Category: Politics

Virginia Democrats are putting pressure on Gov. Abigail Spanberger to get their redistricting campaign across the finish line as they grow increasingly worried about losing their April special election — and hurting their chances for flipping the House this November.

The aggressive effort to redraw the state’s congressional maps, if voters approve the referendum, could deliver Democrats a 10-to-1 seat advantage in Virginia, giving them four more seats than they would likely win under the current map. But despite Democrats’ having a fundraising advantage ten times that of the Republican side, the GOP is seeing strong early voting turnout.

With less than one month to go, nearly a dozen Democratic state lawmakers, strategists and candidates say Spanberger — Virginia’s popular Democratic governor who cruised to victory by double-digits last November — needs to step up more assertively to sell the referendum to voters. And they’re warning that she’ll bear the brunt of the blame if the effort fails.

It’s not that she’s doing nothing: Spanberger has endorsed the referendum and launched an ad supporting it this week, her first of the campaign, as POLITICO first reported. But critics say it’s the bare minimum for an effort that is supposed to be a top Democratic priority as the party works to counter GOP-led states that are redrawing their own maps.

“We Democrats gotta stop bringing a spork to a knife fight. If the Democrats are putting all their stock in this, like, let’s bring our A game,” said Democrat Beth Macy, who is running for Congress in one of the five House districts currently held by the GOP. She added that it would be “helpful” for Spanberger “to be the spokesperson on redistricting because she did so well and won by so much” in 2025.

Prior to her inauguration, Spanberger, who campaigned as a moderate focused on affordability for Virginians, stopped short of fully embracing the drastic redistricting plan the Democratic-led legislature eventually approved. Once in office, she began towing the party line and signed legislation enabling the referendum to go before voters. But she hasn’t been nearly as outspoken on the issue as other leading Democrats in the state — or other Democratic governors who have pushed for gerrymanders in their states, like California Gov. Gavin Newsom.

The stakes are high for Spanberger: A loss on redistricting could impact her rising star status on the national stage.

“How could she watch what Gavin Newsom just did and do the exact opposite?” asked a Democratic activist in Virginia who has worked closely with the pro-redistricting campaign and was granted anonymity to speak candidly. “Out in the field, we really don’t know whether she is for or against this thing.”

Spanberger’s team argues she’s been fighting hard for the new map.

“There isn’t a Democrat in Virginia who has done more to encourage voters to support this referendum than Governor Spanberger,” Libby Wiet, a spokesperson for Spanberger, said in a statement. “She’s a particularly effective messenger because she’s meeting voters where many of them are — Virginians who supported the bipartisan commission in 2020 but understand that the ballgame changed when the President claimed he’s ‘entitled’ to more Republican seats in Congress, and states got to work to give them to him.”

Virginia is not nearly as deeply blue as California is, and many of the state’s Democrats view wooing voters to the polls in April, rather than November, as a gargantuan undertaking. Spanberger is also a brand-new governor with other legislative priorities she wants to spend her political juice on more than helping Democrats take control of the House. And the “yes” campaign is running the risk of turning off Virginians who in 2020 approved a constitutional amendment creating a bipartisan redistricting commission by a two-to-one margin.

Adding confusion to the Democrats’ push is the Virginia Supreme Court, which has reserved the right to potentially nullify the redistricting push after the April election.

Polling on the issue has not been a slam dunk for Democrats. Nearly two-thirds of Virginians support the current method of drawing Congressional districts, while slightly more than half said they would vote to keep the current process in place, according to a Roanoke College survey last month. A separate survey from January found a slight majority, 51 percent, supported the Democratic-backed push to redraw lines.

Spanberger’s defenders push back on the need for the governor to step in as a central figure of the “yes” campaign. It’s a collective effort, they argue, and is supported by towering Democrats in the state, including the lieutenant governor, attorney general and Democratic Sens. Tim Kaine and Mark Warner.

“There’s no one person that has to carry the weight alone,” said Kéren Charles Dongo, the campaign manager Virginia for Fair Elections, which has amassed more than $33 million in donations and is working to mobilize voters.

Virginia House Speaker Don Scott, one of the architects of the redistricting push, has vehemently rejected the comparisons of Spanberger to Newsom — and the need for her to hold more rallies or meet and greets around the state.

“She’s only been on a job freaking 70 days,” he said. “We’re gonna be fine. I feel very confident that we’re gonna win.”

The governor’s seven-figure ad buy this week featured her speaking directly to camera about her party’s “temporary” effort to redraw lines and slamming “Trump’s Redistricting War.” Dongo’s group has also been blanketing the airwaves and social media with ads, including one featuring former President Barack Obama telling Virginians they have a “chance to level the playing field” in the face of unchecked power in Washington. Those close to the campaign also note that more voting sites are opening up in Democratic strongholds in population-rich Northern Virginia, and they anticipate a surge in “yes” voters closer to Election Day.

Privately, some Democrats anticipate Spanberger will ramp up her involvement in the closing weeks of the campaign, after being tied up with reviewing the bills the Virginia legislature passed.

“I think it’s easier if there’s somebody who’s a central person,” said Sarah Pendergraph, chair of the Roanoke City Democratic Committee, who suggested a jolt from a prominent figure like Spanberger may spur more volunteers and voters into action.

Meanwhile, Virginia conservatives have been lambasting Spanberger on social media, essentially making her the face of their anti-redistricting campaign. They’ve slammed her for reversing her stance on redistricting and caving to pressure from state and national Democrats.

