Musk's primary threats pose danger for Republicans
Musk vowed earlier this week that Republicans who supported Trump's megabill 'will lose their primary next year if it is the last thing I do on this Earth' as the Tesla CEO has reignited his feud with Trump in recent days.
Republicans see the comments as unhelpful, with some saying if the threats come to fruition, it could risk diverting resources away in an election environment that historically hasn't been kind to the president's party in power.
'One of the most destructive behaviors that we've had in cycles where we've been unsuccessful in Senate races … are those in which we have expended massive resources in intraparty warfare,' said one Republican consultant who's worked on Senate races.
Ever since Musk ended his stint at the White House, the billionaire has been a vocal critic of Trump's major policy bill, taking particular issue with the projected trillions of dollars multiple analyses say will add to the deficit.
The House narrowly passed the final version of the bill on Thursday, and Trump signed it Friday evening at a White House Fourth of July event.
But Musk's frustrations reached a new point on Monday when he said he would back challengers to Republicans who supported Trump's agenda-setting legislation, while saying he would also look to protect Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.), a prominent opponent of the bill who has drawn Trump's ire.
The Tesla CEO also suggested it was time for a new political party.
'It is obvious with the insane spending of this bill, which increases the debt ceiling by a record FIVE TRILLION DOLLARS that we live in a one-party country — the PORKY PIG PARTY!! Time for a new political party that actually cares about the people,' he said on the social platform X, which he owns.
Some lawmakers have sought to brush off Musk's threat.
'I'll take President Trump's endorsement over Elon's any day of the week, back home,' Sen. Roger Marshall (R-Kan.) said in an interview with Just the News's Nicholas Ballasy regarding the potential primary challenge.
Marshall said his Republican colleagues were 'ignoring' Musk.
Trump, meanwhile, left the door open this week to deporting Musk, who was born in South Africa and became a naturalized U.S. citizen. He also suggested Musk's advisory Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) could be turned against the billionaire and his companies.
'I think what's going to happen is DOGE is going to look at Musk. And if DOGE looks at Musk, we're going to save a fortune,' Trump said while in Florida on Tuesday. 'I don't think he should be playing that game with me.'
The White House and a representative for Musk did not respond to requests for comment for this story.
Some Republicans expressed skepticism that Musk would actually follow through in launching primary challenges against GOP incumbents, while others didn't view the billionaire's remarks as an immediate threat.
'I think the president is much more popular with the base right now than Elon Musk, and I think our elected representatives are also more popular,' said Mark Jefferson, a former executive director for the Wisconsin GOP.
'I don't take the threat all that seriously, because how do you primary hundreds of people?' asked Georgia-based Republican consultant Brian Robinson.
Unlike Musk, Trump has a history of trying to oust Republicans with whom he's been at odds, with varying degrees of success. And Trump's allies have already signaled this cycle they're not afraid to go after holdouts and members of the party they see as stymieing the president and his agenda. A pro-Trump super PAC has already been created with the goal of 'firing' Massie.
'Unless and until Musk can start lining up some A-team candidates or credible people or people in the same wing of the party, he's going nowhere,' said top GOP donor Eric Levine, who described Massie as 'fringe.'
Other Republicans suggest it may not be long before Trump and Musk are back on good terms again.
While it's too soon to say how serious Musk might be about his primary threats, the moves would be an unnecessary obstacle for the party.
'I hope that he doesn't, obviously, because I think that primary fights normally don't do anything but strengthen the opposition,' said longtime GOP donor Bill Bean.
Bean acknowledged that Musk 'has a point' about the GOP legislation raising the deficit, but he also voiced concern that Musk's primary challenges against members of Congress could force Republicans to divert resources from areas where the party might not otherwise have been concerned.
'I think that his money would be much better spent instead of primarying conservative Republicans who maybe aren't 100 percent as conservative or 100 percent agree with him to go out and win elections in swing districts,' Bean said.
'I guarantee you, if we had a 30-seat majority in the House and a 12-seat majority in the Senate, the bill right now going through would be a lot closer to what he would like to see,' he added.
Musk's remarks represent a noteworthy shift from just months ago, when he was considered one of Trump's biggest allies.
His America PAC spent tens of millions of dollars alone supporting the president during the 2024 election, and he was a critical donor for Wisconsin Republicans earlier this year as they looked to narrow the spending gap against Democrats in the high-stakes state Supreme Court race.
Even while Musk has opened up old wounds with Trump over Republicans' major policy bill, it hasn't stopped him from offering some praise for the president. He lauded the president last week over his handling of foreign affairs, writing Wednesday in a post on X: 'Credit where credit is due. @realDonaldTrump has successfully resolved several serious conflicts around the world.'
