Will Ben Sasse win his 2026 primary?

[Tekken_Guy]

Will Ben Sasse win his 2026 Senate primary?

[Schiff for Senate]

As of right now, I'd say it's somewhat unlikely. Sasse has been one of the more anti-Trump Senate Republicans, even prior to January 6 and the 2020 elections - but voting to convict Trump likely took it a bridge too far for many Nebraska Republicans; for example, local county chapters of the GOP in Nebraska have censured/reprimanded Sasse. I mean, I know many Nebraska Republicans knew that Sasse was somewhat critical of Trump and voted for him in 2020 - but while he criticised Trump, he did so occassionally and usually voted with the rest of the GOP; voting to convict Trump is another, more severe, refraction which Nebraska Republicans likely won't forget (or forgive), even in 2026. I'm very surprised that a majority of poll respondents indicate they think that Sasse will win.

[Vosem]

Yes if a Republican wins in 2024 (if it's Trump, then he can just back something Trump does and get backing in exchange, as he did in 2020; if it's someone else 2020 will be forgotten about). Yes if Trump is dead/imprisoned by then (latter is very unlikely, former is possible; not everyone makes it to 80).

No if a Democrat wins in 2024 and Trump is still alive and relevant (especially if he was the nominee). The party will be in the mood for recriminations in that case and he'd be an easy target.

[Ron DeSantis enthusiast]

It all depends if Trump runs and is still relevant in 2026, I think so unless he runs in 2024 and he wins or something like that, but it seems unlikely.

If DeSantis runs in 2024 and wins, I can't see people caring about an impeachment vote of five years ago, there is enough time to make some conservative points and too people forget he voted to impeach

[beesley]

As of right now, I'd say it's somewhat unlikely. Sasse has been one of the more anti-Trump Senate Republicans, even prior to January 6 and the 2020 elections - but voting to convict Trump likely took it a bridge too far for many Nebraska Republicans; for example, local county chapters of the GOP in Nebraska have censured/reprimanded Sasse. I mean, I know many Nebraska Republicans knew that Sasse was somewhat critical of Trump and voted for him in 2020 - but while he criticised Trump, he did so occassionally and usually voted with the rest of the GOP; voting to convict Trump is another, more severe, refraction which Nebraska Republicans likely won't forget (or forgive), even in 2026. I'm very surprised that a majority of poll respondents indicate they think that Sasse will win.

I agree, but I think Sasse's anti Trump demeanour matters just as much as his vote - I think it makes him more vulnerable than Cassidy.

[Schiff for Senate]

As of right now, I'd say it's somewhat unlikely. Sasse has been one of the more anti-Trump Senate Republicans, even prior to January 6 and the 2020 elections - but voting to convict Trump likely took it a bridge too far for many Nebraska Republicans; for example, local county chapters of the GOP in Nebraska have censured/reprimanded Sasse. I mean, I know many Nebraska Republicans knew that Sasse was somewhat critical of Trump and voted for him in 2020 - but while he criticised Trump, he did so occassionally and usually voted with the rest of the GOP; voting to convict Trump is another, more severe, refraction which Nebraska Republicans likely won't forget (or forgive), even in 2026. I'm very surprised that a majority of poll respondents indicate they think that Sasse will win.

I agree, but I think Sasse's anti Trump demeanour matters just as much as his vote - I think it makes him more vulnerable than Cassidy.

Yes, that's true.

  But I think Nebraskite voters understood that Sasse was slightly more critical of Trump than a majority of Senate Republicans even as they voted in 2020. They knew he wasn't as slavishly devoted to Trump as Ted Cruz (R-TX) or Lindsay Graham (R-SC).
 
  But after January 6, Sasse is significantly more critical of Trump than he was earlier - and he voted to convict Trump. I'm not saying his criticisms of Trump prior to voting to convict him were irrelevant - but they would be had he voted to acquit Trump, taken the 'safe route' and just come up with some lame excuse (such as, Trump's already left office, an excuse several Republicans who voted to acquit found comfort in reciting).

   If he had voted to acquit, I think his Nebraskite constituents would have likely forgiven Sasse for his criticisms and focused on the way he voted. Because being critical of Trump after January 6 was not something only the 17 congressional Republicans who voted to impeach/convict did - even Mitch McConnell criticized Trump in the wake of January 6. And I don't think it's going to make McConnell hated in Kentucky (although no one there really likes him), not nearly as much as Bill Cassidy in Louisiana - because he did the important thing: voting to acquit Trump.

