Tag: planned parenthood
'Trad Wife' Influencers Spreading Far Right Disinformation Against Birth Control

'Trad Wife' Influencers Spreading Far Right Disinformation Against Birth Control

Cancer. Infertility. Unintended abortion.

These are just a few of the fears young patients bring to Dr. Bayo Curry-Winchell, a family physician in Reno, Nevada. For some of her patients, she said, taking birth control pills is like wearing a scarlet letter.

“Taking the pill has almost become a bad thing, where you won’t fit in if you’re taking it.”

Curry-Winchell, medical director for the Saint Mary’s Urgent Care Group, said the trend away from hormonal birth control has become pervasive in recent years among her patients between about 14 and 32 years old. According to a recent KFF poll, that’s the same age group most likely to say they get their health information from social media.

When she talks with young patients, Curry-Winchell hears concerns about sinister long-term impacts of hormonal birth control—and the language often echoes conservative influencers who have no medical training.

Doctors say what is at stake is not whether every patient chooses the pill or an IUD, but whether they can make evidence-based decisions about preventing pregnancy in a country with some of the highest maternal mortality rates among wealthy nations.

Misinformation is reshaping exam-room conversations

Curry-Winchell and other doctors interviewed for this story say they have no problem with patients who are not interested in hormonal birth control. What they’re worried about is a growing group of influencers who are robbing young women of the ability to make informed choices.

Dr. Mariko Rajamand, a Reno OB-GYN and founder of FEM Women’s Wellness, said she now meets about three to five patients a day, typically in their early 20s, who are completely resistant to hormonal birth control. On one recent day she saw six patients under 25; two had IUDs and four refused to consider any hormonal contraceptive method at all.

Rajamand said she now spends around 15 minutes in many new-patient appointments just dispelling misinformation. “I tell them that my goal is not to hurt you, it’s to help you,” she said. “I am going to partner with you. I will never push you to do something that you’re not comfortable with.”

Usually, after two or three visits, she said, patients who absolutely do not want to get pregnant but initially opposed hormones decide they are less afraid of hormonal birth control than they thought.

Curry-Winchell, a mother of two young daughters, said countering disinformation about hormonal birth control starts with building “a level of trust and comfort” and letting young women know she is not going to judge them. “I tell them that I want to be their co-pilot,” she said.

“I’ll just be curious and ask, ‘What do you know? Because I don’t know what you know,’” she said. “We just make it a conversation, and I can hit that misinformation in a more targeted way once I know where a patient is coming from in terms of her hesitancy and concerns.”

The problem is bigger than any one clinic. On social media, disinformation about the safety and side effects of the pill and other forms of hormonal birth control has become so pervasive that the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists issued a nationwide fact sheet on contraception misinformation in October. A National Library of Medicine study published in 2025 found it has become “increasingly difficult to distinguish accurate content from misleading information” about contraceptives on TikTok and urged providers to be ready to counter online myths in the exam room.

Influencers push fringe claims to massive audiences

Social media posts about health issues often lack context, and algorithms reward content that is sensational and emotionally charged. Influencers rely on such algorithms for views and, in turn, their paychecks.

One such influencer is podcaster Candace Owens, who has millions of followers on YouTube, Instagram and TikTok and proudly describes herself as a “full-time wife and mother” who does not believe in birth control. Katie Miller, the wife of White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller, told her hundreds of followers on X that the pill is “poison for your body and mind.

Alex Clark, a conservative “health and wellness” podcaster, testified in the Senate and later told her hundreds of thousands of followers that women were “tricked” by pediatricians into going on the pill as teenagers to clear up acne or ease cramps. Clark has also claimed that women who stop taking the pill find they are no longer attracted to their husbands.

Then there is Elon Musk, who has fathered 14 children and has repeatedly insisted that declining birth rates are the “biggest danger to civilization.” In an interview with Tucker Carlson, he claimed hormonal birth control changes women’s personalities and preferences in partners. Carlson has more than 5 million subscribers on YouTube. A clip of that conversation now has hundreds of thousands of likes and more than 100,000 shares on TikTok.

Why women are primed to distrust

Dr. Sharon Thompson, an OB-GYN in Phoenix, said one reason influencers have made such headway sowing distrust is the way medicine has treated women for generations.

She said historically women have been brushed off and dismissed. “Medicine has a bad habit of attributing many things that women complain of to hormones,” Thompson said. “Always in history people just told women what to do—and now this is the pushback.”

“The sad truth for a woman is that she can take her symptoms to her primary doctor and she can not be listened to or she gets brushed off,” she said. “It drives me bananas… when women feel like they are getting the runaround or they aren’t getting equal treatment.”

Michigan-based OB-GYN physician assistant Nikki Vinckier has seen the fallout firsthand. She said she was having “multiple of the same conversations every single day” with young patients asking to come off hormones and try “natural family planning,” a method they had seen promoted on social media.

Vinckier said the challenge is to listen “without gaslighting their experiences and saying, ‘Oh no, none of these side effects exist.’” While studies show hormonal birth control is safe for most patients, she said, there are women who “don’t fit the mold,” and it is condescending to tell a patient her experience is not valid.

“It’s important not to negate the experience of any patient,” Vinckier said. “I want to educate them and empower them to make their own choice.”

“Natural” methods sound safer than they are

Because of fears being pushed on social media, doctors say many patients now come in asking for a “natural” form of birth control instead of the pill, an IUD, or another hormonal method of contraception.

Natural fertility awareness methods require women to take their temperature every morning at the exact same time, check their cervical mucus discharge daily, chart their cycles and abstain from sex for at least 11 days a month when they calculate they might be fertile.

In reality, natural family planning or fertility awareness fails 22to 25 percent of the time to prevent pregnancy in a given year, according to the National Library of Medicine.

“Young women patients often feel that ‘I should be doing it all natural’ or ‘You’re doing birth control the wrong way,’ or ‘You’re not in tune with your body if you do a medication,’” Curry-Winchell said. “They think that if it’s natural, it’s the safest and most in tune with their bodies.”

She said the “beautiful packaging” of natural fertility awareness kits makes the method look like a simple process, but in reality “takes a lot of consistency.” “Plus, our hormones, the way we work, the way we operate, we’re all different. We’re not one-size-fits-all.”

Rajamand said she has “a whole conversation about natural family planning—what it is and what it isn’t.”

“It really only works for the woman who is ovulating perfectly and I have yet to meet that woman,” she said. “If they are going to go that route, then I’ll have a serious discussion about the rate of pregnancy.”

“I’ll ask, ‘If you get pregnant, is that OK?’” she said. “If their answer is yes, then it’s a nonissue, but if they say, ‘That’s a problem,’ then I say, ‘Let’s come up with a Plan B.’”

Wisconsin OB-GYN and complex family planning specialist Dr. Carley Zeal said she is especially concerned about enthusiasm for “natural” methods in states with strict abortion bans. When patients tell her they want to avoid hormones, she works with them “to find whatever contraceptive method is going to work best for them.”

“It’s not my job to tell them they are wrong or that symptoms they may be experiencing are not real, because their experience is their experience and everybody’s side effects or experience with different medications is important to respect,” Zeal said. “But it’s my job to tell them the data.”

What the data actually say

There is cause for careful consideration before choosing a method of contraception, and doctors acknowledge that hormonal birth control can have side effects. Studies have linked hormonal methods to symptoms like altered stress responses and reduced libido, and one large study found a very small increase in depression among girls ages 15 to 19 using certain hormonal IUDs.

ACOG warns its members that while hormonal birth control can have minor side effects, “those minor side effects can be exaggerated to instill fear and uncertainty in people considering using contraception.”

One of the greatest concerns doctors hear now is a belief that hormonal birth control is “pumping” women full of extra hormones. Thompson said that is simply not true.

