President Donald Trump has nominated Kari Lake and Doug Mastriano — two allies who waged failed bids for governor in battleground states — to diplomatic posts.

The White House announced Monday that Trump has nominated Lake to be ambassador to Jamaica and Mastriano to be ambassador to Slovakia. Both nominations require Senate confirmation.

Mastriano, who ran for governor of Pennsylvania, and Lake, who lost in Arizona, both embraced the president and his baseless election conspiracies and were rejected by voters in 2022.

“I look forward to representing our nation abroad, strengthening the friendship between our two countries, and advancing the interests of the American people,” Mastriano said in a statement posted online.

Lake, a former local TV personality who dismantled the Voice of America as Trump’s appointed head of the U.S. Agency for Global Media, said she was looking forward to her new role in the Caribbean.

“Jamaica is a country I know very well, full of incredible people, and if confirmed by the Senate, I look forward to strengthening the partnership between our nations, advancing America’s interests abroad, and building on the deep friendship shared by the American and Jamaican people,” she said in a social media post.

Mastriano said he will continue serving as a Pennsylvania state senator until his appointment is confirmed by the Senate. Lake’s future status leading the U.S. Agency for Global Media is unclear.

Mastriano’s appointment likely undermines an ascendant write-in campaign for him in Pennsylvania’s Republican gubernatorial primary, the race he won in 2022. The campaign, which Mastriano supported but was not involved with, threatened to pose an obstacle for Republicans’ preferred pick, state Treasurer Stacy Garrity, ahead of next Tuesday’s primary.

Lake earned an appointment to USGM last year after losing two statewide races in battleground Arizona. She lost to Gov. Katie Hobbs in 2022, then sought to succeed former Sen. Kyrsten Sinema in 2024, but lost to Ruben Gallego.

Shortly after joining USGM in a non-Senate confirmed role, Lake oversaw the gutting of Voice of America as part of the administration’s remaking of the federal workforce. By the end of the administration’s cuts last year, roughly 85 percent of the agency’s staff had been removed.

But Lake’s work at USGM hasn’t withstood legal scrutiny. A federal judge ruled in March that Lake’s tenure at the head of the agency was improper because she was not confirmed by the Senate. Later in March, the same judge ordered the Trump administration to reinstate the staff members who had been placed on leave.

DAYS THE BUDGET IS LATE: 41 

SPENDING SPECIFICS: Crucial state budget details — including aid for New York City, the structure of a surcharge on high-value second homes and the contours of major pension changes — are yet to be fully ironed out.

Gov. Kathy Hochul last week announced a "general agreement" for a $268 billion spending plan — but without specifics on many items. The closed-door discussions remain underway in Albany and none of the nine remaining budget bills have been printed.

The state budget is now destined to be at least six weeks past its March 31 due date. Yet Hochul is counting on voters to appreciate her policy wins and not focus on what has been an at-times messy process.

Hammering out these final specifics won't make or break a final deal. But the fine print will matter for how much New York plans for its massive tax-and-spend plan — impacting some 19 million people.

Here's what's to still expect when you're expecting a budget.

New York City aid: More help for the Big Apple is on the way from Albany. Lawmakers and Hochul are discussing additional foundation aid, potentially changing the formula for how public education spending is determined, and more cash for homeless students. At the same time, enabling legislation for pension amortization is being considered.

Those measures are designed to help New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani close what's left of a $5.4 billion budget gap. And they come on top of the additional $1.5 billion Hochul agreed to earlier this year.

The governor told reporters Monday morning her office has been working well with the Mamdani administration to fix the city's budget woes.

"There's quite a bit that needs to be OK'd by New York state," she said. "I spent last night talking to the mayor, Friday night talking to the mayor. It's been a great level of cooperation."

Pied-à-terre structure: Lawmakers are yet to see any detailed budget language for Hochul's proposed surcharge on non-primary second residences worth $5 million and above. How that surcharge is structured — including how much it will rely on a home's assessed value — will matter for how many residences are actually captured by the tax.

Overhauling Tier 6: Overhauling the Tier 6 pension category is a potentially costly endeavor. Hochul and lawmakers are now considering what's being called a "skinny" version of a plan originally pushed by unions, according to two people familiar with the talks.

The change would lower the retirement age for teachers to 58 after 30 years of service, but it would not alter how much they contribute from their paychecks. For the rest of the public workforce, contributions of no lower than 3 percent of a worker's take-home pay is under consideration, but no change would be made to their retirement age.

The move is expected to cost $500 million combined for the state, local governments and school districts. That's far less than the $1.5 billion proposal advanced earlier this year by the New York State AFL-CIO.

