A top Democratic organization strongly encouraged state campaigns to do much of their digital ad-buying business with a company that one of its members is set to soon join as CEO — a development that has puzzled and concerned some party insiders.

At a meeting in Little Rock, Arkansas last week, the Association of State Democratic Committees — an umbrella group for state parties — voted to recommend state races use one liberal firm, TargetSmart, for a major portion of digital ad buys, which could be worth millions.

TargetSmart announced on May 7 that Liz Walters, outgoing chair of the Ohio Democratic Party, is taking over as CEO this summer. Walters, who made her departure public in a post on X, said she would leave the state party role by June 30. And until the week before the group’s meeting, she was part of the ASDC’s leadership team as treasurer.

Walters recused herself from the TargetSmart vote. But she has reportedly praised the use of TargetSmart repeatedly in recent years, went to the meeting where the resolution passed, and continues to sit on a key board of state party leaders tied to the deal.

Word of the deal spread through Democratic circles this week, leaving some in the party worried about the possibility of a conflict of interest — or the perception of one — at a time when Democrats are already struggling mightily. Others are concerned that using a sole media-buying platform for many digital ads will stifle innovation and raise costs for campaigns.

“I just don’t understand this at all. It’s the ultimate solution in search of a problem,” said Rob Flaherty, the former deputy campaign manager for Kamala Harris’ 2024 presidential campaign. “No one who works directly in this space is asking for this, nor should we want it. Even the stated rationale makes no sense: This is a space where competition leads to better pricing. A strategic monopoly doesn’t serve us.”

A Democratic campaign veteran who, like others in this story was granted anonymity to speak freely, said the deal is “a conflict of interest you could see from space.” A Democratic state party chair said “the perception sucks, the perception is terrible.”

Walters responded in a statement that the decision to leave the Ohio Democratic Party, “an organization I love,” was “a hard one.” She added that “in the interest of transparency, as soon as I decided to join TargetSmart, we made the news public and I recused myself from all matters involving the company.”

Axios first wrote about the existence of a deal between the ASDC and TargetSmart, but concerns about a conflict of interest have not been reported before.

ASDC president Jane Kleeb said in an interview that it was her suggestion, not Walters’, to give TargetSmart the special status. Kleeb defended the decision as a way for state parties to save money and solve other problems, such as navigating a bewildering web of new digital firms.

She said that Walters has praised TargetSmart internally over the years but added that “lots of us” have also spoken highly of the company since they’ve worked closely with them.

“There is no conflict of interest. We have been talking about this for years,” she said. “I knew that the vendors would have their guns and knives out for me because they will perceive it as taking business away from them. But it doesn’t.”

She added, “I am trying to innovate and create reliable streams of revenue” for state parties and “with this system, there will be a 5 percent return to state parties, which is a really wonderful thing.”

Other Democrats in favor of the resolution said that the setup would also help ensure the digital safety of voter files.

A second Democratic state party chair granted anonymity to speak candidly about the deal said that Walters praised TargetSmart at multiple ASDC meetings in recent months, including in Little Rock last week.

“Every single meeting she would talk about the benefit of the tool and why it’s really important, and anytime people would raise questions, basically, she was answering them as CEO of TargetSmart, but that wasn’t the role she was in,” said the person, who was in the meetings.

“It’s an unfortunate way to enter into a relationship, because I think it could be a good tool, but now it’s clouded,” the person added.

TargetSmart has worked with the Democratic state parties for years to house their voter files, a precious resource used by campaigns. The ASDC said that it asked TargetSmart to develop its digital ad-buying tool in 2023, and that later it was rolled out to some trial participants, including in Ohio. State parties generate revenue when their voter file is bought and sold, as well as when their voter file data is used on TargetSmart’s ad-buying platform.

The ASDC’s nonbinding resolution states that members are encouraged to either “institute a requirement” for voter file users to utilize TargetSmart for digital ad-buying or “strongly encourage” users to “explore utilizing” the platform.