“The idea that hormones are harmful is false. Most people, including influencers, don’t realize this,” she said. “When you are using a hormonal method of birth control, if you were to average your hormones out over the month, they are actually less than your ovaries make naturally.”

“That’s why we can use hormonal birth control to treat some conditions,” she added. “Like migraines—they can get better if you have them cyclically—or endometriosis pain. We’re actually dialing your system down.”

Curry-Winchell said the hormones involved—estrogen and progesterone—are ones “you naturally have.” “Women all have a level of these hormones naturally,” she said. “If anything, the pill is just replicating what your body would do naturally to prevent a pregnancy. They’re not ‘pouring’ extra hormones into you.”

She also noted that estrogen and progesterone “aren’t just important to your reproductive health but to your brain health, your gut and your bones…. These are hormones that are vital to you being able to function.”

A political project to stigmatize the pill

Beyond individual influencers who build careers capitalizing on women’s fears, major conservative institutions have begun amplifying the same talking points about hormonal birth control.

The Heritage Foundation, an influential right-wing think tank that produced Project 2025—a blueprint Donald Trump’s administration has now implemented—has published several essays recycling influencer myths about contraception. A newer Heritage “family” blueprint goes further, calling for limiting contraception, IVF and other fertility treatments as part of a decades-long plan to “save the family” by undoing feminist gains.

In an October 2025 essay, Heritage analyst Jennifer Galardi, who is neither a doctor nor a scientist, urged Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. to “grill the pill” and questioned its safety. Another Heritage piece by policy analyst Emma Waters repeats similar claims without providing scientific evidence, while criticizing the FDA for approving an over-the-counter hormonal birth control pill.

This is not just about “concerns” over side effects. It’s part of a broader project sometimes branded as “pronatalist” or “trad wife” politics. Heritage and allied thinkers explicitly argue that women’s ability to control their fertility is a root cause of declining marriage and birth rates, and promote policies that would push women to marry young, have more children, and rely financially on husbands rather than on degrees or careers. Weakening access to contraception is one way to make that traditional, male‑headed family model harder to opt out of.

Vice President JD Vance has said he wants “more babies” in the US and derided women without children as “childless cat ladies” who are “miserable,” reinforcing a political narrative that casts delaying or preventing pregnancy as a social problem, not a personal decision.

Doctors say they now find themselves countering not only TikTok rumors but also the implied message from powerful politicians and think tanks that women who use birth control—or opt not to have children—are doing something wrong.

Pregnancy is more dangerous than contraception

For Dr. Alhambra Frarey, chief medical officer of Planned Parenthood Southeastern Pennsylvania and a complex family planning specialist, the core medical reality is simple: “Being pregnant is far more dangerous to a woman’s health than any contraceptive.”

“Pregnancy is much more common if you are not on birth control and the health risks of pregnancy are much more significant than from any form of contraception,” she said.

The United States has the highest maternal mortality rate of any high-income country in the world: 22 US women out of every 100,000 die during pregnancy, childbirth or in the months after giving birth. In Canada the rate is 8.4, and in Great Britain it’s 5.5.

“Let’s be real,” Thompson said. “This isn’t about women’s safety. Not having a baby is safer than carrying a pregnancy to term, especially in America where our maternal mortality rates are still way higher than other countries.”

Hormonal methods, by contrast, are extremely effective at preventing pregnancy when used correctly. The IUD is more than 99 percent effective and can last up to 10 years. The pill is about 99 percent effective with perfect use and 93 percent effective with typical use; implants like Nexplanon are also around 99 percent effective, and the Depo-Provera injection is about 95 percent effective.

Clinicians answer with facts—and trust

Thompson said her starting point with patients is not a specific method, but their lives. “My role isn’t to convince you to be on birth control pills,” she said. “What I want to do is talk to you about your life goals.”