“Abigail Spanberger seems to be intent on trying to turn Virginia into California east, so she probably will welcome Gavin Newsom,” said Jason Miyares, the former GOP Virginia Attorney General who is serving as co-chair of Virginians for Fair Maps, which is working to defeat the ballot measure and has raised roughly $3 million.

A small group of cameras followed Spanberger as she cast her ballot last Friday and held an impromptu gaggle from the parking lot of the Richmond City Elections office, where the governor pushed back on Republican critiques that she’s a flip-flopper on the gerrymander issue.

“Had they spoken in opposition to [Trump’s] efforts, I would perhaps take their level of consternation with a bit more seriousness,” Spanberger said. “It wasn’t until their individual House seats seemed in doubt … that they decided to have any opposition to redistricting.”

That retort was insufficient for some Virginia Democrats, who were frustrated that Spanberger didn’t hit back even harder — or use the opportunity, on the heels of casting her “yes” ballot, to forcefully rebuke the misleading mailers Republican-aligned groups have circulated that suggest she is a “no” vote on redistricting.

“She is certainly not 1,000 percent on board,” said a Democratic official granted anonymity to speak candidly about how they view the governor’s involvement. The person suggested the Democratic-led “yes” campaign should work on luring other big-name surrogates to rev up excitement for the base, including Obama, Newsom, Pete Buttigieg and Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), to ensure the redistricting effort doesn’t fail.

“If it goes down,” the official said, “[Spanberger] is gonna own it [so she] might as well go out there.”

​Politics

North Carolina Senate leader Republican Phil Berger, who touted President Donald Trump’s endorsement throughout his campaign, conceded defeat Tuesday in his primary election in a race he lost by just 23 votes.

Berger, a powerful figure in state politics, and Rockingham County Sheriff Sam Page were separated by just two votes when unofficial results first came in for the Greensboro-area seat on election night. A machine recount and a separate hand recount of ballots in some counties affirmed the 23-vote loss for the incumbent.

Page is expected to win the Republican-leaning district in November.

“While this was a close race, the voters have spoken, and I congratulate Sheriff Page on his victory,” Berger said in a statement. “Over the past 15 years, Republicans in the General Assembly have fundamentally redefined our state’s outlook and reputation. It has been an honor to play a role in that transformation.”

Page thanked Berger for conceding and bringing an end to a hard-fought campaign.

“I appreciate Senator Berger’s call earlier today and his concession,” he said in a statement. “I’m grateful for his years of service to our state, and I thank him for wishing me the best moving forward.”

The result adds an uncommon blemish to the president’s endorsement scorecard. Candidates he backed have almost universally either won or advanced to runoffs in primaries this cycle, although Trump withheld his endorsement in some heated contests.

Trump endorsed Berger in December, calling him an “America First Patriot” who is “doing an incredible job.” But he also praised Page as “great,” and said both candidates are “outstanding people.”

Berger’s defeat creates a power vacuum in Republican politics in North Carolina. He has led Republicans in the state senate since 2005, including all the nearly 15 years they have spent in the majority since 2011.

Berger has played a key role in crystallizing Republican control, leading a 2024 move to shift authority over elections from the governor to an elections board and to strip the governor and attorney general of key powers shortly before Democratic Gov. Josh Stein and Democratic Attorney General Jeff Jackson entered office.

Last year, Berger helped redraw North Carolina’s congressional maps to give Republicans a better chance of defeating Democratic Rep. Don Davis in the 1st Congressional district.

Page’s primary challenge was ignited in part by pushback to a 2023 gambling expansion proposal touted by Berger that would have paved the way for a new casino in the district. Republicans ultimately abandoned the idea, but Page’s vocal opposition to the proposal gave him the platform for his campaign.

​Politics

Democrats eyeing White House runs in 2028 are preemptively breaking up with AIPAC.

Sen. Cory Booker, who received donations bundled by the American Israel Public Affairs Committee as late as December, told POLITICO that he’s sworn off the group’s funds (and other PAC money). California Gov. Gavin Newsom said he never has and “never will” take donations from the group. Sen. Ruben Gallego (D-Ariz.) vowed last week that he “wouldn’t take AIPAC money” anymore. A spokesperson for Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro said he has “never taken money or solicited support from AIPAC,” while a spokesperson for Kentucky Gov. Andy Beshear said “AIPAC has never contributed to Gov. Beshear and they’re never going to. Ever.”

Their retreat underscores how rapidly AIPAC has become a bogeyman for Democrats seeking to criticize the Israeli government, particularly with the Netanyahu administration’s involvement with President Donald Trump’s operation in Iran. Many former AIPAC-friendly Democrats see the historically bipartisan group as becoming more and more aligned with Netanyahu’s right-wing government in recent years. Its emergence as an early touchstone in the shadow 2028 presidential primary reflects a calculation among leading Democrats that liberal voters’ hard shift away from the longtime U.S. ally will stick.

“This is going to be a huge flashpoint in the primary throughout 2027 and into 2028,” said veteran Democratic strategist Mark Longabaugh, who advised Sen. Bernie Sanders’ 2016 presidential bid. “The constitution of the party just in the makeup of the voters has changed dramatically. The politics of Israel has changed dramatically.”

Recent AIPAC critics also include some Jewish Democrats who had previously supported the organization or received its backing.

