Special Poll
The former Senate GOP leader Mitch McConnell’s (R-Ky.) notable lack of comment is raising concerns within Tulsi Gabbard’s camp. Despite the silence, President-elect Trump’s transition team remains optimistic that Gabbard, nominated for director of national intelligence, could secure confirmation even if McConnell votes against her. However, any open opposition from McConnell could potentially encourage other Republicans to also withdraw their support.
Sources indicate that Gabbard’s team is not relying on McConnell’s vote. McConnell has been deliberately vague, neither publicly nor privately showing support for Trump’s nominees, according to three sources familiar with the situation. A decision by McConnell to vote against Gabbard could reignite tensions between him and Trump, potentially affecting significant future policy decisions, including those related to Ukraine and tariff adjustments.
On the Senate floor, McConnell emphasized his readiness to support nominees for senior national security roles who he believes will contribute positively to the administration’s goals of peace through strength. However, when pressed for a specific stance on Gabbard by CNN’s Manu Raju, McConnell remained noncommittal.
Gabbard is currently concentrating efforts on persuading members of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, where Republicans hold a narrow majority. Among these, Senators Susan Collins (R-Me.) and Todd Young (R-Ind.) are considered crucial swing votes. Gabbard has engaged with every Republican and five Democratic members of the committee, actively seeking their support.
Even if the committee does not recommend her, Majority Leader John Thune has the authority to bring Gabbard’s nomination before the full Senate for a vote, although this would signal a rocky path to confirmation.
As the nomination process unfolds, other Trump nominees seem to be securing firm commitments from senators, contrasting with Gabbard’s uncertain standing. The situation underscores the strategic importance and potential vulnerability of Gabbard’s nomination, viewed by Democrats as a critical and possibly influential battleground.