Contact Me By Email

Contact Me By Email

Wednesday, May 20, 2026

Republicans Reject Raffensperger, Who Refused to ‘Find’ Votes for Trump

 

Republicans Reject Raffensperger, Who Refused to ‘Find’ Votes for Trump

In his campaign for Georgia governor, Mr. Raffensperger found that G.O.P. voters still blamed him for Mr. Trump’s 2020 loss.

Brad Raffensperger standing at a lectern in a blue suit. His wife, Tricia, is at his side.
Brad Raffensperger’s refusal to bow to President Trump’s demands in 2020 hurt him with the state’s Republican voters.Nicole Craine for The New York Times

Soon after the 2020 presidential race, Brad Raffensperger, Georgia’s Republican secretary of state, was given a “Democracy Action Hero” award by Arnold Schwarzenegger for standing up to President Trump's efforts to pressure him into overturning the election results.

“You’ve proven to be a public servant, not a party servant,” Mr. Schwarzenegger, the former California governor and Hollywood star, told Mr. Raffensperger as he bestowed the honor.

Mr. Raffensperger’s steadfastness in the face of Mr. Trump’s arm-twisting — including a now-infamous January 2021 phone call in which the president told Mr. Raffensperger  to “find” enough votes for him to win — transformed the mild-mannered politician into a darling of liberals and anti-Trump conservatives around the country. But Georgia’s Republican voters have for years considered Mr. Raffensperger a villain who enabled Mr. Trump’s 2020 loss.

That, more than anything, explains why Mr. Raffensperger was soundly defeated on Tuesday in the Republican primary for Georgia governor. His third-place finish brings to a close, for now, a turbulent political career that saw prominent outsiders laud him as a “profile in courage,” even as he infuriated Mr. Trump’s base, whose support he needed to stay in the political game.

Mr. Raffensperger, 71, a longtime conservative, was careful not to overtly criticize Mr. Trump during his run for governor. But it mattered little, as Mr. Raffensperger finished behind two solidly pro-Trump candidates, Lt. Gov. Burt Jones and Rick Jackson, a billionaire health care executive. 

Mr. Raffensperger’s loss adds to a growing number of Republicans who have faced a political reckoning for crossing Mr. Trump during his 10-year reign over Republican politics. It also underscores the still-powerful thrum of the 2020 election and its aftermath. One of Mr. Jackson’s first ads called Mr. Raffensperger “Judas.” That echoed Mr. Trump’s previous line of attack, in which he called Mr. Raffensperger an “enemy of the people” for failing to act on unfounded claims of widespread voter fraud.

Charles S. Bullock III, a political scientist at the University of Georgia, noted that this year, Mr. Trump largely avoided direct attacks on Mr. Raffensperger, though he endorsed Mr. Jones, an election denier.

“Still, for MAGA voters, they would remember, probably, Trump’s criticism,” Mr. Bullock said. “It puts a chunk of the Republican primary electorate out of bounds for Raffensperger.”

On election night, Charles Lutin, a 73-year-old retired doctor, was one of about two dozen supporters at the Raffensperger campaign’s watch party. 

A lifelong Republican, Mr. Lutin said Mr. Raffensperger was one of the few remaining politicians he could trust.

“Some in our party are still strong enough and have enough guts,” Mr. Lutin said, “to stand up for reality and stand up against bologna.”

The candidate came out to speak on Tuesday night, hugging his wife, Tricia, at the podium. “Our message came up short, and we don’t dwell on it, we just kind of move on,” he said.

On this evening, he told supporters, the message that won was one of grievance, largely driven by Mr. Trump: “Some people were living back about six years ago, talking about 2020.”

Mr. Raffensperger, a civil engineer and former state House member, had built a conservative record. Running for secretary of state in 2018, he won on a promise“to make sure that only American citizens are voting in our elections,” even though there was no evidence that a significant number of noncitizens were doing so. Mr. Trump endorsed Mr. Raffensperger that year.

Then came 2020. Few politicians, other than Mr. Trump himself, have been as defined by their actions then as Mr. Raffensperger, who, as secretary of state, was charged with overseeing Georgia elections.

After a recording of Mr. Trump’s January 2021 phone call was leaked, the entire nation had a chance to hear Mr. Raffensperger’s calm, statistical refutation of Mr. Trump’s entreaties to “find” him enough votes to reverse his loss in Georgia.