After AIPAC poured $22 million into Illinois primaries last week to mixed results, Gov. JB Pritzker, a billionaire who does not accept outside funds, accused the group of becoming pro-Trump and said he wants no part of the group he once donated to. A spokesperson for Sen. Elissa Slotkin (D-Mich.) pointed to a podcast in which she said she swore off AIPAC’s support in 2022.

Former Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel told POLITICO he “need not worry about AIPAC’s support. It will not be forthcoming.”

Emanuel – a supporter of Israel whose father was Israeli – has also been a longtime critic of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Emanuel contested past reporting that he held dual U.S.-Israelicitizenship when he was a child: “I never had Israeli citizenship. I’m 66, my whole life I’ve only had American citizenship and an American passport.”

Democrats cited a variety of reasons for rejecting AIPAC’s cash. Booker said it was part of a broader pledge he made at the start of the year to swear off all PAC money going forward. “I don’t believe we should be accepting any PAC money at all from anybody,” he told POLITICO on Friday.

Gallego likened taking the group’s backing to “endorsing what’s happening right now” in Iran and Gaza while appearing on POLITICO’s “The Conversation.”

And progressives like Reps. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.) and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.), who have been highly critical of the Israeli government and have repeatedly sparred with AIPAC, have accused the group of targeting their campaigns and long rejected its financial aid. Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) bluntly told POLITICO: “I don’t take their money, they’re running ads against me.”

Other potential White House aspirants attempted to dodge the question. Sen. Raphael Warnock (D-Ga.), for instance, said he has “individuals who support me” when asked if he would reject AIPAC’s backing. Several more did not respond when reached through spokespeople, including former Vice President Kamala Harris, former Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg, Sens. Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.) and Jon Ossoff (D-Ga.), and Govs. Wes Moore of Maryland and Gretchen Whitmer of Michigan.

That so many Democrats declined to comment on the organization suggests that AIPAC still has some influence in Democratic politics. And the big-spending group can still help its preferred candidates to victory even as its name has become mud in Democratic primaries, as evidenced by its wins last week in two of the four Illinois House races where it spent big. But it’s also telling that no potential 2028 candidate openly embraced the group.

AIPAC and its allies hit back, accusing Democrats who are giving the group the cold shoulder of trying to silence pro-Israel voices within the party. They vowed to continue intervening in Democratic primaries to promote their interests. Deryn Sousa, a spokesperson for AIPAC, said “efforts to push pro-Israel Democrats out of the political process are alarming and fundamentally undemocratic.”

Patrick Dorton, a spokesperson for AIPAC’s super PAC, United Democracy Project, acknowledged the “difficult environment” the lobby is navigating after Gaza and with the war in Iran. But, he said, “we aren’t going to be deterred in ensuring that pro-Israel voices are heard in federal elections.”

“We are going to work with mainstream Democrats across the party to strengthen the U.S.-Israel relationship, and that includes presidential contenders,” Dorton said. “We’re going to remind everybody about the millions of pro-Israel Democratic voters who are part of the political process in federal elections.”

Top Democrats’ rush to rebuff AIPAC comes amid a party-wide grappling over how to handle Israel, after the Biden administration’s approach to the war in Gaza was found to have cost Harris votes in 2024 and as polls show Democratic voters continuing to sour on Israel as it aids the U.S. intervention in Iran. An NBC News poll this month showed 57 percent of Democrats view Israel negatively, a dramatic shift from when just 35 percent held a negative view of the country after Hamas attacked it on Oct. 7, 2023. A Quinnipiac University survey earlier this month showed 62 percent of Democrats felt America is too supportive of Israel.

Democrats eyeing 2028 have been publicly repositioning on Israel for months as Gaza reemerges as a flashpoint in midterm primaries. And their criticisms of Israel and its allies in the U.S. are growing sharper as the war in Iran escalates with no clear off-ramp from Trump.

Newsom earlier this month likened Israel to an “apartheid state” and said the U.S. should reconsider military support for Israel. Pritzker has long been a supporter of Israel and has advocated for a two-state solution, but recently told the New York Times that he’s “challenged” by current geopolitics because the U.S. is supporting Israeli policies “that I don’t think the majority of Americans believe in and I don’t think a majority even of Israelis believe in.”

Shapiro, who’s similarly been a longtime supporter of Israel and a two-state solution, has also criticized Netanyahu and Trump’s enabling of his agenda in recent podcast appearances. But he cautioned that denying Israel’s right to exist could lead to “permanent war.” A spokesperson for Shapiro said the Pennsylvania governor “has been clear that Donald Trump is failing to hold Netanyahu accountable” while also positing that “Israel has a right to exist in security as a Jewish state, and we must find a path to peace in the Middle East that includes a safe homeland for the Palestinian people.”

Leading progressives, including Ocasio-Cortez and Khanna, have gone further — accusing the Netanyahu administration of perpetuating genocide in Gaza and pushing to stop U.S. arms sales to the country.

But Democrats on both ends of the ideological spectrum have argued there are bigger issues around Israel than AIPAC. Shapiro, on a podcast last year, said putting Democrats on record over AIPAC was a “shortcut” for asking their views on Israel and a two-state solution. “Demanding answers on those questions is more important than ‘hey, what about this lobbying group or that lobbying group,’” he said.

Khanna, in a message to POLITICO on Monday, said, “What matters more is the clarity of calling what happened a genocide and stopping military sales to Israel used to kill civilians in Gaza and Lebanon.”

