip retiring Democratic Sen. Gary Peters’ seat, Rogers said “we can’t just put another bandaid” on a “broken health care system” and called for a “new system that works.” Smith advocated for a two-year subsidy extension while also working toward a new health care model.

In New Hampshire, where Republicans are chasing another retiring Democrat’s seat, former Sen. John E. Sununu called to modernize “outdated” regulations and give states more power over their Medicaid programs while ensuring lower-income people are “protected against price spikes.” His rival, former Sen. Scott Brown, said in a statement that “any meaningful solution is going to have to address the underlying cost drivers … and not just temporarily subsidize an unaffordable product.”

In Georgia, where Republicans have their best shot to unseat a Democratic incumbent, two of the three leading GOP candidates — Reps. Mike Collins and Buddy Carter — could soon vote on a specific proposal if a health plan hits the House floor. Derek Dooley, the former football coach backed by GOP Gov. Brian Kemp, said in a statement, “We should be focused on transparency, incentivizing doctors to deliver high-quality care, real market competition, and lowering healthcare costs for hardworking Americans—while making sure we put patients first.”

Democrats are yoking GOP candidates to the lapsing subsidies. Senate Democratic campaigns lambasted their GOP opponents for their votes Thursday, and Protect Our Care, a liberal health care advocacy group, signaled a deluge of attack ads to come.

“I’m worried about my colleagues,” Rep. Jeff Van Drew, a Republican who holds a safe red seat in blue New Jersey, said Wednesday at the Capitol. “Do I think this issue is worth a couple of points in an election? Yeah, I do.”

Erin Doherty contributed to this report.

© Francis Chung/POLITICO

Rahm Emanuel, who is mulling a presidential run, is pushing for the United States to follow Australia's lead in banning children under 16 from most social media.

Alarmed by the addictive nature of social media apps and the attendant health and safety risks for young users, Emanuel wants to amp up public pressure on American lawmakers to restrict access to some of the world’s most popular platforms.

In a bit of irony, the potential 2028 White House hopeful plans to issue his call to action Tuesday, as Australia’s ban takes effect, in a video he’ll post on his social media accounts, according to plans the Democrat shared first with POLITICO.

“We’ve got to make a choice when it comes to our adolescents: Who’s going to be a kind of moral guiding light? I put my thumb on the scale for adults over algorithms,” Emanuel said in an interview, accusing Big Tech of prioritizing profits over “protecting our adolescents.”

It’s the latest in a series of policy stances Emanuel is sharpening as the former ambassador, who worked for three Democratic presidents and was mayor of Chicago, calls out his party’s messaging from education to public safety ahead of a critical midterm election.

It also comes as Democrats are embracing social media influencers and encouraging political leaders and candidates to spend more time online to promote their messaging and reach younger voters.

But Emanuel sees those as separate issues — an electoral strategy targeted toward adults over 18 versus a public health problem affecting adolescents. He likened solving it to steps he took to curb youth smoking as mayor by raising the minimum age to buy tobacco products. And he suggested lawmakers should start with targeting three of the most popular apps among U.S. teens — TikTok, Instagram and Snapchat.

“We can’t lose another generation because of inaction or political gridlock,” he said.

Emanuel appears to be taking a tougher stance on youth access to social media than some of his would-be rivals for the Democratic nomination — and positioning himself against the Big Tech lobby that has fiercely opposed efforts to regulate who accesses their platforms by arguing it infringes upon free speech. As a candidate, he too received donations from tech giants, including Eric Schmidt and Sheryl Sandberg.

Asked about those contributions, he said his stance now shows his independence from those firms.

In California, Gov. Gavin Newsom signed bills this fall that require social media platforms to display health warning labels to minors and require apps to check kids' ages. Both Newsom and his wife, Jennifer Siebel Newsom, have spoken out about social media's impact on kids' mental health.

Maryland Gov. Wes Moore signed a “Kids Code” last year that aims to limit data tech companies can collect from children, but is mired in a legal battle. Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker signed a law in 2023 that works to ensure children are compensated for appearing in online content.

Emanuel, asked if his proposed social-media ban would be key to his platform should he run for president, said “anything that allows us to keep focus on improving academic standards and protecting our children on a public-health basis is going to be a priority.”

Australia’s world-first social media ban is designed to restrict access to major social media platforms including Facebook, Instagram, X, Snapchat, TikTok and YouTube for children under 16. And it threatens to slap their parent companies with tens of millions of dollars in fines if they don’t take “reasonable steps” to prevent youngsters’ access. Tech firms had protested the measure as rushed and “short-sighted” and argued it “will not fulfill its promise to make kids safer online.” But they have already begun deactivating accounts.

There’s some support for a similar ban in the U.S. Nearly six in 10 voters in a Quinnipiac University poll conducted in late 2024 said they would like to see similar age restrictions, though support was lower among those ages 18 to 34. An August POLITICO-Citrin Center-Possibility Lab poll of registered California voters showed 45 percent support for banning social media for kids under 16.

A bipartisan group of senators — including Ted Cruz (R-Texas), who political insiders think is positioning himself for another White House run in 2028 and who has made kids’ online safety a centerpiece of his stint chairing the panel that oversees social media — introduced a bill earlier this year that would ban children under age 13 from social media. Emanuel said that legislation has “the right thrust.”

Another bipartisan group of senators has reintroduced a bill that would require social media firms to remove features that could have negative effects on youth mental health. The bill sailed through the Senate 91-3 last year but stalled in the House, and the two chambers remain at odds over the details.

Amid congressional gridlock, a patchwork of primarily red states have passed laws attempting to limit kids’ access to social media by requiring parental consent and imposing digital curfews. But those efforts have drawn resistance from industry groups representing tech giants like Meta, Alphabet and Snapchat and have been largely blocked by courts.

Still, a divided panel of appeals judges last month gave Florida the go-ahead to begin enforcing a law signed by one-time presidential aspirant, GOP Gov. Ron DeSantis, that bars children under age 14 from using many social media platforms and requires parental approval for those ages 14 and 15. DeSantis, who might mount another White House bid in 2028, has hailed the law as a way of keeping children safe from online predators.

Emanuel acknowledged the stiff legal challenges a sweeping social media ban could face. But he said there’s a potentially “winning argument” in casting the crackdowns as combating “a public health issue associated with technology” rather than the technology itself.

Tyler Katzenberger, Andrew Atterbury and Shia Kapos contributed to this report.

© Patrick Semansky/AP

Fresh off their staggering electoral losses this month, Republicans are urging President Donald Trump to start hitting the campaign trail for them next year with control of Congress on the line.

And in a sign of their rising anxiety over Democrats' renewed enthusiasm, the requests for rallies have started rolling in.

Wisconsin GOP Chair Brian Schimming said Trump’s team is “certainly aware” he wants to see the president visit the purple state next year, where he won by his thinnest margin in 2024 and his party is defending two competitive House seats and trying to win statewide races. Schimming plans to reup his ask when visiting Washington this week. In Tennessee, where Democrats are working to flip a House seat in a special election next month, Republican Matt Van Epps’ campaign requested the president hold an in-person rally in the deep-red district he won by 20 points last year. (Trump held a tele-rally for Van Epps last Thursday night.) Rep. Derrick Van Orden has told Trump he wants the president to campaign with him in his western Wisconsin swing district next year.

