
Susan Collins Was Facing a Tough Re-Election Even Before Voting Against Trump's ‘One Big Beautiful Bill'
When someone crosses Donald Trump, the retribution tends to come fast and fierce. But when Sen. Susan Collins of Maine voted last week against his One Big Beautiful Bill, a tax- and safety net-cuts behemoth, the President was atypically silent. That may be the biggest indicator of just how much danger Collins is in as she faces re-election in Maine in 2026.
Collins' opposition was not enough to kill the giant domestic bill that may be the lone legislative lift of the 119th Congress. She was the 50th nay, which forced Vice President J.D. Vance's to provide a tie breaking 51st vote. Collins is seldom the deciding factor; she did not sink Brett Kavanaugh's nomination to the Supreme Court and voted for all but one of Trump's second-term Cabinet picks, while also voting against Kash Patel's nomination to lead the FBI. Her protest votes are as strategic as they are symbolic; FiveThirtyEight found she voted with Trump 67% of the time during his first term. Plus, on an early test vote on this bill, she let it proceed as she continued, unsuccessfully, to negotiate for carve-outs for rural hospitals.
Collins is the lone Senator up for re-election next year in a state that Democratic presidential nominee Kamala Harris carried in 2024. Democrats have yet to settle on a favored candidate to become the nominee although all eyes are on Maine Gov. Janet Mills, the tough-minded former prosecutor who stared down Trump at the White House and refused to comply with his administration's anti-transgender athlete orders. State Democrats have other options at the ready if the 77-year-old Mills passes and are primed either way to make Collins own the Trump record, especially her votes for his Supreme Court nominees in his first term. While she was re-elected after those votes, the Justices have since overturned a half-century of precedent on abortion rights in Roe.
Republicans in Washington, meanwhile, have seemingly endless patience with Collins and understand her savvy. Her tangles with Trump have been largely performative, not predictive. She is no John McCain, who with a single thumbs-down signal thwarted Trump's first-term effort to repeal Obamacare. Cynics say that Collins shows independence only when it doesn't really make a difference; no one on her side of the aisle really unloaded on her after the vote against the latest package. Most had her back, saying they understood her choice.
Collins, a powerful player and chair of the all-important Appropriations panel, is not terribly difficult to understand, politically speaking. She has never won re-election by less than 8 points despite her home state's fickle politics. The last time the state's majority vote went for a Republican presidential candidate was in 1988, also the last year a Democrat won a Senate race in the state.
But her net approval rating sank 12 percentage points—more than any other Senator's numbers—between the first and second quarters of this year, according to Morning Consult. Her disapproval number stood at 51%, up from a 44% average in the January-March window.
And she is definitely viewed less warmly than when she was at a comparable point ahead of her 2020 bid. In 2019, 52% of Mainers had a favorable impression of Collins, according to Morning Consult polling. Today, the number is 42%.
This suggests she's going to have a trickier time than when she was at the comparable point ahead of her last campaign. In 2019, ahead of her 2020 bid, her net positive numbers were 13 points. Today she's at a net negative of 9 points, according to the same pollsters. That means roughly 1-in-5 Maine voters have changed their minds about Collins in a state where her last victory was secured by less than 9 points.
Collins' allies, meanwhile, offer a different read, noting that she enjoyed a net positive of 2 points in September of last year, and that has moved to a net positive of 4 points last month, according to an independent survey from Pan Atlantic Research.
As a practical matter, about 34,000 Mainers stand to lose health coverage as the bill was drafted. Two solar projects in the state were put on hold even before the bill passed. Hospitals were already bracing for shifting services. Collins' no vote, in a rational world, made sense for her constituents.
But that may not help her. Among voters in Maine, a majority—including a majority of Republicans—says she does not deserve to be re-elected, according to polling from neighboring University of New Hampshire. A striking 71% of all Maine voters say this should be her last term, and 57% of Republicans agree, according to a survey taken in April. That's a simply brutal number.