Buffer zones: As POLITICO Pro reported earlier, lawmakers and Hochul have weighed a 50-foot protest buffer zone that would allow local officials to expand it as they see fit. Having those zones around houses of worship is largely agreed to, but working through the specifics remains a sticking point. — Nick Reisman

From the Capitol

HANTAVIRUS IN NEW YORK: Three New Yorkers were aboard a cruise ship at the center of an international hantavirus outbreak, state Health Commissioner James McDonald said in a statement this afternoon. The three passengers were sent to the Offutt Air Force Base in Nebraska, where they are expected to be subject to a 42-day monitoring period, according to McDonald.

"While the Department is working in close coordination with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and local health departments to gather information, at this point it is unclear how long they will stay in Nebraska and whether, or when those individuals intend to return to New York,” McDonald said.

“At this point, it is important to emphasize that there is no immediate risk to the public. We will continue to monitor the situation and provide updates as needed," he added.

When asked about the threat of the virus to New Yorkers, Hochul said the state health agency is working with the CDC, and she is monitoring the federal government to make sure officials have the capacity to handle any potential outbreak.

“I want to make sure that the CDC is capable of handling something that could be larger than they are predicting, and I say that because I know that over a year ago, there were significant cuts to the CDC,” Hochul said. “We have outstanding resources here in the state of New York…so I’ve activated them to start preparing New York for worst-case scenarios and hope they do not come.”

She noted that the state is putting together a plan to address any spread of the virus, but she does not believe it will turn into another coronavirus pandemic. She said she will begin doing briefings if it spreads beyond the three individuals flown in from the ship. — Katelyn Cordero 

GOV’S SOCIAL ACCOUNT GETS PLAUDITS: The state government’s eyebrow-raising, joke-telling, irreverent social media accounts were honored with a Webby Awards “Honoree” award last week, Hochul’s office told Playbook.

The accounts, which go under the handle @NYGov on Instagram and X, are separate from the “Governor Hochul Press Office” account, which drew the ire of Barstool Sports founder Dave Portnoy last week when it mocked him for his age.

@NYGov, also known as “State of New York” on X, most recently posted messages like “it’s hole filling season” to spread the word about the state’s pothole reporting hotline on X, or "UNALIVE THOSE FLYS" as an Instagram PSA on the invasive spotted lantern fly.

“I’ve always believed that government is for the people, and in order to reach people, we need to communicate like them,” said Milly Czerwinski, a digital content strategist who works in Hochul’s comms shop and runs the account. “NYGov’s oddity and authenticity has broken down the traditional bureaucratic barriers to reach millions of people. Being weird works — this award is proof of that.” — Jason Beeferman

FROM CITY HALL

CCR-CHI COMPLAINT: City Councilmember Chi Ossé filed a misconduct complaint today against an NYPD officer who arrested him, advancing a case that stands to drive a further wedge between the police department and Mayor Mamdani.

The complaint, which Ossé shared with POLITICO, alleges the officer used excessive force during the April 22 arrest in Brooklyn, where the Council member and others were protesting the planned eviction of a woman who claims she’s the victim of deed theft.

The Civilian Complaint Review Board, which investigates and prosecutes cases of police misconduct, has received Ossé’s claim and is reviewing it, a spokesperson confirmed.

Ossé, a democratic socialist and ally of Mamdani, told POLITICO he believes the arresting officer violated his civil rights. “My rights were violated, but more importantly, my responsibility to my community and constituents demands a fact-finding,” said Ossé, who claims he suffered a concussion from being slammed to the ground.

The NYPD previously said Ossé and three other protesters were only arrested after refusing verbal commands to stop blocking access to the property where the eviction was set to be executed.

A spokesperson for Mamdani — who called video of Ossé’s arrest "incredibly concerning” last month — said in response to the Council member’s complaint that "the mayor respects the independence of the CCRB and will allow the disciplinary process to play out based on the evidence, established procedures, and the NYPD’s disciplinary matrix."

Mamdani, a longtime NYPD critic, faces a fraught situation in responding to Ossé’s complaint.

If he doesn’t back up his fellow democratic socialist, Mamdani is likely to anger his allies on the left. On the flipside, if he condemns the arresting officer, he risks drawing the ire of NYPD leaders, including Commissioner Jessica Tisch, as well as the department’s rank-and-file cops.

Read more about the CCRB and Ossé from Chris Sommerfeldt in POLITICO.

CASE CLOSED: Council member Vickie Paladino has reached a settlement with the City Council to resolve disciplinary charges focused on her controversial social media posts.

The takeaway? The Council has withdrawn its disciplinary charges, and Paladino is dropping her lawsuit challenging the proceedings.

