 "Donald Trump")
In Maine, where Gov. Paul R. LePage backed Donald J. Trump’s campaign for the presidency, some political observers are wondering if the state will soon see results from that. Might Mr. Trump lend his support, for instance, to reversing a recent federal parkland designation that Mr. LePage strongly opposed?
In North Dakota, whose only member of the House of Representatives, Kevin Cramer, was an early supporter of Mr. Trump and advised him on energy policy, some suggest that Mr. Trump’s administration will allow the completion of the fiercely protested 1,170-mile Dakota Access oil pipeline, as Mr. Cramer has urged.
And in Iowa, where Gov. Terry E. Branstad pushed strongly for Mr. Trump, some believe that the new president will help the state hold on to its coveted status as the first in the nation to hold presidential caucuses.
In every race for the White House, there are early and fierce endorsers of the winning candidate who are then viewed, postelection, as having greater influence. Some are courted for cabinet spots, but more seek the president’s ear on state policies, federal funds and infrastructure projects. Rarely, though, are the lines as stark as in this election, largely because some Republican leaders took the unusual step of not endorsing Mr. Trump — early or ever. And what this means now for the ones who did is far from clear.
“It’ll be great to have a governor and a president who work well together, and I think it’ll benefit Florida greatly,” Brian Ballard, a Florida lobbyist, said of Gov. Rick Scott, another steadfast supporter of Mr. Trump, who posted photos on Twitter from a meeting he had with Mr. Trump on Thursday.
Could more federal help come when the next hurricane rolls into Florida? Might there be a way for the state to get a leg up in its longstanding water war with neighboring states?
“He’s a person Mr. Trump has known a long time,” Mr. Ballard said of the governor. “They work well together, and I think his counsel will be well received.”
The flip side, too, is being imagined. Will states with Republican governors who said they did not support Mr. Trump (like Massachusetts, Nevada and New Mexico) or who chose not to endorse him (like Michigan) be penalized?
After Gov. John Kasich of Ohio said he could not support Mr. Trump, Ohio “may not be at the top of the pecking order when it comes to discretionary dollars,” acknowledged Michael Gonidakis, a Republican political consultant who leads the state’s Right to Life organization.
“He’s going to reward those states where the leaders and establishment were out there supporting him,” Mr. Gonidakis said. “But Ohio won’t be last in line either. I think Donald Trump is a bigger person than that.”
Mr. Kasich declined an interview request through his spokesman.
Not everyone believes that Mr. Trump’s pre-election relations with local officials will matter all that much — or any more than they have in other administrations. John Hibbing, a political scientist at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln, said he was skeptical about how much political leverage the federal government would exert over states and cities.
Other political analysts noted that the new administration’s decisions on issues that affect states, like energy, environmental regulation and health care, might simply align philosophically with the wishes of Republican governors, regardless of whether they backed Mr. Trump in the election.
Still, many analysts said, lots of people will be making requests in the coming days, and those who backed him when others did not may have a simpler path.
“This governor has a number of times proposed welfare reforms, aimed at fighting fraud, that were viewed negatively by the federal government,” Mark Brewer, a political scientist at the University of Maine, said of Mr. LePage. “I’d put my money on him going back to ask on this, if he hasn’t already. Given the variety of options, you have to wonder what a LePage administration can do now that it couldn’t have requested under President Obama.”
The governor’s office did not respond to a phone inquiry.
Among Republicans at the local level, the issue seemed somewhat more removed.
After a recording emerged in October of Mr. Trump talking about sexually assaulting women, Jean Stothert, the mayor of Omaha, issued a statement condemning the comments as “repulsive.” And after Election Day, Ms. Stothert told reporters that she had chosen Senator John McCain of Arizona as a write-in candidate.
Was Ms. Stothert concerned about fallout for Omaha with the White House now?
“I certainly hope nothing like that would pan out,” she said in an interview. “I would hope no city would be retaliated on because of what position the mayor took.”
She added that she supported Mr. Trump now that he had been elected. “You do have to respect the office of the president,” she said. “You hope and pray they do well.”
In Tulsa, Okla., after delivering his final State of the City address last week, Mayor Dewey F. Bartlett Jr., who leaves office in early December, gave the crowd at a regional chamber of commerce some unexpected news. Asked what he would do next, Mr. Bartlett said he was trying to get in touch with Mr. Trump’s transition team to ask to be considered for secretary of transportation.
“I feel that it’s very reasonable that that would be considered because of the experience I’ve had in transportation,” Mr. Bartlett said in an interview, noting his past work for the state’s turnpike authority and as a pilot.
Mr. Bartlett was an outspoken supporter of Mr. Trump for months. It was a position he took criticism for as he sought re-election in June, and he said he thought it might have contributed to his loss. For the moment, he said last week, he was still trying to figure out how best to get in touch with the Trump team.
© 2016 The New York Times News Service