Depressed turnout is a persistent problem in non-presidential years. And Republicans acknowledge that Trump, whose approval ratings are underwater, can be a liability as well as an asset.

But he remains a singular motivator for the MAGA base, according to interviews with 11 Republican Party chairs, officials and operatives across the Rust and Sun Belt states. They said Republicans must step up their voter-outreach efforts heading into the midterms, when Democrats need only to net three House seats to regain control of the lower chamber. And they’re looking to Trump to be their triple threat — with his trademark rallies, endorsements and deep campaign coffers.

By comparison, Trump largely avoided campaigning for Republicans in this month’s off-cycle elections, later blaming poor candidate quality for the party’s withering defeats. He avoided showing up in New Jersey, where GOP gubernatorial contender Jack Ciattarelli was projected to lose by a slim margin and ended up getting routed by double digits. He never uttered the name of the Virginia Republican candidate for governor, who lost by nearly 16 points. And he lagged miles behind California Gov. Gavin Newsom’s fundraising juggernaut that helped propel a Democrat-backed redistricting measure to swift victory.

Now, even as the GOP descends into in-fighting over the release of files connected to the late convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein and state-level Republicans throughout the country buck Trump’s redistricting push, his party is clamoring for ever more of the president.

“Trump is the ace in the hole,” said Tom Eddy, the Republican chair in Erie County, Pa., a presidential bellwether Trump won in 2016 and 2024, but where Democrats swept key local races earlier this month. “It’s a matter of which party is more motivated. And right now, obviously, the Democrats are.”

A Republican strategist who works on North Carolina races, granted anonymity to speak candidly, painted a dire portrait of the party’s stakes as Democrat Roy Cooper makes the party’s best shot at flipping a Senate seat next year.

“Any Republican not preparing for a turnout challenge in 2026 is whistling by the graveyard,” the strategist said. “If Trump is on the ballot, Republican turnout is strong. And if he’s not, it craters. It collapses. There’s an entire group of people who are Trump voters, but Trump alone. There seems to be no way to get them to the ballot."

James Blair, Trump’s top political director, said on a post-election episode of POLITICO’s “The Conversation” that the president will be “far more involved in the midterms.” Trump has already endorsed the majority of House incumbents and across many Senate races, though he’s yet to clear the field in Texas, Georgia and New Hampshire, where fierce primaries are underway. Two of his top political operatives — Trump 2024 co-campaign manager Chris LaCivita and pollster Tony Fabrizio — are advising campaigns across the country.

“With a lot of campaigning next year, with a lot of resources in the right districts for the right candidates,” Republicans’ turnout woes are “an overcomeable problem,” Blair said on “The Conversation.”

Blair cautioned that victory shouldn’t be entirely Trump’s responsibility, adding, “The president will campaign a lot to get people out” but “candidates still have to connect with these voters, too.”

Blair, LaCivita and a White House spokesperson did not respond to requests for comment for this story.

Republicans brushed aside Trump’s recent hands-off approach, noting the party lost in blue-leaning states where the president is unpopular. But they saw warning signs in the margins. Turnout data shows Republicans lost ground in the places that voted most for Trump last year, suggesting his voters were less likely to cast ballots outside of a presidential year.

Across Virginia, in precincts where Trump won at least 80 percent of the vote in 2024, turnout this year fell below 70 percent of last year’s levels, according to a POLITICO breakdown of the results. Statewide, that figure was 77 percent.

In southwest Virginia’s Buchanan County, where Trump won more than 85 percent of the vote, turnout for the gubernatorial election was less than 60 percent of the prior year. Gov.-elect Abigail Spanberger received about 73 percent of former Vice President Kamala Harris’ vote total while GOP Lt. Gov. Winsome Earle-Sears got just 57 percent of the votes Trump had received.

Republicans shrugged off Earle-Sears as a weak candidate and attributed the results to typical swings toward the opposition party in off-year elections. But as Trump himself has suggested, it indicates Republicans have yet to figure out how to replicate his coalition when he’s not on the ballot.

Republican officials and operatives say Trump is still the “biggest base motivator” they have — a nod to his singularity and to the uncertainty of who else in the GOP has the gravitas to command his MAGA movement.

“We’ve got to make it clear what the stakes of it are — because they don’t want to go back to another Joe Biden,” Schimming said, acknowledging the party’s challenge in reaching irregular voters.

Republicans across battleground states are working to remind their voters of economic pain under the Biden administration — and warning that Democratic control of even one chamber of Congress could lead to investigations that could distract from, if not derail, Trump’s agenda.

They’re also pushing early voting as a way to reach lower-propensity voters and to keep them engaged outside presidential cycles, even as Trump tries to end the practice.

Republicans acknowledge some candidates would benefit from distancing themselves from the president on unpopular policies, like cutting health care benefits and imposing tariffs, in a midterm election that will serve as a referendum on his second term. Their concerns hark back to 2018, when Democrats picked up 40 House seats in a repudiation of Trump’s first term.

After Democrats rode affordability messaging to wins in last week’s elections, Republicans said they need to stay focused on cutting costs. To that end, the White House laid out in a Friday memo how the administration is working to lower prices.

Some Republicans also said Trump needs to focus less on his grievances, like putting millions of dollars from his political operation into primarying GOP Rep. Thomas Massie in a safe seat in Kentucky over the lawmaker’s opposition to Republicans’ megalaw and his push to release the Justice Department files on Epstein.

“Don’t waste your time going after Thomas Massie,” said Todd Gillman, a Republican Party district chair in Michigan, where the GOP is looking to snag the Senate seat being left open by retiring Democrat Gary Peters, hold the House seat Rep. John James is leaving to run for governor and wrest back control of statewide offices.

Instead, he said, “come to Michigan and fight for John James’ seat so we don’t lose it.”

Jessica Piper, Elena Schneider, Andrew Howard, Sam Benson and Liz Crampton contributed to this report.

© Jamie Kelter Davis for POLITICO

Rahm Emanuel believes Americans are being presented a “binary choice” between “defund the police” and President Donald Trump’s National Guard push.

So he’s offering an alternative.

As Democrats grapple with how to cut into one of Republicans’ core issues in the midterm elections next year, the former Chicago mayor plans to lay out his own approach to public safety at an event with police leaders in Washington on Wednesday. He plans to call for pairing community policing methods with tough-on-major-crime tactics and youth interventions. He said his strategy can be a model for cities and for fellow Democrats to combat the electoral narrative that they are weak on crime.

“Democrats a) should not be scared of it and b) should be proactive about what their agenda is,” Emanuel said in an interview Monday previewing his remarks.

A political operative who’s served three presidents and across levels of government, Emanuel is attempting to position himself at the forefront of his party’s conversation on how to tackle public safety as he weighs a White House bid in 2028. He told POLITICO he doesn’t have a “hard timeline” for that decision.

Emanuel will present his strategy at the University of Chicago Crime Lab’s Policing Leadership Academy event honoring graduates on Wednesday.