“What will make your life enjoyable and fulfilling? And if one of your goals is to finish graduate school, to advance your career, or even to build your relationship with the person that you are with, then it may be in your interest to put off childbearing,” she said. “Birth control pills can help you do that, if that’s the right method for you. They’re not the only method. But if putting off childbearing is right for you, let’s talk about the tools I have to help you do that.”

Thompson and Curry-Winchell both said they are frustrated that, as physicians bound by medical ethics, they stick to evidence-based information while wellness influencers face no such constraint.

“Wellness content creators have no oversight,” Curry-Winchell said. “Versus, as a physician I’m beholden. I could be held liable if something happens to you.”

“I cannot lie to women. I must give them information that is evidence-based,” Thompson said. “We have to have scientific validity behind what we tell people, which social media influencers do not.”

“They made me go to school for a long time so I can give you quality information—pros and cons—and I put it in front of you like a great meal at a restaurant and you don’t have to like it,” she said. “You can pick and choose. But on social media they have no such obligation. They can tell you whatever. They can give you their opinion that they made up yesterday in their living room.”

To help patients find providers who will listen and offer that kind of counseling, Curry-Winchell has created the national directory Clinicians Who Care. The site lists physicians and medical providers who, she said, “take the time to listen to and believe in their patients.”

For Rajamand, the stakes could not be clearer. “The greatest liberating thing for women in our history of human culture has been birth control,” she said. “Thankfully society today says that we’re worth more than just as baby producers. That we have more value.”

Bonnie Fuller is the former CEO and editor-in-chief of HollywoodLife.com and former editor-in-chief of Glamour, Cosmopolitan, Marie Claire, and USWeekly. Follow her substack, Bonnie Fuller: Your Body Your Choice.

Reprinted with permission from The Nevadan.

Missouri Republican Urges Death Penalty For Abortion Providers

Missouri Republican Urges Death Penalty For Abortion Providers

States across the country are introducing and passing legislation to limit abortion access. The moves in Republican majority states follow the passing of a Mississippi law, which is currently making its way to the Supreme Court. The law has the ability to limit abortion rights across the country by overturning Roe v. Wade. The most recent state to join those seeking to backtrack women’s rights is Missouri.

Missouri lawmakers are taking restricting abortion to the next level: They are not only stopping residents from obtaining abortions in state, but suggesting that those who travel in order to obtain them also be subject to lawsuits.

State Rep. Mary Elizabeth Coleman proposed a measure that would make performing an abortion on a Missouri resident—or even helping a Missouri resident get one—illegal. A similar law was passed in Texas, in which citizens were granted the ability to enforce the law through lawsuits.

“If your neighboring state doesn’t have pro-life protections, it minimizes the ability to protect the unborn in your state,” Coleman told The Washington Post on Tuesday.

According to the Post, Coleman’s measure would “target anyone even tangentially involved in an abortion performed on a Missouri resident, including the hotline staffers who make the appointments, the marketing representatives who advertise out-of-state clinics, and the Illinois- and Kansas-based doctors who handle the procedure. Her amendment also would make it illegal to manufacture, transport, possess, or distribute abortion pills in Missouri.”

Because the state has ended most surgical abortions, many women are traveling to Kansas or Illinois to seek care. Additionally, while the state has a ban on abortion after eight weeks, the state cannot enforce the ban while a legal challenge to the restriction makes its way through federal court. Coleman hopes abortion ends not just in Missouri but throughout the entire country. In 2021, Missouri only had one clinic in the entire state.

But Coleman isn’t the only GOP lawmaker in the state who has drastic penalties planned for those who have or help others with abortions.

During the debate for his bill that would make it a felony offense to transport or make available “abortion-inducing devices or drugs” in the Missouri, state Rep. Brian Seitz not only advocated for prison time for those in favor of abortion, but mentioned the death penalty. Seitz noted that he felt his proposal was not “strict enough” and would leave the conversation open in regard to implementing the death penalty for people facilitating abortions.