The agreement, filed in Manhattan Supreme Court on Monday, effectively dismisses the charges and cancels an ethics hearing that could have led to censure, fines or expulsion. As part of the settlement, Paladino must delete three posts cited in the case. She must also remove “Council Woman” from her personal X account display name within 48 hours of court approval to communicate to the public a clearer separation between her official posts, which are subject to some of the Council’s rules and regulations, and her personal opinions, one member familiar with the parameters of the settlement told Playbook.

The case stemmed from a string of inflammatory posts starting in December where, in a deleted post, she called for the “expulsion of Muslims from western nations,” prompting the committee to look into her conduct.

In February, she posted that New York was under “foreign occupation” following Mamdani’s appointment of a top immigration official. Paladino questioned whether the administration included “one single actual American” and later described a photo of Muslim sanitation workers praying as part of an “Islamic conquest.”

The Council’s Rules and Ethics Committee had charged Paladino with disorderly conduct and violations of its anti-harassment and discrimination policy in March.

Paladino sued to block the proceedings, arguing she was being targeted for her conservative views and that the discipline violated her First Amendment rights.

As part of the settlement, Paladino must issue a statement saying she did not intend to make colleagues or staff feel “unwelcomed or unsafe.” Council member Sandra Ung, who chairs the ethics committee, issued her own statement Monday afternoon saying the resolution “strikes the balance” between protecting staff and lawmakers’ free speech rights.

Both sides agreed to issue limited public statements and refrain from further comment. — Gelila Negesse

FROM THE CAMPAIGN TRAIL

EYES ON AI: Rep. Pat Ryan is backing state Assemblymember Alex Bores to succeed retiring Rep. Jerry Nadler, making him the latest member of the New York delegation to weigh in on one of the state’s most competitive primary elections.

In making his endorsement, the Hudson Valley Democrat cited the high-profile AI fight that’s become a central theme of the race as a key reason for backing Bores.

“He’s going to be the next member of Congress for the New York 12th District,” Ryan said at an event in Midtown with Bores today. “If you have any doubt, you don’t have to take my word for it — follow the money. Look at the incredible unprecedented amount … It’s because these tech billionaires are terrified, they’re terrified of Alex specifically.”

The millions of dollars in spending by a pro-artificial intelligence super PAC against Bores — an alum-turned-critic of data analytics company Palantir and a sponsor of the AI safety RAISE Act in the state Legislature — has also drawn an influx of money from regulation-friendly AI and tech-affiliated groups to boost him.

Bores’ campaign said that both he and Ryan “share a belief that the next Congress must take decisive action to regulate artificial intelligence before this transformative technology outpaces the rules meant to govern it” — a debate that continues to rage on in Washington and globally.

Bores is viewed as one of the top contenders for the 12th District, which covers a large swath of Manhattan. He’s up against Assemblymember Micah Lasher, Kennedy scion Jack Schlossberg and anti-Trump commentator George Conway, as well as a handful of lesser-known challengers. Public polling has been sparse in the race, and internal polls from earlier this year don’t show a clear front-runner. — Madison Fernandez

IN OTHER NEWS

— CLOCK’S TICKING: Mamdani has less than a month to fill two longstanding vacancies on the Metropolitan Transportation Authority board — and the appointments could be key for his mission to make the city’s buses “fast and free.” (THE CITY)

— NECK AND NECK: Hochul made a joint campaign appearance with Rep. Dan Goldman who’s running for reelection in New York's 10th congressional district, with a primary challenge from Mamdani-backed Brad Lander. (Gothamist)

— SARCONE DOGGED: The top prosecutor in the U.S. attorney’s office for the Northern District of New York is accused of misconduct, according to the watchdog organization Campaign for Accountability. (POLITICO Pro)

Missed this morning’s New York Playbook? We forgive you. Read it here.

John Curtis arrived in the Senate just 16 months ago. He’s already eyeing a possible move back home.

The Utah Republican’s inner circle is actively canvassing donors and allies in Utah to gauge support for a gubernatorial bid in 2028, according to six people involved with or briefed on the discussions. They were granted anonymity to detail private conversations. His allies have asked donors in recent months to hold off on supporting other gubernatorial candidates until Curtis makes up his mind. And his chief of staff has said his boss is keeping the door open.

“John Curtis is going to serve where the people of Utah want him to serve,” Corey Norman, Curtis’ chief of staff, told POLITICO.

Curtis, who replaced former Sen. Mitt Romney (R-Utah) last year, has a reputation as a pragmatic dealmaker and moderate voice from his three terms in the U.S. House. But after seeing Washington grow increasingly polarized during his decade there, the former mayor and business executive may see the benefits of returning home.

“He doesn’t love being in the Senate,” said a Utah Republican operative who has discussed Curtis’ political future with him. “Trump’s MAGA base sees him as one of the four squishiest Republicans. He’s basically Mitt without the stature.”

