How has Turning Point USA supported or opposed specific Republican candidates?
Executive summary
Turning Point USA and its political arm, Turning Point Action/Turning Point Action PAC, have both actively backed and worked against specific Republican candidates — endorsing and mobilizing for some (notably Andy Biggs and Vice President J.D. Vance) while campaigning against other Republicans in intra‑party fights (including Karrin Taylor Robson and Rep. David Schweikert) — using endorsements, volunteer mobilization, paid media, local ballot‑chasing programs and new state PACs to shape GOP primaries and local races [1] [2] [3]. Critics and some Republican operatives warn TPUSA’s interventions can fracture GOP unity and sometimes clash with Trump’s own endorsements, while defenders point to the group’s volunteer network and media reach as valuable to candidates they back [1] [2] [4].
1. Turning Point’s endorsements and public boosters: picking favorites like Biggs and Vance
Turning Point’s leadership has publicly thrown its weight behind specific national and state figures: Erika Kirk’s on‑stage endorsement of Vice President J.D. Vance at TPUSA’s AmericaFest signaled organizational support for a prospective presidential successor to Trump [2] [5], and media reporting and internal materials show the group endorsing Andy Biggs in the Arizona governor contest and recruiting for his campaign through state‑focused operations [1] [3].
2. Electoral machinery: voter outreach, PAC launches and “chase the vote” tactics
Beyond speeches and endorsements, TPUSA’s affiliated entities have run concrete electoral programs: Turning Point Action has publicly listed endorsements and run volunteer voter‑contact operations, and its “chase the vote” program in 2024 hired canvassers focused on battleground states to boost turnout among young and low‑propensity Republican voters — activities that dovetail with the PAC model and a new Arizona PAC intended to influence the governor’s race [6] [7] [3].
3. Local power plays: backing challengers and flipping municipal seats
TPUSA’s influence extends into municipal contests where it has backed candidates like Dorean Taylor in Mesa, Arizona, contributing to the ouster of a local Republican who had supported Democrats — a high‑profile example of TPUSA‑backed local organizing translating into electoral change [3]. Political reporting and internal lists show the organization also targets state party structures and local leadership contests to reshape GOP institutions at the ground level [1].
4. Campaign spending, paid media and controversy over partisan activity
TPUSA has been accused of running paid ads for Republican candidates such as Kari Lake and inviting partisan figures to speak at events, prompting critics to argue the organization crossed lines for a tax‑exempt group and generating formal complaints; TPUSA’s movement into paid advertising and fundraising events — including high‑profile rallies and Mar‑a‑Lago fundraisers documented by media reporting — underscores how it leverages money and media to help favored candidates [8] [4].
5. Opposition to other Republicans and intra‑party fights
The group does not simply back incumbents: reporting shows TPUSA actively campaigned against GOP figures it deemed insufficiently aligned with its brand of conservatism — for example opposing Karrin Taylor Robson and Rep. David Schweikert while promoting Biggs, and attempting to undermine Arizona GOP chair Gina Swoboda despite her Trump endorsement — demonstrating a strategy of reshaping the party rather than reflexively supporting party establishment picks [1] [9].
6. Limits and counterarguments: influence, backlash and mixed electoral returns
While TPUSA’s endorsements and ground resources give candidates a visible boost and a volunteer army in early states, consultants and some reporters stress the organization is one actor among many and its preferences do not guarantee victory; political operatives cited in reporting say voters still care about electability and records, and TPUSA’s interventions can provoke intra‑GOP pushback and media scrutiny that blunt its impact [1] [2].