Although this may be shocking to hear, it’s not the first time a GOP lawmaker has expressed similar thoughts. In Texas, a lawmaker filed a bill that would not only abolish and criminalize abortions but leave those who perform the procedure to face criminal charges that could carry the death penalty.

Of course, like with other laws restricting abortions, there is a lack of exceptions. In this case, a greater penalty is placed on individuals who help people with ectopic pregnancies get abortion-inducing medication. According to the Mayo Clinic, “an ectopic pregnancy can cause your fallopian tube to burst open. Without treatment, the ruptured tube can lead to life-threatening bleeding.”

While these measures have the chance of being defeated, the impact remains. Many attorneys believe that the threat of the proposal alone may cause doctors in nearby states to stop performing abortions on Missouri residents.

But that is not the only issue to arise in Missouri. According to The Missouri Independent, lawmakers also introduced an amendment to a bill that creates a sexual assault survivors bill of rights in which “obscene” material would be criminalized in schools. The amendment is expected to derail the sexual assault survivors bill.

Reprinted with permission from Daily Kos

Pro-choice protest

Texas Judge Blocks Vigilante Lawsuit Against Planned Parenthood

Reprinted with permission from Daily Kos

In a small but significant victory against Texas' new draconian law limiting abortion access, a judge has temporarily blocked one of the state's largest forced-birth groups and its vigilante pals from suing the nation's largest provider of reproductive healthcare. The decision, which is by no means a permanent solution, comes as corporations headquartered or operating within the Lone Star State are also speaking out against the law.

Reuters:

Travis County District Judge Maya Guerra Gamble granted Planned Parenthood a temporary restraining order against the anti-abortion group, Texas Right to Life, blocking the group and its allies from using an unusual mechanism of the Texas law that enables private citizens to sue anyone who provides or "aids or abets" an abortion after six weeks.
[...]
Guerra Gamble said in her three-page written order that allowing the so-called private enforcement mechanism to go forward while Planned Parenthood took further legal action would cause "probable, irreparable and imminent injury" that could not be cured later.
[...]
The Travis County restraining order does not bar others from using the law against Planned Parenthood or other abortion providers in Texas. A hearing on a possible further injunction was set for Sept. 13.

As noted by Planned Parenthood Federation of America's vice president for public policy litigation and law Helene Krasnoff, while Guerra Gamble's decision is one worth celebrating, it is not enough to protect Texans' access to reproductive healthcare. "[M]ake no mistake: this is not enough relief for Texas," she said in a statement.

Meanwhile, the corporate wing of the nation is beginning to speak out. Two top dating apps based in Texas were quick to take a stance against the obscene new law.. Austin-based Bumble announced its plans on Twitter hours after the Supreme Court declined to block the law from taking effect at midnight on Wednesday.

As CNBC reported Thursday, the Match dating empire wasn't far behind.

Match Group CEO Shar Dubey also announced in a memo to employees that she would personally create a fund to support Texas-based workers and dependents who needed to seek care outside of the state, a company spokesperson confirmed to CNBC.
Match, based in Dallas, owns a bevy of dating companies, including its namesake app Match along with Hinge, Tinder and OKCupid.
"As I have said before, the company generally does not take political stands unless it is relevant to our business. But in this instance, I personally, as a woman in Texas, could not keep silent," Dubey said in the memo. "Surely everyone should see the danger of this highly punitive and unfair law that doesn't even make an exception for victims of rape or incest. I would hate for our state to take this big step back in women's rights," she added.

Dating apps aren't the only businesses speaking out.

Lyft and Uber Technologies Inc. said they will cover all legal fees for the ride-hail companies' drivers sued under a law that puts in place a near-total ban on abortion.
Lyft will also donate $1 million to women's health provider Planned Parenthood, chief executive Logan Green said on Twitter.
[...]
Uber CEO Dara Khosrowshahi tweeted in response to Green's announcement that his company would cover drivers' legal fees in the same way, thanking Green for taking the initiative.