His approach includes combining more training in community policing with “tough action against hardened criminals and gang members,” as well as with youth programs like the mentoring initiatives he undertook as mayor. He also wants more enforcement of gun laws and efforts to intensify them.

He distilled his public-safety pitch into a slogan that harkens back to his time leading Chicago: “More cops on the beat, and getting kids, guns and gangs off the street.”

As mayor, Emanuel grappled with a surge in homicides and shootings, with the city reporting its deadliest year in two decades in 2016. Crime rates across major categories — murders, shootings, robberies and burglaries — declined over the next two years, which the city’s police department attributed to strengthened community partnerships and technological investments. And Emanuel poured millions in expanding youth mentoring and summer job programs to keep kids off the streets, initiatives that remain a point of pride.

He was also besieged by backlash to his handling of the 2014 murder of a Black teenager by a white cop — criticism that continued as he embarked on reforming Chicago’s police department and has persisted in his political career.

Emanuel drew national headlines for tangling with Trump over crime and immigration during the president’s first term. He would face stiff competition in that lane if he ran for the White House in 2028 — Democratic governors like Illinois’ JB Pritzker are fighting Trump’s National Guard incursions into their major cities.

Emanuel expressed opposition to Trump’s efforts to flood blue bastions with Guard troops and federal immigration officers, part of a two-pronged crackdown the president is pushing to boost Republicans in the midterms. Trump claims it has reduced crime. Several states and cities have sued over his Guard deployments to some success, with Illinois and Chicago currently battling the Trump administration before the Supreme Court.

Asked if there was anything effective about Trump’s strategy, Emanuel pointed to a “thread of positive” — that concentrating troops in one area of a city could give local law enforcement the ability to focus elsewhere.

But he stressed he was “not endorsing” that use of the Guard. “It’s a horrible idea to parachute in 100 to 200 people for a short duration of time who have no sense of a community or no sense of what policing is,” he said. “All the money you’re spending on the National Guard could be used to train 500 [local] officers.”

As Trump works to exploit public safety concerns in the midterms, Emanuel said Democrats have to get “comfortable” talking about crime. Democrats are broadly urging their party to go on the offense on the issue, bolstered by private polling that shows a mix of attacks on Republicans and showing steps Democrats are taking to reduce crime can swing voters in their direction.

Emanuel said Democrats should stop crouching behind falling crime statistics that don’t match voters’ perceptions. “Nobody can be complacent or comforted by a statistic,” he added.

He also repeatedly derided the “defund” slogan that criminal justice reformers and progressives popularized in 2020 after the murder of George Floyd but that Democrats have since abandoned. The rallying cry for police reform quickly became an anchor for the party as the GOP successfully argued against its absolutism. Since then, Democrats have worked to distance themselves from it, with Michigan Senate candidate Abdul El-Sayed scrubbing his social media of mentions of it and New York City Mayor-elect Zohran Mamdani backing away from his past embrace of it.

Republicans are nevertheless seizing on it as they work to make Mamdani their midterms foil and hammer Democrats as soft on crime. But Emanuel argued they won’t be able to make the association stick to candidates broadly after Mamdani moved away from the mantra.

Emanuel will have to contend with his own past on public safety as he contemplates a political comeback, a record that includes helping pass Clinton’s controversial 1994 crime bill and his bungled handling of Laquan McDonald’s murder in 2014.

Emanuel said he bears “responsibility” for how he handled McDonald’s case. He has forged a “very strong relationship” with McDonald’s great uncle, Chicago pastor Marvin Hunter, who supported Emanuel as ambassador to Japan during the Biden administration. The two keep in regular contact.

He also pointed to his 2021 Senate confirmation hearing, when he acknowledged he had underestimated the “distrust” of law enforcement among Black Chicagoans and failed to do enough to address it.

“The problems were deeper, farther and more ingrained than I fully appreciated. That’s on me,” Emanuel said Monday. “But I was determined to make the changes.”

© AP

Senate Democrats’ embrace of a shutdown deal that doesn’t guarantee extended health care subsidies is already an electoral issue.

Nearly every major Democratic Senate candidate panned the deal, from Texas hopeful Colin Allred, a former member of Congress, deriding it as a “joke” to Illinois Lt. Gov. Juliana Stratton condemning it as a “complete betrayal of the American people.” Sen. Jon Ossoff (D-Ga.), the party’s most vulnerable incumbent in 2026, voted against advancing it, as did several senators eyeing a 2028 White House bid.

“Pathetic,” California Gov. Gavin Newsom wrote on X. “This is not a deal — it’s an empty promise,” Gov. JB Pritzker of Illinois said. Former Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg called it a “bad deal.”

The Sunday agreement even caused a familial dispute: Stefany Shaheen, who is running in a crowded Democratic primary for an open House seat in New Hampshire, said she couldn’t support a deal that failed to extend the Affordable Care Act tax credits. Her mother, retiring Sen. Jeanne Shaheen, was one of the lead Democratic negotiators of the deal.

Democratic Rep. Chris Pappas, who is running to replace Jeanne Shaheen, creating the very opening her daughter is vying to fill, also rejected it in a statement Monday.

After looking to make soaring health care costs an albatross for Republicans in the midterms, Democrats’ deal to reopen the government after 40 days without language extending the expiring insurance subsidies delivered a blow to their base. The result was so fraught, even Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) opposed it amid intense criticism for allowing eight members of the Democratic caucus to side with Republicans.

Now it’s creating a litmus test for candidates in competitive midterm races next year, as Democrats fight to retake the Senate — a tough task they feel better about after routing Republicans in last week’s off-cycle elections throughout the country. They’d need to net four seats in order to seize control of the upper chamber.

“The infighting over the deal will fade quickly and by the time we get closer to the midterms, it’s very clear that Democrats will aggressively prosecute the case against Republicans on health care,” said Matt Bennett of the centrist think tank Third Way. “They will say Republicans yanked lifesaving money away from millions of Americans to fund tax cuts for the rich. And that will have the benefit of being true.”

Thirty-three Senate seats are up for grabs next year and Democrats are making a serious play for holding or flipping at least a dozen of them. A quartet of candidates vying for open seats — Graham Platner in Maine, Mallory McMorrow in Michigan and Zach Wahls and Nathan Sage in Iowa — reiterated their opposition to Schumer’s leadership as news of the deal spread.

“Chuck Schumer failed in his job yet again,” Platner said in a video on X. “We need to elect leaders who want to fight. … Call your senators and tell them Chuck Schumer can no longer be leader. Call your congressman and tell them that they cannot vote for this when it comes to them.”

In Michigan’s three-way primary, each candidate panned the deal, representing the ideologically vast opposition within a party otherwise mired in internal dispute.

“This is a bad deal,” McMorrow said in a video late Sunday, adding that “the old way of doing things is not working.” Abdul El-Sayed slammed the “shit” agreement and castigated Democrats for giving up their leverage “when we actually can force [Republicans] to the table” after their electoral losses last week. Rep. Haley Stevens said the deal “doesn’t work for Michigan” and that she’s “going to need a whole lot more than empty promises that we’re going to lower costs.” She did not say how she’d vote on the measure in the House. Stevens’ team confirmed she would vote against the measure in the House.

