Fresher faces, same names: Meet New England's new crop of politicians' relatives who are looking at elected office

King's dad is Angus King Jr., the third-term US senator and former two-term governor of Maine, who remains one of the most popular politicians in the state. An entrepreneur and businessman, the younger King, 54, has not previously run for elected office or held any government position.
And King may have a rival in the Democratic primary for governor who also has a parent in Congress: Hannah Pingree, the 48-year-old daughter of Representative Chellie Pingree, who has held the state's 1st Congressional District since 2008. Hannah Pingree, a former speaker of the Maine House, is widely considered to be mulling a bid for governor after she recently stepped down from a post in the office of current Governor Janet Mills.
Get Starting Point
A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday.
Enter Email
Sign Up
And then there is a scion of one of Maine's — and the nation's —most
Advertisement
Across the border in New Hampshire, another political dynasty could be perpetuated in 2026: Stefany Shaheen, a 51-year-old former Portsmouth city councilor, is running for New Hampshire's 1st Congressional District. But most voters will know her mother best: Jeanne Shaheen, who has served as US senator from New Hampshire since 2008 and, before that, was a three-term governor. Her father, Billy Shaheen, serves on the Democratic National Committee and is a former US attorney.
Advertisement
Children of American politicians have followed in their parents' footsteps since John Quincy Adams, the progeny of Massachusetts' first political dynasty, won the presidency 25 years after his father. But the current crop of candidates from well-known families comes at a time when many voters, Democrats in particular, are increasingly dissatisfied with their established (read: older)
political class and are hungry for new faces.
Whether candidates with different faces but the same names can gain traction in 2026 will test voters' long-standing fondness for political dynasties, which has been a hallmark — sometimes uncomfortably — of American politics.
Former New Hampshire governor Chris Sununu knows something about running with a famous political last name: He is the son of a former governor who also served as White House chief of staff for the elder George Bush, and his brother is a former US senator. In an interview, Sununu said there are two fundamentals of running in a situation like this.
'The first key is to surprise people either in terms of your personality or approach to policy. You just have to be a little bit different so people take notice, but you don't want to shock them into disbelief,' said Sununu, who broke with his relatives by supporting abortion rights.
'The second bit of advice is to actively campaign retail style so people can meet you and not rely on just money and television ads,' he added. 'Being out there a lot and seen as earning the vote does a lot to quell the nepo baby argument that you are always going to hear.'
Advertisement
Dan Kildee, a former Democratic congressman from Michigan, said the environment facing candidates from political families has changed significantly since 2012, when he won the seat left by his uncle, Dale Kildee.
That's 'because the sort of populist, anti-institutional sentiment is something you see in both parties now and is pretty prevalent,' Kildee said. 'My advice would be, don't ignore this factor, don't assume it's a net positive.'
'When your name represents the establishment, it does require you to take seriously the obligation to try to separate yourself and define yourself separately from conventional politics,' Kildee said. 'And that's hard.'
In a statement to the Globe, King III said that asking whether having his father is helpful in his campaign is like asking Wayne Gretzky's son if it helps to have Gretzky as his dad. 'The answer is: of course,' he said.
'I was lucky to grow up having dinner every night with one of Maine's great public servants. He helped shape me into who I am today,' King III said. 'And just like my dad, I'm always looking to bring people together to solve the hardest problems.'
Stefany Shaheen told the Globe she gets questions at campaign house parties about her lineage, saying she is 'incredibly proud' of her mom but emphasized she is running as her own person. She cited her years of advocacy for advancing medical research for people like her daughter, who was diagnosed with type 1 diabetes at age eight.