Still, progressive groups such as MoveOn and Justice Democrats are plotting how to make taking AIPAC money a red line for those vying to be the party’s next standard bearer.

“We’re going to be demanding that anyone who deserves to get the Democratic nomination not only doesn’t take AIPAC support or donations, but actively speaks out against this lobby,” said Justice Democrats spokesperson Usamah Andrabi.

In a sign of the volatile and complex politics surrounding Israel, some Democrats who are shutting the door to AIPAC donations are declining to call on their would-be rivals to do the same.

Pritzker, asked by POLITICO last week whether Democratic presidential candidates should accept AIPAC funding, criticized the flood of special-interest money in campaigns in general but cast taking PAC cash as “a matter of values” for each candidate. Murphy said “everybody will make their own decision about it.”

And Booker went so far as to call the AIPAC pile-on “problematic.”

“There are Iranian Americans that bundle money. There are Turkish Americans that bundle money. There are a lot of ethnic groups that bundle money, and often for things that I don’t agree with. But somehow AIPAC seems to be drawing a lot of attention, and that’s problematic to me,” Booker said. “[AIPAC] is not the problem in America. The problem in America is money in politics.”

CLARIFICATION: This article has been updated to include Emanuel’s statement that he has never held dual Israeli citizenship.

​Politics

Newsom: We could lose the country in 2028

lead image

​Politics

When Brandon Herrera ran for Congress in 2024, the Republican Jewish Coalition called him “a goose-stepping extremist” and spent big to take him down. Two years later, he’s the presumptive GOP nominee — and his former foes are staying home as the GOP establishment moves to embrace him.

Herrera, a gun shop owner and popular YouTuber known as “The AKGuy” running in Texas’ 23rd Congressional District, has faced widespread criticism for past videos in which he mimics a Nazi march to Nazi music, jokes about the Holocaust and boasts about his 1939 edition of “Mein Kampf.” His 2024 opponent, Rep. Tony Gonzales (R-Texas) called him a “known neo-Nazi,” a characterization Herrera disputes. Concern over Herrera’s comments were so severe that the American Israel Public Affairs Committee’s United Democracy Project spent more than $1 million two years ago and the Republican Jewish Coalition spent close to $400,000 to sink his campaign.

But now, a scandal forced Gonzales to drop out of the runoff, and Herrera is the GOP nominee in the sprawling, GOP-leaning Texas border district, which President Donald Trump carried by a 17-point margin in 2024.

And faced with the choice of a candidate they’ve long accused of antisemitism and a Democrat, these pro-Israel and Jewish groups are thus far choosing to sit on their hands.

AIPAC, which backs both Democratic and Republican pro-Israel candidates and usually focuses its efforts in primaries, has not endorsed in the race. AIPAC spokesperson Deryn Sousa said in a statement only that the group would “continue to assess where candidates across the country stand on issues that affect the U.S.-Israel partnership.”

And the RJC, which only supports Republican candidates, won’t get involved. “The RJC has a longstanding policy of speaking out against those who traffic in Nazi ideology, and this is another case,” said RJC political director and spokesperson Sam Markstein. “The RJC opposed Mr. Herrera in 2024, and he will not get our support now.”

But Markstein made clear it was likely they would sit the race out rather than oppose him in the general election. “We’ve never supported a Democrat, so that should tell you everything you need to know,” he said.

In the weeks since Herrera finished as the top vote-getter in Texas’ March 4 primary and Gonzales dropped out, the GOP establishment has largely embraced Herrera.

Last week, as lawmakers and donors socialized during a glitzy Mar-a-Lago fundraiser for the House Freedom Caucus, which backed him in the primary, Herrera made a triumphant appearance, according to an attendee granted anonymity to detail a private event and another attendee’s post on social media. Trump announced his endorsement on social media the same night.

“Brandon is strongly supported by many Highly Respected MAGA Warriors in Texas, and Republicans in the US House,” Trump wrote. “HE WILL NEVER LET YOU DOWN!”

Speaker Mike Johnson and House GOP leadership followed a week later, calling him an “America First grassroots leader” in a joint statement Thursday.

Trump’s endorsement brings “a little bit of comfort” to pro-Israel GOP donors who view Trump as a loyal ally, said Gabriel Groisman, a Florida-based GOP donor active in pro-Israel circles. “We trust the president and his team in their vetting of congressional candidates,” Groisman said. “But it doesn’t mean we don’t ask questions and we don’t dig further.”And Groisman said that the “ugly truth about politics” is Jewish Republican donors are now faced with the option of him or a Democrat, rather than another Republican. “So the question is whether it’s better to have him in [office], or not. That’s a very, very difficult question to answer.”

Herrera criticized AIPAC’s spending against him in 2024, calling it “Israel first bullshit.” “I’m not anti-Israel, I’m anti Israel buying American elections,” he wrote on social media.

He has also been critical of U.S. policy toward Israel, arguing American taxpayers should not have to pay for military aid to Israel. We shouldn’t be spending a cent of taxpayer dollars on anything that is not either an investment or right here in the United States,” he said in a speech, Israel National News reported. “I don’t hate my neighbor just because I don’t want to pay his power bill. If they want to buy rockets from us, let’s sell to them.”

Republicans’ embrace of Herrera shows how seriously the GOP values maintaining control of the House this cycle, even as some Republicans warn of growing antisemitism within their own ranks.