Senate Democrats’ capitulation opened an off-ramp to the record-breaking government shutdown that has snarled air travel and led to missed paychecks and lapsed food assistance. The agreement now advancing through the Senate would fund some agencies and programs for the full fiscal year and extend others until Jan. 30, 2026. It also promises Democrats a December floor vote on extending the expiring Obamacare subsidies, though it’s uncertain to pass the GOP-controlled chamber and Speaker Mike Johnson won’t promise to bring up such a vote in the House.

But in cutting a deal, Senate Democrats infuriated a party reinvigorated by its off-year electoral blowout, sparking accusations that the party again squandered its only leverage in the Republican-led Congress — and ensuring Schumer’s leadership will remain a touchstone in competitive Senate races.

None of the eight Democrats who voted to break the shutdown stalemate are facing voters next year. Two are retiring; the rest are not up for reelection until at least 2028.

They cited the financial pain the prolonged federal funding lapse was inflicting on their constituents. They cast the pending floor vote on the tax credits as a win for Democrats. And they touted other concessions they secured, like the rehiring of federal workers laid off during the shutdown.

“This bill is not perfect, but it takes important steps to reduce their shutdown’s hurt,” Sen. Dick Durbin, the No. 2 Senate Democrat who is retiring next year, said Sunday.

The Democrats vying to replace him disagree. Stratton, who’s previously called for new Senate leadership, cast Democrats’ cave as “a complete betrayal of the American people.” Reps. Raja Krishnamoorthi and Robin Kelly both said the outcome failed to help millions of people whose health care premiums are set to skyrocket.

Across the Senate map, opposition spanned Schumer’s handpicked recruits — who’ve been largely silent about the shutdown — to the insurgents who’ve called for his ouster.

“This is a bad deal for Ohioans,” former Sen. Sherrod Brown said in a statement. Maine Gov. Janet Mills panned “the promise of a vote [on the subsidies] that won’t go anywhere.” Former North Carolina Gov. Roy Cooper — Democrats’ best chance for flipping a Senate seat and the last major candidate to weigh in on the deal — said in a statement that “any deal that lets health care costs continue to skyrocket is unacceptable.

Sage slammed the Senate Democrats who “caved and accomplished nothing.” Jordan Wood, another Democrat running in Maine, said “America needs an opposition party willing to fight for them.” Minnesota Lt. Gov. Peggy Flanagan said in a video, “we deserve so much more than this bullshit.” Hours later, she was endorsed by Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), who voted against the deal.

“If people believe this is a ‘deal,’ I have a bridge to sell you,” said Flanagan’s rival, Rep. Angie Craig (D-Minn.), adding that she’s a “no” when the measure comes up for a vote in the House. “I’m not going to put 24 million Americans at risk of losing their health care.”

Senate Democrats who brokered the spending deal argued Sunday that they had succeeded in hanging rising health care costs on Republicans’ necks heading into the midterms.

“If Republicans want to join us in lowering costs for working families, they have the perfect opportunity,” Sen. Catherine Cortez Masto (D-Nevada) said Sunday at the Capitol. “If they do choose not to come to the table, they can own the disastrous premium increases.”

Democrats continued to target their own.

Rep. Mikie Sherrill, who was elected the next governor of New Jersey in last week’s blue wave, denounced the deal as “malpractice.” Zohran Mamdani, New York City’s incoming mayor who Schumer declined to endorse, said the compromise and anyone who supports it “should be rejected.”

“That’s not a deal,” Rep. Ritchie Torres (D-N.Y.), who drew a primary challenge last week, said Sunday. “It’s an unconditional surrender.”

Anger toward Senate Democrats also appears to be fueling the party’s recruitment efforts. Run for Something, a progressive candidate recruitment organization, saw double the number of signups over seven hours Sunday night — as the shutdown deal moved through the Senate — than over the same time period last Tuesday night as Democrats won elections across the country, according to co-founder Amanda Litman. The group saw 838 signups Sunday night versus 417 on election night.

The political blast radius is extending to Schumer, who is up for reelection in 2028.

Some progressive Democrats and advocacy groups called for his ouster as leader, blaming him for failing to keep his caucus in line even as he voted against the deal he said didn’t address the “health care crisis” and vowed to “keep fighting.”

Schumer “is no longer effective and should be replaced,” Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.), a potential 2028er, blasted out on X. On Monday, Khanna turned that push into a pitch to pad his supporter list.

The Sunrise Movement called for Schumer to step aside. Justice Democrats urged voters to reject the eight Senate Democrats who allowed the funding patch to proceed.

“I don’t think the Democrats leading this surrender effort understand the trust they are shattering in their own voting coalition,” Andrew O’Neill, the national advocacy director for Indivisible, warned Sunday night.

Schumer voted against the bill because it does “nothing” to address a “health care crisis” he called “devastating.” He pledged to “keep fighting.”

As House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, too, vowed to fight on, O’Neill called for his caucus to follow suit. Several said Sunday that they would.

Adam Wren and Elena Schneider contributed to this report.

© AP

Heritage Foundation President Kevin Roberts is standing by Tucker Carlson after the conservative podcaster’s friendly interview with Holocaust-denier Nick Fuentes drew condemnation from within a GOP grappling with a series of antisemitic incidents.

Roberts, in a video posted to X Thursday, denounced the “venomous coalition” that has criticized Carlson and said “their attempt to cancel him will fail,” though he didn’t specifically name anyone. He said Carlson remains a “close friend” of the highly influential conservative group and “always will be.”

Roberts added that “I disagree with and even abhor things that Nick Fuentes says, but canceling him is not the answer, either.”

Roberts, whose group launched “Project Esther” to combat antisemitism, also said “Christians can critique the state of Israel without being antisemitic. And of course, antisemitism should be condemned.”

The Heritage Foundation leader’s public support of Carlson comes as the former Fox News host faces backlash from conservatives over an inflammatory interview with Fuentes that was laced with antisemitism. Carlson said GOP supporters of Israel — including U.S. Ambassador to Israel Mike Huckabee and Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) — suffer from a “brain virus,” while Fuentes said the “big challenge” to unifying the country was “organized Jewry.”

Huckabee, who is set to speak at this weekend’s Republican Jewish Coalition annual leadership conference in Las Vegas, dismissed the criticism.

“Wasn’t aware that Tucker despises me. I do get that a lot from people not familiar with the Bible or history. Somehow I will survive this animosity,” Huckabee posted on X.

Cruz defended Huckabee in his own post. The former governor “is a pastor and a patriot who loves America, loves Israel, and loves Jesus. I’m proud to be in his company,” Cruz said.

Roberts and Carlson did not immediately respond to requests for comment. Fuentes could not be reached for comment.

The furor over the Fuentes sitdown comes as Republicans wrestle with how to respond to a string of antisemitic incidents on the right. POLITICO first reported two weeks ago on an explosive Telegram group chat in which leaders of various Young Republican groups joked about the Holocaust and lauded Adolf Hitler. A day later, a staffer for Rep. Dave Taylor’s (R-Ohio) joined a virtual meeting with a flag featuring a Nazi symbol visible behind him.