Yet, as The New York Times notes, other companies' silence on the issue is deafening.

When Texas lawmakers advanced a restrictive voting rights bill this year, American Airlines and Dell Technologies, two of the state's biggest employers, were early and vocal critics of the effort.
But this week, as a law that prohibits most abortions after about six weeks took effect in Texas, both companies declined to comment on the measure.
[...]
Two dozen major companies contacted by The New York Times on Friday either did not reply or declined to comment. Among those that would not say something were McDonald's, a sponsor of International Women's Day; PwC, a major supporter of diversity and inclusion efforts; and Coca-Cola and Delta Air Lines, which led a corporate backlash last year against a restrictive voting bill in Georgia, where they have their headquarters.
Many of the biggest employers in Texas, including AT&T, Oracle, McKesson and Phillips 66, declined to comment. Even companies that are quick to speak up on social issues, including Patagonia and Levi's, did not say anything about the new law. And Catalyst, a nonprofit organization that teams up with big companies to "build workplaces that work for women," declined to comment.

After Texas Gov. Greg Abbott crowed about companies' support of the anti-choice law, namedropping Tesla's Elon Musk, the electric car pioneer offered a lukewarm response.

As Fortune noted on Friday, the seeming indifference of corporations to the Texas law is startling … and a bit of a change.

In 2019, almost 200 corporate leaders stood up for abortion rights. Amid a rash of antiabortion legislation throughout the U.S. South, they said: no more. Abortion restrictions are bad for business.
[...]
And yet this time around, the business backlash is missing.
"Their silence is shameful," says Shelley Alpern, director of shareholder advocacy for Rhia Ventures who has worked to galvanize companies around reproductive rights. "Their very integrity is at stake."

Fortune reached out to "about a dozen" companies about the new law, but most did not respond. What will it take to get the nation's industry to flex their significant capital and muscle when it comes to reproductive rights? It's unclear. But as Fortune notes, recent research indicates that as much as two-thirds of the college-educated workforce would refuse a new job in Texas due to the new law.

Glenn Youngkin

VIDEO: Virginia Republican Nominee Admits Hiding His Extreme Views To Win

Reprinted with permission from American Independent

Virginia's Republican nominee for governor reportedly told supporters at a fundraising event in June that he couldn't reveal his true position on abortion rights until after he's elected.

His reasoning: He needs the independent vote to ensure his victory in November.

Glenn Youngkin, the venture capitalist running as a Republican in Virginia's gubernatorial race against former Democratic Virginia Gov. Terry McAuliffe, made the comments to Lauren Windsor, who runs The Undercurrent, a self-described "grassroots political web-show" funded by the liberal advocacy group American Family Voices.

The American Independent obtained the video footage from Windsor, who also shared it with MSNBC.

In the video, Windsor begins speaking with Youngkin about her feigned support for things like "getting a fetal heartbeat bill here like they did in Texas, or defunding Planned Parenthood."

A man who identifies himself only as "Pete" also appears in the video, though his full identity is not immediately clear.

Youngkin responds by telling Windsor that she's "on the right path," adding that he initially wants to work on abortion issues he says a "majority of Virginians" support, including to "stop using taxpayer money for abortions" and banning "abortions all the way up until the last week before birth." (Taxpayer money is not used to fund abortions.)

When Windsor pushes him more, Youngkin says that he's unable to speak much on the issue for fear of losing the independent voters he says he needs to win Virginia's gubernatorial contest in November.

"I'm gonna be really honest with you, the short answer is, in this campaign, I can't," Youngkin says after "Pete" asks him whether he plans to "take it to the abortionists."

"When I'm governor, and I have a majority in the House, we can start going on offense," he continues. "But as a campaign topic, sadly, that in fact won't win my independent votes that I have to get. So you'll never hear me support Planned Parenthood, what you'll hear me talk about is actually taking back the radical abortion policies that Virginians don't want."