Flipping ahead a few pages in the same UNH binder, things get even worse. Their survey finds Collins with a favorability number of just 12%, landing a 58% unfavorable number. Among Republicans, the gap is a 19% positive to a 43% negative.
The University of New Hampshire Survey Center found the bill was deeply unpopular, according to a June poll. A 58% majority did not want to see the bill pass, including 72% of independent voters.
Still, Democrats are realistic about what they face. While Collins has just $3 million in her account, she raised almost $31 million for her 2020 bid and won her 2014 campaign with less than $6 million in spending to notch 67% of the vote. Senate Republicans' campaign committee is, first and foremost, an incumbent-retention operation and will have her back.
Senate Democrats, meanwhile, are going to be defending tricky seats in Georgia, New Hampshire, Minnesota, Michigan, and Colorado. They would need a net pick-up run of four seats to take a majority, and the path to that would require upsets in Trump-backing states like Ohio, North Carolina, Florida, Iowa, and Texas, plus holding every seat that is currently blue.
So Collins is facing some pretty lousy poll numbers and is going to be dogged by her no vote that had no real upside. The vote against Trump is not going to be the salve that cures her dour numbers. She defied Republicans but is not going to get any love from Democrats. She's going to be hounded by a bill she did not support. Plus, the headwinds are historic—and that's before Trump decides whether he will launch his own revenge.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
6 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Venezuelan Little League team granted exemption to President Trump's travel ban after senior team denied entry
A team from Venezuela has received approval from the Trump administration to participate in the 2025 Little League World Series, two weeks after a team from the same country was denied entry for a different tournament. The team from Barquisimeto, Venezuela, the winners of last month's Latin America region tournament, was granted a "national exemption" to enter the country, per The Athletic. The effort reportedly required both the intervention of Sen. David McCormick (R-Penn.) and a personal sign-off from Secretary of State Marco Rubio. The team's Instagram account confirmed it was playing over the weekend. The team's status was in limbo following the denial of a team from Maracaibo, Venezuela to play in the Senior League World Series, a Little League-run tournament for players between 13 and 16 years old. Venezuela is one of seven countries facing a limited ban on entry into the U.S. following an executive order from President Donald Trump. That order grants exceptions to 'any athlete or member of an athletic team, including coaches, persons performing a necessary support role, and immediate relatives, traveling for the World Cup, Olympics, or other major sporting event as determined by the Secretary of State." However, that leaves Rubio as the arbiter for what constitutes a "major sporting event," leaving uncertainty for any international event looking to take place in the country. The order specifically carves out an opening for those involved with the 2026 World Cup and 2028 Olympics in Los Angeles, but even that leaves uncertainty based on what is considered a "necessary support role" or "immediate relative." St. Louis Cardinals first baseman Willson Contreras, one of 86 players born in Venezuela to appear in MLB this year, blasted the Senior League team's situation in an interview with The Athletic: 'What pisses me off is they earned the right to be here,' Contreras said of the team that was barred last month. 'They are little kids chasing dreams. I put myself in their shoes because I was a kid once, and I dreamed of being in the Little League World Series once.' In the case of the Little League team, McCormick, a Trump ally on immigration, reportedly worked with the State Department to ensure the Venezuelans were granted entry, via the Athletic: 'I am thrilled my team and I were able to play a small role in making sure young athletes are able to chase their dreams and participate in this timeless Pennsylvania tradition,' McCormick said in a statement to The Athletic. MLB also reportedly offered help to Little League with the visa process, after months of following the Trump's lead on topics such as reinstating Pete Rose from the ineligible list and eliminating mentions of its diversity programs from its site. The 2025 Little League World Series is scheduled to take place from Aug. 13-24 in Williamsport, Penn.