   No one tried to argue that January 6 was good, or that Trump had absolutely nothing to do with it - the real questions were how much Trump had a hand in it, if he deserved to be impeached, and if a president could still be impeached/convicted after leaving office.

  If the answer to either of the latter two questions was 'no', then it didn't matter what you thought of January 6, because you had an excuse to vote against impeaching Trump. If the answer to both questions was in the affirmative, like it was for Sasse, then voting to convict Trump was the sensible thing to do (spoiler alert: it was).

  Going back to the McConnell example, the Kentucky GOP didn't vote to censure him because he criticised January 6; state parties only censured their senators when they decided to actually take action against Trump instead of just using empty words to criticise him - like when Richard Burr and Bill Cassidy voted to impeach, they were censured by  the NC and LA Republican parties, respectively.

  And returning to the example of McConnell, I don't think he's going to face a serious primary challenge if he runs in 2026 (a big if), and neither will any of the other 43 Senate Republicans who voted to convict Trump (or if they do, it would be because of some separate scandal or controversy). However, all seven GOP senators who voted to acquit will likely face big challenges in their next races if they run (which is likely why Burr and Toomey have already announced they'll be retiring).

  Not because they criticised Trump and January 6 (if that were the case the vast majority of GOP senators would be primaried) - but because they took it a step farther and voted to impeach/convict him.

  If they'd criticised Trump, and then voted to acquit him anyway, they'd be a pretty mainstream Republican Senator. But voting to impeach or convict Trump (actually taking action and actually punishing Trump for what he did) is what makes one a traitor to the GOP. If Cheney, a devoted conservative, had stopped after criticising Trump and voted to acquit, she would still be the third-ranking Republican: but now, because of one crucial vote, she's a RINO and faces a very serious primary threat in 2022.

  This all goes to say that Sasse's criticisms matter only insofar that they influenced him to vote to convict Trump - if he had voted to acquit after criticising Trump, he'd probably be fine right now.

[beesley]

As of right now, I'd say it's somewhat unlikely. Sasse has been one of the more anti-Trump Senate Republicans, even prior to January 6 and the 2020 elections - but voting to convict Trump likely took it a bridge too far for many Nebraska Republicans; for example, local county chapters of the GOP in Nebraska have censured/reprimanded Sasse. I mean, I know many Nebraska Republicans knew that Sasse was somewhat critical of Trump and voted for him in 2020 - but while he criticised Trump, he did so occassionally and usually voted with the rest of the GOP; voting to convict Trump is another, more severe, refraction which Nebraska Republicans likely won't forget (or forgive), even in 2026. I'm very surprised that a majority of poll respondents indicate they think that Sasse will win.

I agree, but I think Sasse's anti Trump demeanour matters just as much as his vote - I think it makes him more vulnerable than Cassidy.

Yes, that's true...

Fair points. It was also mentioned in another thread that the Louisiana jungle primary system means that Cassidy will have more of an advantage - any crossover appeal + independent vote. I don't think these Republican primaries will be easily won things for either side's candidate, so the lack of one might favour Cassidy.

[Schiff for Senate]

As of right now, I'd say it's somewhat unlikely. Sasse has been one of the more anti-Trump Senate Republicans, even prior to January 6 and the 2020 elections - but voting to convict Trump likely took it a bridge too far for many Nebraska Republicans; for example, local county chapters of the GOP in Nebraska have censured/reprimanded Sasse. I mean, I know many Nebraska Republicans knew that Sasse was somewhat critical of Trump and voted for him in 2020 - but while he criticised Trump, he did so occassionally and usually voted with the rest of the GOP; voting to convict Trump is another, more severe, refraction which Nebraska Republicans likely won't forget (or forgive), even in 2026. I'm very surprised that a majority of poll respondents indicate they think that Sasse will win.

I agree, but I think Sasse's anti Trump demeanour matters just as much as his vote - I think it makes him more vulnerable than Cassidy.

Yes, that's true...

Fair points. It was also mentioned in another thread that the Louisiana jungle primary system means that Cassidy will have more of an advantage - any crossover appeal + independent vote. I don't think these Republican primaries will be easily won things for either side's candidate, so the lack of one might favour Cassidy.