Advertisement
'Now, I'm running to fight for all New Hampshire and fight back against what Donald Trump, Bobby Kennedy, and the Republicans are doing to crush medical research and slash Medicaid,' said Shaheen. 'But I know how hard campaigns are having watched it up close, and I know I am going to have to work twice as hard,' given the heightened expectations of her last name.
A spokesperson for Senator Shaheen referred the Globe to her post on X touting her daughter's resume, which 'has shown me she has the experience, heart and determination needed to make a difference' for the state.
Hannah Pingree did not respond to a request for comment.
Elsewhere in the country, other political children are seeking office, including Adelita Grijalva, who is running for the Arizona congressional seat left vacant by the death of her father, Representative Raúl Grijalva.
But the phenomenon appears most pronounced in New England, where the success of famous families has been a feature, not a bug of politics. Massachusetts has its Kennedys and Lodges, Rhode Island its Chaffees, New Hampshire its Greggs and Sununus; both Connecticut and Maine claim the Bushes.
'In some sense, these political families are an affront to the old Yankee ethos of individualism and getting ahead by working hard,' said Erin O'Brien, political science chair at the University of Massachusetts Boston, who has written about New England politics. 'But New England voters have not shied away from voting for these political dynasties again and again.'
The appeal of legacy political families has shown signs of fading more recently, however. Former representative Joe Kennedy III saw his famed family become a foil for Senator Ed Markey, who defeated him in the Democratic primary for US Senate in 2020.
Advertisement
So far, there haven't been signs of similar attacks against the 2026 cohort.
Dante Scala, a University of New Hampshire politics professor, said a nepotism charge becomes a dynamic in races only if opponents are willing to exploit it. Otherwise, it might only be a factor in close races if voters are inclined not to like it.
Martha Fuller Clark, a two-time Democratic nominee for the seat Shaheen is seeking, told the Globe there are obvious advantages.
'The Shaheen name ID among New Hampshire Democrats is nearly 100 percent,' said Clark, who is not running this time but has endorsed a Shaheen rival in the primary, Maura Sullivan.
A third Democrat who just joined the primary for the Congressional seat, Carleigh Beriont, leaned into the theme by saying in an interview that one reason she is running is to ensure 'my kids, especially my daughter, to grow up believing that they deserve a seat at the table regardless of their last name or how much money they have.'
In an interview with the Globe, Troy Jackson, a former president of the Maine Senate who is running for governor as a Democrat, didn't make too much of the pedigrees of his potential rivals.
Asked about the appeal of King and Pingree's names in the race, he said, 'I don't really know. All I know is, I'm going to fight for people that I know across the state are frustrated by government.'
More generally, Jackson said, the last 50 years have seen 'the same people sitting around the same table making the same decisions — and wondering why the same things are happening.'
Advertisement
One of Jackson's most high-profile supporters comes from a well-known Democratic family himself: Maine state Senator Joe Baldacci, whose brother John was a two-term governor and former congressman.
'I don't think anyone is given a pass because they have a certain last name at all,' Baldacci said. 'Maine people give you a consideration, but you've got to back it up.'
He praised Hannah Pingree's own record in politics and said while he has 'deep affection' for Senator King, Baldacci wondered if his son had the relationships and experience advocating for Democratic policies to win sufficient support.
A recent poll of the gubernatorial field from longtime Maine pollster Pan Atlantic Research, however, showed King III with the most support, and by far the most recognition: Nearly 90 percent of those surveyed said they were familiar with him.
Nonetheless, observers in Maine and elsewhere see the dynamic around political family brands inevitably becoming part of these key races.
'His name's Angus King,' said Wes Pelletier, a Portland city councilman who has endorsed Jackson. 'There's no way that conversation isn't going to happen.'
Sam Brodey can be reached at