A TargetSmart spokesperson said the buying platform is more cost efficient, reliable and enables transparency in ad placements. And TargetSmart senior adviser Tom Bonier said in a statement that “we’re proud to have the opportunity to continue to serve state parties as they provide this cutting-edge resource to their members.” He didn’t respond to a question about when TargetSmart began discussions with Walters about the job.

A person close to Walters said that she “resigned as treasurer well before the meeting, recused herself from the process entirely and it passed unanimously.”

But that has done little to tamp down criticism of Walters among some Democrats.

“Even being there is a way to exert influence, especially when it was already announced that she was going to TargetSmart,” said the Democratic campaign veteran.

Walters submitted her resignation as treasurer of the ASDC on May 20, the person close to her said. The ASDC passed the resolution unanimously on May 29.

Walters is also on the board of a linked “co-op” made up of state party officials that manages its voter file data. She is expected to leave that entity and as head of the Ohio Democratic Party next week.

President Donald Trump on Thursday threatened Elon Musk’s federal contracts, a remarkable escalation in a public feud between the president and the world’s richest man, his former ally.

“The easiest way to save money in our Budget, Billions and Billions of Dollars, is to terminate Elon’s Governmental Subsidies and Contracts,” Trump wrote on his social media platform Thursday afternoon. “I was always surprised that Biden didn’t do it!”

The president’s relationship with Musk has deteriorated rapidly since Musk left the White House last week. The acrimony went public when Musk publicly slammed Trump’s sweeping domestic policy package on Tuesday.

He’s continued to lash out at the White House in the days since — with Musk baiting Trump by name earlier Thursday, and Trump responding by chastising the Tesla CEO from the Oval Office later in the day.

Still, Trump’s criticism from the White House — where the two men less than a week ago shared a laudatory sendoff for Musk — was not as pointed as the president’s barbs on social media.

“Without me, Trump would have lost the election, Dems would control the House and the Republicans would be 51-49 in the Senate.,” Musk wrote on X Thursday, the social media site he owns. “Such ingratitude.”

Musk’s companies have significant ties to the federal government, even before the Trump administration. SpaceX is one of NASA’s largest contractors. And his car company Tesla benefitted from a clean energy subsidy that is on the chopping block in Republicans’ reconciliation package.

“Elon was ‘wearing thin,’ I asked him to leave, I took away his EV Mandate that forced everyone to buy Electric Cars that nobody else wanted (that he knew for months I was going to do!), and he just went CRAZY!” Trump posted.

“Such an obvious lie. So sad,” Musk fired back.

Trump has previously boosted Tesla because of his close relationship with Musk. In March, with the company’s stock at a low after public anger over job cuts fueled by Musk’s DOGE initiative, the president toured different Tesla models at a makeshift car show on the White House lawn. Trump later purchased his own Tesla, “a show of confidence and support” for Musk.

Trump has routinely wielded the power of the executive branch against institutions that he deems are misbehaving. He’s frozen billions in federal grants to some of the country’s top universities, Harvard chief among them, as punishment for alleged antisemitism and civil rights violations. And he’s secured multimillion dollar deals with law firms weary of his threats to tank their business.

Elon Musk has been the Democratic Party’s boogeyman since shortly after President Donald Trump deputized him as a top adviser.

The billionaire and Trump had a very public breakup this week. After Musk called the GOP's "big beautiful bill" a “disgusting abomination” and threatened to “fire all politicians” who backed it, the president mused on Thursday that he didn't know if the two would still have a "great relationship." Musk responded on his powerful platform X, "Without me, Trump would have lost," adding "Such ingratitude."

Democrats' portrayal of Musk as a chainsaw-wielding, bureaucracy-breaking villain may be more complicated now — with some saying they should give him another chance. After all, Musk said he voted for former President Joe Biden in 2020 and gave a tour of SpaceX to then-President Barack Obama.

Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.), who represents Silicon Valley and has known Musk for over a decade, said Democrats should “be in a dialogue” with Musk, given their shared opposition to the GOP’s megabill.

“We should ultimately be trying to convince him that the Democratic Party has more of the values that he agrees with,” Khanna said. “A commitment to science funding, a commitment to clean technology, a commitment to seeing international students like him.”

Other Democrats are warming back up to Musk as he leaves the White House and starts to break with his former boss in ways that could benefit the opposition.

“I'm a believer in redemption, and he is telling the truth about the legislation,” said Rep. Ritchie Torres (D-N.Y.). But, he added, Musk has “done an enormous amount of damage” and “there are Democrats who see his decimation of the federal workforce and the federal government as an unforgivable sin.”

Liam Kerr, co-founder of the group behind the centrist Democrats’ WelcomeFest meeting this week in Washington, said “of course” Democrats should open the door if Musk wants back into the party.

“You don't want anyone wildly distorting your politics, which he has a unique capability to do. But it’s a zero-sum game,” Kerr said. “Anything that he does that moves more toward Democrats hurts Republicans.”

Rep. Brad Schneider (D-Ill.), the chair of the New Democrat Coalition who earlier this year supported the party’s targeting of Musk as the Department of Government Efficiency slashed through federal agencies, said that with his departure from Washington, Democrats shouldn’t make Musk their focus. “We should be talking about what we're doing for the American people,” he said.

Still, Musk recently threatened to cut off the money spigot for Republicans. And Democrats would have a lot to gain by merely keeping the world’s richest man on the sidelines in the midterm elections and beyond. If Musk makes a mess of GOP primaries, that would work in their favor, too.

But Musk’s recent heel-turn also risks reopening a divide between progressives and moderates over how to approach him and other billionaires.

“Our caucus has done the right thing and gone toe-to-toe against Musk,” said Rep. Greg Casar (D-Texas), chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus and one of the party’s most vocal advocates for making Musk an antagonist on the campaign trail.

Others are taking a wait-and-see approach. “I don’t think we should take one ketamine-fueled tweet as evidence of a change of heart,” said Matt Bennett, co-founder of the center-left group Third Way. “It’s more complicated.”

Die Gruppe der Euro-Länder bekommt mit Bulgarien voraussichtlich 2026 ein neues Mitglied. Gegen Österreich leitet die EU ein Defizitverfahren ein.

Der Klub der Euroländer bekommt voraussichtlich im nächsten Jahr ein neues Mitglied: Bulgarien bemüht sich schon länger um Aufnahme. Nun hat das Land eine wichtige Hürde überwunden.#EuropäischeUnion #Euro #Leserdiskussion #Wirtschaft #SüddeutscheZeitung

EU-Kommission: Grünes Licht für Euro-Einführung in Bulgarien

^{Anna-Maria Salmen (Süddeutsche Zeitung)}

An unsteady truce between Nashville’s Democratic mayor and Tennessee's Republican leaders just collapsed after an ICE dragnet in the city.

Tension began to build in early May, when ICE started making traffic stops in partnership with the state highway patrol in the immigrant-heavy neighborhood of South Nashville, leading to the arrests of nearly 200 suspected undocumented immigrants.

Mayor Freddie O’Connell quickly condemned the action as damaging to the community. And a GOP firestorm resulted, with Republicans accusing O’Connell of interfering with federal immigration enforcement.

Four weeks later, a simple public policy spat has turned into a major conflict between some of the most powerful leaders in Tennessee, breaking a fragile peace between the city and the GOP supermajority legislature – and exposing Nashville to the wrath of the Trump administration. The feud, which shows no signs of ending soon, comes with real potential consequences for Nashville and other blue cities in red states being targeted over their immigration policies.

“It's unfortunate that he's willing to support the law breakers instead of supporting us as the lawmakers,” state Rep. Rusty Grills, a Republican, said of the mayor.