And last week, POLITICO reported on another group chat in which Paul Ingrassia, then Trump’s nominee to lead the Office of Special Counsel at the Justice Department, claimed he has “a Nazi streak.” Ingrassia previously appeared at a rally for Fuentes.

Several Young Republican chapters were dissolved and participants in the group chat were fired or resigned from their jobs or public office. Capitol police investigated the flag in Taylor’s office. Ingrassia withdrew his nomination days later amid opposition from within the Senate GOP.

The incidents have broadly divided the GOP. Cruz recently decried what he called “antisemitism rising on the right in a way I have never seen…in my entire life.” Some prominent GOP officials swiftly denounced the racist texts in the Young Republicans group.

But others have followed Vice President JD Vance’s lead in attempting to divert attention onto Democrats as one of their candidates, Virginia Attorney General nominee Jay Jones, became engulfed in his own violence-laced texting scandal. And that was before Maine Senate candidate Graham Platner’s tattoo resembling a Nazi symbol forced Democrats to confront antisemitism within their party.

Samuel Benson contributed to this report.

© Jess Rapfogel/AP

Centrist Democrats have a plan for their party to win again: Talk more about the economy and less about democracy. Reject corporate interests and ideological purity tests. Keep the progressive policies that are popular — like expanding health care and raising the minimum wage — and moderate on issues like immigration and crime.

Those are among the takeaways laid out in an expansive report Monday from WelcomePAC, which supports center-left candidates, on how Democrats can rebound from last year’s electoral wipeout in 2026 and 2028.

The 58-page prescription comes as Democrats continue to war over the direction of their party nearly a year after their national shellacking. And it drops a week before a slate of gubernatorial and mayoral contests that will serve as the first major temperature check of the electorate since 2024 and President Donald Trump retaking the Oval Office.

It features input from a who’s who of top Democratic consultants — including David Axelrod; James Carville; David Plouffe, a top adviser to former Vice President Kamala Harris’ campaign; Lis Smith; and former Biden White House spokesperson Andrew Bates — as well as analysts and strategists like Nate Silver, Sarah Longwell and former Rep. Cheri Bustos of Illinois.

The report is less an autopsy of the 2024 election — it spends a scant five pages on former President Joe Biden’s and Harris’ campaigns — and more so an indictment of the party’s leftward shift since the Obama administration and the donors, campaign operatives and progressive advocacy groups the authors blame for putting Democrats in an unwinnable position.

It largely echoes what moderate Democrats have been saying loudly for months — that the party should be running to the center and focusing on kitchen table issues.

It uses polling data to reinforce the message many centrist Democrats believe voters sent the party in 2024: that voters felt Democrats were prioritizing democracy, abortion and identity over top-of-mind issues like the economy, immigration and crime. It argues that moderate candidates tend to overperform progressive ones, citing centrist Sen. Ruben Gallego (D-Ariz.) and Rep. Jared Golden (D-Maine) as models for how the party should message on border security and the economy.

And Democrats “should distance ourselves from the Biden administration,” the authors write, “particularly by critiquing the Biden administration’s approach to border security and the cost of living.” Harris, they posit, lost in part because of her failure to do so — and because voters couldn’t let go of her past progressive policies even as she ran a more moderate campaign.

The report doesn’t call for a wholesale rejection of progressive stances. Expanding access to public health care, making the wealthy “pay their fair share” in taxes and raising the minimum wage are all popular with voters, and WelcomePAC believes the party should continue to focus on them. Democrats, the authors say, should emulate Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) and Democratic nominee for New York City mayor Zohran Mamdani’s “relentless focus” on affordability.

But they also say Democrats should focus less on “lower-salience issues where our views are unpopular,” such as transgender athletes. They insist that running against the establishment — as is en vogue these days — doesn’t have to mean running toward the left. And they contend that simply running younger candidates “is not a panacea.”

WelcomePAC made no mention of next week’s gubernatorial contests in New Jersey and Virginia. But their strategy will undergo an early test in both states, where the party has put forward a pair of moderate lawmakers with military and national security backgrounds who are running campaigns centered on affordability. Democrats are favored to win both races, though Rep. Mikie Sherrill’s contest in New Jersey is expected to be far closer than former Rep. Abigail Spanberger’s in Virginia.

WelcomePAC warned against drawing conclusions from the elections heading into 2028 in its report, insisting that “doing well in midterms and special elections does not guarantee Democrats anywhere close to the same results in a presidential race” because less-engaged voters tend to skip those intermediate contests.

But Democrats across the ideological spectrum will undoubtedly be scanning the results of next week’s elections in two states that stayed blue in 2024 but shifted toward Trump for signs of what is — and isn’t — working for the party heading into a high-stakes midterm election and the critical presidential contest to follow.

© Richard Drew/AP

Republicans’ redistricting push is on ice in New Hampshire, in a blow to the White House’s aggressive effort to protect the GOP’s House majority in the midterms.

State Sen. Dan Innis has yanked his own bill that would have kicked off a mid-decade redraw of the state’s two congressional districts in the face of resistance from GOP Gov. Kelly Ayotte.

“The governor wasn’t that supportive of it since it’s in the middle of the normal redistricting cycle,” Innis, a Republican who recently ended his U.S. Senate campaign, told POLITICO. “Rather than create a difficult situation in my own house, the New Hampshire State House, I thought it made sense to save this for another time.”

Innis’ decision to withdraw his bill deals the White House another setback in its pressure campaign to strong-arm GOP-led states into redistricting. Indiana Senate Republican leadership said this week that they lack the votes to pass a mid-cycle redraw in the Hoosier State, though Gov. Mike Braun is still eyeing a special session to redo the state’s maps. The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment about New Hampshire.

The White House had been ratcheting up pressure on New Hampshire Republicans to put forward a new map for months, threatening a take-no-prisoners approach that included weighing a primary challenge to Ayotte. Trump ally and longtime New Hampshire resident Corey Lewandowski, who is serving as a Department of Homeland Security senior adviser, said days later he was considering running for governor against Ayotte.

There is some interest among Granite State Republican lawmakers in remapping, because New Hampshire has been using a court-approved congressional map since then-Gov. Chris Sununu, a Republican, vetoed plans the Legislature sent him in 2022. Democrats need to net three seats in next year’s midterms in order to win back control of the House, and the Trump team was hoping to secure one seat in a New Hampshire redraw.

Both of the districts are currently represented by Democrats, although the state’s open 1st District will likely be a battleground next November even without new lines.

State lawmakers say they would want buy-in from Ayotte, who isn’t budging.

The first-term governor has repeatedly rejected the idea of a mid-decade redraw, saying the “timing is off” and insisting the Trump team’s pressure tactics wouldn’t change her mind.

“We’re in the middle of the census, I don’t think the timing is right for redistricting,” Ayotte recently told local television station WMUR, adding that “the thing [Granite Staters are] talking to me about is not redistricting.”

© Charles Krupa/AP

Republicans have recruited a Sununu to run for Senate in New Hampshire after all.

Former Sen. John E. Sununu said Wednesday that he is running to reclaim the seat he held for a single term before Democrat Jeanne Shaheen ousted him in 2008. Shaheen is retiring next year.