Herrera’s campaign has continued to publicly push back on criticisms of his social media history, which they contend are taken out of context from his “work as a historical firearms educator” and omitting extended clips that include “comments ridiculing and condemning Hitler’s book.” 

“The accusations against Brandon were bizarre and false, manufactured by a desperate political opponent who misleadingly cut and pasted together disparate video clips,” Herrera campaign manager Kimmie Gonzalez said in a statement.

Groisman, the Florida-based donor, said Herrera’s allies are working to assuage concerns about his past statements through outreach to Jewish and pro-Israel donors in Texas and beyond.

“They’re trying to send them what he has actually said, versus what people say he said, which they seem to claim that there’s a big delta there,” Groisman said. “The concern is, are we, as a Republican Party, allowing in another potential Thomas Massie-type figure? Nobody knows the answer to that question.” Massie, a Republican member of the House from Kentucky, has been an outspoken critic of Trump and Israel.

Herrera’s campaign confirmed he is looking for dialogue with those same groups that have attacked him for years — including the RJC.

Katie Padilla Stout, the Democratic nominee in the district, has said that Herrera has “consistently been on the wrong side of history,” citing content from his YouTube videos that mocked veterans and another video in which he tested Nazi weaponry. Padilla Stout has started to make allegations of antisemitism core to her attacks on her Republican opponent, as outside Democratic groups — like the House Majority PAC — use his past videos as attacks.

“Given his documented history of apparent anti-semitism, it’s no surprise our campaign has received an outpouring of support from people from all across the district and from both sides of the aisle, including support from the Jewish community,” Padilla Stout’s campaign manager, Yolitzma Aguirre, said in a statement.

Some of the Republican officeholders who have warned loudly about growing antisemitism within their party dodged when asked about Herrera.

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) has vowed to take on any Republican congressional candidate who espoused antisemitism, but when asked about Herrera said “I don’t know what you’re talking about, in terms of what he said.”

Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas), who denounced podcaster Nick Fuentes as a “goose-stepping Nazi” during a speech last week, has stayed out of the primary, even as he endorsed in other U.S. House races in his state. He said questions about Herrera’s statements or actions should be directed to Herrera himself.

“I haven’t seen the video you’re discussing, and so you’re welcome to ask him those questions,” Cruz said in a brief interview last week.

When asked how he would advise Texas voters to cast their ballot in Herrera’s race, Cruz refused to answer. “Those are the exact same questions a Democrat tracker would ask,” Cruz said before walking away. His office declined to elaborate on his answers.

While Republicans circle the wagons or duck the topic, a Jewish Democratic group that rarely plays in districts like this is thinking about investing in trying to defeat Herrera.

The Jewish Democratic Council of America is considering getting involved in the heavily Republican district, which would deviate from their norm of engaging only in districts with significant Jewish voter populations.

“If there was ever a chance that a Democrat could win a seat like this, maybe it’s in these midterms,” said JDCA CEO Halie Soifer. “So it is something we’re looking at. Certainly it is a priority for us to defeat Trump-endorsed neo-Nazis, like this candidate.”

CORRECTION: An earlier version of this article misspelled Halie Soifer’s name and misstated her title.

​Politics

DES MOINES — Rob Sand got a hero’s welcome at a state deer hunting expo at the Iowa Events Center on a recent March weekend.

The state’s lone Democratic statewide elected official, and Democrats’ hope for flipping the governor’s mansion for the first time in 16 years, could barely make it through the Sunday morning sea of camo-wearing, venison jerky-chomping, Busch Light tallboy-nursing fellow hunters as more than a dozen people stopped and congratulated him.

But it wasn’t because of his politics. If anything, it was in spite of them.

“Rob, heckuva buck!” said one passerby.

Sand was at the annual Iowa Deer Classic to enter a Green gross-scoring 209-inch buck he’d tagged earlier this season. Photos of the deer have proliferated on Trophy Bucks of Iowa and other Facebook hunting groups across the state.

“Mr. 200!” said Levi Schmitz, a Trump-voting Republican who nonetheless plans to back Sand.

“You got me,” the 43-year-old state auditor responded with a grin.

As Democrats across the map continue to hunt for paths out of the metaphorical wilderness, Sand is betting that his own path to the governor’s mansion runs through his familiarity in the literal wilderness.

Sand represents the kind of candidate Democrats have long sought to win on tough red terrain: an inarguably of-the-place contender whose persona and bio can help sell political views that have become a tough pitch in places where many hear “Democrat” and picture coastal elites. Iowa, a swing state through 2012, moved hard right in the Trump years as Democrats increasingly struggled to connect.

Here, Republicans have taken advantage of the culture wars in a big way for years. Retiring Sen. Joni Ernst first won in 2014 by running hard on her pig-farming, military vet bio and painting her attorney opponent as an effete outsider.

Sand doesn’t run from some of his more liberal views. But like many other Democrats running this year, he’s banking that his local cultural cred will make him tougher for Republicans to caricature as a not-like-us coastal outsider.The day the expo kicked off, the avid bow hunter and fisherman’s campaign launched a “Hunting With Rob” microsite that extolls the rugged Iowa way of life. “For the first time in Iowa history, hunters, sportsmen, conservationists, and outdoor enthusiasts alike will finally have an ally in the governor’s office,” it reads.

In a state where the first day of deer season is an unofficial holiday, Sand’s strategy to center his culturally midwestern hobby rather than his Democratic brand was on full display. He dropped $30 on a glove for removing burrs, $35 on a tool that keeps hunting bows level and $69 on MAXX Step Aiders for climbing trees. And the branding appeared to be working.