O’Connell, who has worked to calm long-running tensions with Republicans since his election in 2023, is the latest target of GOP ire over perceived threats to President Donald Trump’s deportations, and the onslaught against the mayor also represents a further escalation in the administration’s attack on local officials. In New Jersey, Newark Mayor Ras Baraka was arrested in May on a trespassing charge outside an ICE facility. That charge was later dropped, but U.S. Rep. LaMonica McIver is facing assault charges from the same confrontation.

In Tennessee, Republicans in the state legislature told POLITICO that O’Connell was putting officers at risk by updating a longstanding executive order mandating that city officials disclose interactions with ICE to the mayor’s office within 24 hours. They have latched onto that as evidence the mayor is impeding law enforcement operations.

O’Connell, speaking at a press conference following the raids, said the city does not have the authority to enforce immigration laws, and noted that Nashville’s crime rates are down. He has maintained that the city did not interfere with the ICE operation in early May.

Yet GOP outrage has spread from Tennessee to Washington. O’Connell is facing a federal investigation from House Republicans announced last week, and a call for another from the Department of Justice by Sen. Marsha Blackburn, who all argue that O’Connell is impeding law enforcement’s ability to crack down on crime committed by illegal immigrants.

U.S. border czar Tom Homan has warned that Nashville could see larger immigration crackdowns as a result of O’Connell’s opposition.

“We’ll flood the zone in the neighborhoods to find the bad guy,” Homan said on Fox News last week. “We’ll flood the zone at work sites to find the bad guy, but we’re going to do it, and [O’Connell’s] not going to stop us.”

Republicans have also gone after O’Connell for highlighting a donations fund that supports individuals affected by the arrests, like children whose parents were detained. Republicans say the fund is an improper use of taxpayer dollars, although the fund was created by a nonprofit that says it exclusively uses private donations.

Tennessee Democrats and immigrant advocates say that Republicans are cheering ICE’s involvement because of a bad-faith view of immigrant communities and that the criticism of O’Connell is purely GOP rhetoric lacking any basis. They also say the sweep shows how the Department of Homeland Security is taking in people that pose no threat to the public. DHS said about half of the people arrested have criminal records, but only identified four of them – leading Democrats to demand more information about those detained.

“For the politicians who care about nothing but the national news, this is a symbolic story,” said Democratic State Sen. Jeff Yarbro. “But for those of us who represent communities where we've seen lawless dragnet policing, there are real life consequences to our community and to our neighbors.”

The raid’s scale and scope was “unlike anything we've ever seen before,” said Lisa Sherman Luna, the executive director of the Tennessee Immigrants & Refugee Rights Coalition.

The Tennessee Highway Patrol’s cooperation with ICE underscores the role states will play in carrying out the Trump administration’s immigration agenda – especially as DHS struggles to hit its deportation goals. GOP leaders eager to impress the president have taken steps in recent months to deputize local law enforcement as immigration enforcers, like in Georgia, where Gov. Brian Kemp recently signed a law requiring law enforcement to check the immigration status of detainees.

“They are building an infrastructure that we've never seen, especially for a non-border state, to really carry out the President's agenda of mass deportations,” Luna said of the ICE operation in Nashville. “The devastation for families and local communities is going to be deep and broad, because everyone is a target now, and so it's really alarming to see our state government being used in this manner.”

Tennessee Republicans have framed the conflict as a matter of law and order – arguing that the ICE raids were a necessary use of force to crack down on crime they blame on illegal immigrants. Under the leadership of Gov. Bill Lee, Tennessee has emerged as one of the most aggressive non-border states on immigration in the second Trump era.

Lee, to the surprise of many Tennesseans, was the first Republican governor to say in January before Trump’s inauguration he was readying the National Guard should they be called upon to aid in deportations. In January, a few days after attending a governors meeting at Mar-A-Lago, Lee tacked onto immigration legislation as part of a special session on school vouchers. Lawmakers then passed a sweeping law expanding local law enforcement’s immigration purview and making it a felony for state officials to establish sanctuary cities.