“Maybe you’re surprised to hear that I’m running for the Senate again. I’m a bit surprised myself. Why would anyone subject themselves to everything going on there right now?” Sununu said in a launch video posted online Wednesday morning. “Well, somebody has to step up and lower the temperature. Somebody has to get things done.”

The scion of a prominent GOP political dynasty, Sununu, 61, likely gives Republicans their best chance of flipping the seat after his brother, former Gov. Chris Sununu, rejected the party’s recruitment efforts for another cycle.

John E. Sununu brings access to his family’s fundraising machine and boasts close relationships with members of Senate GOP leadership, including Majority Leader John Thune. National and state Republicans consider him a strong candidate. Early polls put him ahead in the GOP primary and show him as the most competitive Republican against the Democratic front-runner, Rep. Chris Pappas.

Sununu has been in talks with the White House about his campaign and will soon meet with President Donald Trump about it, POLITICO first reported. Trump’s endorsement would be critical in the GOP primary, even though the state’s broader electorate thrice rejected him for president.

But Sununu’s path to securing Trump’s nod — and the GOP nomination — is not clear.

Sununu has long opposed Trump, serving as a national co-chair of former Ohio Gov. John Kasich’s 2016 presidential campaign and backing former U.N. Ambassador Nikki Haley for president in 2024. He penned an op-ed lambasting Trump as a “loser” ahead of New Hampshire’s presidential primary last year (Trump went on to win by 11 points). He later derided Trump’s 2020 election conspiracies as “completely inappropriate” through his position with the Democracy Defense Project, a bipartisan group focused on restoring public trust in election security.

And Sununu faces another former senator, Scott Brown, who represented Massachusetts before moving to New Hampshire and mounting an unsuccessful bid to unseat Shaheen in 2014. Brown was the president’s first-term ambassador to New Zealand and Samoa and is now seeking his own political comeback by positioning himself as the more Trump-aligned candidate in the race. Another GOP candidate, state Sen. Dan Innis, has already dropped his bid and backed Sununu. He’s called on Brown to do the same, but the former ambassador is battling on.

“Anyone who thinks that a never Trump, corporate lobbyist who hasn’t won an election in a quarter century will resonate with today’s GOP primary voters is living in a different universe,” Brown said in a statement.

Sununu, who is also the son of former Gov. and White House chief of staff John H. Sununu, served three terms in the House before defeating then-Gov. Shaheen to win his Senate seat in 2002.

He pledged in his launch video to focus on the economy and “making our lives more affordable.” He also called to “protect Medicare” and “really tackle our health care costs” as expiring Affordable Care Act subsidies take center stage in the government shutdown now spilling into a third week. WMUR was first to report on his official campaign launch.

Sununu starts with a polling advantage in the GOP primary. A University of New Hampshire survey from late September had him leading Brown 42 percent to 19 percent, with 28 percent undecided.

Early surveys also show him within striking distance of Pappas. The Democrat leads Sununu 49 percent to 43 percent in the UNH poll’s hypothetical general-election matchup; Pappas leads Brown by a wider margin of 52 percent to 37 percent. A survey from GOP-aligned co/efficient had Pappas leading Sununu by 3 percentage points and Brown by 10 points.

Sununu began publicly exploring a bid in September, after conversations with Thune and former Colorado Sen. Cory Gardner, then the chair of the GOP super PAC Senate Leadership Fund. Among those involved in his latest campaign is Paul Collins, a longtime adviser to the Sununu family.

Alex Latcham, Senate Leadership Fund’s executive director, said in a statement that Sununu’s candidacy “instantly expands the Senate map and puts the Granite State in play for Republicans.”

His candidacy has also generated instant excitement in the Granite State. A group of prominent New Hampshire GOP donors and business leaders — including Phil Taub, Joe Faro, Al Letizio Jr., Nick Vailas and Kelly Cohen — will host a fundraiser for Sununu in Bedford on Nov. 3, POLITICO has learned first.

Still, Sununu could face challenges in his attempted comeback. While his family’s brand remains strong in New Hampshire, Sununu largely faded from elective politics after his 2008 defeat, ceding the spotlight to his younger brother. His post-congressional work on corporate boards has drawn him early fire from his opponents on both sides of the aisle. The state Democratic Party already has a website attacking Sununu for “selling out to corporations.” Pappas hammered Sununu for “cashing in … working for special interests” in a statement Wednesday responding to his launch.

And his past opposition to Trump could prove difficult to reconcile with the MAGA base, even though it could win him support among independents who can pull ballots in the GOP primary.

Sununu downplayed Trump’s importance in the Senate race in a WMUR interview last month, saying the contest “is going to be about New Hampshire.”

But Brown is working to weaponize Sununu’s repeated rejections of the president, even as he faces his own MAGA image problem after saying in 2021 that Trump “bears responsibility” for the Jan. 6 Capitol riot.

© Jim Cole/AP

Democrats’ hardline opposition to rising health care costs isn’t earning them voters’ trust on economic issues — a disconnect that lays bare the party’s challenge heading into next year’s midterms.

Voters blame Republicans more than Democrats for the federal government shutdown, according to a review of polling conducted after services shuttered. An Economist/YouGov survey of 1,648 Americans showed 41 percent hold the GOP accountable for the lapse in federal funding, compared to 30 percent who point a finger at Democrats and 23 percent who hold the parties equally responsible. A 2,441-person CBS News/YouGov survey also found Americans blame Republicans more than Democrats — 39 percent to 30 percent — with 31 percent faulting both. And a Harvard/Harris poll demonstrated 2,413 voters impugned Republicans more than Democrats by 6 points.

Those same voters, however, delivered the GOP a 4-point advantage when asked which party they trust more on economic issues. And a survey from Democratic-aligned firm Navigator Research showed 1,000 registered voters faulting Republicans for the shutdown by 11 points, but giving them a 2-point advantage on inflation and cost of living.

That dichotomy underscores an electoral hurdle for the party locked out of power: Even as Democrats hold the line over expiring health care subsidies that could send millions of Americans’ insurance prices soaring, voters still favor Republicans on the economy and cost of living.

“Are we going to get all the working class back? Probably not,” said Rep. Henry Cuellar (D-Texas), who is seeking reelection in a redrawn Texas district while facing federal bribery charges. “[But] I see an opening here. … And we need to jump on that and just really focus and repeat over and over and over that we Democrats are interested in bringing costs down.”

The next challenge for his party, he added: “Make sure people understand we are a viable alternative.”

The shutdown-polling paradox has shown up in surveys for months, as Democrats struggle to move voters who are souring on President Donald Trump and his party’s handling of the economy and inflation into their corner. And it underscores the uphill battle Democrats face in wresting power from Republicans, even as they narrow their scattered messaging to affordability.

Frontliner Rep. Laura Gillen (D-N.Y.) called her party’s shutdown stance “an important step” toward convincing voters Democrats can tackle rising costs.

“And it’s a crucial step to take right now … to make sure that people don’t see their premiums go up exponentially,” said Gillen, who is defending the Long Island swing seat she flipped last year. “But then it needs to be part of a broader discussion to show that we are on the side of the American people and we care about the economic pain they’re feeling and we have a concrete plan.”