The timing of Curtis’ exploration is tethered to former GOP Rep. Jason Chaffetz, who is quietly attempting to clear the 2028 gubernatorial field for himself since Utah Gov. Spencer Cox announced he wouldn’t seek a third term.

A potential Chaffetz-Curtis primary in 2028 would likely mirror the Republican Party’s own ideological battles as it enters its first presidential election without Trump on the ballot in over a decade. Chaffetz is one of the Trump administration's staunchest defenders on Fox News; Curtis is a self-described “Reagan Republican” and occasional Trump critic more in the mold of his predecessor, Romney.

Earlier this year, as Chaffetz began asking Utah donors and elected officials to back him, Curtis received an influx of inquiries about a run of his own, according to two people close to the senator, granted anonymity to discuss private conversations. Curtis first rebuffed the proddings; now, he is actively exploring it.

“The first time I asked John about this, and the third and fourth and fifth time, his answer was, ‘Have I said hell no lately?’” said one longtime friend. “And now his response has changed dramatically.”

Just in the last few weeks, the friend said, “there has been a very meaningful change in his thinking.”

The ad-hoc team of advisers, friends and longtime allies that are now canvassing donors have a goal of securing $10 million in pledges. Curtis’ current outlook, a second longtime friend said, is, “If there’s a pathway forward and I felt like it was clear to me that citizens wanted me to do it, then I would do it.”

Curtis, an avid outdoorsman and practicing Latter-day Saint, went on a retreat in the mountains recently to pray and meditate about running, according to the first longtime friend. Now Curtis is planning a 250-mile solo walk across the state to honor the U.S.’ 250th anniversary, concluding on July 4 in Provo, Utah, a second person close to the senator said. The walk will give Curtis additional time to meditate on his political future.

Meanwhile, Chaffetz, who Curtis replaced in the U.S. House when the former left Congress for a gig on Fox News, is holding regular meetings with local lawmakers and donors across the state to ask for their support, and he’s begun transferring funds from a federal PAC to a state PAC.

“His pitch is that he is the likely nominee and he invites them to get in early while they still can,” said a second longtime Utah GOP operative who hasn’t chosen sides in the potential primary, granted anonymity to discuss the topic openly. “You can tell from his finance disclosures that he has had limited success on that front.” Chaffetz did not respond to a request for comment.

Keeping the door open now may be an attempt to avoid repeating past mistakes: Curtis initially vowed he wouldn’t run for Romney’s seat, but he changed his mind and made a late entry into the 2024 GOP primary field after being urged to run by Utah donors, politicos and Romney allies. It was a tough fight, as former Utah House Speaker Brad Wilson and others had already locked up supporters across the state. But Curtis rallied and garnered over 50 percent of the vote in a crowded primary.

“He’s not going to cede early ground to Chaffetz like he did to Wilson in the Senate race,” the second Utah GOP political operative said. “It’s now to the point where I would be surprised if Curtis doesn’t run.”

Curtis entered the Senate in 2025 amid much fanfare among Trump-skeptical Republicans who hoped he would fill the role of his predecessor, Romney, as a frequent critic of and check on the president. Curtis had earned a reputation during his time in the House as a China hawk and a rare Republican voice supporting conservation, as founder of the House’s Conservative Climate Caucus. He was one of the most effective House members, passing 27 bills during his three terms.

But the Senate has proved to be a difficult place for a consensus-minded pragmatist like Curtis. He failed to get a seat on the Energy and Natural Resources Committee which his fellow Utahn, Sen. Mike Lee, chairs. Though he bucked the Trump administration on several occasions — he was credited with torpedoing several Trump nominees, and he fought to protect clean energy tax credits in the One Beautiful Bill Act — he voted in line with Trump 100% of the time in 2025, per VoteHub’s tally. (He eventually relented and voted for the reconciliation package — with a gradual rollback of some credits included.)

Curtis often tells allies his favorite job was as mayor of Provo, Utah, where he could enact change as the city’s nonpartisan chief executive, according to two other people close to the senator.

Norman, the senator’s longtime chief of staff, has made the rounds on local media hinting that his boss is open to a run for governor. During an appearance on KSL NewsRadio on April 9, he said his boss “hasn’t said yes, he hasn’t said no.” During an interview with ABC4 that aired Sunday, Norman was more blunt: “He is an executive problem solver at heart, and in my opinion, he would make an exceptional governor.”

Curtis could retain his seat in the U.S. Senate while running for governor. If he wins, he would select his successor from three options provided by the state legislature.

There is a growing contingent of Utah politicos who want him in the governor’s mansion.

“Chaffetz is the only one out there right now and folks are looking for an alternative that has the ability to beat him,” said a third Utah GOP operative, granted anonymity to speak openly. “It just sucks that he’s forcing the field to start so early. A two-plus year run for governor is absurd.”

