Battleground Republicans are breaking from President Donald Trump with increasing frequency as Election Day draws closer and the party fights to protect its congressional majorities.

With just three weeks until voters head to the polls to decide who controls Congress for the latter half of Trump’s term, some Republicans are putting distance between themselves and Trump as the party faces significant political headwinds.

Veteran GOP strategist Doug Heye told Digital that such a strategy at this juncture was «not a surprise.»

«It happens in midterms when presidents aren’t popular,» Heye said. «Add to that the more outlandish things he’s done — often on things that have nothing to do with lowering costs, ending the war with Iran, etc. — this was bound to happen.»

TRUMP VANISHES FROM GOP SENATOR’S CAMPAIGN WEBSITE AS POLL NUMBERS PLUNGE WEEKS BEFORE ELECTION

It’s a similar situation to what’s played out with past presidents during a midterm election year, most recently with former President Joe Biden in 2022.

And the Republican National Committee (RNC) is arguing that the party is united behind Trump, while conceding that GOP candidates have individual stakes.

«Unlike the Democrats who are in a full-blown civil war with extremists, Republicans remain united behind the president’s agenda of cutting taxes, lowering drug costs and securing our communities. We are laser-focused on winning, and our candidates will run the races necessary to best represent their districts and prevent Democrats from taking control,» RNC spokeswoman Natalie Baldessarre said.

And running their own races is what several are notably doing, balancing individuality with their support for Trump and the GOP base.

At least two House Republicans, Reps. Jen Kiggans, R-Va., and Mike Lawler, R-N.Y., have touted conflict with Trump in advertisements.

TRUMP-LINKED SUPER PAC PULLS FUNDING FROM 2 HOUSE REPUBLICANS AS GOP FIGHTS TO KEEP MAJORITY

Kiggans is out with a new ad touting herself as «one of the most bipartisan members of Congress,» who has taken on her «own party to protect jobs, and working with Democrats to save healthcare.» One visual referenced a news article that said, «Kiggans bucks Trump on offshore wind.»

Meanwhile, Lawler recently released an advertisement in which he highlighted taking on «the left and the right,» followed by a clip of Trump calling him a «pain in the a–» on state and local tax deduction issues.

But for many, like Lawler, it’s a balancing act of trying to keep Trump and the GOP base happy, while courting independent voters.

White House spokesperson Davis Ingle said, «No one can dispute the fact that President Trump has created one of the most robust coalitions in political history with the MAGA movement, and the president understands how to communicate with them.»

«President Trump is the unequivocal leader, best messenger and unmatched motivator for the Republican Party, and he is committed to maintaining Republican majorities in Congress,» Ingle told Digital.

«The president signed the largest working-class tax cuts in history, lowered the cost of prescription drugs, sealed the border, drove violent crime to the lowest level in nearly a century, unleashed an energy revolution, added more than a million private-sector jobs and sent Americans’ 401(k)s climbing to record highs,» Ingle continued. «The choice has never been more clear: doubling down on President Trump’s winning, commonsense agenda or the Democrats’ extreme liberal policies and obstruction.»

Still, the political tightrope was on full display when Lawler appeared on stage at Trump’s midterm convention in September, when he noted he and the president didn’t «always agree.»

He told Digital at the convention, «I fundamentally believe if you want to get things done, you have to be able to work with whoever the president is. And it’s why I’ve consistently been rated among the most bipartisan and effective members of Congress.»

Former Rep. Mike Rogers, R-Mich., and Sen. John Husted, R-Ohio, also notably appeared at Trump’s convention in Dallas.

They have, however, split from Trump on some key issues in an effort to show daylight between themselves and the president.

CAN THE ‘BEST SHOWMAN IN POLITICS’ DELIVER AGAIN? GOP BETS ON TRUMP AT HISTORIC MIDTERM CONVENTION

They have called for an end to the Iran war and have diverged from Trump on data centers — the president declared on Truth Social shortly after the midterm convention that «the only reason that communities throughout the U.S.A. should not want Data Centers is if they want to end up being backwards and poor.»

