The future of Donald Trump’s second term will be shaped Wednesday in a locked room in the United States Senate. There, Republican senators will choose Mitch McConnell’s replacement by secret ballot and usher in a new era for the Republican Senate.
In an interview with POLITICO Magazine, Liam Donovan, a former Republican Party political operative and lobbyist who keeps a close eye on Capitol Hill, laid bare the political landmines facing the candidates to become the next Senate majority leader and power that Trump has – or doesn’t have’. t keep — in the match.
There are three contenders: John Thune of South Dakota, the current Republican whip; John Cornyn of Texas, his predecessor as Republican whip; and Rick Scott of Florida, a longtime McConnell critic who presents himself as an outsider.
The MAGA crowd has rallied behind Scott, but Trump himself has backed away from an endorsement. Instead, Trump has issued demands to Truth Social for candidates to allow him to make recess appointments to fill vacancies, to which the leadership candidates quickly responded with varying degrees of support.
It’s a reminder that no matter who wins, there will be a rift with McConnell.
“I think there’s enough desire to change the way the House works that you have to meet some demands,” Donovan said, “both from the grassroots and the issues that the president is talking about.”
This conversation has been edited for length and clarity.
What is the stakes of the race, and why is it so important?
I think it’s a big deal in the sense that Donald Trump just won a huge victory, bigger than anyone actually expected, and so it’s a huge opportunity for the party to consolidate those gains through policy victories.
But it is also a fundamental turning point in the future of the Senate as an institution. The McConnell era lasted 18 years. That’s the longest-serving leader in history. That leadership style began to conflict with the course of the institution. And so it is now up to the members to determine what that future looks like. I think it’s a unique moment because the president-elect will have the opportunity to shape the senators’ prerogatives more than probably any president before him, and certainly more than we could have imagined a week ago.
Is this a race over the Senate’s internal processes, or is this ideological?
I think it’s mainly about the process. There is a process and there is some kind of attitude. And when you think about what the party’s shift has been under Donald Trump, I think it’s very much a matter of attitude.
Certainly from the point of view of the voting results of these members, they are quite comparable. Rick Scott may be in a slightly different place, a slightly harder line, but generally they are all considered conservative members. The difference between them lies mainly in their approach to the establishment. It is clear that Thune and Cornyn are long-time members of the leadership. Scott has described himself as an opponent of leadership and the establishment. So it’s less about ideology per se, more about attitude, and more about how the Senate should operate.
What are the factions within the conference that each appeals to?
I think the early rifts we saw happened in 2022, the last time McConnell was challenged, and there was an effort to delay the leadership election until after the Georgia runoff. About a third of the conference was a sign of frustration with the way things were going, and at some level that’s indicative of “We need to change direction.” I think this is very much the faction Scott wants to leverage. For the most part, it’s the votes he got in McConnell’s last challenge. Maybe that caucus has grown as the Republican Conference here grows with new members, it’s hard to say yet. But I think those members will really determine where things go, because the Cornyn and Thune binary is a much more nuanced issue. I think it’s personality based. They are very similar in direction. They are both very loved. And so what it really comes down to is that if, as conventional wisdom expects, and Scott falls short on the first ballot, the election will be determined by the direction those Scott votes go.
There is a hunger for something different. But Rick Scott, as we’ve seen before, is a poor vessel for those desires. Interpersonally he doesn’t have much support. I think we’ve seen an impressive show of force online and with Trump/MAGA allies, and that’s all well and good, but they don’t get a vote. I do think there was probably a time when there was room for someone else, but it doesn’t seem like we’re going to get that. So what it really means is that Rick Scott is likely playing the role of kingmaker – that his vote pool will be the ones who will determine which Majority Leader John we end up with.
What are the nuances between the two Johns? Is it just personality?
They are men who both have a long history in the Chamber. Both have long stints in leadership. They both had the same job as whips. I think that puts them in a fairly similar position.
Thune reads like the continuity choice, if only because he’s the sitting whip, but that’s just about timing. John Cornyn had been the whip and he was sent out on the sole basis of the [term limit] rules of the conference. That’s in some ways a fluke of history, and McConnell’s longevity. Cornyn’s biggest selling point is that he is the strongest fundraiser at the conference. Since he’s been in the Senate, he’s raised more than $400 million in hard dollars. They’ve raised similar amounts this cycle, but Thune, I think, is focusing a little more on the soft money, which is important but has a different flavor. In many ways, Texas is the cash machine of the conference, and will remain so for years to come.
And the other part of this is that John Cornyn was a two-term chairman of the National Republican Senate Committee. My full disclosure is that I worked there for him in the right cycle. I believe he had a hand in recruiting and electing a large number of senators. We elected thirteen Republicans in 2010, he was back in 2012, so I look at that as a differentiator, that’s something he brings to the table.
But really, I don’t think you can go wrong if you’re a Republican voting on these things, and it really just comes down to those personal relationships. The other part of this is that they prepare for the competition.
Trump has cleverly viewed Scott as leverage, even if that is true [Trump] If he cannot make him leader with certainty, he can extract quite a few concessions from both majority leaders. So Scott’s usefulness is that he sets the bar for what a majority leader will have to do to get the job. And you’re already seeing that in terms of what both Johns – actually all three candidates – are demonstrating an openness to. Negotiations are ongoing. Trump has demanded recess agreements, which is kind of interesting because in a majority you are in control. He has not demanded a deal with Democrats on lame-duck nominations and timely consideration of his own nominees. The question now will be: will he come up with even more demands? Because at this point I think you have to be willing to negotiate if it means you get the big job.
So if Trump can’t choose the leader, can he at least choose the rules the leader agrees to?
Trump has a keener ability to break people than to make people, and so I think this is part of his choice about how much to weigh in here. Because Rick Scott is probably not popular enough as a starting point for Trump’s endorsement to make him successful, but he could absolutely sink all of these candidates, and so that gives him the power to make whatever concessions he wants.
There are reasons why the various MAGA boosters are mad at one of these guys. I don’t think it will matter in the end, but it does matter what the senators who favor Rick Scott think. How do they view this choice?
Does the public pressure campaign on Scott’s behalf matter at all?
These things are so personal. I think the online pressure campaigns could have a counterproductive effect. I think public pressure to make your voice heard or make your choice public is something to be aware of, but beyond that I think it’s a bit delicate because historically the senatorial privilege at the most prominent club in the world is something is that they appreciate. But I think we’re in a new era and a new moment.
Regardless of which John it is, how big will the rift be with McConnell?
I think there will be some who will tear up the floor of the chamber, trying to accommodate and satisfy the hunger of some of these members to vote to do more. That’s not necessarily a rejection of the McConnell era. He served admirably for the time he did. But I do think there is enough desire to change the way the House works that you have to meet some demands, both from the grassroots and the things that the president is talking about. I don’t think there will be a clean break. These are reasonable, smart and smart operators who have been at the highest levels of leadership for decades. But I think they’re taking on this job with their eyes open when it comes to what it means to be in the 2024 Republican Party in a Trump trifecta.