I think it's pretty likely that Cassidy will lose as well, regardless of Democratic/independent turnout in his favour: https://talkelections.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=454433.msg8162487#msg8162487

[Alcibiades]

As of right now, I'd say it's somewhat unlikely. Sasse has been one of the more anti-Trump Senate Republicans, even prior to January 6 and the 2020 elections - but voting to convict Trump likely took it a bridge too far for many Nebraska Republicans; for example, local county chapters of the GOP in Nebraska have censured/reprimanded Sasse. I mean, I know many Nebraska Republicans knew that Sasse was somewhat critical of Trump and voted for him in 2020 - but while he criticised Trump, he did so occassionally and usually voted with the rest of the GOP; voting to convict Trump is another, more severe, refraction which Nebraska Republicans likely won't forget (or forgive), even in 2026. I'm very surprised that a majority of poll respondents indicate they think that Sasse will win.

I agree, but I think Sasse's anti Trump demeanour matters just as much as his vote - I think it makes him more vulnerable than Cassidy.

Yes, that's true. But I think Nebraskite voters understood that Sasse was slightly more critical of Trump than a majority of Senate Republicans even as they voted in 2020. They knew he wasn't as slavishly devoted to Trump as Ted Cruz (R-TX) or Lindsay Graham (R-SC). But after January 6, Sasse is significantly more critical of Trump than he was earlier - and he voted to convict Trump. I'm not saying his criticisms of Trump prior to voting to convict him were irrelevant - but they would be had he voted to acquit Trump, taken the 'safe route' and just come up with some lame excuse (such as, Trump's already left office, an excuse several Republicans who voted to acquit found comfort in reciting). If he had voted to acquit, I think his Nebraskite constituents would have likely forgiven Sasse for his criticisms and focused on the way he voted. Because being critical of Trump after January 6 was not something only the 17 congressional Republicans who voted to impeach/convict did - even Mitch McConnell criticized Trump in the wake of January 6. And I don't think it's going to make McConnell hated in Kentucky (although no one there really likes him), not nearly as much as Bill Cassidy in Louisiana - because he did the important thing: voting to acquit Trump. No one tried to argue that January 6 was good, or that Trump had absolutely nothing to do with it - the real questions were how much Trump had a hand in it, if he deserved to be impeached, and if a president could still be impeached/convicted after leaving office. If the answer to either of the latter two questions was 'no', then it didn't matter what you thought of January 6, because you had an excuse to vote against impeaching Trump. If the answer to both questions was in the affirmative, like it was for Sasse, then voting to convict Trump was the sensible thing to do (spoiler alert: it was). Going back to the McConnell example, the Kentucky GOP didn't vote to censure him because he criticised January 6; state parties only censured their senators when they decided to actually take action against Trump instead of just using empty words to criticise him - like when Richard Burr and Bill Cassidy voted to impeach, they were censured by  the NC and LA Republican parties, respectively. And returning to the example of McConnell, I don't think he's going to face a serious primary challenge if he runs in 2026 (a big if), and neither will any of the other 43 Senate Republicans who voted to convict Trump (or if they do, it would be because of some separate scandal or controversy). However, all seven GOP senators who voted to acquit will likely face big challenges in their next races if they run (which is likely why Burr and Toomey have already announced they'll be retiring). Not because they criticised Trump and January 6 (if that were the case the vast majority of GOP senators would be primaried) - but because they took it a step farther and voted to impeach/convict him. If they'd criticised Trump, and then voted to acquit him anyway, they'd be a pretty mainstream Republican Senator. But voting to impeach or convict Trump (actually taking action and actually punishing Trump for what he did) is what makes one a traitor to the GOP. If Cheney, a devoted conservative, had stopped after criticising Trump and voted to acquit, she would still be the third-ranking Republican: but now, because of one crucial vote, she's a RINO and faces a very serious primary threat in 2022. This all goes to say that Sasse's criticisms matter only insofar that they influenced him to vote to convict Trump - if he had voted to acquit after criticising Trump, he'd probably be fine right now.

Oh my God, no one is going to read this if you don’t bother to fix this visual abomination with paragraph breaks.