Meanwhile, some Republicans have a warning for Musk, should he follow through on his threats.
'Musk is deeply hated among Democrats. For now, he maintains good standing among Republicans, but if he follows through, he will lose them as well and be a man without a country,' said Michigan-based GOP strategist Jason Cabel Roe in an email to The Hill. 'That will sabotage any political or business initiatives he's involved in.'
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
8 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Top Copper Nation Chile Sweats on Details of Trump's 50% Tariff
(Bloomberg) -- Chile, by far the biggest shipper of copper into the US, is waiting for details to emerge following President's Donald Trump's bombshell comments on tariffs. Are Tourists Ruining Europe? How Locals Are Pushing Back Can Americans Just Stop Building New Highways? Denver City Hall Takes a Page From NASA Philadelphia Trash Piles Up as Garbage Workers' Strike Drags On Trump sent shock-waves through the global copper industry on Tuesday by telling reporters that he would be slapping a 50% levy on copper imports — much higher than previously thought. Chile — and particularly state-owned Codelco — would be the most affected producer given the country accounts for about 500,000 metric tons of the total of 700,000 tons of refined metal that the US imports a year. Of that, Codelco alone ships about 350,000 tons. Asked about the 50% remarks, Chile's Foreign Ministry pointed out that there's still no executive order regarding a Commerce Department investigation into copper tariffs, and that Chile is yet to receive notification of any decision. Similarly, Codelco Chairman Maximo Pacheco said it's too soon to draw conclusions. Two major unknowns are whether there'll be country exemptions and whether the tariff will apply to both semi-fabricated copper products as well as refined metal, Pacheco said. The US needs that copper and Chile will continue to be ready to supply it, he said. Chilean officials participated in public consultations in the framework of the Commerce Department investigation. 'We remain in contact and engaged in discussions on this and other matters with the relevant authorities and technical teams,' Chile's Foreign Ministry said in a written response. Will Trade War Make South India the Next Manufacturing Hub? 'Telecom Is the New Tequila': Behind the Celebrity Wireless Boom SNAP Cuts in Big Tax Bill Will Hit a Lot of Trump Voters Too Pistachios Are Everywhere Right Now, Not Just in Dubai Chocolate For Brazil's Criminals, Coffee Beans Are the Target ©2025 Bloomberg L.P. 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
Yahoo
9 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Mayor Brandon Johnson open to future Chicago NASCAR race, suggests date change
CHICAGO — Mayor Brandon Johnson is open to NASCAR returning to Chicago, but hinted Tuesday the city may need a better deal before stock car drivers again race through its streets. NASCAR has 90 days to request a contract extension with the Chicago Park District. If the racing authority wants to win city leaders over, it could need to change race dates, the mayor said Tuesday. 'The Fourth of July is already, quite frankly, it is a heavier burden for our law enforcement because of so much activity,' Johnson said at a City Hall news conference. 'It's something that will be part of the larger discussion if, in fact, NASCAR returns, what is the optimal time.' Pressed on what else the city might need to approve another race, Johnson stayed tight-lipped, promising only that 'there will be a lot of things that we will discuss.' Whether the city and NASCAR can find dates that fit into both schedules is a key question. A NASCAR spokesperson declined comment Tuesday. The 2026 and 2027 races, the prior contract negotiated by former Mayor Lori Lightfoot said, would be held on mutually agreeable dates. But the park district did confirm in the original contract that the 2023 event and staging window — July 4th weekend — 'is acceptable for potential 2026 or 2027 events.' NASCAR is reportedly in separate negotiations with officials in San Diego to host a street race there in 2026. The potential San Diego race may be in addition to Chicago, or supplant it. A negotiation window with Chicago officials could be narrow: NASCAR announced last year's cup schedule last August. It featured 38 races between February and November, breaking briefly in May and June. Considered the city's front lawn, Grant Park already has a packed schedule in the warmer months, including Lollapalooza, Suenos, Blues and Jazz fests, Taste of Chicago, the half marathon, and various other festivals. Downtown aldermen say moving the race is critical to winning their approval. The Fourth of July is a 'family-oriented' weekend when Chicagoans should have free access to Grant Park, Ald. Bill Conway, 34th, said. 'If you're going to have it again, please don't have it on July 4th weekend,' Conway said. 'We should choose to do it a different weekend if we choose to do it at all.' Conway also said the city should recoup costs tied to the event 'at a minimum' and added that he hopes construction and tear-down times continue to improve. The racing authority has become more efficient in its set-up and communicated well with residents to resolve initial concerns, he added. 