logo
Peters offers optimistic outlook for Michigan Dems in 2026 Senate Race

Peters offers optimistic outlook for Michigan Dems in 2026 Senate Race

Yahoo13-06-2025
U.S. Sen. Gary Peters (D-Bloomfield Twp.) at the Mackinac Policy Conference, May 30, 2024 | Anna Liz Nichols
Following the conclusion of his term in 2027, U.S. Sen. Gary Peters (D-Bloomfield Township) said he plans to remain active in public policy.
Earlier this year, Peters, who has served in the U.S. Senate since 2015, announced he would not seek reelection in 2026, to the shock of many.
While sitting down with the Michigan Advance at last month's Mackinac Policy Conference, Peters said his post-Washington plans are still up in the air, but stressed that he's not retiring.
'I'll have a lot more control over my life when I'm not in the Senate, because it gives me a lot more flexibility to do a variety of things. But I'm going to stay active,' Peters said.
With a year and a half left in the Senate, Peters said he remains focused on the Great Lakes, specifically on securing funding for the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative and additional appropriations for the U.S. National Guard's Great Lakes Oil Spill Center of Expertise in Sault Ste. Marie, which he helped establish.
Alongside serving in the U.S. Senate, Peters also chaired the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee from 2021 through 2025, with U.S. Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.) taking over the role for the 2026 campaign cycle.
While Peter's decision not to run for reelection created uncertainty for Democrats' pathway back to a majority in the Senate, Peters said he's confident his party will retain the seat.
'Actually, that was part of my decision, because I want to make sure that the seat continues to be Democratic,' he said, pointing to two key factors that he said give the Democrats good odds.
First, 2026 will be a good year to be a Democrat, Peters said, with the party out of power typically performing better during midterm elections.
SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
'You have that historical precedent. Plus just the increased chaos we're seeing out of the Trump administration will mean that people are going to be voting Democratic, and next year, I think you're going to see that similar to what we saw in the last Trump administration,' Peters said, referencing the 2018 mid-term election where Democrats were able to take control of the U.S. House of Representatives.
In another benefit, Democrats also have a deep bench of candidates, Peters said, noting that while others may declare for candidacy, the four Democratic candidates that have already jumped into the race 'are all very talented people.'
The Democratic slate is currently made up of U.S. Rep. Haley Stevens (D-Birmingham), state Sen. Mallory McMorrow (D-Royal Oak), former Michigan House Speaker Joe Tate (D-Detroit) and former Wayne County Health Director Abdul El-Sayed. Former U.S. Rep. Mike Rogers (R-White Lake) is currently the only Republican candidate, however reports say U.S. Rep. Bill Huizenga (R-Zeeland) is also weighing a run, though he has yet to make a formal announcement.
That said, Democrats can't take anything for granted as Michigan is set to be a top battleground state, Peters said.
'The challenge for a race – Senate race in particular – when you have a primary is that you don't get your nominee till fairly late into August. And this race, it'll go from zero to 100 miles an hour within hours of the election,' Peters said.
However, the 2024 election illustrated a clear divide in the Democratic Party between its moderate members and the more progressive wing, best illustrated by the party's split over Israel and Gaza.
When looking for a pathway forward, Peters said Democrats need to remain focused on economic issues like affordable health care, job opportunities and voters' ability to save for and live a dignified retirement.
'All those issues are the most powerful. And you should always be focused on those. And that's not going to change,' Peters said.
When you think about the previous presidential election – where former Vice President Kamala Harris lost to Trump by just over 80,000 votes – a presidential loss would typically bring a Senate election loss with it, Peters said. However, that didn't happen in Michigan.