The party is still hashing out the particulars of that plan, which depending on the candidate ranges from pitching a hardscrabble background to railing against a rigged economy and vilifying the billionaires that benefit from it.

Right now, Democrats are trying to leverage their minimal power to force Republicans to stop Affordable Care Act subsidies from expiring at the end of the year, attempting to squeeze out a policy win on a top cost-of-living issue as they scramble to regain working-class voters.

The political winds have been shifting in Democrats’ favor on the economy. Trump’s net approval rating on the subject has nosedived since the start of his second term, polling averages show. Voters routinely rank inflation as one of their top issues, but disapprove of his handling of it. The latest CBS/YouGov poll showed three-quarters of adults don’t think Trump is doing enough to lower prices — one of his 2024 campaign trail pledges. Labor Department statistics show the job market is slowing.

Despite signs of economic distress, Republicans consistently enjoy a polling advantage on the economy. And Liam Kerr, who co-founded the centrist WelcomePAC, warned that Democrats won’t be able to erase it through a single stand on health care costs.

“You can’t just do it one time and all is forgotten,” Kerr said. “Playing against type requires even more effort.”

Nevertheless, Democrats remain confident they can reverse their heavy losses in 2024 by drilling down on voters’ cost-of-living concerns, according to interviews with half a dozen congressional candidates.

They cast their party’s shutdown play as part of a broader strategy that ranges from hammering Republicans over tariffs that could drive up prices for consumers and for businesses, to battling utility companies over rising bills. And they believe the slate of working-class candidates the party is putting up for House and Senate seats, from a firefighter in Pennsylvania’s Lehigh Valley to a waitress in western Wisconsin, can convince voters that Democrats care about blue-collar Americans who have turned toward Trump in recent years.

They’re getting backup from Democrats’ national campaign arm, which on Friday launched a five-figure digital-and-billboard ad campaign and organizing effort to alert voters to the pending increase in their premiums.

Still, shutdowns carry risks for both parties, especially the longer they drag on. The Trump administration on Friday began firing federal workers, which could increase pressure on both sides to bring their standoff to an end. And some polls already show voters think Democrats should cave and reopen the government; a sentiment expressed by nearly two-thirds of voters in the Harvard/Harris survey and just over half of respondents to the Navigator poll.

But Democrats are dug in.

“We have to give people a reason to fight, and we have to get back to catering to the many over the few,” Cherlynn Stevenson, a state representative running for the Democratic nomination in Kentucky’s open 6th District, said. “This can be a big turning point for our party.”

Alec Hernández contributed to this report.

© Heather Khalifa/AP

Democrats are pushing their candidates to go on the offense on crime ahead of the 2026 midterms, seeing upside in what’s been one of their weakest electoral issues.

A private polling memo that shows potential openings for the party to peel voters away from Republicans on one of their core issues is being distributed to House Democrats and their campaign committees, and was shared exclusively with POLITICO.

The battleground-district survey from Global Strategy Group — commissioned by gun-safety advocacy group Giffords and House Majority Forward, a nonprofit aligned with House Democratic leadership — offers a bleak assessment of Democrats’ starting point: 89 percent of the 1,200 likely voters surveyed want their Congress member to take steps to keep them safe, but only 38 percent trust Democrats over Republicans with that task.

Voters also reported preferring Republicans to Democrats with preventing and reducing crime and cracking down on violent crime — gaps that grew among swing voters.

But, in a hint of hope for the party looking to neutralize a weakness President Donald Trump will exploit next year, those voters swung toward Democrats in all four categories after hearing messaging acknowledging crime is a problem and showing steps the party has taken to increase safety. Specifically, pollsters cited cracking down on gun trafficking and strengthening firearm background checks. The persuasion effort included criticisms of GOP cuts to gun-violence prevention funding, the Trump administration’s attempts to roll back firearm regulations and Republicans’ ties to pro-gun groups.

The double-digit swings gave Democrats a 2-point advantage when respondents were asked about crime reduction, 4 points on keeping people safe and 6 points on crime prevention. The shifts were even more pronounced among swing voters.

Democrats also shrunk the GOP advantage on preventing violent crime to 1 point.

Giffords, House Majority Forward and Global Strategy Group pollsters are in the midst of briefing top House Democrats, frontline candidates and party committees about the poll, which was conducted in July. The groups are angling to revamp Democrats’ crime messaging, urging candidates to project toughness on crime and campaign against traditionally law-and-order-focused Republicans for making cities less safe by slashing federal funding.

And they want the party to shift quickly, lest they give Republicans a runway to ramp up their attacks in the upcoming midterms, when Democrats look to deny the GOP its slim advantage in the House.

“We do not want people to get shot or stabbed or carjacked. We want to hold people accountable when they break the law. None of that is revolutionary. But we do have to actually say that,” Emma Brown, Giffords’ executive director, said.

Doug Thornell, the CEO of consulting firm SKDK, who advised the polling project and works with Democrats including Maryland Gov. Wes Moore, called crime “personal and emotional to voters, and they expect their leaders to make it a serious priority.”

But Democrats face a difficult task in trying to figure out how to handle voters’ concerns over crime, with Trump fomenting those worries by sending the National Guard into blue cities across the country as part of a broader law-and-order crackdown.

Democrats are responding to the push with recent statistics that show violent crime falling from a pandemic-era spike and touting their investments in anti-violence initiatives. But they have struggled to change voters’ perceptions that they’re weak on crime — a belief that helped Trump’s 2024 victory.

Polls show voters largely trust Republicans more on crime; a Reuters/Ipsos survey last month found the GOP holds a 20-point advantage over Democrats on the issue. They see crime-fighting as a strength of the president, who maintains higher approval ratings on lawlessness than on the economy. Republicans are already hammering Democrats in key midterm races as “soft on crime” and anti-law enforcement.

And Democrats have spent years trying to distance themselves from the “defund the police” slogan that hurt them with their own constituents — touting support for law enforcement and tough-on-crime tactics in an acknowledgment they need to retool their approach to criminal justice.

“Anytime Republicans make an aggressive stance and the Democrats criticize it, it looks like the Democrats are defending the status quo. And no one believes the status quo is acceptable when it comes to crime,” GOP pollster Whit Ayres said.

The Democratic groups that commissioned the poll see political openings on crime and on gun violence. Mass shootings topped the list of crimes voters worry, and neighborhood shootings ranked third. Majorities of respondents said easy access to guns and illegal gun trafficking contribute heavily to crime.

Operatives point to Moore, as well as Mayors Justin Bibb of Cleveland and Michelle Wu of Boston, as Democrats who’ve prioritized public safety while parrying Trump’s National Guard push.

But Democrats are not unified.

Some battleground-district Democrats are imploring party leadership to do more to defend law enforcement funding, while others in the emerging slate of populist candidates hardly mention public safety as they position themselves to win back working-class voters on economic messaging.

Democratic-aligned think tanks and strategists disagree on the specifics of what more proactive messaging should look like.

A recent Vera Institute polling presentation to Democratic National Committee members suggested the party use “serious about safety” messaging instead of “tough on crime” talking points and was quickly panned by more centrist Democratic figures — even as other aspects of the progressive criminal justice group’s argument aligned with advice being doled out across the party.