Along with the bouquets came brickbats. From the moment audits confirmed Mr. Trump’s loss in Georgia, Mr. Raffensperger, his staff and family faced relentless harassment and death threats. Members of a far-right militia group were spotted outside his house.

Earlier this month, Mr. Raffensperger received a “manifesto” deemed a “credible threat on his life.” The next day, a suspicious object disrupted a campaign event in Macon, campaign officials said.

Through the turmoil, Mr. Raffensperger did not put on “Never Trump” regalia. He was a vocal supporter of adding new voting restrictions in 2021, even if it meant ceding some of his authority over the state electoral process.

He tried to craft a political persona of principled conservatism. He published a book, “Integrity Counts,” in November 2021, and headed into a 2022 re-election campaign against a Trump-backed challenger, Jody Hice, in the primary.

Mr. Hice, a Freedom Caucus member leaving a safe House seat, made Mr. Trump’s 2020 election denialism central to his campaign.

He saw some early fund-raising success, but suffered from poor name recognition. And though Mr. Raffensperger never wavered in his defense of the 2020 election and Georgia’s election process, he routinely spoke of wanting to investigate noncitizens on the voter rolls, despite a lack of evidence that they existed in meaningful numbers.

Mr. Raffensperger surprised many by winning the primary by nearly 20 percentage points and avoiding a runoff.

Some of Mr. Trump’s allies claimed that Mr. Raffensperger was buoyed by Democrats crossing over to vote in the Republican primary, but data suggested that his win came from unpredictable swing voters.

Mr. Raffensperger's decision to run for governor was unsurprising. The current governor, Brian Kemp, had used the secretary of state’s office as a springboard to the governor’s mansion. (Mr. Kemp, who also pushed back against Mr. Trump’s accusations of voter fraud, is leaving office because of term limits.)

But it was a crowded primary, and Chris Carr, the state attorney general, appealed to a very similar universe of voters. Mr. Jackson’s wealth allowed him to blanket the airwaves with $81 million in ads, according to AdImpact, an ad-tracking firm. Mr. Raffensperger spent just $4.5 million on ads.

Mr. Raffensperger, who had built a successful steel company, sought to lean into this aspect of his biography. Campaign news releases referred to him as a “Christian conservative businessman.” On the trail, he focused on tax reform and job creation. His campaign website promised that he would “take on the woke left.”

But he struggled to outrun the suspicion of some Republican voters, however unfounded, that he had given his blessing to an outcome that they believed was compromised.

President Trump stoked that suspicion, directing federal agencies to investigate the 2020 election. In January, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, using an affidavit that relied on some already debunked conspiracy theories, raided a warehouse outside Atlanta and seized more than 600 boxes of material from that election.

Until the end, Mr. Raffensperger’s rivals figured that he was a dog well worth kicking. In recent days, a number of them, including Lieutenant Governor Jones, had begun demanding that observers gain access to the state’s emergency operations center, where the secretary of state’s staff monitors potential threats and other problems on Election Day.

Mr. Raffensperger said there was no reason to let them in. He noted that votes were not counted in the center, but rather in Georgia’s 159 counties, under the auspices of local elections officials.

On Election Day, a judge ruled in favor of Mr. Raffensperger. He, in turn, denounced the criticism as “political theater.” Soon enough, though, Republican voters forced his exit from the stage.

Johnny Kauffman contributed reporting.

Richard Fausset, a Times reporter based in Atlanta, writes about the American South, focusing on politics, culture, race, poverty and criminal justice.

Nick Corasaniti is a Times reporter covering national politics, with a focus on voting and elections.“

Where Are the Republicans Who Put America First?

 

Where Are the Republicans Who Put America First?

“The Republican Party is divided into three factions: “Never Trump” Republicans who oppose Trump, “America First” Republicans who support his policies but not his undermining of democracy, and “Trump First” Republicans who prioritize Trump’s interests over the Constitution. The “Trump First” faction is actively purging “America First” Republicans, threatening to remove any checks on Trump’s power. This includes gerrymandering electoral districts and using taxpayer funds for political gain, raising concerns about the future of American democracy.