Nashville is not a sanctuary city. But Democrats there still view the law as a warning shot from the legislature, which has clashed with city leaders over a range of issues — from control of the airport to representation in Congress.

“We wanted to send a signal that Tennessee was ready to cooperate and welcomed ICE coming into our communities to get these violent people out,” said state Sen. Jack Johnson, a Republican. “So I'm very, very happy with it and excited, and I hope they do more.”

And many want to see ICE return. State Sen. Brent Taylor has asked Homan to send ICE to Memphis to address “the violent crime epidemic” that he says is “exacerbated by poor local leadership.”

Shelby County, where Memphis is located, was included on a list of sanctuary cities and counties published by DHS last week that was soon taken down. Leaders of Shelby County, Memphis and Nashville — which was also on the list – disputed their designation as sanctuary cities, which have been outlawed by the Tennessee legislature.

State Sen. Jody Barrett described relations between Nashville and the GOP legislature as a “forced marriage,” complicated by the fact that Nashville serves as the state’s economic engine. Nashville’s population has exploded in recent years, and the city’s tourism industry keeps the state coffers filled.

“And because of that, it’s kind of a love-hate relationship,” he said.

It turns out, Democrats aren't online enough.

Conservative organizations spend more than left-leaning ones on platforms such as Facebook and Instagram in non-election years, capturing a large audience while those Democratic-aligned groups go more dormant in the digital space. And it’s making Democrats’ election-year persuasion game that much harder.

That’s the warning of a new report from Tech for Campaigns, a political nonprofit focused on using digital marketing and data techniques to support Democrats, that argues one of the party’s major problems is that its communication falters in non-election years. While Democratic spending and presence online surged leading up to the election, for example, Republicans quickly regained the spending advantage this year.

Democrats, in other words, aren’t putting in the work online during “off years.”

The report, shared first with POLITICO, comes as Democratic donors and officials have grappled with how online personalities and social media content boosted President Donald Trump in 2024, and openly acknowledged Democrats need to fix their brand.

“The Right, especially Trump, recognized that persuasion is no longer about last-minute convincing, but about shaping beliefs continuously — building trust, shifting opinions, and staying visible through frequent engagement — just like commercial brand building,” the report’s authors wrote. “Democrats may acknowledge this shift but continue treating digital communication as a campaign-season sprint.”

Republicans’ audience advantage spans from podcasts, where Democrats have fretted about the influence of hosts like Joe Rogan, to social media and digital sites. On Facebook and Instagram, for example, Republican-aligned pages outspent those associated with Democrats throughout former President Joe Biden’s term, the report found. The only exception of the fourth quarter of 2024, when Democratic-aligned spending surged ahead of the November election. Republicans regained the spending advantage in the first quarter of 2025, suggesting Democrats are not making up ground.

“Democrats have a brand and customers who require consistent and constant communication,” said Jessica Alter, co-founder of Tech for Campaigns. “And ads … 3-6 months before an election can certainly supplement that strategy, but they can't be the main strategy, not when Republicans never stop talking to their audience.”

The online spending gap is not coming from political parties or campaigns. Instead, Republicans’ digital advantage largely stems from allied groups and digital media companies, such as PragerU and the Daily Wire.

Those sites and other similar ones are not focused strictly on electoral politics. But they have cultivated broad audiences, and spent years sharing content about issues — such as transgender students’ participation in sports and opposition to diversity, equity and inclusion programs — that are electorally potent. And Republican candidates are primed to take advantage of those large, sympathetic audiences when an election draws near.

While there are newer left-leaning media competitors, such as Courier Newsroom and NowThis Impact, the conservative pages and websites still have a larger audience and spend more on to boost their content across the platforms.

When it comes to campaigns, Democrats do have a financial advantage. But although Democratic campaigns consistently outspend Republicans on digital platforms, that’s often more focused on fundraising than persuasion and mobilization ads. That’s a mistake, Tech for Campaigns argues.