'We won here in Michigan. And if you look at Elissa Slotkin's campaign, it was focused on those bread and butter economic issues. We won Tammy Baldwin in Wisconsin, and Nevada and Arizona and all of those Senate candidates, that's what they focused on. They outperformed the top of the ticket and they won,' Peters said.
Democrats still have to work to excite their base and cannot ignore them, but those economic issues are just as important to Democratic voters as they are to independents, Peters said.
As President Donald Trump works to radically reshape the federal government, congressional Democrats are tasked with both resisting the president and the Republican majority, and delivering results for their constituents.
While bringing home results for constituents is difficult, the Democratic minority has to use its position to call out Republicans' actions and paint a contrast in the minds of voters, Peters said, emphasizing elections are all about contrast.
Trump has violated pretty much every major norm of democracy, alongside several laws, Peters said, and while the judicial system has repeatedly been a check on the president, Democrats need to be aggressive in calling that out.
'I think we definitely have to be extremely aggressive in calling out just the blatant corruption we're seeing from the Trump administration,' Peters said, pointing to his decision to accept a $400 million jet as a gift from Qatar as well as his meeting with investors in his cryptocurrency business.
'We can't normalize that in any way, not just for the short term of getting rid of President Trump, but we can't normalize it for future administrations as well. The United States needs to be the place where corruption is never tolerated,' Peters said.
However, Democrats still need to walk and chew gum by retaining their focus on the economic issues, Peters said.
'I think those issues too are going to play out as we look at tariffs, which will increase costs. When people start paying more for the everyday goods that they have, they're going to realize that Donald Trump's promise that he was going to lower inflation on day one is not the case,' Peters said.
He also pointed to Republican's tax and spending bill, warning the plan would increase the nation's deficit by trillions of dollars, prompting higher interest rates.
'So you pay more for your car, you're going to pay more for your mortgage, your credit card, all those costs as a result of what I believe is completely irresponsible fiscal policy from the Republicans right now,' Peters said.
As some Democrats have called on their officials to do more to resist the president, arguing they could do more to be a thorn in Trump's side, Peters said Democratic lawmakers are using the tools they have.
While they've been able to use procedures to delay votes on legislation, those efforts are only delays, Peters said.
'We currently live, and I hope we always live, in a democracy and that means the majority rules in a democracy, yep. And if, if the majority have the votes, you can't stop it,' Peters said, noting that Republicans were in a similar position during the first half of former President Joe Biden's term.
This is where elections have consequences, Peters said, prompting Democrats to put their energy into next year's election.
Given the current political circumstances, Peters predicts Democrats will take back control of the U.S. House in 2026. The chamber is currently split 220-212, with three open seats.
'When you take back the House, then the dynamic changes dramatically in Washington. And Donald Trump, we'll be able to stop him, because he won't be able to pass things through the House,' Peters said.
While retaking the Senate would prove more challenging, it's not something Democrats can write off, Peters said. The chamber is currently split 53-45 with two independents Senators, Bernie Sanders (D-Vt.) and Angus King (D-Maine), caucusing with Democrats.
While he understands the frustration among activists, Peters reiterated Democrats' limited options.
'You can slow down the majority, but eventually majority wins,' he said.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