But it’s a key sticking point for several Republicans on the trail who recognize the bad optics the hulking, windowless behemoths have with voters. Many, including Husted and Rogers, don’t believe it’s an issue that the federal government should have total dominion over.

«What we’ve said is there should be a moratorium until we get all of the voters’ decisions and questions answered,» Rogers told Digital during the convention. «These are big decisions. I don’t think there should be a federal ban, because if the federal government can ban it, it can also tell you have to have one.»

Another vulnerable GOP lawmaker who broke from Trump on the issue of data centers is Rep. Tom Barrett, R-Mich., who has maintained that it should be a decision for local governments whether to allow such facilities in their backyards.

«When you have people colluding with these corporations to come in and build a data center, before people in the community even know about it, because of these non-disclosure agreements, I think that violates the trust that people have or don’t have with their local officials right now,» Barrett said on Fox News’ «The Big Weekend Show.»

Barrett is also one of a small handful of House Republicans who has consistently voted against the U.S. operation in Iran without congressional approval. The Middle East conflict has gained a steady stream of GOP opposition the longer it’s gone on, as evidenced by the growing number of Republicans voting for Democrats’ war powers resolutions in the House.

Among them is Rep. Marianette Miller-Meeks, R-Iowa, who previously voted with the GOP on similar measures until the most recent such vote in mid-September.

And Rep. Max Miller, R-Ohio, who voted against reining in Trump on Iran, noted on the Woo & WayCo podcast last week, «We need to get out of this war quickly.»

«What [Trump] did to stop a nuclear danger is a beautiful thing, but right now, you know, I don’t think anyone can cut a deal with Iranians, because you can’t trust them,» Miller said.

The Ohio Republican’s re-election chances are up in the air amid a slew of domestic abuse allegations from his ex-wife and former father-in-law.

He did notably appear at Trump’s rally in Youngstown, Ohio.

Trump’s plan to import foreign beef has also gotten some pushback from vulnerable House Republicans like Miller-Meeks and Rep. Zach Nunn, R-Iowa.

Nunn, another battleground Iowan, introduced a bipartisan bill last month that would suspend Trump’s plan while directing the federal government to find a strategy to grow domestic cattle numbers.

And some candidates, like Rep. Tom Kean, R-N.J., do not mention the president on their websites at all. References to Republicans on Kean’s site are few and far between, but it touts him as an «independent leader standing up for what is right for New Jersey.»

A separate White House official argued that Republicans distancing themselves from Trump «could not be further from the truth — President Trump is still the unequivocal leader of the Republican Party.»

politics, donald trump, midterm elections, republican convention, battleground voters

The New York gubernatorial race heated up Tuesday as Democratic Gov. Kathy Hochul and Nassau County Executive Bruce Blakeman clashed on the debate stage, with the pair trading jabs over President Donald Trump, a recent ICE-involved shooting and inflation.

The debate opened with the candidates being asked about the conduct of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), which last week drew outrage in New York City following the shooting of a 28-year-old Dominican national whom the Department of Homeland Security said refused to comply with lawful orders during a targeted operation in the Bronx. A 5-year-old boy inside Oscar Bergal’s vehicle was unharmed.

«Kathy Hochul appealed to ICE to let this criminal out. The question that New Yorkers have to ask is what was this guy doing in New York in the first place? It’s because Kathy Hochul has made us a sanctuary state,» said Blakeman, a Republican.

«Think about it. This guy came into the country illegally. He’s been convicted of a crime. He’s got pending charges for dealing drugs, poison to our children. And he’s a gangbanger. This is who Kathy Hochul is defending?» Blakeman continued. «I have a cooperative agreement with ICE until Kathy Hochul said we could no longer cooperate with ICE. We got over 2,000 illegal migrants out of my county with criminal records ranging from rape, attempted murder, robbery, burglary, drug dealing, carjacking, gang activity. And that’s because we cooperated with ICE, and we didn’t raid one school, one hospital, one daycare center or one church. If you cooperate with federal law enforcement, it makes for a safer community. That’s what I did. Kathy Hochul is taking that ability away from us. That’s why things like this happen.»

Hochul called Blakeman’s response a «non-answer,» because «he refused to condemn what ICE did.»