A blurred image of Republican congressmen standing and looking off camera.
Damon Winter/The New York Times

As President Trump and his administration head toward the midterm elections, it’s now clear that the Republican Party has split into three factions: the “Never Trump” Republicans, who refuse to ever vote for this unethical man; the “America First” Republicans, who favor Trump’s policies but won’t countenance his destroying American norms and laws; and “Trump First” Republicans — those who think Trump’s dictates come first and the Constitution and traditional norms come second.

The most alarming thing happening in America today is that the Trump First Republicans, on Trump’s orders, are purging the few America First Republicans. So should the G.O.P. hold the House and the Senate in the midterms, there will be no brakes whatsoever on this party and this president. I would not at all rule out their pushing for a third Trump term. We are going to a very bad place.

Just look at the trend-line: The Never Trump Republicans, who included traditional conservatives like Liz Cheney, John McCain and Mitt Romney, did not believe in Trump the man or many of his ideas. They thought that he both dishonored the Constitution and true conservative principles. Alas, though, McCain died, Cheney was forced out of the party and Romney quit politics altogether.  On Tuesday, another Trump antagonist in the Republican Party, Representative Thomas Massie of Kentucky, lost a primary to an opponent handpicked by the president.

The America First Republicans were ready to sign on to many Trump ideas — lowering taxes or limiting immigration or deflating the woke left — but when it came down to a choice between advancing those ideas and undermining democracy, this faction drew a red line. They put America first, not Trump first.

I am talking about people like former Vice President Mike Pence, Senator Bill Cassidy of Louisiana and the Indiana and South Carolina state legislators who refused to go along with Trump’s shameful out-of-cycle gerrymandering of electoral districts just to increase the G.O.P.’s odds of holding the House. But now they too are being driven from the party.

Cassidy, the two-term Republican who voted to convict Trump in his 2021 impeachment trial, was just defeated by a Trump First Republican in his primary. The back and forth between Cassidy and Trump was revealing. While he did not mention Trump by name in his concession speech, there was no doubt about whom Cassidy was talking about.

“Let me just set the record straight,” Cassidy said. “Our country is not about one individual. It is about the welfare of all Americans, and it is about our Constitution. And if someone doesn’t understand that and attempts to control others through using the levers of power, they’re about serving themselves. They’re not about serving us. And that person is not qualified to be a leader.”

Trump’s response was more direct — and incredibly revealing. He wrote on social media of Cassidy: “His disloyalty to the man who got him elected is now a part of legend, and it’s nice to see that his political career is OVER!”

Read those words carefully: “His disloyalty to the man” — not to the Constitution — is what got him defeated. Trump first.

Senator Lindsey Graham, who seems willing to abandon any principle he ever held to stay on Trump’s good side and remain his golfing buddy, expressed the essence of the Trump First Republicans after Cassidy lost:

“You can disagree with President Trump,” Graham said, “but if you try to destroy him, you’re going to lose, because this is the party of Donald Trump.”

Read those words carefully, too: It is not the party of Republicans, it is “the party of Donald Trump," which means it is whatever Trump says it is. But the most revealing part of Graham’s quote was“If you try to destroy him, you’re going to lose.”

Translation: If you vote, as Cassidy did, to convict Trump after he was impeached for inciting an insurrection in our nation’s capital in a shameful effort to overturn the free and fair 2020 election, it means you are trying to “destroy” Trump — not protect America.

For Graham, upholding the Constitution apparently equals trying to “destroy” a man, even when that man was attempting to destroy the most sacred principle of our Constitution: the peaceful transfer of power by elections.

Don’t worry, Lindsey, your place in Trump’s golf rotation is secure.

At least Cassidy is not alone in the America First G.O.P. wing. My colleague David French wrote eloquently about the Republican majority leader of the South Carolina Senate, Shane Massey, who last week gave a speech explaining why he would not go along with Trump’s personal request that he support a midterm gerrymander to eliminate the state’s only Democratic-held congressional district.

A reminder: The Constitution requires a census every 10 years and reapportionment of House seats among states based on the population changes. But it is silent on when states can redistrict. Some states explicitly limit redistricting to once per decade in line with the census and some have independent commissions that restrict when and how lines can be redrawn. But once-in-a-decade has been the norm in most states, because new census data was the natural trigger.