State of play in Trump's tariffs, threats and delays
State of play in Trump's tariffs, threats and delays

Yahoo

time29 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

State of play in Trump's tariffs, threats and delays

Dozens of economies including India, Canada and Mexico face threats of higher tariffs Friday if they fail to strike deals with Washington. Here is a summary of duties President Donald Trump has introduced in his second term as he pressures allies and competitors alike to reshape US trade relationships. - Global tariffs - US "reciprocal" tariffs -- imposed under legally contentious emergency powers -- are due to jump from 10 percent to various steeper levels for a list of dozens of economies come August 1, including South Korea, India and Taiwan. The hikes were to take effect July 9 but Trump postponed them days before imposition, marking a second delay since their shock unveiling in April. A 10 percent "baseline" levy on most partners, which Trump imposed in April, remains in place. He has also issued letters dictating tariff rates above 10 percent for individual countries, including Brazil, which has a trade deficit with the United States and was not on the initial list of higher "reciprocal" rates. Several economies -- the European Union, Britain, Vietnam, Japan, Indonesia and the Philippines -- have struck initial tariff deals with Washington, while China managed to temporarily lower tit-for-tat duties. Certain products like pharmaceuticals, semiconductors and lumber are excluded from Trump's "reciprocal" tariffs, but may face separate action under different authorities. This has been the case for steel, aluminum, and soon copper. Gold and silver, alongside energy commodities, are also exempted. Excluded too are Mexico and Canada, hit with a different set of tariffs, and countries like Russia and North Korea as they already face sanctions. - Canada, Mexico - Canadian and Mexican products were hit by 25 percent US tariffs shortly after Trump returned to office, with a lower rate for Canadian energy. Trump targeted both neighbors over illegal immigration and fentanyl trafficking, also invoking emergency powers. But trade negotiations have been bumpy. This month, Trump said Canadian goods will face a higher 35 percent duty from August 1, and Mexican goods will see a 30 percent level. Products entering the United States under the USMCA North American free trade pact, covering large swaths of goods, are expected to remain exempt -- with Canadian energy resources and potash, used as fertilizer, to still face lower rates. - China focus - Trump has also taken special aim at China. The world's two biggest economies engaged in an escalating tariffs war this year before their temporary pullback. The countries imposed triple-digit duties on each other at one point, a level described as a trade embargo. After high level talks, Washington lowered its levies on Chinese goods to 30 percent and Beijing slashed its own to 10 percent. This pause is set to expire August 12, and officials will meet for further talks on Monday and Tuesday in the Swedish capital Stockholm. The US level is higher as it includes a 20 percent tariff over China's alleged role in the global fentanyl trade. Beyond expansive tariffs on Chinese products, Trump ordered the closure of a duty-free exemption for low-value parcels from the country. This adds to the cost of importing items like clothing and small electronics. - Autos, metals - Trump has targeted individual business sectors too, under more conventional national security grounds, imposing a 25 percent levy on steel and aluminum imports which he later doubled to 50 percent. The president has unveiled plans for a 50 percent tariff on copper imports starting August 1 as well and rolled out a 25 percent tariff on imported autos, although those entering under the USMCA can qualify for a lower rate. Trump's auto tariffs impact vehicle parts too, but new rules ensure automakers paying vehicle tariffs will not also be charged for certain other duties. He has ongoing investigations into imports of lumber, semiconductors, pharmaceuticals and critical minerals that could trigger further duties. - Legal challenges - Several legal challenges have been filed against the tariffs Trump invoked citing emergencies. The US Court of International Trade ruled in May that the president had overstepped his authority, but a federal appeals court has allowed the duties to remain while it considers the case. If these tariffs are ultimately ruled illegal, companies could possibly seek reimbursements. bys/des/mlm Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data

Trump's Obama ‘Russia-gate' push offers the MAGA Epstein crowd a head on a plate. Here's why he can't deliver on that promise
Trump's Obama ‘Russia-gate' push offers the MAGA Epstein crowd a head on a plate. Here's why he can't deliver on that promise

Yahoo

timean hour ago

  • Yahoo

Trump's Obama ‘Russia-gate' push offers the MAGA Epstein crowd a head on a plate. Here's why he can't deliver on that promise