«So he basically says in the state of New York, he’d be fine if ICE agents shoot into cars, shoot guns into vehicles, not knowing who’s inside and could have killed a 5-year-old child. If that doesn’t shock the conscience of everybody — and it should shock his conscience as well — that he says, that’s OK, that’s how ICE is supposed to do it,» Hochul added. «I’ll tell you what. I oversee over 500 policing agencies in the state of New York, over half a million arrests every year. That’s not how you conduct yourself. ICE is out of control. It’s out of control in Nassau County.»

Blakeman pushed back, saying, «it never would have happened» but for Hochul’s «sanctuary policy.»

«You have invited criminals to come into our state and prey on our communities. And now you won’t let local law enforcement cooperate with ICE in an orderly way, like we did in my county,» Blakeman added. «We didn’t have any incidents in my county because we were allowed to cooperate with local law enforcement. But you took that tool away. The reason why that happened is because of you, Kathy Hochul, and your immigration policies, where you actually invite people into our state, give them free everything, and you don’t care whether they’re criminals or not. That’s a bad policy.»

As part of her rebuttal, Hochul said, «I have a right to answer this one because this is so absurd. I have said, from the president on down, I said, New York is not a sanctuary for criminals, not a sanctuary for criminals. Full stop.»

The two candidates also clashed over Trump and the state of the U.S. economy.

«He promised to cut energy costs. He promised to cut down grocery costs. And you know what? Everything has happened under your friend, Donald Trump, who you are the president of the fan club for Donald Trump. It’s absurd how adoring you are of him. My gosh,» Hochul told Blakeman. «Well, what he has done is raise gasoline prices and energy prices and the cost of tariffs have driven up everything in the state. If you bought groceries lately, my God, the people are suffering. And that didn’t have to be the case. Why are we at war with the rest of the world?»

«You like to talk about Donald Trump all the time, because you don’t want to talk about your record,» Blakeman responded.

«I’m talking about my record right now,» Hochul said.

«Because it’s a record of misery and failure,» Blakeman continued. «The highest taxes, utility rates that are 70% higher than the national average. But let me say something about Donald Trump. Donald Trump is my friend. He’s endorsed me. But so is Bonnie Lautenberg, a liberal Democrat whose husband, Frank, served in the United States Senate and was a pillar of the Democratic Party. Actor Debra Messing, who is a liberal Democrat who supports me because she trusts me to make safer communities, improve the quality of life here in New York.»

«Alright, you got two votes,» Hochul said. «Good for you.»

kathy hochul, gubernatorial, new york city, homeland security, new york, politics

Volví de Uruguay con la grata impresión de que allí la democracia todavía puede vivirse sin estridencias. No es un país libre de tensiones, pero sus dirigentes parecen entender que ninguna diferencia justifica destruir las reglas que les permiten convivir. Esa normalidad rara vez produce titulares y, quizá por eso mismo, merece nuestra atención.

Pocos días después de mi visita, leí en El País de Montevideo un editorial titulado «¿Quiénes son los nuestros?». Su pregunta me dejó pensando y terminó por impulsar estas líneas. El texto proponía reconocer a los demócratas por su conducta ante la derrota, incluso cuando esa conducta tiene un costo personal. Es una medida exigente. Resulta fácil invocar la libertad cuando se gana. Defenderla cuando obliga a ceder el poder revela la profundidad de nuestras convicciones.

Esa reflexión había comenzado durante el coloquio del Centro de Estudios para el Desarrollo sobre el nuevo escenario político de América Latina. Continuó en mis conversaciones con profesores y estudiantes de la Universidad ORT, en el reencuentro con Luis Lacalle Pou y durante mi visita a Julio María Sanguinetti. Fueron diálogos distintos, unidos por una convicción acerca del carácter temporal del poder, la legitimidad del adversario y el deber de preservar instituciones que pertenecen a todos.

En Uruguay, además, esa convicción tiene una expresión cotidiana. Sus líderes caminan por las calles y conversan con la gente sin la parafernalia que suele rodear al poder. Esa sencillez no les resta autoridad. Recuerda que gobernar es un servicio temporal y que la distancia entre un presidente y un ciudadano nunca debería volverse insalvable.