For Trump to order Republican-dominated states to redistrict on his whim — purely to manipulate the election outcome so the G.O.P. won’t lose the House in November under a president whose popularity is at record lows — may be technically legal under the Constitution, but it is pure cheating in my book. It is also pure Trump: Life is only about what you can do, never about what you should do.

Massey wasn’t buying it. He refused to be a party to that travesty in his state — and specifically he refused to wipe out Representative James Clyburn’s district. Clyburn is the only Black member of the House from South Carolina, a state that is roughly 30 percent Black. The other six are Republicans.

Like a true America First Republican, Massey described himself as a “rabid partisan” and Washington Democrats as “crazy,” but he drew the line at cheating. Massey said he rued the day when “maybe we become convinced that the only way to preserve the Republic is to implement policies that are contrary to the founding ideas of the Republic.”

A similar sentiment was expressed by the America First Republican state legislators in Indiana who refused to obey Trump’s demand to wipe out Democratic-leaning districts. In the recent Republican primary there, five of those legislators lost to candidates who openly ran on their willingness to put Trump first.

Spencer Deery, one of two anti-redistricting Republicans to survive the pro-Trump cash tsunami to oust them, told NBC News, “I will never regret listening to constituents and doing the right thing.”

This is not one of those “both sides are doing it” things. Everything California did and Virginia tried to do in terms of out-of-cycle redistricting was based on statewide votes — not legislative shenanigans. They were only temporary and were initiated in self-defense against Trump’s effort to wipe out Democratic congressional seats in every state possible, starting in Texas.

So let me end where I began: Trump’s midcycle “redistricting” is not politics as usual, but cheating. And the $1.776 billion slush fund Trump just established to pay “victims” of the Biden administration’s supposed lawfare — which, as The Washington Post editorial board noted, “will pay out for two years before conveniently ceasing to exist right after the 2028 election, ensuring Democrats never get control over the money” — is not business as usual. It is stealing our tax dollars.

Democrats may still turn out enough votes in the midterms to overcome this in-your-face cheating and stealing. But if that doesn’t happen — if it is precisely this dirty dealing that keeps the Democrats from taking the House even if they overwhelmingly win the popular vote nationally — people are not going to take it sitting down. And they shouldn’t.

I worry for the future of the Republic if that happens. You push, you push, you push — and you never know when you’ve crossed the last red line and wiped out the last norm and our whole governing system just starts to fall apart.

That is exactly where Trump and the Trump First Republicans are driving us.

The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. We’d like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips. And here’s our email: letters@nytimes.com.

Follow the New York Times Opinion section on FacebookInstagramTikTokBlueskyWhatsApp and Threads.

Thomas L. Friedman is the foreign affairs Opinion columnist. He joined the paper in 1981 and has won three Pulitzer Prizes. He is the author of seven books, including “From Beirut to Jerusalem,” which won the National Book Award. @tomfriedman  Facebook

Senate Votes to Take Up Measure to Force Trump to End Iran War

Senate Votes to Take Up Measure to Force Trump to End Iran War

“The Senate voted 50-47 to advance a resolution forcing President Trump to end the Iran war or seek congressional authorization. This marks the eighth attempt by Democrats and a few Republicans to limit Trump’s war powers, with growing GOP skepticism fueled by Trump’s failure to seek congressional approval past the 60-day deadline. The resolution, even if passed, faces a likely presidential veto.

With four Republican backers, Democrats won a vote to advance a resolution that would force the president to end hostilities or win authorization from Congress.

The sliver of G.O.P. skepticism to the president’s handling of the Iran conflict widened last week.Haiyun Jiang/The New York Times

The Senate on Tuesday agreed to take up a measure that would force President Trump to end the war in Iran or win authorization from Congress to continue it, after a handful of Republicans joined Democrats in pushing forward with a resolution the G.O.P. has managed to block for months.

Senator Bill Cassidy, the Louisiana Republican who lost his primary over the weekend after Mr. Trump targeted him for defeat, was the latest member of his party to switch his vote and side with Democrats in an effort to limit the president’s war powers. That, combined with the absences of several other Republicans, was enough to push the resolution forward.

The vote was 50 to 47 to advance the resolution, allowing it to be debated and receive a vote in the coming weeks. It was the eighth attempt by Democrats and a single Republican to rein in Mr. Trump’s war powers since he began the military campaign, now in its third month, which a majority of Americans say he should never have launched.

