The Only Member of Congress Donald Trump Endorsed Lost by 30 Points

Sad!

Rep. Renee Ellmers (R-N.C.) holds her great-nephew after winning re-election in 2014.Cindy Burnham/AP

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.


Rep. Renee Ellmers (R-N.C.), the recipient of Donald Trump’s first congressional endorsement this election season, also became the first incumbent to fall in a 2016 primary when she lost Tuesday’s North Carolina Republican congressional race to George Holding, a congressman who currently represents North Carolina’s 13th District, by 30 points.

Trump endorsed Ellmers, the two-term congresswoman for North Carolina’s 2nd District, on Saturday, just three days before North Carolina voters went to the polls. Her campaign used a recording of the endorsement in a final get-out-the-vote effort on Monday. “Renee was the first congresswoman to endorse me, and boy is she a fighter,” Trump said in the message. “Together, we will make America great again.”

A tea party darling known for suggesting that her Democratic opponent in the 2010 congressional race supported the building of a “victory mosque” near Ground Zero, Ellmers was plagued by attacks from right-leaning organizations in her bid to keep her seat in the recently redrawn 2nd District. The Koch-backed Americans for Prosperity and the Club for Growth each contributed six-figure amounts to the anti-Ellmers effort, citing the congresswoman’s willingness to compromise on spending legislation and her vote to reauthorize the Export-Import Bank as proof that her conservatism didn’t extend to her votes on major issues. But the most withering condemnations of Ellmers’ performance in Congress came from the anti-abortion groups that once saw her as a key ally. 

The trouble for Ellmers, typically a reliable pro-life vote in the House, began last year after she joined a group of Republican congresswomen in objecting to a provision in the proposed Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act that would have required rape victims to file a report with police before being permitted to have an abortion after 20 weeks. Ellmers, one of the provision’s most vocal opponents, argued that the requirement would do additional damage to the GOP’s image among younger and female voters. Democrats and women’s rights groups argued that the provision would not increase the number of rapes reported to police, citing Bureau of Justice Statistics figures that placed the average percentage of rapes and sexual assaults reported at fewer than 40 percent.

The congresswoman reportedly supported the version of the bill that did not contain that provision, but the anti-abortion group National Right to Life still cited Ellmers’ initial objection as a key reason for the legislation’s failure to pass. In March, the group sent a letter to Holding announcing its support. The Susan B. Anthony List, a group that works to elect anti-abortion women to Congress, also endorsed Holding in the primary and ran an online campaign urging voters to “Dump Ellmers.”

“Rep. Renee Ellmers was our ally until she led the charge to derail the Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act,” Marjorie Dannenfelser, the president of the Susan B. Anthony List and a North Carolina native, said in a statement after the primary results were announced. “That’s why we had to flex the political muscle of the pro-life movement. She has her own failed leadership to blame for this loss.”

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate