We’re also tracking the fallout over a controversial ad from Vivek Ramaswamy – the Republican gubernatorial nominee in Ohio – which featured the estranged mother of his Democratic opponent, Amy Acton.
In the campaign spot her mother, Donna Arthur, was critical of Acton and called her a “liar”.
Political debate has moved away from resolving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict even as violent events in the West Bank are making the issue harder to ignore
Democrats believe circumstances have aligned for them to win a slew of competitive elections in the state
Mary Peltola’s campaign to represent Alaska in the US Senate has taken her to parts of the massive state’s interior that are inaccessible by road and on the frontlines of the cost-of-living crisis she hopes will make her the first Democrat to win the seat in nearly two decades.
She has been to towns where paper towels retail for $40, a half gallon of oat milk goes for $21 and the cost of a new freezer can be quadruple what it is in the state’s largest city, Anchorage, simply because it’s so complicated to get there. Along the Arctic Ocean, she’s heard of communities where power bills have climbed to $1,500 a month because they rely on generators for power and the Iran war has pushed the cost of diesel to new heights.
Frustration with a sprawling fraud scandal has cut Peggy Flanagan’s poll lead – could ex-NFL reporter Michele Tafoya win a first statewide election for Republicans in 20 years?
As Democrats fight to regain control of the US Senate, hopes are rising in states – from Kansas to Texas – where they have not prevailed in decades. But in Minnesota, where Republicans have not won statewide election since 2006, the contest for an open Senate seat is closer than expected.
Should Peggy Flanagan – the state’s Democratic lieutenant governor – win the election, she will be the first Native American woman to serve in the US Senate. But history has not yet been made. The closely watched Cook Political Report shifted its rating on the race this week from “likely Democrat” to “lean Democrat”.
Should President Donald Trump deliver a primetime address next week with the avowed purpose of impacting the elections nationwide?
Yes. Absolutely yes.
President Trump is often the best proponent of his own policies, and the much-anticipated "blue wave" would effectively paralyze those policies and his plans to finish the battle with Iran, build the Golden Dome and Golden Fleet, and slow, if not reverse, the regulatory overhaul underway.
Loss of the Senate majority would also mean near-zero chances of confirming any appellate judges or Supreme Court justices. Spending on the Pentagon would also plummet as Democrats return to their long-standing position of insisting that every dollar of increased defense spending must be matched by one for non-defense domestic discretionary spending.
If President Trump makes these arguments directly to voters and names the names of the senators or Senate candidates who are key allies or the Democratic nominees he believes are from the far, far left, the sharpened focus could help mobilize his base to again support his agenda one last time.
There are precedents for such an appeal, and they had mixed results.
On October 24, 2022, President Biden made a direct closing argument for Democrats at Democratic National Committee headquarters, 15 days before Election Day. The expected "red wave" that year was reduced to a ripple.
On October 25, 2006, President George W. Bush held a nationally televised news conference less than two weeks before the midterms. President Bush discussed Iraq and framed the election choice around national security and taxes. It was a news conference, not a formal primetime address. The GOP got "thumped," to borrow President Bushâs own characterization of the 2006 results.
The takeaway from that limited data set? A speech could work to rally a presidentâs base voters. A press conference wonât.
President Trumpâs rallies around the country have always served as a feedback loop for his messaging. He knows itâs his base that turns out, and he tries out various messages and themes, then amplifies what works and cuts what doesnât in subsequent rallies and in his conversations with the press.
Getting the feedback is particularly important when it comes to turning out the base. As the president has been everywhere in the past month, he has a good idea of what "works" in this campaign cycle.
The Trump PAC may even want to buy network time for an address, or it may simply allow social media to do its thing. A tight 15 minutes would play and play, give birth to ten thousand posts and reels and, crucially, focus the base and independent voters on the stakes, which are very high indeed.
President Trump has got a fine writing staff, but brevity is not second nature to him or them when it comes to speeches. If he does try such a direct appeal, the crucial points I hope he makes in succinct fashion are these:
Economists see the next few years as a boom for the nation. We canât screw it up by ceding control of taxes and spending to Democrats. The 71 economists surveyed by The Wall Street Journal this week predict continued and expanding economic growth, falling gas prices and tamed inflation ahead. "Morning in America" is beginning to dawn again.
Iran is defeated, but the mop-up will take some months, even though oil exports from the Middle East have risen to levels that exceed prewar levels. President Trump knows the scorecard on the battle by heart. He should repeat it again. The United States has decisively triumphed over the evil Iranian regime, and he will finish the job. It will be easier with Republican majorities.
The battle with Iran has demonstrated to the world the need for missile defense and a vibrant, modernized Navy. The president should emphasize his plans for both and warn that Democratic majorities present mortal threats to each.
"Medicare for All" is a clever way of saying "higher taxes, rationed healthcare, and diminished healthcare for seniors." President Trump should pledge again to stop efforts to pass Obamacare 2.0.
The only thing Democrats can agree on is a combination of obstruction and impeachment. Their commitment to weaponizing all of government and bringing back McCarthyism â this time aimed at every Trump supporter and not just him â is extremely strong. Democrats are unapologetically calling for these things, as well as for packing the Supreme Court and many other radical plans.
The Democrats have put forward the most radical set of candidates in American history. Abdul El-Sayed in Michigan, Peggy Flanagan in Minnesota, Troy Jackson in Maine and James Talarico in Texas are all extremists camouflaged as Democrats. In Alaska, they have attempted to defeat the great Senator Dan Sullivan by running a "decoy Dan Sullivan" in an attempt to get leftist Mary Peltola over the finish line. Retreads like left-winger Sherrod Brown in Ohio should not replace the effective and able Jon Husted. Congresswoman Ashley Hinson is exactly what Iowa needs. North Carolina should send Michael Whatley to Washington to continue his long-standing partnership with the president. These are easy choices when the big picture is set before voters, especially when they are reminded of just how far off the normal political map El-Sayed, Flanagan, Talarico and Troy Jackson are.
The president should explicitly ask voters to support Mike Rogers in Michigan, Michele Tafoya in Minnesota, Ken Paxton in Texas and Susan Collins in Maine. President Trump should note that Rogers and Tafoya are likely to be as independent-minded as Sen. Collins, who has often opposed presidential policies, but that all of them represent their states very well.
States that are "light blue" or "light red" deserve senators that represent them, not Hamas or other extremist positions.
President Trump should close by reminding everyone of the mess he inherited. The once wide-open border is now completely closed and sealed tight, with the long-awaited wall nearing completion. Fraud in Minnesota, California and other blue states is being exposed and corrected. Inflation is way down from the 9.1% it reached under President Joe Biden but needs to go down further still, and President Trump and his economic team can get that done with support from Congress, not obstruction.
And the evil regime in Iran that has terrorized the world for 47 years is on its last legs and wobbling. Its nuclear weapons program is obliterated and will not be allowed to be rebuilt. There is work to be done with our allies across the globe, but taking us down the impeachment road because the Democrats have no proposals to do anything else would be a disaster for everyone.
"Americaâs Golden Age is indeed upon us," President Trump should conclude. "I need your vote, and so do these great Republican candidates. Please make a plan to vote and turn out. Thank you. God bless our troops everywhere, but especially in the blockade and at the bases around the Islamic radicals in Iran, and those confronting Hamas, Hezbollah and the Houthis, and God bless the United States."
Hugh Hewitt is a Fox News contributor and host of "The Hugh Hewitt Show" heard weekday afternoons from 3 PM to 6 PM ET on the Salem Radio Network, and simulcast on Salem News Channel. Hugh drives Americans home on the East Coast and to lunch on the West Coast on over 400 affiliates nationwide, and on all the streaming platforms where SNC can be seen. He is a frequent guest on the Fox News Channelâs news roundtable, hosted by Bret Baier weekdays at 6pm ET. A son of Ohio and a graduate of Harvard College and the University of Michigan Law School, Hewitt has been a Professor of Law at Chapman Universityâs Fowler School of Law since 1996 where he teaches Constitutional Law. Hewitt launched his eponymous radio show from Los Angeles in 1990. Hewitt has frequently appeared on every major national news television network, hosted television shows for PBS and MSNBC, written for every major American paper, has authored a dozen books and moderated a score of Republican candidate debates, most recently the November 2023 Republican presidential debate in Miami and four Republican presidential debates in the 2015-16 cycle. Hewitt focuses his radio show and his column on the Constitution, national security, American politics and the Cleveland Browns and Guardians. Hewitt has interviewed tens of thousands of guests from Democrats Hillary Clinton and John Kerry to Republican Presidents George W. Bush and Donald Trump over his 40 years in broadcasting. This column previews the lead story that will drive his radio/ TV show today.
Minnesota Democratic U.S. Senate nominee and Lt. Gov. Peggy Flanagan previously claimed she graduated Phi Beta Kappa despite never belonging to the prestigious honor society, while her official state biography suggests she completed two college majors when she actually earned one major and a minor, according to an exclusive report published Wednesday by the Wall Street Journal.
Democratic Senate candidate James Talarico blamed Republican extremism for prompting some of his past controversial remarks during a new interview, including assertions that God is "nonbinary" and that there are six biological sexes, arguing that those weren't issues he ran for office to discuss.
Talarico said that culture war issues became more prominent in the 2021 Texas state legislature and suggested Republicans were responsible for the increased attention to those topics. Talarico, in 2021, opposed a bill to ban men from women’s sports and claimed that "God is non-binary" while on the Austin, Texas, House floor.
Additionally, at a Texas House Committee on Public Education hearing in 2021, he stated, "Modern science obviously recognizes that there are many more than two biological sexes; in fact, there are six."
Talarico, who is running against Republican Ken Paxton in the state's closely watched U.S. Senate race, spoke to The New York Times' Michael Barbaro on the paper's "The Daily" podcast Tuesday. He said he felt compelled to fight what he described as Republican extremism at the time when asked about the comments.
"I was put in a position where I had to fight back against that extremism. So, you mentioned some of my comments on gender or on issues affecting trans people. It's not like I ran for the legislature to talk about these things. Again, if you go back to my first session, I wanted to talk about public education, which is why I ran in the first place," he said, pointing to other issues on which he ran.
"It's kind of ironic that they're clipping these things to make it sound like I'm the one who was talking about this when, in reality, it was the Republican extremists at the Capitol who were obsessed with talking about trans issues, obsessed with talking about people's private parts. That wasn't me. That was them that changed."
The Democratic Senate candidate said that, at the national level, the party may have gone too far. But at the state level, specifically in Texas, he believed certain bills were targeting and harming his constituents.
He pointed to Texas' abortion ban and legislation affecting the LGBTQ community.
"These bills targeting LGBTQ people have real ramifications in our state, especially when they're written to be overly broad," he said. "I'm all for if we want to figure out when it's appropriate for a trans athlete to play in a sport. That's a policy discussion that we should have and an issue we should solve.
"But the bill that they were trying to pass, the bill they ultimately did pass, was a blanket ban in all cases," he continued. "It treated tee-ball the same as varsity baseball.
"And it's because their goal was to score political points off of the backs of a very small, vulnerable group of people in our state. And, so, you know, my values haven't changed, but I was put in a position because of the rise in Republican extremism to defend my constituents."
Barbaro asked Talarico if he subscribed to Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., and her assertion that so-called "Woke One" was "crazy" at a personal level.
Talarico said he regretted not articulating his position in a "more straightforward way" but had no regrets about defending his constituents.
"So, there's a lot that is said and, when you pull out maybe the most inarticulate of those things to make an attack ad, you know, I certainly regret not articulating my position more clearly, in a more straightforward way to say what I actually mean. And that's going to be true, you know, probably for my entire time in public service. I'm not a perfect person. None of us are. And, so, I'm going to always keep trying to improve how I talk about things so that I'm getting my point across," he said.
"I wasn't making a large point about American politics or the Democratic Party. I'll leave those to the pundits and the commentators. All I was trying to say is that I've said things imperfectly, and I'm going to keep working on trying to communicate more clearly and effectively."
Inez Stepman, senior policy and legal analyst at Independent Women, criticized Talarico's remarks.
"The left is always pulling a bait and switch with cultural issues. They advanced policies that placed males on girls sports teams, in locker rooms, in women’s prisons, and tried to push anyone who objected to that insanity out of public life. Now, they say none of this ever existed or isn’t important. But they don’t change their policy or votes," Stepman told Fox News Digital in a statement.
"Not a single Democrat on the federal level voted for a bill to keep men out of women’s sports. If they don’t want to talk about these issues, they could easily put them behind us by ceasing their campaign, including passing laws and regulations that force us to accept men in women’s spaces. But they won’t do that. They merely want us to stop talking about the consequences of their ideas and policies on women and girls."
Talarico was recently confronted about some of his comments regarding cultural issues while participating in a "Jubilee"-style town hall, during which voters confronted him one-on-one. Talarico met with a fellow Christian from Texas who pressed him on his past statements.
"You've said some concerning things in the past kind of related to faith and social issues. Things such as God is nonbinary, questions about how many genders there really are and your justifications using the Bible for abortion," Sarah Gardner, a small business owner, said to Talarico.
"The first comment about God not being defined by gender, when I said that I was being provocative. And I want to admit that and come clean about that. But I think what I was saying is actually not controversial theologically.
"The idea that we can't define God using human categories, not only did I say that, but the late Charlie Kirk said that, the late Pope Benedict said that. And so, yes, I was doing it, maybe in an annoying way, I can admit that," he said.
Lawler, a moderate Republican, is fending off a challenge from Democrat Cait Conley in the Hudson valley. It is among the most-watched races that could determine whether Republicans hold on to their majority in Congress.
Coordination by Democratic officials overseeing elections includes Zoom calls and in-person tabletop exercises
Democratic state attorneys general, other top state officials and civic groups have accelerated planning to thwart any federal meddling in the November midterm elections by Donald Trump as he continues his false charges of widespread voting fraud and veiled threats of interfering in the process.
Since early this year, 24 Democratic attorneys general have expanded coordination with about a dozen Democratic secretaries of state and several civic groups using weekly Zoom calls and in-person tabletop exercises to strategize about countering any federal intervention in the elections.
The Israeli military has detained about 80 US, Israeli and British volunteers helping Palestinians harvest olives near Bethlehem, including the New York Democratic congressional nominee Brad Lander, several rabbis and Israel’s former deputy attorney general.
Against a backdrop of rising Islamophobia, Michigan Senate hopeful has challenged premise of repeated questions on Muslim Brotherhood, Israel and faith
As a candidate positioned at the center of what researchers say are the worst Islamophobic attacks seen since the aftermath of 9/11, many would expect Abdul El-Sayed to simply defend himself and move on.
Instead, the Democratic candidate for US Senate in Michigan has repeatedly demanded those who question his positions on Israel, the Muslim Brotherhood, and his faith, explain the premise of their enquiry. Rather than let others put his loyalties on trial, he has tried to put their assumptions on trial.
On Tuesday’s broadcast of CNN’s “The Lead,” host Jake Tapper stated that House Democrats “have not presented any sort of cohesive plan for how you guys are going to legislate” if they win the House in the midterms. While speaking
Kansas Democrat Senate nominee Adam Hamilton read descriptions of four executive orders issued under former President Joe Biden concerning gender identity and LGBTQ protections to his congregation during a January 2025 sermon, saying the thought of losing those protections was painful for people in the LGBTQ community.
Anti-Defamation League post decries ‘shylock’ slur but does not explain that president used it at Kansas rally on Monday
The Anti-Defamation League (ADL) denounced the use of the term “shylock” as antisemitic on Tuesday, without explaining that the slur had been used a day earlier by Donald Trump in a speech in Kansas.
Trump used the slur during a Monday night rally in support of Republican senator Roger Marshall, who is locked in a closer-than-expected re-election fight against Democratic challenger Adam Hamilton. Marshall, a doctor, as been criticized for filing lawsuits against more than 700 patients with outstanding bills, leading to 18 of them being arrested.
At a rally in Kansas on Monday, President Trump looked to boost Republican Sen. Roger Marshall in his reelection bid. Marshall faces a surprisingly close race with his Democratic challenger, Pastor Adam Hamilton. William Brangham discusses the Senate race with Jared Cerullo of PBS Kansas, the host of the weekly current affairs show, "Kansas Week."
The billionaire Michael Bloomberg will spend $80m to help Democratic candidates in the midterm elections, US media reported on Tuesday, a significant infusion of cash for a party that has recently struggled with fundraising as it seeks to win control of Congress.
The reported donations came as Donald Trump announced on Tuesday he intended to spend a total of $400m to aid Republican candidates, with $300m already disbursed.
"You made me promises. Promises. Knowing I'd believe. Promises. Promises. I knew you'd never keep."
— Promises, Promises by Naked Eyes
"I am a supporter of Medicare-for-all," declared Minnesota’s Democratic nominee for Senate, Lt. Gov. Peggy Flanagan, D. "I'm going to get there with my friend Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt. And we are going to power map the s--t out of the U.S. Senate and figure out how to build power for the things that we know that we deserve and the things that we need."
Hard-left progressive House and Senate candidates like Flanagan are pitching Medicare-for-all. The abolition of ICE. The Green New Deal. An arms embargo for Israel. And a $25 an hour minimum wage.
Flanagan is in a race with Republican Senate nominee Michelle Tafoya to succeed retiring Sen. Tina Smith, D-Minn. The race favors Flanagan. However, it’s not a done deal that she wins. But Democratic Socialist candidates for the House like Donavan McKinney in Michigan, Chris Rabb in Pennsylvania, Melat Kiros in Colorado, along with Claire Valdez and Darializa Avila Chevalier in New York probably will. Come January, they will prospectively represent Democratic strongholds where progressive ideas are popular.
But if Democrats win either the House or Senate, it won’t be because voters pulled the lever for Kiros in Denver or Avila Chevalier in Harlem. They’ll win because Democrat Cait Conley defeated Rep. Mike Lawler, R-N.Y., in Dutchess County, north of New York City. Maybe because voters cast their ballots for Democrat Brian Poindexter in Wooster, Ohio, rather than Rep. Max Miller, R-Ohio. Democrats could flip the House if Democratic nominee Christina Bohannan appeals more to voters in Davenport, IA than Rep. Mariannette Miller-Meeks, R-Iowa.
This brings us back to the progressive agenda.
Democrats might win the House and or the Senate. But Valdez and Kiros aren’t the "majority makers." Candidates like Poindexter and Conley are. And if they’re elected to the House, it’s doubtful that moderates from swing districts can support progressive ideas like the Green New Deal or Medicare-for-all. It’s about the math. And it’s more than likely that Democrats will need the voters of those moderate "majority makers" from battleground districts to enact those policies.
That’s to say nothing about needing 60 yeas in the Senate to crack a filibuster – even if Democrats do marshal a slim majority there. And, if something extreme did get through both bodies of a potentially Democratically-controlled Congress, President Trump would like veto it.