USA Today
7 minutes ago
- USA Today
Olympics organizers willing to treat Trump like a toddler to protect 2028 LA Games
It's the oldest trick in the book for anyone needing to get something done when there's an active toddler or rambunctious puppy around: Give them a toy or a game, or get them to do a task by making them think it's their idea. The distraction keeps them busy and happy while you get some peace and quiet. So it is with President Donald Trump's new 'task force' for the Los Angeles Olympics. Trump signed an executive order Tuesday afternoon creating the task force, which will handle security and transportation issues for the 2028 Summer Games. Yes, there have been task forces for previous Olympics in the United States. But they were not chaired by the president, as this one is. But LA28 needs Trump not to gum up the works over the next three years. By letting him think he's in charge of … something, Games officials could avoid headaches over athlete visas and fan safety while keeping Trump from meddling elsewhere. "We are now focused more than ever on delivery (of the Games) and we can't do this alone. I want to thank President Trump and the entire administration for their support and their partnership as we work to bring these Games home," LA28 chairman Casey Wasserman said at the signing, where he doubled down on the flattery by presenting Trump with a set of the medals from the 1984 Games in Los Angeles. It should embarrass us all that the president of the United States can be so easily played. It should embarrass LA28 that it's willing to be party to it. Yet here we are. The LA Games, the first in the United States since the 2002 Winter Olympics in Salt Lake City, is a multi-billion-dollar effort more than a decade in the making. Organizers are painstaking in their planning, from venues to housing to sponsors. Yet Trump could ruin it all, the proverbial fly in the punchbowl, given his overreaches on immigration and squabbles with Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass and California Gov. Gavin Newsom, both Democrats. Trump picks fights with Bass and Newsom every chance he gets, most notably when he needlessly sent the National Guard into Los Angeles. It's a certainty he'd grandstand in some similar manner during the Games if he didn't think it would make him look bad, too. Olympic athletes and their coaches are supposed to be exempt from Trump's latest travel ban, while Olympic fans are usually greeted with open arms by host countries. Yet the recent refusal to allow Cuba's women's volleyball team and Senegal's women's basketball team into the United States, along with ICE agents who target immigrants, as well as citizens and tourists, have raised concerns that Olympic athletes and fans won't have safe harbor for the Los Angeles Games. If those embarrassing visa problems and the harassment were to be pinned on Trump, however, they're less likely to occur. By creating the task force and putting Trump "in charge" of it, LA28 is letting him think he's an integral part of an event where his only real role should be that of a figurehead. It's organizers' way of making sure he has a vested interest in seeing athletes arrive without issue, fans don't wind up in Alligator Alcatraz and the Los Angeles Games go off without any humiliating sideshows. This isn't the stuff of normally functioning democracies, and no one should pretend it is. Los Angeles organizers also should not assume they've fully protected the Games from Trump's tirades and pettiness. Anyone who thinks they've won a permanent place in Trump's good graces should remember how well that worked out for Elon Musk. Sure enough, Trump was threatening to call in the National Guard and other members of the U.S. military to safeguard the Games before Tuesday's news conference was even over. Insulting Bass in the process for good measure. But with so much time and money already invested, this is also the least-worst option for LA28 and the International Olympic Committee. "We remain incredibly confident in our ability to deliver the greatest Games ever, and that starts with the support of this administration every step of the way," Wasserman said. And before anyone squawks about canceling the Games or moving them, save your breath. The IOC held two Olympics in the middle of a global pandemic and has done business with plenty of other unsavory leaders. It isn't going to be dissuaded by Donald Trump's awful policies or inept handling of global issues. The IOC and its host cities have made going along to get along an art form. Trump's task force is just more of the same, a reminder that the price tag for the Games includes more than money. Follow USA TODAY Sports columnist Nancy Armour on social media @nrarmour.