While former Vice President Kamala Harris’ campaign spent nearly three times as much as Trump’s across Facebook, Google and CTV after she entered the presidential race in July 2024, only a small share, 8 percent, was devoted to mobilization, the report finds. That allowed Trump and his allies to close much of the gap when it came to digital content designed to get voters to the polls.

But the report cautions against simply trying to recreate what Republicans have done well — for instance, by trying to find a Democratic equivalent of Rogan or even assuming that podcasts will be the most important medium for 2028. Instead, it argues, Democrats need to be willing to try different formats, testing what works and adapting as needed.

“Simply increasing funding to replicate Republican tactics from the last cycle won't be sufficient — nor will continuing to rely primarily on the same networks of talent,” the report concludes. “Successful right-wing influencers emerged largely organically outside party structures, not through top-down creation.”

Elon Musk came out swinging against President Donald Trump’s “big beautiful bill” on Tuesday, slamming the reconciliation package as a “disgusting abomination” in a massive break from the president just days after stepping away from his role in the administration.

“I’m sorry, but I just can’t stand it anymore,” Musk wrote on his social media platform X. “This massive, outrageous, pork-filled Congressional spending bill is a disgusting abomination. Shame on those who voted for it: you know you did wrong. You know it.”

Musk, who Trump had tapped to lead the federal expense-slashing Department of Government Efficiency, went on to criticize the bill for setting up Congress to “increase the already gigantic budget deficit to $2.5 trillion (!!!)” and saddle Americans with “crushingly unsustainable debt.”

His comments come as the bill is set to face Senate scrutiny after narrowly passing in the House last month.

Musk’s bombshell attack on Trump’s prized megabill marks a dam-breaking moment for the billionaire presidential adviser, shortly after stepping back from his position helming DOGE last week as the end of his designated time as a special government employee came to a close.

The Tesla CEO had criticized some of the president’s policies while he was serving in government. But the harsh rebuke of legislation pushed by Trump — who said in May that the bill was “arguably the most significant piece of Legislation that will ever be signed in the History of our Country” — marks the most severe split between the Trump ally and the president.

White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt brushed off Musk’s criticism, which he posted as she was at the briefing room podium. "The president already knows where Elon Musk stood on this bill,” she said. “It doesn't change the president's opinion."

Musk’s social media post emboldened some of the reconcilation’s package Republican critics. Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.), one of two Republican defections against the bill last month, was quick to boost Musk’s tirade, writing “He’s right” in a post on X.

And Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.), who Trump criticized repeatedly earlier Tuesday for his opposition to the bill, came out in support of Musk.

“I agree with Elon,” Paul wrote on X. “We have both seen the massive waste in government spending and we know another $5 trillion in debt is a huge mistake. We can and must do better.” Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) also jumped on the post, replying to Musk that “The Senate must make this bill better.”

But the message came as a blow to House Speaker Mike Johnson, who was instrumental in pushing the bill through the House.

Musk “coming out and panning” the GOP megabill is “very disappointing,” Johnson told reporters at the Capitol, “and very surprising in light of the conversation I had with him.”

Tuesday’s post wasn’t the first time Musk expressed disapproval of Republicans’ megabill.

The former DOGE head took to CBS News last week to criticize the bill, saying he was “disappointed to see the massive spending bill,” and lamenting that it “undermines the work that the DOGE team is doing.”

While Musk’s role at DOGE fundamentally reshaped Washington, the close Trump ally has signaled his frustration with the administration in recent weeks, from launching an attack on Trump trade adviser Peter Navarro on X over the administration’s sweeping tariff policy — which impacted Musk’s business holdings — to indicating that he had “done enough” in politics after throwing significant funds at an ill-fated Wisconsin Supreme Court race in April.

Meredith Lee Hill and Ben Johansen contributed to this report.

Pennsylvania Sen. John Fetterman’s chief of staff is leaving her post, two people familiar with the matter confirmed to POLITICO on Tuesday. The move is yet another key departure for a congressional office that’s been marked by turnover amid mounting questions about the Democrat's health and shifting political persona.