Senator John Fetterman of Pennsylvania was again the only Democrat to vote with Republicans to beat back the measure, while Mr. Cassidy was one of four Republicans who sided with Democrats to push it forward. Mr. Cassidy said after the vote that the Trump administration had “left Congress in the dark on Operation Epic Fury,” referring to the administration’s name for the operation.

“In Louisiana, I’ve heard from people, including President Trump’s supporters, who are concerned about this war,” he added in a statement. “Until the administration provides clarity, no congressional authorization or extension can be justified.”

The sliver of G.O.P. skepticism to the president’s handling of the Iran conflict widened last week, fueled in part by Mr. Trump ignoring a statutory deadline to seek permission from Congress to carry on combat operations past 60 days. In both the House and Senate, efforts to advance a war powers resolution were narrowly defeated.

Senator Lisa Murkowski, Republican of Alaska, voted with Democrats on the measure. Kenny Holston/The New York Times

On Tuesday, Senators Lisa Murkowski of Alaska and Susan Collins of Maine, both of whom rejected the administration’s claim that the fragile cease-fire between the United States and Iran has pushed off the 60-day deadline, joined Senator Rand Paul of Kentucky, who opposes foreign military intervention, in voting with Democrats to bring the measure to the Senate floor.

It was not immediately clear when the Senate could vote on passage of the war powers resolution, which, even if approved by both chambers, would still be subject to an all-but-certain veto.

With three G.O.P. senators absent — Tommy Tuberville of Alabama, Thom Tillis of North Carolina and John Cornyn of Texas — the majority was unable to beat back the resolution as they have seven times since the war began. Still, Mr. Cassidy’s defection was the latest sign of growing Republican resistance to Mr. Trump’s handling of the conflict and to his refusal to engage with Congress on it.

“The momentum is moving our way slowly,” said Senator Tim Kaine of Virginia, the Democrat leading the weekslong effort to pressure Republicans into voting to end the war.

Senator Bill Cassidy, Republican of Louisiana, on Tuesday.Haiyun Jiang/The New York Times

Democrats have for months argued that passage of such a measure would send a message to Mr. Trump that popular opinion for the operation had soured.

“What the president cares about is his own popularity, and when Congress, even including members of his own party, start to vote against him,” Mr. Kaine added.

The House was expected to vote on a similar measure in the coming days. Lawmakers in that chamber just barely defeated a war powers resolution last week on a tie vote, after two Republicans, frustrated by the president ignoring the legal deadline to seek permission from Congress to carry on fighting past 60 days, defected to join Democrats to move ahead with the measure.

The vote fell as the cease-fire looked increasingly shaky. Mr. Trump said Monday that he would hold off launching any new major attacks on Iran to allow more time for diplomacy. But he has threatened to order a “full, large-scale assault” if Iran does not agree to terms acceptable to the White House.

Disagreement between the United States and Iran over the future of Iran’s nuclear program and the Strait of Hormuz have slowed talks. Iran has mostly barred transit through the major global shipping route since the opening days of the war, driving up the cost of oil and gas and fueling frustration in the United States over the war because of the spike in energy prices.

Mr. Kaine said he expected the Senate would not take the next procedural vote on his war powers resolution until after the Memorial Day recess. He added that he hoped hearing from constituents would make Republicans who voted against it on Tuesday think twice about whether they would continue to stand by the war.

“People are going to hear an earful when they get home about gas prices,” he said.“ 

Monday, May 18, 2026

Trump’s Christian Nationalist Agenda & Taxpayer-Funded D.C. Prayer Rally: Bishop Barber & Sarah Posner | Democracy Now!

 

Georgia Republicans Grasp for a Contender to Take On Democratic Sen. Jon Ossoff - The New York Times

Can Anyone Beat Jon Ossoff? Georgia Republicans Grasp for a Contender.

"On the eve of their primary, Republicans have grown nervous about their prospects in November against Mr. Ossoff, regarded as the most vulnerable Democratic senator in the fall midterms.