Curtis’ openness about the possibility of a gubernatorial run — a full two-and-a-half years before November 2028 — is rankling some allies. The topic arose at a wedding for Romney’s grandson last week, where Romney’s allies and former staffers mingled. They acknowledged Curtis would make a good governor but wanted to see him finish out his term in the Senate, according to one individual present, granted anonymity to discuss a private conversation. 



But all were frustrated by Curtis’ team signaling at his intentions this early in the cycle. “It’s pretty early to leak it all out,” the person said. “Way too early.”

VININGS, Ga. — Brad Raffensperger is fighting to save his political future as MAGA takes hold of the Georgia GOP.

The secretary of state rose to national prominence by defying President Donald Trump’s efforts to overturn the 2020 election, but he is carefully trying to avoid the anti-Trump lane while he runs for governor.

Instead, he’s running an old-school campaign aimed at an old-school Republican Party: He’s holding low-key events compared with his GOP opponents’ flashier rallies, and he’s focusing on bread-and-butter issues, rather than harping on election security. At one Atlanta-area rotary club gathering in April, Raffensperger was all too happy to tout his business background and his pledge to cap property taxes. Everywhere he goes, he drops the word conservative.

“I have my own lane, and I feel good where we are,” Raffensperger told POLITICO after the event. “It’s the lane about being a Christian conservative businessman who’s built a business from scratch.”

At its core, Raffensperger’s candidacy is a test of whether the party’s non-MAGA guard can hold on in one of the nation’s premiere battleground states. He’s defied expectations before, fending off a Trump-backed candidate in 2022 to keep his current position. But 2026 poses a new challenge, as Georgia’s GOP has increasingly shunned its small government roots in favor of aligning with the populist right.

Raffensperger maintains he has a path to victory. Asked whether Trump’s grip on the party is complicating it, he deflected: “I'm doing just fine. I'm going to be in the run-off.”

But the reality is Raffensperger is still struggling to break through in the governor’s race, polling at a consistent third place behind Trump-backed Lt. Gov. Burt Jones and billionaire Rick Jackson ahead of the May 19 primary. Republican strategists and officials in the state were widely skeptical of Raffensperger’s chances of success.

“This is the party of Trump today — like it or not, it is — and I find it very difficult to see someone being able to be anti-Trump in a Republican primary and be successful,” said Casey Cagle, a Republican who served as lieutenant governor from 2007 to 2019. He’s experienced the rise of the MAGA base firsthand and has since tacked further to the right.

“The base has grown far, far greater to the right than what it was in my day,” said Cagle, who is supporting Jones in the governor’s race. “The core of the Republican Party has moved far away from the Chamber of Commerce mindset.”

Before February of this year, Raffensperger seemed poised to draw enough support in the primary to keep Jones under the 50 percent threshold he needed to trigger a run-off election. Then Jackson upended the race with his bombastic spending and MAGA pandering, pushing Raffensperger further down in the polls.

Even if the secretary of state were to make a run-off against either Jones or Jackson, his chances of actually winning the nomination are still slim, said GOP strategist Jeremy Brand, who has worked on Gov. Brian Kemp-aligned committees and is unaffiliated in the governor’s race.

“It'd be incredibly tough,” Brand said. “The edge in a run-off where voters are traditionally more conservative, that are willing to come back out again, I think the odds go to the more conservative candidate.”

2020 election woes

Raffensperger has been battling his own party on various fronts since he first stood up to Trump.

A faction of the Georgia GOP tried to bar him from seeking office again on the Republican ticket. And local party leaders recently broke with precedent to allow the RNC to eschew its neutrality and spend resources on backing Jones in the primary. The MAGA base that failed to oust Raffensperger in 2022 is trying again to end his political career — along with others deemed insufficiently loyal to the president.

Attorney General Chris Carr, like Raffensperger, is also mounting a bid for governor and previously defeated a Trump-backed challenger in 2022. But he’s polling even lower than the secretary of state. And Gabriel Sterling, a former top Raffensperger lieutenant, is locked in a noisy primary in his bid for secretary of state as he faces off against a former Democrat-turned-MAGA acolyte and a GOP state representative who once served as Kemp’s top aide.

The 2020 election has continued to be a key litmus test in Georgia, especially as Trump continues to air his grievances over his loss. Several recounts and extensive litigation have only proven Raffensperger’s case that former President Joe Biden fairly defeated Trump in 2020. But many voters and candidates continue to question the truth of the results in a show of loyalty to the president, further isolating the secretary from the increasingly conservative Republican base.