In a separate video from The Undercurrent, shared with the American Independent, Youngkin again talks about his need to appeal to independent voters in order to win the gubernatorial race.

"We're going after those middle 1 million voters who are, sadly, gonna decide this — have decided elections for the last 10 to 12 years in Virginia, and they've moved a bit away from us," Youngkin tells a room of supporters. "We're going to get them. We just got back a whole bunch of data today, and we're winning this group. This is the group that we have to go get."

He continues, "What's most interesting in the dataset that comes back is the decisions, the issues, and the emotions of this group are nearly 100 percent aligned with Republicans. That's because the issues that are gonna decide this race are, first and foremost, the economy and jobs — 25 percent of these targeted folks say that that's their most important issue. Second issue: public safety. Third issue: schools. These are the issues that swing voters, these are the issues that Republicans are most focused on."

Both videos appear to have been taken at a June 17 fundraising event with the Loudoun County Republican Women's Club.

In a statement to the American Independent, a Youngkin spokesperson denied that the Virginia Republican was hiding his positions.

"This deceptively recorded audio demonstrates that Glenn Youngkin says the same thing no matter who he is talking to, and that Terry McAuliffe's allegations about him are false," the spokesperson said, referring to an original transcript of the video, in which Windsor appears to identify herself to Youngkin only as a "Michelle," which Windsor later said was her middle name.

Abortion rights advocate and former Planned Parenthood president Cecile Richards, who is currently serving as co-chair of the left-leaning opposition research group American Bridge 21st Century, meanwhile, accused Youngkin of "tricking Virginians into thinking he's reasonable — when it's clear that he stands with Donald Trump and the extremists of the Republican Party." (The American Independent is funded in part by American Bridge.)

"This should terrify women who care about making their own health care decisions and doing what is best for their families," Richards said.

Republicans, for their part, have not won a gubernatorial contest in Virginia since 2009, and have lost every presidential contest in the state since 2008.

In 2020, President Joe Biden beat then-President Donald Trump in Virginia by 10 points, nearly doubling Hillary Clinton's 5.4-point win over Trump in 2016.

Youngkin has tried to pivot to a more moderate message in order to change his party's fortunes. However, his ties to Trump — who is unpopular in Virginia — may complicate things.

Shortly after Youngkin won the GOP nomination, Trump gave Youngkin a glowing endorsement, saying "Glenn is pro-Business, pro-Second Amendment, pro-Veterans, pro-America, he knows how to make Virginia's economy rip-roaring, and he has my Complete and Total Endorsement!"

Still, Youngkin cannot afford to lose Republican base voters in the state by moving too far to the middle.

The push and pull between appealing to both moderates and the GOP base is is the exact conundrum 2017 GOP nominee Ed Gillespie — once hailed for his more moderate Republican profile — had in the state.

Rather than court independent voters, Gillespie chose to go after the Trump-supporting base, running racist ads that voiced support for Trump's anti-immigrant platform. Gillespie went on to lose to now-Democratic Gov. Ralph Northam by 9 points.

Republicans are heavily targeting Virginia's gubernatorial election, hoping a win here could start a narrative that Republicans are on track to win majorities in the House and Senate in the 2022 midterm elections.

"This is going to be a test about whether or not a candidate can appeal to a Trump base in a nominating battle then pivot and win suburban voters. [Republicans] nominated someone who looks like he might have the capacity to do that," Virginia-based political analyst Bob Holsworth told the Los Angeles Times in May.

Youngkin is set to face off with McAuliffe, who is seeking a second, non-consecutive term, in November. In Virginia, governors can only serve four years in a row, and cannot run for another consecutive four years.

A poll from mid-June found McAuliffe with a 4-point lead over Youngkin.

The nonpartisan Cook Political Report rates the race a Lean Democratic contest.

Shop our Store

Headlines

Editor's Blog

Corona Virus

Trending

World