Jon Ossoff in a jacket and tie.
Senator Jon Ossoff, Democrat of Georgia, is running for re-election in a battleground state. Eric Lee/The New York Times

Senator Jon Ossoff of Georgia is widely regarded as the most vulnerable Democratic senator in the November midterm elections. But on the eve of the primary, there is a creeping anxiety in Republican circles that their party is poorly positioned to challenge him.

Eighteen months after President Trump won Georgia by about two percentage points, Republicans in the state worry about national political headwinds, an extended G.O.P. primary fight, and Mr. Ossoff’s popularity, interviews show. Ben Burnett, a Republican commentator in Georgia, said he could not detect a winning argument among any of the candidates.

“The three Republicans in the U.S. Senate race are all competing,” he said, “to see who is going to be the sacrificial lamb in November.”

Running to challenge Mr. Ossoff are two Trump-aligned Republican congressmen, Mike Collins and Buddy Carter, and the former University of Tennessee football coach Derek Dooley. Each would most likely enter the general election in a fund-raising hole. Each suggest their opponents are not up to task of taking on Mr. Ossoff. None have won a statewide race.

Still, some Republican and Democratic strategists predict Georgia will host one of the hardest-fought Senate races in November, and that a flood of funding will meet with the winner of the Republican primary. Democrats need to gain at least four seats to win the Senate majority, a once far-fetched goal that has looked more realistic in recent months amid growing voter anger with Mr. Trump. Mr. Ossoff’s seat is one of a handful at the center of the fight for control of the chamber.

Republicans will take a first step toward settling their differences on Tuesday, when voters head to the polls in a primary that is widely expected to go to a runoff on June 16. The challenge facing their party this year is clear: The three leading candidates have each sought to put electability at the center of the campaigns.

Mr. Collins, an immigration hard-liner who built a trucking company in central Georgia, has consistently led in the polls. He says he can appeal to working-class voters and points proudly to his work with Mr. Trump on immigration.

“Georgia needs the right Republican to take on Jon Ossoff,” Mr. Collins wrote on social media last week. “Someone who’s delivered, has the conservative record to prove it, and had President Trump’s back when it mattered most.”

Mr. Dooley, running as an outsider, says he can win over voters of all backgrounds by leaning on his experience as a football coach. “You better have somebody who can find some common ground,” he said at a recent campaign stop at a coffee shop in Milton, Ga.

Hanging over the race is Gov. Brian Kemp of Georgia, a popular term-limited Republican set to leave office. Some Republicans had hoped he would challenge Mr. Ossoff this cycle. Instead, he put his weight behind Mr. Dooley, a friend since childhood, and has joined him on dozens of campaign stops around the state in recent months.

“I don’t know if y’all have noticed, but we haven’t done so well in U.S. Senate races here in the state of Georgia in the last several cycles,” Mr. Kemp said at the coffee shop. “We’ve got to have the right person.”

Mr. Carter, a former pharmacy owner whose campaign website brands him a “MAGA Warrior” and outlines no policy positions, says that his rivals are too flawed to have a chance in November.

He said in an interview that Mr. Dooley had “not been engaged at all” in state politics and did not have as close a relationship with Mr. Trump. And he said that Mr. Collins, who has a history of incendiary social-media posts and is facing a House ethics inquiry, would be brought down by his “baggage.” (The ethics inquiry relates to claims that an intern in his office had a romantic relationship with a member of his staff and received pay for no work.)

“If Derek Dooley is our candidate we lose,” Mr. Carter said. “If Mike Collins is our candidate, we lose.”

Mr. Collins’s campaign said in a statement that Mr. Carter was losing in the primary to a “failed and fired Tennessee coach” and that the “only winning occurring in his camp is the consultants taking him to the cleaners.”

Nationwide, Republicans are facing challenges posed by the unpopular war in Iran, Mr. Trump’s low approval ratings, and voter frustration over rising energy prices. In Georgia, Mr. Ossoff, a rising Democratic star and strong fund-raiser who has amassed a large war chest, has impressed voters on both sides of the aisle with his focus on constituent services in state that is growing more diverse.

“Ossoff is a remarkable political talent,” said Joel McElhannon, a retired Republican strategist in Georgia, adding, “It’s going to be very, very difficult to beat him.”

Last month, Republicans in the state received a warning shot in a special House election in former Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene’s district: Republicans kept the seat, but a Democrat running on his opposition to the war shifted the district 25 points to the left compared with the 2024 presidential election.