'If we can get those things ironed out, I think it would be good to have NASCAR back. Chicago shines on the world stage, and it's clear Chicago gives NASCAR that platform,' he said. Conway said Johnson previously told him a city decision on the event's future would come after this year's race. The mayor on Tuesday promised 'far more people are going to be involved' as future races are considered. 'We should have input, we should be involved in this process,' Ald. Brian Hopkins, 2nd, said. Hopkins argued Lightfoot failed to bring in others when she landed the deal to bring the race to Chicago. He declined to cast judgement on whether the race should continue. It seems the city comes out slightly ahead financially, but weeks-long street closures still make the race hard to justify, he said. The city's cut has long been a point of contention with NASCAR skeptics. The 2025 payment includes a $605,000 base permit fee, plus $2 per ticket sold and 25% of net commissions on food, drinks and merchandise sold at the event. NASCAR must pay the non-permit cut within a 90-day window after the event. In the fall of 2023, Johnson and NASCAR also memorialized an additional $2 million payment for 2024 and 2025. That payment was supposed to help compensate the city for public safety and other costs. NASCAR also agreed to continually slim down its setup and takedown window to reduce inconvenience to drivers and downtown residents. The city came out slightly ahead last year, thanks in large part to that $2 million payment and fewer roadwork improvement costs. NASCAR officials point to the broader economic impact as a point in their favor — plus added amusement taxes that flow to the city and county. Leslie Recht, who leads the Grant Park Advisory Council, said she's urged Park District Superintendent Carlos Ramirez Rosa, a close Johnson ally, to push for more money from the company and an even quicker set-up and takedown. 'For me, it's still too long,' Recht said, stipulating that other advisory council members don't mind it. 'All the disruption in Grant Park, if you compare it to Lollapalooza or Suenos or some of the other events, they come, they go. They're a much less impactful situation in Grant Park than NASCAR and they don't pay enough … Lolla and Suenos together pay $12 million. It's ridiculous.' The city must be careful with how it uses Grant Park, because 'it is for everyone,' Ald. Lamont Robinson, 4th, said. But NASCAR has so far been a 'good neighbor,' he added. 'I think we need as much revenue as we can get in the city of Chicago,' Robinson said. ____
Politico
13 minutes ago
- Politico
Senate GOP preps vote on the first judge of the second Trump era
House Budget Chair Jodey Arrington says Republicans shouldn't give up on advancing certain priorities that were cut out of their 'big, beautiful bill' for not complying with Senate rules, telling reporters Tuesday that lawmakers will try again in follow-up budget reconciliation packages. 'There may be a longer list of things that were kicked out by the Senate parliamentarian as non-compliant with the Byrd rule — I think we should make another run at that and look for ways to structure the provisions so that it's more fundamentally budgetary in impact and policy,' the Texas Republican said during the press call Tuesday afternoon. 'I suspect that's why they were kicked out.' The so-called Byrd rule limits what provisions can be included in a bill moving through Congress through the reconciliation process, which allows lawmakers to skirt the 60-vote filibuster threshold in the Senate. Arrington specifically pointed to one provision stripped in the Senate from the House-passed megabill that would have prohibited Medicaid coverage for gender affirming surgeries, and another that would have banned noncitizens from tapping into Medicaid resources. 'I think those — we need to spend more time' crafting the provisions to pass muster with the parliamentarian, Arrington said. 'I don't think we spent enough time to look for a pathway to success on them, and that's sort of the landscape, as I see it, of the opportunities in another reconciliation bill.' Echoing Speaker Mike Johnson 's recent comments, Arrington said he suspects GOP leaders will attempt to do two more party-line packages in the 119th Congress, with the next one slated for the fall. Arrington added members would likely demand that those additional measures be drafted under circumstances where both chambers adhere to the same budget framework, avoiding a repeat of the most recent scenario where House and Senate Republicans each gave their committees different deficit reduction targets. He lamented the fact that the Senate did not comply with the House's aggressive instructions for writing iits version of the megabill, but credited fiscal hawks for helping secure $1.5 trillion in savings in a final product, and noted that it was not 'feasible' to expect the full magnitude of cost savings would be acheived in a single reconciliation bill — 'politically, at least.' As it currently stands, the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, which President Donald Trump signed into law over the weekend, is 'front loaded with costs and back-end loaded with savings,' which Arrington said should compel Republicans to make sure the administration follows through in 'mak[ing] sure the savings actually happen.' 'That was a concern among conservative budget hawks,' Arrington said. 'When I think about the Budget Committee's role going forward, one of the things that we need to do … is keep the pressure on the Senate, on the House and the administration to be diligent in implementation and enforcement.'