“I’m super-Republican, but you got my vote,” said Tom Buckroyd, a hunter from a small community near Marshalltown wearing a “Crossbows Are Gay” T-shirt who spent roughly 20 minutes talking to Sand about hunting.

As he picked at a free sample of barbecue venison jerky on a toothpick, Sand said he wasn’t surprised by his warm reception.

“Number one, it just means I shot a huge buck this year,” he told POLITICO. “But number two, I go back to culture. And we have this stupid, broken, two-choice political system. … And we are told stories about who can be right in either party. And when you find someone that’s in a party, but then also doesn’t fit that story, I think for a lot of people that is a sign of realness or a sign of authenticity about who they are.”

Since their bruising losses in 2024, Democrats have tried all manner of ways to rehabilitate their brand, from cursing more to growing beards to talking about sports. This cycle, they’ve redoubled their efforts to find authentically local candidates — and in some races, those candidates have emerged and caught lightning as they challenge status-quo Democratic candidates. Many are leaning hard into local culture signals.

Sand has hunting. Maine’s Senate candidate Graham Platner has his oystering and his Second Amendment creds. Texas’ Bobby Pulido has his guitar; James Talarico has the Good Book. Alaska’s Mary Peltola has fish. Democratic candidates who can win in tough places often get national buzz. And Sand happens to be from a state that — at least for now — still plays an outsized role in the presidential process. Could Sand be a surprise 2028 contender?

“If Rob wins, he will instantly be part of that conversation,” said Tommy Vietor, President Barack Obama’s former Iowa press secretary and a host of Pod Save America.

Sand is running as a hunting-loving, churchgoing, Casey’s gas station pizza-loving state auditor who has spent the past five years positioning himself as a fiscally responsible friend to the Iowa taxpayer.

There’s been little public polling of the race; the only public survey, released back in October, found Sand beating GOP Rep. Randy Feenstra by two points, 45 percent to 43 percent. But national operatives in both parties see it as one of a handful of governor’s races that could flip. Sand is unopposed in the state’s June 2 primary, though five Republicans will be on the ballot for their party’s nomination.

He entered the show room at the EMC Expo Center after attending a chapel service for expo-goers where he quietly scrolled a Contemporary English Version of the Bible on his phone, listening dutifully to the sermon about Jesus’ feeding of the 5,000. “What sort of kingdom work is He asking you to do?” the pastor asked.

And what does Sand see as his kingdom work? “Talking about the evils of the two-choice system and trying to break down a system that inherently divides us and leads our leaders into the temptation of being lazy, and leads our leaders into the temptation of lying, bearing false witness against their opponents, because they know that they don’t actually have to solve our problems,” he said.

“In order to get reelected, all they got to do is convince us that they’re the lesser of two evils,” Sand continued. “And they win because we only have two realistic options on the ballot — and that entire system, to me, is just such a temptation to not serve people, to not do good, to actively lie, to spread false information.”

You’d be forgiven if you forgot Sand was running as a Democrat. That, of course, is part of the point of his campaign. Sometimes to salvage the Democratic brand in a red state you have to first savage it.

But Republicans will be sure to remind voters a few times between now and November.

“He hasn’t really had to take very many positions,” said David Kochel, a longtime Iowa Republican operative who has guided multiple presidential campaigns. ”He’s going to be forced at some point to either disavow the Democratic Party platform, which is going to piss off progressives, or he’s going to have to accept the label of being a Democrat in Iowa and defend it. And it’s gonna be hard for him to do.”

Republicans will paint some images of Sand of their own. As much as he would like to cut the figure of a rugged outdoorsman, they say, he also spent some time in college modeling in Milan and Paris — photos that may well pop up in GOP ads. “I mean, it was a part-time job I had in college,” Sand said. “Catching chickens was my first one.” Catching chickens? “Castrated male chickens,” he clarifies.

There is also the matter of his election financing: His wealthy in-laws have dumped$7 million into his campaign. “Hardworking Iowans know the value of a dollar, and don’t have the luxury of having a silver spoon feeding them their career,” Iowa Republican Chairman Jeff Kaufmannsaid in a statement.

Iowa Republicans are taking Sand’s candidacy seriously. In an interview, Bob Vander Plaats, the influential West Des Moines evangelical leader, called Sand “dangerous” and the “best candidate” Democrats could run.

“He’s trying to come off as a more folksy, more accomplished Tim Walz. ‘I go to church every Sunday. I hunt. I’m the taxpayers’ watchdog. I’m gonna hit all the Republican talking points, basically, that I can,’” Vander Plaats said before stressing that Sand “would be way outside of where Iowans are.”

On the Republican side, Vander Plaats endorsed Adam Steen over Rep. Randy Feenstra, the GOP establishment pick and primary frontrunner. “I just haven’t been impressed with Randy’s campaign. I don’t think he has the campaign to win a general election.”

Sand practices a judge-not-lest-ye-be-judge approach with would-be voters. When he was speaking to the man wearing a “Crossbows Are Gay” shirt, Sand didn’t bat an eye.

“I know what that shirt says, but I’m not going to assume that he literally is anti-homosexual because his T-shirt says that,” Sand said. “I’m not a believer that lecturing people is an effective way to get them to not do a thing. Now, I’m open about my support for gay marriage, for the gay community. He’s probably seen me say that. … And he’s not going to hear me back away from that. So to me, there’s probably room for someone to wear a shirt that they mean as a joke they don’t actually mean to be negative.”