“This is where we should be unifying,” Kim Foxx, a former state’s attorney in Cook County, Illinois, said. “It's right there that we don't have transparency on police killings anymore, that in [the Trump administration’s] effort to go after immigration, they're cutting funding to strategies that work to reduce violence. … We just have to be bold and call it out with a consistent message.”

© Noah Berger/AP

Democrats are entering the government shutdown blaming their rivals for rising health care costs. Republicans are countering by leaning into culture wars and attacking Democrats for pausing paychecks.

The partisan salvos crescendoed into Wednesday as each side prepared to answer for shutting down federal government operations after reaching a stalemate over a short-term funding patch.

Democratic and Republican leaders accused each other of operating in bad faith. The parties’ major campaign arms readied a barrage of attacks to hit airwaves and social media feeds across battlegrounds. And congressional candidates rushed to pin blame on the opposition — all moves that portend the battles to come next year when they tangle for control of the House.

Democrats believe they’re starting off the shutdown with the upper hand, pointing to polling that shows they have an advantage with voters concerned about health care. A string of surveys, including a Morning Consult poll shared first with POLITICO, reveal more voters are poised to blame Republicans than Democrats for the funding lapse — though swaths of Americans say both parties share responsibility. Independents across those surveys more readily point fingers at the GOP governing trifecta.

“Democrats have an advantage: It's a persuasive issue, it's a trust issue. And people care about it,” Brad Woodhouse, who runs a progressive health care group advising members of Congress, said of health care costs.

But Republicans aren’t ceding any ground as they, too, gear up for a shutdown-era feud.

The GOP already sees cracks forming across the aisle, prompting its House campaign arm to launch a digital ad across 42 competitive districts slamming Democrats over delayed paychecks for military members and other federal workers and accusing the party of “grinding America to a halt” to give undocumented immigrants “free health care.” The party's Senate campaign committee is yoking Democratic candidates in key races to what they’re referring to as Senate Minority Leader Chuck “Schumer’s shutdown.”

“If you want to talk about how to hold down people's health care premiums I’m all for that. If you want to talk about how to protect rural hospitals, I'm here for that. But I don't understand what shutting down the government has to do with that. I don't get why the two things are linked,” Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) said.

He was echoing Republicans who have blasted Democrats for attaching health care negotiations to government funding, accusing them of holding the federal workforce “hostage” over an issue Senate Majority Leader John Thune and several rank-and-file GOP senators said they were willing to engage in separate talks on. The Congressional Budget Office estimated Tuesday that roughly 750,000 employees could be furloughed each day of the shutdown.

“The people who will be hurt the most are the people that they say they want to help. It’s going to be working people,” Hawley added. “I just think that's kind of crazy."

Congressional Democrats’ refusal to support a stopgap funding measure without extending expiring Affordable Care Act subsidies marks a stark role reversal for the normally risk-averse party that typically abhors government shutdowns. And it represents a strategy shift for Schumer, who infuriated fellow Democrats when he sided with Republicans during the last funding fight in March.

Now his party is confident it’s returning to what’s historically been one of its winning issues by emphasizing health care. Democrats are armed with polling that shows opposition to the health care cuts in Republicans’ megalaw and are backed by the same advocacy groups that railed against Schumer after his spring shutdown cave. They’re also supported by surveys that show broad support for extending the enhanced Affordable Care Act tax credits set to expire by year’s end.

Democrats have discussed framing their message around health care for months, seizing on the expiring subsidies as another opportunity to hammer Republicans over rising costs and to freshen their attacks against the megalaw passed in July. The party’s House and Senate campaign arms began running digital ads ahead of the shutdown, accusing vulnerable Republican lawmakers of voting to raise health care costs and “standing in the way of affordable health care — on purpose.”

House Majority Forward is continuing its $3 million ad campaign targeting 10 vulnerable Republicans over tariffs and the shutdown until at least the end of next week, according to the group.

The minority party's bullishness is owed to millions of Americans likely being hit with higher health care premiums, should subsidies expire at year’s end without congressional action — another strain on the health care system on top of looming Medicaid cuts that providers warn threaten access nationwide. Even President Donald Trump’s top pollster has cautioned those cuts could harm battleground Republicans in the midterms.

But there are some warning signs for Democrats.

In a New York Times/Siena survey released Tuesday, nearly two-thirds of voters, including 59 percent of independents, said Democrats should not shut down the government if their demands are not met — a stat Thune’s aides and Republican campaign arms circulated online in the hours leading up to the shutdown.

And some Democrats are breaking rank: Sen. John Fetterman (D-Pa.), one of the three members of the Democratic caucus who voted with Republicans on Tuesday, had cautioned his colleagues ahead of the vote that Democrats “run the risk of not getting any of those kinds of changes to health care” if the government shuts down.

“There’s no such thing as a totally risk-less strategy,” Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) said in a brief interview Monday night. “But this strategy is the right one. It's the right thing to do morally, ethically and legally."

Republicans — sensing they’ll be vulnerable on an issue central to many voters determining the makeup of the House next year — are trying to redirect attention to a culture war fight, arguing Democrats are shutting down the government to fund free health care for undocumented immigrants and suggesting Schumer is acting out of self interest to avoid a primary challenge in 2028.

“Democrats are fighting for free health care for illegal aliens. And at the end of the day, that's not even what they're fighting for. What they're really fighting for is their left wing base that hates Donald Trump,” Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas), whose push to defund President Barack Obama’s signature health care law in 2013 propelled a shutdown, told reporters at the Capitol Tuesday night.

Trump amplified Republicans’ immigration message in a vulgar, artificial intelligence-generated video mocking Schumer and House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries that he posted after a meeting Monday with congressional leaders from both parties.

The video contains an inaccurate characterization of how the programs operate: undocumented immigrants are largely prohibited from federal health care assistance.

Republicans are also highlighting the shutdown’s impacts — like cutting funding for Head Start programs — in Democratically controlled swing areas. The National Republican Senatorial Committee launched a digital ad Wednesday hitting Georgia Sen. Jon Ossoff, who voted against the plan to avert a government closure Tuesday, over how the shutdown will affect military families and veterans who may see delays in getting their paychecks and benefits. The NRSC also plans to blast out the ad to voters in a text campaign.

Ossoff is running for reelection in one of the Senate’s few tossup seats next year.

Georgia Democrats, however, are already blaming Trump for losing health care access. In Georgia and Virginia, several rural health care clinics recently announced closures explicitly tied to Medicaid changes under the megalaw officially called the One Big Beautiful Bill Act. And if the Affordable Care Act tax credits expire, 750,000 people across the Peach State could lose access to health insurance by 2034, according to KFF.

Seth Clark, a Georgia Democrat and Macon mayor pro tempore, dismissed attacks on Ossoff as ineffective, saying he anticipates Georgians will blame the party in charge for the shutdown as they see government services shutter.

“I definitely don't think a 30-second spot with a scary voice is going to be the one who pins that tail on the donkey,” Clark said. “It's who called for negotiations and who walked away.”

© Francis Chung/POLITICO