...
By Daniel Orton and Sam Stevenson
Share
Newsweek is a Trust Project member
See more of our trusted coverage when you search.Prefer Newsweek on Googleto see more of our trusted coverage when you search.
President Donald Trump’s latest jab at Senator Jon Ossoff has drawn a pointed response from the Georgia Democrat, who dismissed the insult while escalating his criticism of the president.
In a Truth Social post, Trump had praised Republican Congressman Mike Collins as a "highly respected" candidate and predicted he would defeat the incumbent Ossoff, who Trump called a "pathetic failed Dumocrat Senator," and referred to as "Os(jerk!)off."
Asked about the remarks on MS Now, Ossoff brushed off the jab, saying: "I didn’t think it was his best work, as nicknames go."
Read More on News
But the senator went further, using the moment to launch a broader critique of Trump’s leadership and conduct in office.
"More to the point, he is increasingly unstable, and I think that it flows from the fact that he is globally humiliated from this failed war," Ossoff said.
"This is a debacle for our national security. It is a debacle for the Trump presidency, and we see him lashing out and behaving erratically in ways that put the nation at risk."
Trump's original post also sought to minimize Ossoff’s national profile, claiming "nobody even knows who he is" despite the Democrat’s high-profile 2021 runoff victory that helped hand control of the Senate to his party. Trump added that he plans to hold "Big TRUMP Rallies" in Georgia to boost Collins’ campaign, signaling an active role in what is shaping up to be a key 2026 battleground.
The president's intervention underscores the importance of Georgia to Republican hopes of reclaiming the Senate majority. His endorsement—and willingness to campaign in person—could energize the GOP base, but it also risks galvanizing Democratic turnout in a state that has repeatedly delivered razor-thin margins in recent cycles.
...
Trump’s Nickname Strategy: A Defining Political Tactic
Trump’s attack on Ossoff is part of a long-running rhetorical strategy that has defined his campaigns and presidency.
He has repeatedly assigned short, memorable—and often derogatory—nicknames to rivals as a way of framing political opponents in voters’ minds.
Trump has used such nicknames across multiple election cycles as a way to criticize, insult, or otherwise express commentary about opponents and public figures.
The practice intensified during the 2016 Republican primaries and has remained a hallmark of Trump’s communication style, often reducing complex political critiques into short, repeatable labels designed for rallies and social media.
Notable Examples:
- "Crooked Hillary" for Hillary Clinton, coined during the 2016 presidential election to reinforce Trump’s attacks on her integrity, particularly around her use of a private email server.
- "Sleepy Joe" / "Crooked Joe" for former Democratic President Joe Biden, used across the 2020 campaign and beyond to question his energy and credibility, and to frame him as both weak and allegedly corrupt.
- "Lyin’ Ted" for Senator Ted Cruz, a key rival during the 2016 Republican primaries, reflecting Trump’s effort to paint Cruz as dishonest in a bitter intraparty contest.
- "Little Marco" for Marco Rubio, another former 2016 Republican primary opponent—though the label jars somewhat today, as Rubio later aligned with Trump politically and now serves within his governing coalition as Secretary of State.
- "Low Energy Jeb" for former Florida Governor Jeb Bush, widely seen as one of Trump’s most effective early attacks, helping to define Bush’s campaign as lacking momentum during the 2016 primary race.
- "Pocahontas" for Senator Elizabeth Warren, a long-running nickname Trump used to mock her claims of Native American ancestry—an issue that dates back to her academic career and a later DNA test showing distant ancestry several generations ago, but which drew sharp criticism, including from Native American groups, as racially insensitive and dismissive of tribal identity.
- "Alfred E. Neuman" for Texas Democrat James Talarico, revived in 2026 after Trump first used it against Pete Buttigieg in 2019, referencing the gap-toothed mascot of Mad magazine—traditionally used to imply a kind of naive or oblivious persona rather than a direct policy critique.
- "Crazy Bernie" for Senator Bernie Sanders, aimed at casting the progressive Democrat’s policies as extreme or outside the mainstream during both the 2016 and 2020 election cycles.
- "Mini Mike" for former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, deployed during the 2020 Democratic primary season to undercut Bloomberg’s stature and late entry into the race.
- "Pencil Neck" for Representative Adam Schiff, used during Trump’s first presidency in the context of the impeachment inquiry led by Schiff, underscoring Trump’s tendency to personalize conflicts with congressional critics.
- "Rocket Man" for North Korean leader Kim Jong-un, coined amid heightened tensions in 2017 before later diplomatic outreach, illustrating how Trump has used nicknames not only for domestic rivals but foreign leaders.