Sand didn’t win the Big Buck contest he’d entered. But as he took selfies with the men who had beat him, an onlooker from Exira named Jeremy brought up a possible consolation prize.

“You’re the next governor of Iowa!” he told Sand.

As the day wrapped, the lanky state auditor pulled his buck head down off the wall and, carrying it by an antler, walked out of the convention center — its taxidermied eyes fixed in a frozen stare at Sand’s potential new voters.

​Politics

MIDLAND, Michigan — Pete Buttigieg is known for going everywhere to get his message out in the media. In 2026, he’s taking that strategy offline, too, traveling virtually everywhere.

A source close to Buttigieg tells Playbook he’s spent half of 2026 on the road, hitting 10 states so far — including battleground states Georgia, Nevada, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin and his adopted home state Michigan, plus a multiday swing across for-now-first-in-the-nation New Hampshire. And he’s not yet hawking books like some of his would-be 2028 rivals. He’s stumping for candidates up and down the ballot.

While potential 2028ers like Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker and Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro focus on flexing midterm-year dominance in their own backyards, Buttigieg is embarking on a more national project to position himself as a super surrogate not confined to specific geography or demographics. It’s a strategy that could help him counter the base of power that comes from holding elected office.

Buttigieg laid out his midterm strategy to Playbook in an exclusive interview after gripping and grinning and taking selfies along a ropeline: “The basic idea is to make myself useful to candidates and causes that I care about and that we all need to succeed,” he said at Mi Element Grains & Grounds, a combination microbrewery, bakery and coffeehouse, after launching a canvassing effort backing Chedrick Greene in a special election to determine control of the Michigan state Senate.

“Every kind of state, red, blue and purple, there are races going on and fights going on that I want to make sure I’m part of,” Buttigieg told Playbook. “And they are all often very different from each other, but what they have in common is leaders who are very rooted in a sense of place. They’re very much of where they’re from, and I think represent a big part of what the future for Democrats is going to look like.”

Buttigieg has increased his engagement with Black candidates like Greene and the community more broadly, addressing a perceived weakness. In Alabama, Buttigieg joined civil rights leaders and community members in Selma for the Bridge Crossing Jubilee and Anniversary of Bloody Sunday, and made remarks at a unity breakfast and Tabernacle Baptist Church. In Birmingham, he joined a roundtable with business owners from the Historic 4th Avenue Business District.

A source familiar with Buttigieg’s past outreach to the Black community described his efforts a “natural extension” of his work on his 2020 presidential campaign and in the Biden administration.

“It’s a recognition that engagement in those spaces and showing up in 2026 is going to be a huge indicator of who’s going to be the leader of this party,” this person, granted anonymity to candidly appraise Buttigieg’s approach, told POLITICO. “I think it’s really smart to think along those lines, and to show, right? Not just talk about it, but to actually show and demonstrate it.”

He also campaigned for Shawn Harris in former Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene’s deep-red Georgia congressional district, and gave an interview to Black creator Hood Anchor Ye alongside Rep. Nikema Williams. He also attended Sen. Raphael Warnock’s Ebenezer Baptist Church, where he received a very warm welcome.

“I’m very focused on coalition right now, and that includes pillars of our Democratic coalition, like the building trades workers I was with in Toledo or in Nevada, and certainly Black voters who are so vital to the past, present and future of the party,” Buttigieg said.

A February Emerson poll found Buttigieg had about 6 percent support among Black voters; California Gov. Gavin Newsom had 17 percent and former VP Kamala Harris had 36 percent.

“He had a remarkable run in 2020 and ultimately, one of the, perhaps the greatest obstacle, is that he didn’t have much of a relationship with African American voters,” David Axelrod, the former strategist for former President Barack Obama and longtime Buttigieg ally, told Playbook. “And the fact that he’s spending a lot of time communing with Black voters across the country even if in the service of the midterm elections, is a reflection that he’s not headed for early retirement.”

There is also, of course, the fact that Buttigieg has a newly crafted stump speech that walks an average voter through their day and overlays his policy hopes for them, something reminiscent of James Joyce’s “Ulysses”. “I don’t want to overdo that, but yes, as you know, my whole thing is the politics of everyday life. And one way to get that across is to just literally walk through everyday life and all of the hundreds of moments in that day that are shaped by political choices.”

Asked about whether he thought the narrative of his struggles with Black voters matched the

reality of what he was seeing on the ground, Buttigieg redirected. “This year is very much not about me,” he said. “What it’s really all part of for me is where are there leaders that I can help and where it’s going to make a difference to engage.”

Beyond that, Buttigieg’s travels and how he’s talking is revealing about his potential trajectory: For starters, he’s laser-focused on building a majority Democratic governing coalition. He used the word no fewer than 10 times.

Buttigieg insisted that Democrats “should be able to build a supermajority coalition” based on the party’s platform. He has noted in the past most Americans support paid family leave, raising the federal minimum wage, raising taxes on the wealthy, universal background checks, and a public health insurance option. “If we can’t get those two-thirds supported positions over 50 percent that means we’re missing something in terms of the coalition we built.”