“I voted for Trump. I wish he’d have won. I think he did win, I'm one of those people,” said Bruce Brooker, 72, outside a Jones campaign event in rural Atkinson County earlier this month.

An April POLITICO Poll found that most respondents who plan to vote for Republicans this midterm are still skeptical: Nearly 40 percent say the 2020 election was stolen, while 25 percent don’t believe it was but have questions about the election’s legitimacy. Just 25 percent say the election wasn’t stolen.

Raffensperger continues to defend his work and the integrity of Georgia's elections at large — “I'm really proud because we made elections more secure” — and is quick to highlight the changes he and state Republicans made in their 2021 overhaul of how the state conducts elections, which drew ire from Democrats and the MLB alike.

Still, several Georgia Republicans say he’s struggling to play catch-up as the base shifts away from his technocratic approach to politics.

“Brad stands in stark conflict to a party that is at the activist level very much aligned with President Trump, when Raffensperger is anything but,” said one former longtime state GOP official, granted anonymity to speak openly about evolving party dynamics. “His candidacy will be and is a test to determine if that lane still exists in the Georgia Republican Party apparatus.”

Raffensperger’s path forward

On a recent afternoon, Raffensperger, clad in a navy suit and striped red tie, headlined the Vinings-Cumberland Rotary Club’s weekly meeting, shaking hands and chatting with voters before taking his place behind the lectern at the front of the room. The state’s legislative session had ended barely a week earlier.

“What I thought I’d do is tell you where we are right now. We just finished up my last session,” he told the audience, ticking through accomplishments: streamlining professional licensing processes, securing an agreement to have money returned to victims of a local Ponzi scheme, and improving systems to make Georgia elections “free, fair and fast.”

It wasn’t the kind of red meat fodder that Republican politics thrive on in the Trump era, but the type of accolades that resonate with the kind of voters at the meeting, held just over the border from Atlanta’s city limits in suburban Cobb County.

Cobb County is one of several former Republican bastions surrounding metro Atlanta that have flipped blue as the Trump-styled GOP turned off suburban voters. Once the homebase for conservative stalwart former Speaker Newt Gingrich, the county voted overwhelmingly for former Vice President Kamala Harris in 2024 despite her statewide loss to Trump.

It’s still home to plenty of business-focused Republican voters who are not keen on the president — then-Sen. Marco Rubio carried the county over Trump during the 2016 GOP primaries, and former United Nations Ambassador Nikki Haley performed nearly twice as well in the county compared to her statewide returns against the president in 2024. These are the voters Raffensperger is focused on, content to let Jones and Jackson battle it out for the MAGA class.

Jason Shepherd, the former Cobb County Republican chair, said the low-key civic group events have “been the hallmark of Brad Raffensperger’s success” and an emblem of the party’s business-focused past. It’s in sharp contrast with the attention-grabbing rallies that have defined Trump’s dominance of Republican politics.

Raffensperger’s quieter approach has previously served him well, when he overcame a 2022 primary challenge from former Rep. Jody Hice (R-Ga.) who ran with the president’s endorsement. This time is different: Then, he held the power of incumbency and benefited from Trump's influence waning temporarily in the aftermath of Jan. 6 and his 2020 election defeat.

Now, Trump, back in power, has reaffirmed his iron grip on the party and Raffensperger is up against two MAGA candidates pining for the base’s attention. Add to that the fact he’s being massively outspent: His $4 million has been dwarfed by Jackson’s whopping $61 million and Jones’ $26 million in expenditures, according to an AdImpact analysis.

The Jones and Carr campaigns were quick to dismiss claims that the secretary of state had a path to the run-off and an eventual win. A spokesperson for Jackson did not respond to a request for comment.

If Raffensperger were to lose the primary, his loss would become another nail in the coffin for an old-school GOP that continues to resist MAGA. But his insistence that his lane — and version of the Republican Party — still exists is, for his closest allies, a testament to his persistence.

“Brad Raffensperger never really stopped from 2022 on,” said Sterling, the Raffensperger ally who’s running for secretary of state and has also faced MAGA’s ire for refusing to overturn election results. “He could have set up a foundation, gone around the country and just talked about democracy and he would have been applauded. Instead he chose to go into the battle and fight.”

Questions about the integrity of elections have become pervasive in American politics — and new polling reveals the sharp differences in Republican and Democratic fears.

Nearly six years after President Donald Trump and his allies sought to overturn the results of the 2020 election, a recent POLITICO Poll suggests that a notable number of Americans are distrustful of the system heading into November. More than one-third say it is likely the 2026 midterms will be “stolen,” and one in four say they don’t expect the elections to be fair.

But both parties clash strongly over what they believe are the core problems with U.S. elections, complicating any path to restoring voter trust.