Although Republicans performed well in the state in 2024, their history in recent Senate races is filled with disappointment. Mr. Ossoff and Raphael Warnock both won runoffs in early 2021, and Mr. Warnock was re-elected in 2022 after facing Herschel Walker, a first-time candidate and former star football player at the University of Georgia who was widely seen as a flawed nominee.

For now, the leading Republican candidates are more focused on outshining each other. Each has, in their own way, angled for the endorsement of Mr. Trump, a potent political kingmaker who has stayed out of the race.

Mr. Kemp and Mr. Trump have had a tense relationship ever since the governor refused to join Mr. Trump’s efforts to reverse the 2020 presidential election result in Georgia. The mention of Mr. Kemp’s name has in the past drawn jeers from crowds at Trump rallies.

But in August, Mr. Dooley met with the president in the Oval Office, discussing sports and politics, according to his campaign.

Mr. Carter said in the interview that he was regularly in touch with Mr. Trump and had been asking the president to endorse him. “I don’t know that he will,” Mr. Carter said.

Mr. Collins has often raised his role in passing the Laken Riley Act, a law targeting undocumented immigrants that was the first piece of legislation Mr. Trump signed after returning to office.

In recent days, Mr. Collins has appeared to turn his focus on Mr. Dooley. “You don’t beat Jon Ossoff by having no record,” he wrote on social media last week.

The attacks could sharpen in a runoff, bruising the candidates and draining resources that could otherwise be used in the general election. Already the “prolonged, protracted primary has hurt all three,” Stephen Lawson, a Republican strategist, said, though he predicted the general election would still “get tight as we get closer to November.”

Mr. Ossoff, for his part, will not have to worry about the primary or any runoff. He is running unopposed."

Georgia Republicans Grasp for a Contender to Take On Democratic Sen. Jon Ossoff - The New York Times

Trump’s Taiwan Gambit is Already a Gift to China

 

Trump’s Taiwan Gambit is Already a Gift to China

“President Trump’s willingness to use a $14 billion arms package to Taiwan as a bargaining chip with China is seen as a win for Beijing. This move undermines Taiwan’s confidence in U.S. support and strengthens China’s position, potentially delaying or scaling back the arms sale. While the U.S. maintains its policy on Taiwan, the situation raises concerns about the reliability of U.S. deterrence and Taiwan’s security.

President Trump’s open willingness to hold up a $14 billion Taiwan arms package is a win for Beijing. Now China could be weighing how to keep the weapons on ice for as long as it can.

President Trump, in a dark suit with a red tie, shakes hands with Xi Jinping in an ornate room. In the background are other men in suits and tables laid with white cloths.
President Trump with the Chinese leader, Xi Jinping, in Beijing, on Thursday.Kenny Holston/The New York Times

By laying out U.S. arms sales to Taiwan as a bargaining chip with China, President Trump has handed a gift to China’s leader, Xi Jinping, in his efforts to undermine the Taiwanese government.

On Monday, China’s state media used Mr. Trump’s comments to send a message at home and to Taiwan: that the United States cannot be relied on to defend Taiwan, the island democracy that Beijing claims as its territory.

President Lai Ching-te of Taiwan, a frequent target of Beijing’s vitriol, and his Democratic Progressive Party can no longer rely on “unconditional indulgence” from the United States, said the Global Times, a Chinese newspaper, citing a Chinese researcher.

“Security cannot be bought with military purchases; if you become a pawn, you will only be squeezed dry,” said Col. Jiang Bin, a spokesman for China’s Ministry of National Defense, on Monday, referring to Taiwan.

The American president’s comments had been released over the weekend, after Mr. Trump left a summit with Mr. Xi in Beijing on Friday. He said he was keeping on hold a decision about a package of weapons to Taiwan worth around $14 billion, and described it as a “very good negotiating chip” that could be used with Beijing.

“I’m holding that in abeyance and it depends on China,” he said in an interview with Fox News. It was not immediately clear what Mr. Trump wanted China to do in return.

Pressure on Iran?

The United States went into the summit hoping to persuade China to do more to get Iran to reopen the Strait of Hormuz. Mr. Trump later said he had discussed Iran with Mr. Xi but the details of their discussions have not emerged.