But as potential candidates like Newsom seek to emulate Trump’s smashmouth social media style, Buttigieg is more focused on creating a Democratic version of MAGA’s sweeping coalition. That means Buttigieg’s 2026 project is to build a big tent in nature — not a matter of pure ideology. In Pennsylvania, for example, Buttigieg held a well-attended event with Bob Brooks, the bellwether Lehigh Valley Democratic congressional candidate running to flip Pennsylvania’s 7th Congressional District. Brooks, a Pennsylvania firefighter, supports Medicare for All, which Buttigieg opposed in his presidential run.

“It is really important that we understand what it means that this president stitched together this very unlikely crew that includes traditional Republicans, Libertarians, authoritarians and white nationalists,” Buttigieg said. “We have to have a bigger, better, different coalition.”

In the next few weeks, Buttigieg is expected to cross another battleground off his list, with a stop in North Carolina where he’ll campaign for Democrats, as well as two redder states: a town hall in Oklahoma and a stop in Montana, where he is planning to boost “The Montana Plan,” a ballot initiative to curtail corporations from spending money on political candidates or ballot issues.

“We’re trying to get everywhere we can,” Buttigieg said. “Including places in the same way that — you know, I think Fox News is this kind of place — places where people don’t hear enough from us, because I think there are potential members of our coalition to be found.”

Like this content? Consider signing up for POLITICO’s Playbook newsletter.

​Politics

Ruben Gallego wants to make Democrats fun again

lead image

​Politics

Two companies with ties to veteran political operatives received at least $23 million in commissions for their role in the controversial Department of Homeland Security ad campaign that helped lead to Secretary Kristi Noem’s ouster.

One of the firms, Safe America Media, received at least $15.2 million and was formed last February just a few days before it was awarded the limited-bid contract to work on the overall $220 million, taxpayer-funded ad campaign, according to an internal DHS memo and three people familiar with the contracts who were granted anonymity because they weren’t authorized to speak publicly about the contracts. Safe America Media was run by Republican operatives Mike McElwain and Patrick McCarthy, who have ties to a firm that did extensive media buying on President Donald Trump’s 2024 campaign.

The second firm, People Who Think, received at least $7.7 million from its 10 percent commission on a portion of the $220 million, according to the memo, which was written by DHS Deputy Under Secretary for Management Paul Stackhouse, and reviewed by POLITICO. People Who Think was co-founded by Jay Connaughton, who did work for Trump’s 2016 campaign and has reportedly worked for other conservative politicians and causes.

The March 3 DHS memo noted there was only a “limited competition” for the awarded contracts because of the “urgent and compelling need” for the ad campaign. It also stated that People Who Think’s 10 percent commission for international advertising and Safe America Media’s 12 percent commission for domestic advertising was below the industry norm of 15 percent.

Besides military recruiting efforts and Covid-19-related campaigns, the DHS ads were the most expensive U.S. government marketing campaign in the last 10 years, Bloomberg reported.

The information about the contracts add new details to the ongoing fallout over DHS’s $220 million ad campaign, which included a video of a cowboy-hat clad Noem riding a horse at Mount Rushmore. It also highlights how political operatives were awarded contracts worth millions of dollars with seemingly little oversight or guardrails — including from President Donald Trump, who White House officials have said did not sign off on the ad campaign.

The ads became a sore spot within the White House, including with Trump, because they fed into a perception that Noem used her position to set herself up for a future political run.

“Safe America Media submitted a proposal for and was awarded a contract to support DHS’s nationwide public awareness campaign, and committed substantial resources to meet an accelerated timeline on budget,” Safe America Media lawyer Joseph Folio said in a statement to POLITICO. “We look forward to providing additional information to address inaccuracies in the public reporting and ensure the record accurately reflects the scope and context of that work.” It’s unclear what he is referring to and a spokesperson didn’t respond to a follow-up question.

McCarthy, McElwain and Connaughton didn’t respond to requests for comment and People Who Think could not be reached for comment. A spokesperson for DHS declined to comment.

Republican Sens. Thom Tillis of North Carolina and John Kennedy of Louisiana, along with Democrats, grilled Noem when she testified before Congress in early March about the DHS ad campaign. At one point during the hearing, a clearly frustrated Tillis threatened to halt all Senate business if Noem refused to provide information about immigration enforcement in his home state, while Kennedy probed Noem about the ads and derided them for only being “effective in your name recognition.”

Noem has defended the campaign by saying the ads helped encourage two million immigrants to self-deport and thus saved billions of dollars.

Noem was also asked during the hearing about the Strategy Group,which worked to make some of the ads for Safe America Media. The Strategy Group is run by Ben Yoho, the husband of Noem’s former right-hand communications aide Tricia McLaughlin. McLaughlin has said she recused herself from the campaign, and DHS general counsel James Percival has backed her up publicly on questions about the matter and said she was not involved in selecting subcontractors.

In a response to inquiries from Sens. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) and Peter Welch (D-Vt.), both members of the Senate Homeland Security Committee, Yoho said his company was only hired as a subcontractor by Safe America Media for ad production worth $226,000.

Asked about his role in this ad campaign, Yoho referred POLITICO to the letter.

Welch’s office told POLITICO that they have talked with legal representatives for People Who Think and Safe America Media but have not yet received responses to their questions. They said they expect to hear from them soon.

Safe America Media LLC placed some of the DHS ads through Strategic Media Services Inc., which received more than $269 million from Trump’s campaign in 2024, according to FEC records. SMS used the same office address on corporate registrations between 2013 and 2021 as Designated Market Media Inc., which McElwain is the president of.

SMS didn’t respond to a request for comment.

​Politics