It is said that you campaign in poetry but you govern in prose.
The left has pushed a lot of progressive poetry with their agenda items of late. They’ll tout the opportunity to enact some of those policies if Democrats win the majority.
However, the reality of advancing any of that into a legislative reality is slim. The progressive ideas may energize the base. But the Democratic base is sure to feel let down if Democrats can’t make good on some of their campaign promises.
We’ve seen this before. A party promises voters the moon in the midterm elections. Then struggles to make good on those promises.
Republicans won the House in 1994 for the first time in four decades with the 10-point "Contract With America." The document promised to cut spending and reduce influence in Washington. But in the end, the House and Senate only approved a few of the items. President Clinton vetoed others.
In 2006, House Democrats campaigned on drawing down the war in Iraq. They captured the House. Congress began defunding the war effort. But it took several years, much to the dismay of party activists who demanded an immediate pullout.
In 2010, Republicans won back control of the House, gaining a record 63 seats. The goal was to reduce spending and repeal and replace ObamaCare. It never happened. In fact, some Republicans are still trying to unwind ObamaCare today.
This is all about exciting the base. And then figuring out how to govern. What candidates promise on the campaign trail rarely morphs into a legislative reality.
House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., is reportedly in discussions with DSA-backed candidates to secure legislative commitments before some of their candidates will back him in a potential race for Speaker. That said, political observers would find it hard to believe that Democrats would balk at promoting Jeffries, making him the first Black House Speaker in American history.
There’s a chance Democrats could face infighting if the party fractures between moderates and progressives.
Imagine for a moment that Democrats do have the House and intend to bring a Medicare-for-all bill to the floor. The House must first adopt a rule which governs how the House debates that measure on the floor. Would a moderate Democrat like Rep. Marie Gluesenkamp Perez, D-Wash., oppose the rule (provided she wins reelection)? After all, Gluesenkamp Perez voted for GOP procedural measures earlier this year, igniting an internal Democratic firestorm. However, those votes may have been good matches for her battleground district. But voting aye on a procedural plan for a controversial, progressive political initiative won’t work in Gluesenkamp Perez’s district. That’s why the progressive agenda may already be dead in the water.
If Democrats do win the House and Jeffries clasps the Speaker’s gavel, his role will be different. He needs to manage his entire caucus. So appealing to the hard left doesn’t work. He must also hear out the moderates. And certainly the majority makers.
For instance, Jeffries isn’t pushing the Medicare for all scheme.
"I haven't co-sponsored the Medicare for all legislation that has been introduced over the last several years. I do think we need to figure out how to fix our broken healthcare system and then build something better once we repair the damage that has been done," said Jeffries.
That’s a natural stance for a national political leader. Jumping feet first into such a nettlesome issue might not be sound politics. Especially since you must also address the concerns of the moderate majority makers.
But Jeffries may have an out that all Democrats can unify around: investigations of the Trump administration. Since President Trump began his term, Jeffries has promised to hold its officials to account. Jeffries has called out Pentagon chief Pete Hegseth. Ridiculed Attorney General Todd Blanche. Blasted Vice President JD Vance. Spoken about alleged corruption by the Trump family.
Democrats are also campaigning as a foil to the Trump Administration. Their base will demand action via investigations, too. That certainly resonates with the progressive base. And, even moderates who may be the majority makers.
But it isn’t a $25 an hour minimum wage. It’s not the abolition of ICE. It’s not the Green New Deal. Democrats probably won’t get what they want legislatively if they attain the majority. Those are just the political realities. But they may be able to rack some points with investigations. Those would reflect the political realities as well.
During an appearance on Fox News Channel’s “The Will Cain Show” on Monday, Government Accountability Institute president, Peter Schweizer, said former President Barack Obama defending Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN) shows Democrats are worried about the federal investigation into her. Schweizer,
Login