Democrats are concerned about voter intimidation and suppression, with 58 percent of those who voted for former Vice President Kamala Harris worried that eligible Americans will be prevented from voting, the survey finds. Meanwhile, Republicans remain focused on the possibility of fraud, with 52 percent of Trump voters saying they are concerned that some ineligible people will be allowed to vote.

The POLITICO Poll asked respondents about 11 common election concerns, ranging from partisan gerrymandering to impounding ballots, and whether people saw them as legitimate parts of the process or a way to rig elections. Of those, Democrats and Republicans had meaningful disagreement or lacked consensus on six.

Take expanding mail-in voting, for example. Once considered a largely routine way to broaden access to voting, a majority of Trump voters now say this can be a way to rig elections. Harris voters feel the opposite: 59 percent say expanding mail-in voting is a normally fair or always fair part of the electoral system.

Then there’s deploying ICE at polling locations. A majority of Harris voters say the practice would more likely be a way to sway election results, even as some Republicans haven't ruled out such a measure to strengthen election security. A 47 percent plurality of Trump voters say deploying ICE across polling stations would be normally fair or always fair.

The poll results reveal a striking truth as lawmakers continue to battle over election security: Even as a sizable share of Americans believe elections can, or will, be “stolen,” there’s very little agreement on what that even means.

“I don't think that we have a great working definition of what constitutes … a free and fair election,” said Stephen Richer, a legal fellow at the Cato Institute and former Republican county recorder of Maricopa County, Arizona. “I think it is entirely possible that even within the world that doesn’t think that elections are being hacked by Italian spy satellites, that we have a disagreement as to whether or not we’ve had a free and fair election in 2026.”

Trump often claims the 2020 results were “stolen” and blames mail voting, the lack of strict voter ID and proof of citizenship laws for opening the door to voter fraud — though courts and election officials have repeatedly upheld the legitimacy of those results. Many Democrats, on the other hand, are already bracing for Trump to interfere with the election and strategizing about ways to respond.

“President Trump is committed to ensuring that Americans have full confidence in the administration of elections, and that includes totally accurate and up-to-date voter rolls free of errors and unlawfully registered non-citizen voters,” White House spokesperson Abigail Jackson said in a statement.

Doubt about election proceedings has still not overtaken the electorate — nearly half of Americans say they still expect the 2026 midterms to be fair. But the survey — along with interviews with election experts — underscores how rhetoric from leaders is trickling down to voters.

David Becker, the executive director and founder of the nonpartisan Center for Election Innovation & Research, said the divergence results partly from the strict echo chambers within the Democratic and Republican parties.

“This goes back to the problem where many of us are retreating into our media bubbles, where we hear a reality that only serves to validate our existing opinions,” he said.

For Democrats, their doubts appear to be going up as Trump continues to repeat false claims about the 2020 election and raise alarms about the 2026 midterms.

Nearly 40 percent of Harris voters say it is likely the 2026 midterms will be “stolen,” compared to 16 percent who believed the 2020 election was stolen — though comparing perspectives on a past election to a future one is not an exact measure. That’s roughly the same level as Trump voters who doubt the integrity of the 2020 results or who fear the 2026 midterms will be stolen — both at around 40 percent — according to the poll results.

The survey finds that some of the most significant areas of disagreement or distance between the parties are the prospect of ICE showing up at polls, mail-in voting, and requiring proof of citizenship to register to vote.

Roughly 60 percent of Harris voters say ICE showing up at polling places would normally or always be a way to steal elections, compared to 33 percent of Trump voters who say the same.

The Trump administration has insisted that immigration officers will not be at polling places in November, but many Democrats have still expressed concern over the possibility. In March, nine state secretaries of state wrote a letter to Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin seeking confirmation that immigration agents would not be present at polling locations in November.

“If you have ICE outside of a handful of voting locations, I think that there are some on the left of the pro-democracy coalition, or the previously existing pro-democracy coalition, who would say that it invalidates the fairness of an election,” Richer said. “And then there are those of us who would say … it's not ideal, and there are legal remedies, but that doesn't mean that the election was stolen or should be thrown out.”

The 2020 election marked a major turning point in rhetoric surrounding mail-in voting, when Trump repeatedly criticized the practice during the COVID-19 pandemic — allegations he has continued to press in the years since.

Roughly 55 percent of Harris voters say banning mail-in voting could lead to a rigged election, while Trump voters are split on the issue: 41 percent say banning mail-in voting would largely be fair, while 42 percent say this would be a way to steal an election.

And then there’s the question of voter registration, and whether to require proof of citizenship when voters register — a core objective of Trump’s SAVE America Act. Just under two-thirds of Trump voters say this would always or normally be a fair part of the election process. A plurality of Harris voters agree, but by a much smaller margin: 44 percent say this would be a fair election practice.