- "Crazy Nancy" for former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, used frequently during Trump’s first presidency to question her judgment and leadership, particularly during high-profile clashes such as budget standoffs and impeachment proceedings.
- "Leakin’ James Comey" for former FBI Director James Comey, coined after Trump fired him in 2017 and accused him of sharing details of private conversations with the press—an allegation that became central to their ongoing public feud.
- "Wacky Omarosa" for former White House aide Omarosa Manigault Newman, deployed after she left the administration and publicly criticized Trump, including releasing recordings from her time in the West Wing.
- "Cheatin’ Obama" for former President Barack Obama, part of a broader pattern of attacks in which Trump suggested—often without specifics—that Obama engaged in improper or unethical conduct, reinforcing longstanding political tensions between the two.
- "Foul-Mouthed Omar" for Democratic Representative Ilhan Omar of Minnesota, used in response to her outspoken criticism of Trump and his policies, framing her remarks as inappropriate while escalating their political clashes.
...
...
...
A High-Stakes Georgia Senate Contest
The latest exchange comes as Georgia’s 2026 Senate race solidifies into a key battleground.
Democratic incumbent Ossoff—first elected in a 2021 runoff that helped Democrats secure Senate control—is seeking re-election against Republican Mike Collins, who emerged from a competitive GOP primary and runoff.
The Republican primary itself illustrated both party divisions and eventual consolidation: Collins led early polling averages and ultimately secured the nomination after defeating rivals, including Derek Dooley.
Georgia’s political landscape remains closely divided. The Cook Political Report rates the race as "Lean Democratic," reflecting Ossoff’s incumbency advantage.
What Polls Show
Early general election polling suggests a narrow but consistent edge for Ossoff, while underscoring the competitiveness of the race.
- A RealClearPolitics polling average showed Ossoff ahead by roughly 2.8 percentage points (45.0 percent to 42.2 percent) in head-to-head matchups against Collins.
- Individual polls have varied but often place Ossoff slightly ahead, including surveys showing leads of 3–5 points.
- Earlier hypothetical matchups—before Republicans settled on a nominee—also indicated Ossoff as the general election favorite.
Polling, however, provides only a snapshot in time and can fluctuate as campaigns evolve, particularly in a state like Georgia where turnout dynamics are decisive.
What Forecasters Say
Professional election forecasters offer a broader view by combining polling with structural factors such as demographics, fundraising, and historical voting patterns.
Recent ratings include:
- Inside Elections: Toss-up, as of April 23, 2026
- RealClearPolitics: Toss-up, May 19, 2026
- Cook Political Report: Lean Democratic, April 13, 2026
- Sabato’s Crystal Ball: Lean Democratic, March 4, 2026
- Race to the WH: Likely Democratic, as of May 22, 2026
These ratings are not predictions of vote share, but assessments of which party currently holds the advantage. Analysts typically weigh multiple factors, including past election results, candidate strength, fundraising, and the national political environment, when assigning them.
Forecasters emphasize that ratings are dynamic and can shift as new data emerges—particularly as Election Day approaches and polling becomes more precise.
What Prediction Markets Say
Alongside polls and expert ratings, prediction markets have become a prominent—if controversial—tool for evaluating election outcomes.
Platforms such as Kalshi and Polymarket allow users to trade contracts based on whether a particular candidate will win, with prices reflecting the market’s collective estimate of probability.
On Polymarket, traders currently assign roughly 85 percent odds to a Democratic win in Georgia, versus about 14 percent for Republicans. Kalshi market pricing similarly indicates a strong probability of an Ossoff victory at 85 percent vs. 18 percent for Collins, aligning with that broader Democratic advantage.
Prediction markets offer real-time, money-backed signals of what informed participants think will happen—and in some cases can outperform polls.
But they reflect sentiment, not certainty, and can be skewed by participation, liquidity, or late-breaking events, so they are best viewed as one indicator rather than a definitive forecast.
What Happens Next
The Georgia Senate race is expected to intensify significantly in the coming months, with both parties investing heavily in advertising, turnout operations, and candidate appearances.
For now, Ossoff appears to hold a modest advantage according to polls, forecasters, and prediction markets—but the narrow margins underline how competitive Georgia remains.
Update: 06/18/26, 04:56 a.m. ET. This article has been updated with a new headline and Jon Ossoff's response to President Donald Trump's Truth Social post.
Submit Correction
View Editorial & AI Guidelines