Former President Donald Trump suffered his first high-profile setback in the 2022 primary election season on Tuesday night.
The news came at 11:23 p.m. Central Time (CT) when the Associated Press called the Nebraska Republican gubernatorial primary for University of Nebraska regent, veterinarian and farmer Jim Pillen.
Pillen enjoyed the support of term-limited Gov. Pete Ricketts but not Trump, who aggressively campaigned for businessman Charles Herbster.
With almost all precincts reporting, Pillen leads Herbster by 3.7%.
Shortly after Trump revealed his endorsement, Ricketts said, “While I agree with President Trump on many things, I strongly disagree that Charles Herbster is qualified to be our next governor.”
Eight women, including a Republican state senator and a GOP aide, accused Herbster of groping them late in the campaign.
The Hill further reports:
Trump appeared at a rally with Herbster earlier this month in a push to drag him across the finish line amid the growing furor over the sexual misconduct claims.
“Charles is a fine man, and he’s innocent of these despicable charges,” Trump said at the rally.
But in the end, it appeared that the sexual misconduct allegations and Ricketts’s support for Pillen proved too much for Herbster to overcome. Pillen now enters the general election as the overwhelming favorite in deep red Nebraska.
Herbster alluded to the allegations against him in his concession speech and called the primary “one of the nastiest campaigns” in Nebraska history.
ALN Staff is a dedicated group of liberty-minded professionals available 24/7 to keep you informed on the news that matters.
Canceled
Odd, Trump’s own sexual indiscretions did not turn away support!
Can you point to any former President that has had such a winning record of endorsements?
Let’s put a positive spin on incredible wins!
Trump is not some epic genius when it comes to endorsements. As proof, I point to Trump’s endorsement of Mitt Romney in the 2018 senate race in Utah. If Trump had stayed out of it, Mike Kennedy (a fantastic conservative who had won the votes of the majority at the state convention) would have likely won the primary. You would think that Trump would have apologized for that gross error in judgment, since Romney ended up paying Trump back for the endorsement by stabbing Pres. Trump in the back. But no, Pres. Trump has trouble fessing up to his mistakes.
In Ohio, Trump’s endorsement of J D Vance helped Vance win, but I am far from sure that Vance will turn out to be the sort of champion we need in the Senate, given that he has never before held elective office, and seems overly anxious to “reach across the aisle” like John McCain.
Likewise, Trump’s involvement in the Georgia primary (Kemp v. Perdue) will not prove helpful to Republican chances to keep that seat, no matter who the eventual nominee is (and polling suggests that it will be Kemp despite Trump’s hatred for him). We have already seen the sort of calamity that can happen in Georgia when Trump stokes division between Republicans in the Peach State (i.e., two Democrat Senators).
Finally, I am skeptical that any good can come out of Trump’s decision to endorse Dr. Oz for the Pennsylvania senate seat in the Republican primary. Why not choose a candidate who actually lives in the state? Why endorse a candidate who is a dual citizen of a foreign country that has not always been our best friend? I have the sense that Trump endorsed Dr. Oz simply on account of Dr. Oz’s status as a TV celebrity rather than because Dr. Oz would make that great a senator. Legislation is a different skill than diagnosing illness (or talking about illness on TV). I hope that I will be proven wrong on that score, but it is critical that the party unite around a candidate who can actually WIN in November. This is a red tide year, but it’s still possible for the party to blow it by nominating someone who is untested in political battles.