With midterms approaching, President Donald Trump has been doing something rather untraditional: waging open warfare against members of his own party. The strategy makes sense in a lot of ways. What good is having a majority when members of your own party stand in the way of your agenda? But is Trump taking things too far?
Earlier this month, Trump helped defeat five of seven Indiana state senators who voted against his mid-decade redistricting push to fight back against decades of Democrat gerrymandering. These weren't RINOs or Never-Trumpers. In fact, some had considered themselves Trump loyalists. But the message was clear: if you stand in the way of Trump’s agenda, you pay the price.
Then came Saturday night.
Sen. Bill Cassidy (R-La.) became the first sitting U.S. senator since 2012 to lose a primary challenge, finishing third in a field that included Rep. Julia Letlow and state Treasurer John Fleming. Cassidy's sin, of course, was voting to convict Trump on sham impeachment charges in 2020. Even Trump didn’t deny the connection. In a post-midnight Truth Social message, Trump made the connection explicit: "That's what you get by voting to Impeach an innocent man."
ICYMI: Multiple 2020 Election Fraud Investigations in Georgia and Arizona Are Underway
He then pivoted immediately to his next Republican target: Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.), the seven-term libertarian-leaning congressman Trump has branded "the worst and most unreliable Republican Congressman in the history of our Country." Trump endorsed challenger Ed Gallrein and issued a simple directive to Kentucky voters ahead of Tuesday's primary: "Get this LOSER out of politics."
And Trump was far from finished.
When Rep. Lauren Boebert (R-Colo.) — one of his most loyal allies — chose to campaign with Massie, Trump turned his fire on her, too. "Is anyone interested in running against Weak Minded Lauren Boebert?" he posted on Truth Social, adding that "anybody who can be that dumb deserves a good Primary fight." He openly offered to withdraw his endorsement and back a challenger.
I get it. I really do. Look, I’m all for libertarian-leaning Republicans, but not when ideological purity gets in the way of winning.
"It would be nice if Trump put half as much effort into defeating Democrats," former Trump attorney Jenna Ellis wrote on X, and I see her point. But I also see that Trump has made a calculation. Think about it. He has a majority in the House and the Senate, and yet key elements of his agenda can’t pass. From his perspective, the real obstacle to his agenda isn't Democratic opposition, it's Republican resistance.
Of course, with midterms on the horizon, the question of whether this is the right fight to be picking is a valid one to ask. But at the same time, I continue to see the Democrats overwhelmingly unified all the time, and Republicans hardly ever able to take advantage of their majority. For once, I’d like to see that happen.