China has pushed Iran to negotiate with the United States, and has called for the Strait of Hormuz to be open.

But Beijing has strong strategic reasons to avoid siding explicitly with the United States and Israel against Iran, its partner in the Middle East, in a war it has repeatedly said should not have happened.

Even if China were willing to use its influence over Tehran, it would not want it to be seen as an explicit quid pro quo for U.S. concessions on Taiwan, said Bao Chengke, a researcher of Shanghai Cross-Strait Research Association, an organization in Shanghai.

“He tends to act like a businessman, understanding issues through the lens of deal-making,” Mr. Bao said of Mr. Trump. “But tying the two issues so tightly together really isn’t feasible.”

More Purchases of U.S. Goods?

If Mr. Trump were to suspend the $14 billion package, or scale back the number and sophistication of the weapons, China could respond in a few ways, said Xin Qiang, the director of the Center for Taiwan Studies at Fudan University.

For instance, China could buy more American farm produce and Boeing planes, Professor Xin said.

President Trump and Boeing have already said that China had agreed to order 200 of the company’s planes. The Trump administration also said on Sunday that China had agreed to “purchase at least $17 billion per year of U.S. agricultural products” in 2026, 2027 and 2028, though the amount this year would be prorated.

Beijing’s official position is that Taiwan is a domestic issue and any continued U.S. arms sales to the island are unacceptable. But it can be pragmatic, too, Mr. Xin said.

“China has never wanted to treat arms sales to Taiwan as a bargaining chip in negotiations with the United States,” he said. “But realistically, any issue can in essence become a bargaining chip in the course of international relations or great power competition.”

A Messaging Win for Beijing

In some ways, Beijing has already benefited from Mr. Trump’s gambit.

Mr. Trump’s remarks suggested he had partly absorbed China’s depiction of Mr. Lai as a dangerous separatist seeking to lead the United States to war. (Mr. Lai and his government say Taiwan is in reality already independent, and that it is Beijing that is the aggressor.)

Mr. Trump also questioned whether the United States could successfully come to Taiwan’s defense in a war. “I’m not looking to have somebody go independent and, you know, we’re supposed to travel 9,500 miles to fight a war,” he said.

Minxin Pei, a professor at Claremont McKenna College who studies Chinese leadership politics, said: “I think Xi Jinping believes he succeeded in one respect in this summit — that is, in educating Trump on Taiwan.”

“In the view of Chinese people, Trump’s comments on the Taiwan issue are a massive breakthrough,” said Wang Wen, a former Chinese journalist in Beijing who is now a professor at Renmin University in Beijing.

Beijing can gain some advantage simply if Mr. Trump puts off any approval for long enough, some analysts said.

“The question is whether the pending $14 billion sale is delayed for weeks, months, or longer,” said Craig Singleton, the China Program senior director at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies in Washington. “A prolonged hold, especially one shaped by Beijing’s objections, would raise much more serious concerns about the reliability of U.S. deterrence.”

Trouble for Taiwan?

Taiwan’s main opposition party, the Nationalist Party, which supports closer ties with China, has seized on this moment to argue that President Lai has pushed the island into a dangerous bind — distrusted by Beijing, unable to rely on Washington.

“I believe the Trump-Xi summit represents a turning point for Taiwan,” Su Chi, a former senior official who had worked under Nationalist Party administrations, said at a forum in Taipei. “Our big brother, America, I’m sorry, he has too many problems right now and simply cannot take care of us here.”

Mr. Lai and his officials have argued that Mr. Trump’s comments do not shift relations. They have pointed to parts of Mr. Trump’s comments, including that “nothing’s changed” on policy toward Taiwan. They have also pointed to comments from Trump administration officials, including Jamieson Greer, the U.S. trade representative, that policy on Taiwan is unchanged.

“I don’t think the Taiwanese public needs to worry,” Chen Ming-chi, a Taiwanese deputy minister of foreign affairs, told reporters. “I believe the United States security commitments to us and our bilateral economic and trade relations are being maintained just as before.”

Berry Wang contributed reporting from Hong Kong.

Chris Buckley, the chief China correspondent for The Times, reports on China and Taiwan from Taipei, focused on politics, social change and security and military issues.

Amy Chang Chien is a reporter and researcher for The Times in Taipei, covering Taiwan and China.“