New York Post
7 minutes ago
- New York Post
Biden ‘Politburo' aide Bruce Reed blames ex-prez's debate fiasco on his stutter
WASHINGTON — A member of former President Joe Biden's so-called 'Politburo' testified that his ex-boss's infamously bad debate performance was the result of his stutter during a closed-door transcribed interview with House Oversight Committee lawyers this week. Bruce Reed, 65, Biden's former deputy chief of staff for policy, delivered a spirited defense of the 46th president's cognitive abilities during his roughly six-hour-long transcribed interview Tuesday, The Post has learned. 'Mr. Reed claimed in his transcribed interview that Joe Biden's debate performance was the result of his stutter,' a source familiar with Reed's testimony told The Post. Advertisement 'When asked whether Americans' concerns about Joe Biden's mental acuity were legitimate, Mr. Reed responded that he believes Americans should not have had any concerns about the President's mental faculties.' 3 Bruce Reed has been described as a policy wonk and was seen as a driving force behind much of former President Joe Biden's domestic agenda. Bloomberg via Getty Images Reed, who is now the ninth ex-Biden aide to appear before the panel, did not take questions from the press before his closed-door testimony. Biden struggled with a stutter during his youth, but he participated in numerous public debates over the past five decades where he seemed much more coherent. Advertisement Biden, 82, agreed to debate President Trump in late June of last year, far earlier than presidential verbal bouts have typically taken place during recent decades, usually in the fall. Reed, who has been described by Democratic operatives as a policy wonk, was among the advisers who helped prepare Biden for the notorious fumbling debate. Biden appeared on the debate stage borderline stonefaced at times and struggled to complete some of his thoughts, with his mouth agape during portions. The stunning display sparked a Democratic mutiny against Biden that led to him dropping out of the 2024 race. Advertisement 3 Former President Joe Biden has ripped into Republicans for questioning whether he actually made the decisions on how autopen was used. POOL/AFP via Getty Images 'During his interview, Mr. Reed stated that the decision to hold the debate early was a deliberate strategy to get ahead of early voting and the Olympics,' the source recounted. 'He emphasized that the campaign's push for the early debate was unrelated to concerns about President Biden's age.' The bombshell book 'Original Sin' described Reed as one of what the authors called Biden's 'Politburo,' the core inner circle of 'ultimate decision-makers' around the 46th president. He is now the last of the non-family 'Politburo' members described in the book to testify before the panel. Advertisement The 65-year-old has been a key figure in the Biden team and Democratic politics for years. In addition to his time as deputy chief of staff for policy during the Biden administration, Reed also served as Biden's chief of staff during the first half of his vice presidency and held key roles in the 2020 and 2024 campaigns. He also worked in the Clinton administration as the director of the Domestic Policy Council, a deputy campaign manager for policy during the 1992 Clinton campaign for the presidency, and a speechwriter for former Vice President Al Gore during his Senate days. Back in May, House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer (R-Ky.) revived his probe into whether there was a 'cover-up' of Biden's mental cognition that he had opened last Congress. 3 Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer revived the probe into Joe Biden's acuity back in May. Getty Images The Kentucky Republican also expanded the probe to look at Biden's use of autopen to sign official documents after revelations emerged that the 46th president used the device very frequently. No lawmakers were present for Reed's transcribed interview. Biden has publicly ripped into aspersions from Republicans over his use of the autopen and insisted that he made every decision. Advertisement Other ex-Biden aides who sat before the Oversight panel, include former White House Chief of Staff Ron Klain; former senior adviser Mike Donilon; former counselor Steve Ricchetti; Jill Biden's powerful former chief of staff Anthony Bernal; former presidential physician Dr. Kevin O'Connor; Ashley Williams, former special assistant to the president and deputy director of Oval Office Operations; and Neera Tanden, the former White House director of the Domestic Policy Council. Some of those ex-Biden aides who came before the powerful investigatory committee had been subpoenaed and opted to plead their Fifth Amendment, refraining from answering questions. Reed had agreed to a transcribed interview before the Oversight Committee and, therefore, wasn't able to plead the Fifth. The powerful investigatory panel is slated to hear from former senior adviser Anita Dunn on Thursday. There are at least four more ex-Biden aides scheduled to appear before the panel after Dunn.