Elon Musk just launched a war against the GOP. Now the party’s hopes of holding onto power are at stake.

Musk has gone from helping Republicans take total control of Washington — spending nearly $300 million to become the single biggest known donor last year — to attacking the highest-ranking leaders of the party and daring the rank and file to cross him.

“Trump has 3.5 years left as President, but I will be around for 40+ years,” Musk said on X.

The post was an unambiguous warning from the world's richest man, who has the power to single-handedly reshape elections with his wealth. It was not long ago that Republicans hoped Musk could pour cash into their efforts to help maintain control of Washington. Instead, he’s becoming their public adversary.

Musk spent Thursday online attacking President Donald Trump over Republicans’ massive tax-and-spending bill, which Musk says does not cut enough government spending.

He’d already threatened to challenge Republicans who support the megabill; on Thursday, he blasted House Speaker Mike Johnson and Senate Majority Leader John Thune, took credit for Republicans winning trifecta control in November, and floated the idea of launching a third party.

“This is a massive crack in the MAGA coalition,” said Matthew Bartlett, a Republican strategist and a former Trump administration appointee. “This town is historically built on Republican versus Democrat, and this seems to be crazy versus crazy. It is asymmetric and it seems, for the first time, President Trump seems to be out-crazied.”

Just a few weeks ago, Republicans were still praising Musk for his financial backing in the 2024 election as they hoped he'd make a graceful return to the private sector after overseeing the administration's program to slash federal spending. Less than one week ago, Musk was in the Oval Office with Trump commemorating his time in administration as a special government employee.

But that polite departure, it quickly became evident, was not going to happen.

"Elon was 'wearing thin,' I asked him to leave," Trump wrote on Truth Social, blaming Musk’s anger on the megabill’s removal of electric vehicle tax credits. “He just went CRAZY!”

As Musk’s drama engulfed the party Thursday, Republicans in Congress mostly tried to avoid getting caught in the crossfire. Key GOP lawmakers in both chambers worked to downplay the potential effects on both the party’s domestic policy package and on the GOP’s midterms posture.

Rep. Richard Hudson (R-N.C.), who leads the House GOP campaign arm, told reporters Thursday that he hopes the spat will “blow over.” Before the breakup went nuclear, Hudson had said in a brief interview Wednesday evening that Musk has “been a friend and he’s just wrong about this bill.”

Even fiscal hard-liners who have embraced some of Musk’s talking points about the bill tried to avoid getting drawn into the fracas. Rep. Chip Roy (R-Texas), who at one point threatened to tank the megabill for not being fiscally conservative enough, said, "Elon crossed the line today ... we'll let those guys go play it out."

"I don't disagree with him about our need to find more spending cuts," Roy added, but Musk needs to "keep it in the lines."

Another hard-liner, Rep. Tim Burchett (R-Tenn.), said he believes Musk is losing sway within MAGA. Musk is “just another shiny object,” he said, “and we’ll deal with it.”

But Musk appeared intent on turning his opposition to the legislation into a civil war for the party. He amplified two Kentucky Republicans, Rep. Thomas Massie and Sen. Rand Paul, who have been thorns in the side of Trump and GOP leaders trying to pass the bill.

Even though Musk brought massive financial backing, he has also at times been an electoral problem for Republicans. His popularity has fallen below Trump’s, and his biggest political effort this year — the Wisconsin Supreme Court race — ended with the conservative candidate losing by almost 10 points.

“Elon couldn’t buy a Wisconsin Supreme Court seat. You really think that people are gonna be afraid of this money?” said a person close to the White House, granted anonymity to discuss the dynamics.

As Musk’s popularity faded, Republicans wondered how long his relationship with Trump could endure. On Thursday, Musk severed ties.

He took shot after shot at Trump, accusing him of lying, replying “yes” to a post suggesting he should be impeached, and accusing him of having a cozy relationship with the deceased Jeffrey Epstein, who had been accused of sex trafficking.

