Three Trump-endorsed candidates also lost in Republican primaries.
June 25 was one of the most jam-packed primary election days of the year: Democrats and Republicans in Colorado, New York, Utah and parts of South Carolina picked their party's nominees for this fall's elections.
Two incumbent representatives — Jamaal Bowman and Lauren Boebert — who have made enemies inside and outside their own parties faced serious challengers in their primaries, but they met with different fates. Bowman lost to a more moderate Democrat, George Latimer, in what was the most expensive congressional primary in history. However, Boebert easily prevailed in her Republican primary despite running in an entirely new district.
It was also a bad night for former President Donald Trump. Going into these primaries, only one candidate he had endorsed for Senate, House or governor had lost; tonight alone, three did, including his preferred candidate to replace retiring Sen. Mitt Romney in Utah.
In addition, the fields are now set in some key congressional matchups this fall. In Colorado, Republicans avoided nominating far-right candidates who could have put normally safe red districts in play. Meanwhile, Democrats picked their fighters in two competitive New York House districts that could help them reclaim the House majority.
538 reporters and contributors broke down the election results as they came in with live updates, analysis and commentary. Read our full live blog below.
Only one race we’re watching is still unresolved (the Republican primary for Utah’s 2nd District), so it’s time for some final thoughts. What big-picture takeaways do folks have from tonight’s results?
—Nathaniel Rakich, 538
The AP projects that state Sen. Mike Kennedy will win the GOP nomination in Utah’s 3rd District, which is currently held by Curtis. Kennedy leads the field with 36 percent, with 72 percent of the expected vote counted. Trampoline tycoon Case Lawrence is set to finish in second with 23 percent. Kennedy, a physician who ran an underdog primary campaign for Senate against Mitt Romney in 2018, will be a shoo-in in the fall.
—Jacob Rubashkin, Inside Elections
I think there's a decent argument that Burns's loss in South Carolina was a bit of bad luck. Neither Burns nor Biggs had held elected office before, and neither had significant backing from the state party generally, so that one may have been a bit of a toss-up. As Geoffrey mentioned, Burns had some baggage, so given two unknown candidates, that might have offset the benefit of the Trump endorsement.
But in the Utah Senate race and Colorado's 5th, Trump chose to back outsider-ish candidates rather than those who were supported by other Republican institutions or the party apparatus. Dave Williams was controversial from the start, running as a candidate while maintaining his position as party chair, which many saw as a conflict of interest. And neither Utah nor Colorado have ever been states that were particularly friendly to Trump's bombastic style, so his choice of outspoken MAGA candidates in those races may not have persuaded voters to those candidates.
—Mary Radcliffe, 538
Nathaniel, I think these were Trump’s riskiest set of endorsements so far. All three candidates had some serious weaknesses and they were running against credible alternatives. However, one thing I think is notable is that outside groups had no issue spending heavily against these particular Trump-backed candidates.
In South Carolina, Burns was on the receiving end of several hundred thousand dollars in independent expenditures from groups bankrolled by deep-pocketed GOP donors. Those same groups also spent against Dave Williams in Colorado. And in Utah? Well, Utah is among the least Trump-friendly of the heavily Republican states, and rather than back the more established conservative horse in the race, Brad Wilson, Trump looked further afield. And there was a lot of outside spending to back Curtis as well, while Staggs got little help.
—Jacob Rubashkin, Inside Elections