Tulsi Gabbard is the face of Donald Trump's newest bid to move the news cycle off the Jeffrey Epstein files. But she, like the president himself, is likely to see her efforts end in the same murky water where the dreams of prosecuting Hillary Clinton died during Trump's first term in office. On Wednesday, the White House trotted out the Director of National Intelligence, alongside press secretary Karoline Leavitt, to brief reporters on an intel review that Gabbard had led. She told reporters that new evidence pointed to the involvement of former president Barack Obama and top officials in a supposed campaign to alter the conclusions of intelligence assessments, in order to forge a link between Trump and Russia where none supposedly existed. It was an old theory with a new twist, which Gabbard laid out as an apparent years-long 'coup' attempt against Trump. She argued that Obama, along with former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, and former FBI chief James Comey, knowingly changed official intelligence assessments to explain the scope of the nefarious activity Russia was up to during the 2016 election. 'The implications of this are far reaching and have to do with the integrity of our democratic republic,' Gabbard claimed. 'It has to do with an outgoing President taking action to manufacture intelligence, to undermine and usurp the will of the American people in that election and launch what would be a years long coup against the incoming president United States, Donald Trump.' It's at this point where Trump and the White House's call for 'justice' and 'accountability' (two words Leavitt and Gabbard floated Wednesday) runs out of gas. In 2019, Trump's White House appointed a special counsel to look at the origins of the Russia investigation and found no evidence of criminal activity committed by Obama or other members of his administration. And given how the federal statute of limitations works, the clock is ticking for Trumpworld to take a second crack at delivering the retribution the president has long threatened to levy against his enemies. Under federal law, most criminal charges have a statute of limitation of five years, meaning that the entirety of the 'Russiagate' probe's duration now falls outside the legal window for criminal prosecution. To be clear, the statute of limitations does not apply to murder, or sexual abuse. Nor does it apply to treason, which Trumpworld has long, and frivolously, suggested charging Obama and others with. (Trump made that specific accusation once again in the wake of Gabbard's memo being published last week.) Nor does the statute of limitations apply to another criminal count that could be leveled against the former president and members of his team in a last-ditch attempt to make something stick: conspiracy against rights. The latter charge carries a statute of limitations of ten years, not five, and as a result it's by far the most likely avenue for federal prosecutors to take if a real effort is made to deliver on Trump's promised vengeance. The New York Post reported that some of Trump's allies view it as their best shot. But opponents say even that would be a fool's errand. 'These bizarre claims against President Obama are a made up farrago of malicious nonsense. The context makes clear that this is an effort to distract from Trump's major Epstein problem,' Norm Eisen, a constitutional scholar and co-counsel for the first Trump impeachment effort in 2020, said in a statement to The Independent on Wednesday. Eisen added: 'We at Democracy Defenders Fund have filed a legal demand under the freedom of information act for the Trump - Epstein documents and if we do not get them we will be litigating. But there is no basis for charging Obama with any crime irrespective of the statute of limitations, and plucking an offense out of thin air simply because it has a longer statute of limitations just highlights the baselessness of it all. ' The Obama "Russia-gate" push is the latest move by the Trump administration to attempt to quell outrage from the MAGA base after a July 6 DOJ memo concluded there were no more significant disclosures to be made in the Epstein case. The pressure has also intensified on the president after it was revealed the DOJ told Trump in May that his name appears multiple times in the Epstein files, the Wall Street Journal reported Wednesday. The president had denied to reporters earlier this month that his name had been in the files. Appearing in the files does not indicate that an individual has committed any wrongdoing, nor has Trump ever been accused of misconduct in connection with the Epstein case. At Wednesday's White House briefing, Gabbard deflected questions on potential charges for former president Obama to Attorney General Pam Bondi, possibly the most embattled member of Trump's Cabinet thanks to the Epstein Files uproar. 'I'm leaving the criminal charges to the Department of Justice. I am not an attorney,' said Gabbard. But the DOJ has been silent for nearly a week since the publication of a memo outlining the Director of National Intelligence's latest review. And the DOJ hasn't uttered a peep in terms of plans to launch investigations into Gabbard's findings, despite the director's claim that all evidence was referred to Bondi's office. A spokesperson for Obama, meanwhile, issued a rare statement Tuesday calling the 'Russia-gate' accusations 'bizarre', and correctly noting that 'nothing in the document issued last week undercuts the widely accepted conclusion that Russia worked to influence the 2016 presidential election but didn't successfully manipulate any votes.' The intelligence assessment, released by Gabbard, relied heavily on her conflation of the finding that Russian actors did not launch cyberattacks against U.S. voting platforms with a finding that Russia had not interfered at all. Like the Senate Intelligence Committee in 2020, the DOJ and other agencies found that Russia was behind influence campaigns on social media aimed at sowing election disinformation. At the White House briefing, Gabbard and Leavitt presented that conclusion anew by inferring that Russia did interfere but without the goal of helping either major candidate in the 2016 race. Conspiracy against rights would be an ironic charge for Trump's team to level against Obama, considering the president was accused of this in a criminal probe launched by special counsel Jack Smith over Trump's efforts to overturn the 2020 election. This charge would require that Trump's prosecutors prove the existence of an organized plot between Obama and his advisers to keep Trump out of the White House — something even Gabbard didn't allege on Wednesday, as the intelligence probe did not turn up any evidence of a concerted scheme. The Biden administration tried for four years to hold Trump accountable for his attempts to overturn the 2020 election. His mishandling of classified materials after leaving the White House also triggered criminal charges. But in both cases, the DOJ was too slow to bring the case to trial, and the charges were dismissed after Trump's 2024 election victory. Trump was charged with conspiracy against rights for allegedly conspiring to violate the rights of millions of Americans by working with state legislatures and Congress in a half-cocked bid to throw out the 2020 election results pointing to his defeat. It's the same charge, down to the letter, that Obama would now face from a Trump-DOJ, if such an effort be launched. Gabbard couldn't answer why those charges against Obama weren't pursued during Trump's first term. 'I can't speak to what happened there,' she said Wednesday. 'There were several [directors of national intelligence] under the first Trump administration. President Trump faced many challenges from those who were working in the government who sought to undermine his presidency.'

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store