[Schiff for Senate]

As of right now, I'd say it's somewhat unlikely. Sasse has been one of the more anti-Trump Senate Republicans, even prior to January 6 and the 2020 elections - but voting to convict Trump likely took it a bridge too far for many Nebraska Republicans; for example, local county chapters of the GOP in Nebraska have censured/reprimanded Sasse. I mean, I know many Nebraska Republicans knew that Sasse was somewhat critical of Trump and voted for him in 2020 - but while he criticised Trump, he did so occassionally and usually voted with the rest of the GOP; voting to convict Trump is another, more severe, refraction which Nebraska Republicans likely won't forget (or forgive), even in 2026. I'm very surprised that a majority of poll respondents indicate they think that Sasse will win.

I agree, but I think Sasse's anti Trump demeanour matters just as much as his vote - I think it makes him more vulnerable than Cassidy.

Yes, that's true. But I think Nebraskite voters understood that Sasse was slightly more critical of Trump than a majority of Senate Republicans even as they voted in 2020. They knew he wasn't as slavishly devoted to Trump as Ted Cruz (R-TX) or Lindsay Graham (R-SC). But after January 6, Sasse is significantly more critical of Trump than he was earlier - and he voted to convict Trump. I'm not saying his criticisms of Trump prior to voting to convict him were irrelevant - but they would be had he voted to acquit Trump, taken the 'safe route' and just come up with some lame excuse (such as, Trump's already left office, an excuse several Republicans who voted to acquit found comfort in reciting). If he had voted to acquit, I think his Nebraskite constituents would have likely forgiven Sasse for his criticisms and focused on the way he voted. Because being critical of Trump after January 6 was not something only the 17 congressional Republicans who voted to impeach/convict did - even Mitch McConnell criticized Trump in the wake of January 6. And I don't think it's going to make McConnell hated in Kentucky (although no one there really likes him), not nearly as much as Bill Cassidy in Louisiana - because he did the important thing: voting to acquit Trump. No one tried to argue that January 6 was good, or that Trump had absolutely nothing to do with it - the real questions were how much Trump had a hand in it, if he deserved to be impeached, and if a president could still be impeached/convicted after leaving office. If the answer to either of the latter two questions was 'no', then it didn't matter what you thought of January 6, because you had an excuse to vote against impeaching Trump. If the answer to both questions was in the affirmative, like it was for Sasse, then voting to convict Trump was the sensible thing to do (spoiler alert: it was). Going back to the McConnell example, the Kentucky GOP didn't vote to censure him because he criticised January 6; state parties only censured their senators when they decided to actually take action against Trump instead of just using empty words to criticise him - like when Richard Burr and Bill Cassidy voted to impeach, they were censured by  the NC and LA Republican parties, respectively. And returning to the example of McConnell, I don't think he's going to face a serious primary challenge if he runs in 2026 (a big if), and neither will any of the other 43 Senate Republicans who voted to convict Trump (or if they do, it would be because of some separate scandal or controversy). However, all seven GOP senators who voted to acquit will likely face big challenges in their next races if they run (which is likely why Burr and Toomey have already announced they'll be retiring). Not because they criticised Trump and January 6 (if that were the case the vast majority of GOP senators would be primaried) - but because they took it a step farther and voted to impeach/convict him. If they'd criticised Trump, and then voted to acquit him anyway, they'd be a pretty mainstream Republican Senator. But voting to impeach or convict Trump (actually taking action and actually punishing Trump for what he did) is what makes one a traitor to the GOP. If Cheney, a devoted conservative, had stopped after criticising Trump and voted to acquit, she would still be the third-ranking Republican: but now, because of one crucial vote, she's a RINO and faces a very serious primary threat in 2022. This all goes to say that Sasse's criticisms matter only insofar that they influenced him to vote to convict Trump - if he had voted to acquit after criticising Trump, he'd probably be fine right now.

Oh my God, no one is going to read this if you don’t bother to fix this visual abomination with paragraph breaks.

I'll keep that in mind...thanks for the advice!

[MarkD]

No, because I don't think he will even run for another term.
He supports term limits, and even though not all supporters of term limits limit themselves, I think he is the kind of politician who will limit himself.
Plus, I think he's realistic enough to recognize that he has alienated himself from most of his party, and therefore he has little chance at winning the next Republican primary if he does run.
There's two good reasons for him to retire from politics in 2026. He can always return to a position as president of a college or university, like he was before running for the Senate in 2014.