Even the idea of voter roll maintenance — a common part of election administration that Trump’s Justice Department has intensified by aiming to strip non-citizens from every state’s rolls — shows a partisan gap. Roughly 60 percent of Harris voters say the practice of “purging voter rolls” is normally or always a way to steal an election, compared to just 46 percent of Trump voters.

There are areas where the parties agree. Pluralities or majorities of both groups agree that same-day voter registration and signing up new voters outside of churches are largely fair.

Majorities of both Trump and Harris voters say partisan gerrymandering can be a way to steal elections, which comes as officials in both parties engage in an intensifying redistricting arms race. There is also a near-majority consensus that seizing or impounding ballots can be a way to rig results. Earlier this year, the FBIseized 2020 election ballots from the Fulton County elections office in Georgia, and a federal judge recently ruled that the Justice Department can keep the election records as part of its search.

Still, election experts say the overall partisan divide is dampening voters’ confidence.

“We've now had multiple years in a row of state legislators passing and introducing and passing laws that are targeting voter access — making it harder to participate in the electoral process — where the actual mechanics of elections have been politicized, and that too takes its toll,” said Wendy Weiser, the Brennan Center for Justice's vice president for democracy.

Americans think cash rules more of the political system than it should — a concern that crosses party lines as midterm spending is projected to once again shatter records.

New results from The POLITICO Poll are stark: 72 percent of Americans say there is too much money in politics, with just 5 percent disagreeing. Across parties, majorities say billionaires wield outsized influence over U.S. politics and that special interest spending is a type of corruption that should be restricted, rather than protected as free speech. Nearly half of respondents say voters have too little power.

Outside money shows no sign of slowing. New groups tied to artificial intelligence, cryptocurrency and other emerging industries are rapidly entering the political arena, pouring millions into competitive primaries to shape who makes it to Washington. Each of the last three midterm elections has set new spending records, and ad tracking firm AdImpact projects advertising spending will once again reach new heights, to the tune of $10.8 billion.

“This type of astronomical spending corrodes people's faith in our system of government, and I think people are really looking for changes to take some of this outrageous amount of spending and rein it in,” said Michael Beckel, the Money in Politics Reform Director at Issue One, a nonprofit advocacy group.

The poll — conducted in partnership with Public First — suggests many Americans see that influence as coming at voters’ expense, raising concerns not just about fairness, but about the health of the democratic system itself.

Still, there was some partisan disagreement, with Democrats tending to hold the strongest views against money in politics. Non-voters, meanwhile, were more likely to respond “I don’t know” to these questions, which lowered the overall shares of Americans who are critical of money in politics, compared with Harris voters and Trump voters.

Here’s a look at where Americans stand, starting with a place of unified skepticism:

Americans overwhelmingly believe there is too much money in politics.

Cutting across party lines, nearly 3 out of 4 Americans agreed with the statement that “There is too much money in American politics,” while most others didn’t take a position.

They also see that money as powerful. A majority think it can shape election outcomes — with 39 percent saying money can outright buy results and another 34 percent saying it can influence but not buy them. That perception mirrors what’s already playing out in campaigns: wealthy donors and outside groups are pouring millions into competitive races, often through vehicles that can accept unlimited contributions and amplify a small group of voices.

There’s a partisan break in beliefs about how far that money can go. Trump voters lean toward saying people or organizations with a lot of money can influence elections without buying the outcomes, while Harris voters were more likely to say election outcomes can be bought.

Americans agree: Voters don’t have enough power.

When asked how much sway different groups have over politics, about half of respondents said voters have too little — far greater than the shares that said voters have either too much influence or the right amount.

Meanwhile, 6 in 10 say billionaires have too much influence over U.S. politics — a view that’s more widespread among Democrats, with 75 percent of Harris voters agreeing, compared with 55 percent of Trump voters. A sizable share of respondents also see political parties, special interest groups and foreign governments as overly influential, far outweighing the number of Americans saying those groups have too little influence.

Concern about special interest money runs particularly deep. Not only do two-thirds of Americans say there is too much of it flowing into U.S. politics, a majority (53 percent) view that money as corrupt and in need of stricter regulation, instead of following the conservative legal principle that it is an act of free speech to be protected. That includes 56 percent of Trump voters.

Money plays a major role in shaping elections, including in determining candidates’ ability to run advertising to get their message in front of voters, to hold campaign events and to hire staff. It can even shape who runs in the first place.

Americans know that money matters, expressing a broad skepticism about how elections are decided. A plurality believes the candidate with the most money — not the most popular positions — wins.

That view is far more common among Democrats: Over half of 2024 Harris voters say money is the deciding factor, compared with a little over a third of Trump voters.

Erin Doherty contributed reporting.