Sanguinetti lleva consigo la memoria de la recuperación democrática uruguaya. Lacalle Pou representa a una generación que ha impulsado cambios sin romper la continuidad republicana. Ambos recuerdan que la moderación exige carácter, pues supone defender las propias ideas y, al mismo tiempo, reconocer la dignidad de quien piensa distinto. En una democracia madura, una elección no tiene que convertirse en una refundación, ni la salida del gobierno en un acto de resentimiento.

Durante años explicamos la política latinoamericana como un péndulo entre izquierda y derecha. Las diferencias ideológicas siguen siendo legítimas y necesarias, pero esa imagen ya no alcanza para comprender lo que está en juego. La frontera más profunda separa hoy a quienes aceptan la democracia como un sistema de límites y alternancia de quienes utilizan el voto para concentrar poder, apropiarse de las instituciones y convertir al adversario en enemigo. El populismo puede hablar en nombre de la igualdad o de la libertad, prometer una revolución o invocar el orden. Lo delata su relación con los límites. Considera que los contrapesos estorban, trata a la prensa independiente como una amenaza y quisiera una justicia dócil. Cambian sus banderas, pero permanece la pretensión de reducir una sociedad plural a una sola voz.

Por eso quienes nos reconocemos como liberales y demócratas debemos examinar también a los dirigentes que sentimos cercanos. Un gobierno favorable al mercado no necesariamente respeta la libertad. Un político puede denunciar el populismo y, al llegar al poder, adoptar sus métodos. Como sugería la pregunta de El País, la afinidad ideológica no puede decidir por nosotros quiénes son «los nuestros». Los límites al poder tienen verdadero valor cuando se los exigimos también a quienes comparten nuestras ideas.

Defender la democracia exige, además, responder a la angustia cotidiana de los ciudadanos. Cuando las instituciones deliberan mucho y resuelven poco, el cansancio se transforma en desapego. Entonces aparece quien promete resolverlo todo si se le permite gobernar sin controles. Una democracia incapaz de ofrecer seguridad, oportunidades y confianza deja espacio a esa tentación.

José María Aznar aborda esta fatiga en su reciente obra Orden y libertad y plantea una distinción valiosa entre fragilidad y debilidad. Las democracias son frágiles porque dependen de reglas aceptadas, equilibrios delicados y juego limpio. Eso no las hace débiles. Han demostrado una extraordinaria capacidad para corregirse, ampliar derechos y permitir que millones de personas construyan su propio proyecto de vida.

El autoritarismo ofrece certezas rápidas a cambio de entregar poder. La democracia acepta que nadie es infalible y, por ello, nadie debe gobernar sin límites. Después de haber ejercido la Presidencia, respeto más la complejidad de gobernar y desconfío todavía más de las soluciones sencillas. También sé que la prueba más difícil para un demócrata llega cuando respetar las reglas tiene un costo personal.

Orden y libertad deben sostenerse mutuamente. Sin orden, las personas quedan expuestas a la violencia y al miedo. Sin libertad, el orden se convierte en imposición. Necesitamos Estados capaces de proteger a sus ciudadanos y lo bastante limitados para no someterlos. En un mundo donde la fuerza vuelve a desafiar las reglas, América Latina tiene una razón adicional para defenderlas. Para nuestros países, un orden internacional basado en normas es una garantía concreta de autonomía.

Uruguay me devolvió esperanza. Sus instituciones sobreviven a los gobiernos, sus dirigentes compiten sin negarse mutuamente y sus jóvenes pueden discutir sin asumir que toda diferencia es una enemistad. La tarea no consiste en borrar las distancias entre izquierda y derecha, sino en cuidar el espacio democrático donde ambas pueden expresarse. Allí se encuentra, quizá, la respuesta a la inquietud que me dejó aquel editorial. Los nuestros son quienes saben ganar sin apropiarse del Estado y perder sin dejar de reconocer a su país en manos de otros.

*Guillermo Lasso Mendoza, ex presidente de la República del Ecuador.