"What a predictable shitshow," said a person who has been in the room with both Musk and Trump. "Trump is a liar, and it was obvious Elon would not be able to go along with his incessant lying forever."

A nervous Republican Party is now scrambling to figure out what the electoral fallout will look like, starting with next year’s midterms.

Already, two of Trump's top campaign operatives, Chris LaCivita and Tony Fabrizio had signed up to work with Musk's Building America's Future PAC. But Musk's scorched-earth strategy could create dueling allegiances.

Privately, some Republicans are arguing they had already been preparing for next year's elections without Musk's money, and complained that America PAC — the tech billionaire’s super PAC — didn't spend its money effectively in House races last year.

America PAC spent $19.2 million backing GOP candidates across 18 battleground House races last year, according to data from the Federal Election Commission. Republicans won 10 of those elections. But those were among the highest-profile and most expensive races in the country, and Musk’s group accounted for only 12 percent of Republican outside spending in them. It wasn’t even the biggest GOP spender — that was still the Congressional Leadership Fund, the primary super PAC affiliated with House Republicans.

“What Elon has is money, and if he’s not going to put $100 million in the [midterms], that’s a hole that has to be filled,” said Chris Mottola, a GOP media consultant. "On the other hand, there was a question about how effective the money was that he spent, because he spent it the way he wanted to."

Over the last few months, Musk has floated the idea of getting involved in the midterms, but he’s also claimed he would step back from political spending. If Musk is going to go all-in against the party, he’s going to need more than money.

“Are there enough good Republican operatives out there to go achieve this mission for Elon Musk when it means going up against the president?" said a former RNC official, granted anonymity to discuss the situation candidly. “Everybody’s got a price, but I don’t think they are rushing to go help Elon further divide the Republican Party ahead of the midterms.”

Lisa Kashinsky, Jessica Piper, Holly Otterbein, Dasha Burns, Nicholas Wu, Sophia Cai, Jordain Carney and Meredith Lee Hill contributed to this report.

The tension between President Donald Trump and Elon Musk finally burst into the open Thursday, likely closing the chapter on one of the most significant alliances in recent political history.

In the wake of the schism, some Republicans are stuck in the middle debating their next moves. Do they side with Trump, the leader of the party whose influence and authority looms over so many aspects of life? Or do they back Musk, whose massive fortune could provide a boost to anyone running for reelection — or running to succeed Trump in 2028 — even as he threatens to withhold donations to lawmakers who back the Republican megabill? Could they attempt to appease both?

Musk, 53, is already drawing a future-forward line between himself and Trump, 78, and urging Republicans to come to his side.

“Some food for thought as they ponder this question,” Musk wrote on X in response to far-right activist Laura Loomer wondering how Republicans would react. “Trump has 3.5 years left as President, but I will be around for 40+ years.”

Here are the Republicans who we’re watching closely to determine how to navigate the fallout:

JD Vance

The vice president and possible heir to Trump’s political movement could be the biggest loser of the blowout.

With Musk’s future potential campaign contributions now in jeopardy, Vance, an expected 2028 presidential candidate, would have an incentive to mediate the relationship. Vance wouldn’t want to jeopardize a donor relationship with Musk, but he also needs Trump’s support if he wants to inherit his base. He will be constrained in how much he can realistically break from Trump if the feud continues.

Musk appeared to endorse Vance in ‘in an X post calling from Trump to be impeached and the vice president to take his place, suggesting their relationship remains intact for now. And the two appear to share some political stances, including supporting Germany’s far-right party Alternative for Deutschland (AfD).

In April, after it was first reported that Musk intended to leave the White House, Vance said he expected Trump and Musk to remain close, a seemingly lousy prediction in hindsight.

“DOGE has got a lot of work to do, and yeah, that work is going to continue after Elon leaves,” Vance said in April. “But fundamentally, Elon is going to remain a friend and an adviser of both me and the president.”