Axios first reported Krysta Sinclair Juris’ plans to part ways with Fetterman’s office.

POLITICO has learned Cabelle St. John, who previously served as Fetterman’s deputy chief of staff, senior adviser and scheduling director, is taking over as his new top aide.

“Cabelle St. John has been a trusted advisor since day 1 in the office. I’m lucky to have her taking over as my Chief of Staff and I’m confident she’ll do a great job,” Fetterman said in a statement. “I’m grateful for Krysta’s work. She’s been an invaluable member of the team for over two years and I wish her all the best.”

In the last year and a half, the senator’s former chief of staff, Adam Jentleson, top communications aides and legislative director all left his team. Two more aides departed Fetterman’s office in the last couple months.

In a Monday debate in Boston with Sen. Dave McCormick (R-Pa.), Fetterman said that reporting about his missing votes and committee hearings is a “weird smear.” Previously, he criticized a New York magazine article about former and current aides who expressed concerns about his health “a one-source hit piece.”

“I’m here. I’m doing that job,” he said in the debate that aired on Fox Nation. “For me, if I miss some of those quotes — I mean some of those votes — I’ve made 90 percent of them and, and we all know those votes that I’ve missed were on Monday; those are travel days, and I have three young kids, and I — those are throwaway procedural votes. … That’s a choice that I made, and if you want to attack me for that, go ahead.”

In addition to concerns over his health, some ex-staffers have been frustrated with Fetterman's hardline support of Israel and recent meeting with President Donald Trump.

After Latino voters moved toward President Donald Trump in November, a new in-depth survey of this demographic shows their support for him could be breaking, according to polling shared first with POLITICO.

Throughout the president’s first few months in office, his favorability among Latinos is crashing, especially among independents and women, according to a new poll conducted by Global Strategy Group and commissioned by Somos Votantes, a Democratic-leaning group that focuses on Latinos.

Among independents, Trump’s approval dropped from 43 percent in February to 29 percent in May. Overall, his approval among Latinos dropped from 43 percent to 39 percent. The poll surveyed 800 Hispanic/Latino registered voters nationwide between May 8 and May 18 and has a margin of error of plus or minus 3.5 percent.

The Latinos surveyed were also increasingly negative on Trump’s handling of the economy, with just 38 percent of those surveyed holding a positive view. Among independents, that figure drops to 26 percent, and among women it’s at 30 percent.

“These numbers tell a pretty clear story that (Trump’s economic) trust is not only steadily, but quickly, eroding, which is a huge liability for the president,” said Somos Votantes president Melissa Morales, who said Trump’s gains among Latinos were mostly because of his promises to create a better economy.

Fifty-six percent of those surveyed said that the economy is getting worse under Trump’s administration, and 19 percent said the economy is improving.

“I think there are a lot of Latinos who didn't necessarily vote for Donald Trump. They voted for change,” Morales said. “They voted for something different than they were experiencing in their everyday economic lives.”

Republicans have continued to bet that Hispanic and Latino voters will continue to back them in the midterms following Trump’s inroads. On Monday, the National Republican Congressional Committee launched a Spanish ad campaign targeting eight House Democrats, which doubled down on their promise to target 11 seats occupied by Democrats across the Southwest.

Republicans point to Trump’s progress with this voting bloc, as well as specific gains in a few majority-Hispanic House districts. When Republicans announced their targets, Rep. Richard Hudson (R-N.C.) — who chairs the NRCC — made a direct plea to Hispanic voters during a cable appearance.

“Hispanic voters. We want your vote,” Hudson said at the time. “We share your values. Our policies will make your lives better.”

Somos Votantes said that messaging isn’t landing so far.

“There is a huge disconnect between what Hispanic/Latino voters want the President and Congress to focus on versus what they believe Trump and Republicans are doing,” said a memo shared alongside the polling.