Ron DeSantis

The Florida governor has had a tortured relationship with Trump, his former political benefactor-turned-2024 rival who bulldozed him during the presidential campaign.

But since Trump took office, DeSantis has publicly supported the president and signed into law a Florida immigration law that furthered Trump’s immigration agenda.

He’s also a big fan of Musk.

Musk was an early booster of the Florida governor’s failed presidential campaign, offering to host a glitchy, error-ridden launch event via X Spaces, the audio livestream feature on the Musk-owned social media site. Musk also contributed $10 million to DeSantis’ campaign before he dropped out and endorsed Trump.

In Musk’s final week as part of the Trump administration, DeSantis praised his work leading the Department of Government Efficiency and echoed Musk’s criticisms of the reconciliation package for not doing enough to reduce the deficit, calling the bill “a betrayal of the voters.”

He went further on Wednesday, singling out Musk in a fundraising solicitation.

“Elon Musk stood tall and took the hits to lead the fight on DOGE, cutting wasteful spending and exposing bloated government programs,” said a fundraising email Wednesday from one of DeSantis’ political committees. “The media attacked him. The Left panicked. But now? Even Republicans in Congress are backing down.”

It’s unclear what DeSantis’ political future holds — he’s term-limited as governor from 2026 — but Musk’s backing could play a role in whatever he does next.

A spokesperson for the governor’s political operation said the fundraising language was approved May 29 — the day before Trump prepared to extol Musk during a friendly send-off at the White House.

Stephen Miller and Katie Miller

The Trump-Musk rift sets up some potential awkwardness between Stephen Miller, Trump’s powerful deputy chief of staff, and his wife Katie Miller, who joined DOGE as an aide to Musk and left last week to work for the billionaire entrepreneur.

The New York Times reported in January that Stephen Miller had been advising Musk on his political donations. But it’s unclear if that relationship is still strong. And after Musk started attacking the Republican megabill, Stephen Miller became a staunch defender of the legislation.

On Thursday, after Trump and Musk traded barbs, Musk appeared to unfollow Miller on X. If there was ever a path to peace between Trump and Musk, the Millers could play a role — or it could cause a rift in their marriage.

Vivek Ramaswamy

Once tapped to co-lead DOGE with Musk, Ramaswamy split off from the administration before Inauguration Day and ultimately mounted a run for governor of Ohio.

But the former presidential candidate, who raised his profile by passionately defending Trump in the 2024 Republican primaries, has always aligned himself with the cost-cutting, Libertarian brand of conservatism that Musk embraces. However, if Ramaswamy seeks to grow closer to Musk in the vacuum left by Trump when he leaves office, he’ll have to overcome the fact that Musk thinks he’s annoying.

David Sacks

Sacks, a South African entrepreneur, came into Trump’s orbit by way of Musk, and now heads artificial intelligence and cryptocurrency policy for the White House. But if the White House withdrawing Jared Isaacman’s nomination to head NASA is any indication, Sacks may not be long for Washington.

On the other hand, Trump’s embrace of the crypto industry — and Sacks’ role as crypto czar — could prove to be tempting enough for Sacks to side with the president against his longtime friend.

Thom Tillis

As Trump and Musk clash over the reconciliation bill, Senate Republicans are left to pick up the pieces as they continue to argue over changes to satisfy at least 50 members and pass the bill. Tillis in particular is facing a tough reelection battle and could surely use strong support from Trump and Musk.

On Wednesday — day two of Musk tweeting attacks against the bill — Tillis told CNN Musk is a “brilliant guy,” while noting he’s “got resources.”

With Republicans looking to approve the bill this summer, Tillis could be forced to take a side earlier than he might like. How he navigates the rift may offer a roadmap for other battleground Republicans ahead of 2026.

Vance, DeSantis, Stephen Miller, Katie Miller, Ramaswamy, Sack and Tillis did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

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.”