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Learn with AIFact CheckingText to SpeechAI Summary

Related Articles

Hamilton Spectator

20 minutes ago

• Hamilton Spectator

The Latest: Trump muses about regime change in Iran after U.S. strikes on nuclear facilities

Israel's military said Monday it was striking around Iran's western city of Kermanshah, as fears of a wider regional conflict loomed large after the United States inserted itself into Israel's war by attacking Iranian nuclear sites. The operation raised urgent questions about what remained of Tehran's nuclear program and how its weakened military might respond. The price of oil rose as financial markets reacted. Iran lashed out at the U.S. for crossing 'a very big red line' with its risky gambit to strike the three sites with missiles and 30,000-pound bunker-buster bombs . President Donald Trump, who has warned of additional strikes if Tehran retaliates against U.S. forces, has mused about the possibility of 'regime change ″ in Iran, despite administration officials earlier indicating they wanted to restart talks with Iran. U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio, in an interview with CBS, said: 'Let's meet directly.' Ali Akbar Velayati, an adviser to Iran's supreme leader, said any country used by the U.S. to strike Iran 'will be a legitimate target for our armed forces,' the state-run IRNA news agency reported. Tens of thousands of American troops are based in the Middle East. Here is the latest: North Korea condemns U.S. strikes on Iran North Korea says it 'strongly condemns' the U.S. attack on Iranian nuclear facilities, calling it an egregious violation of Iran's territorial integrity and security interests. North Korea's Foreign Ministry said in a statement Monday that the United States and Israel were escalating tensions in the Middle East through the use of military force, and called on the 'just-minded international community' to raise a unified voice against their 'confrontational behavior.' During his first term, U.S. President Donald Trump met North Korean leader Kim Jong Un three times in 2018 and 2019, but their diplomacy collapsed over disagreements in exchanging the release of U.S.-led sanctions against North Korea and the North's steps to wind down its nuclear and missile program. Kim has since accelerated his arms development while ignoring talk offers by Washington and Seoul. He has shifted the priority of his foreign policy to Russia, sending thousands of troops and huge shipments of military equipment to fuel Russian President Vladimir Putin's war on Ukraine. Trump claims 'monumental damage' inflicted on Iranian nuclear sites President Donald Trump asserted on his Truth Social platform that Iran's nuclear sites sustained 'monumental damage' in the American attack, though a U.S. assessment on the strikes is still underway. 'The biggest damage took place far below ground level. Bullseye!!!' he wrote. U.S. defense officials have said they are working to determine about just how much damage the strikes did. Iran as well has not said how much damage was done in the attack, though Tehran has not offered any details so far on the strikes it has faced from Israel in its war with that country. Iran likely filled in tunnels at nuclear sites ahead of U.S. strikes An analysis of satellite photos by a nuclear nonproliferation group based in Washington shows Iran likely filled in tunnels at its nuclear site at Isfahan ahead of U.S. strikes early Sunday. The Washington-based Institute for Science and International Security published satellite images taken by Airbus it assessed showed trucks dumping soil into tunnels at the site on Friday. The U.S. attack likely targeted the tunnel entries, the group said. 'At least three of the four tunnel entrances are collapsed,' it said. 'The status of the fourth one is unclear.' Error! Sorry, there was an error processing your request. There was a problem with the recaptcha. Please try again. You may unsubscribe at any time. By signing up, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy . This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google privacy policy and terms of service apply. Want more of the latest from us? Sign up for more at our newsletter page .

Boston Globe

an hour ago

• Boston Globe

Democrats, and some Republicans, question Trump's unilateral attack

Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up 'The foreign minister of Israel said Friday night that its own bombing campaign had set the Iranian nuclear program back 'at least two or three years,'' Kaine noted on 'Face the Nation' on Sunday. 'There was no urgency that suggested, while diplomatic talks were underway, that the U.S. should take this unilateral action by President Trump's orders yesterday.' Advertisement He disagreed with the assertions of Vice President JD Vance and Secretary of State Marco Rubio, who stressed on Sunday shows that the U.S. is not at war with Iran. 'Would we think it was war if Iran bombed a U.S. nuclear facility? Of course we would,' Kaine said. Advertisement A few Republicans are also breaking with the president on the issue. Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Kentucky), who this month introduced a resolution alongside Rep. Ro Khanna (D-California) to require congressional approval before any strike, said Sunday that there had been 'no imminent threat' to the U.S. to justify Trump's unilateral actions against Iran. The U.S. House, Massie noted, was on recess last week. If the situation in Iran was as urgent as the Trump administration has made it seem, the White House should have called lawmakers back to Washington. 'Frankly, we should've debated this,' Massie told CBS's 'Face the Nation.' 'Instead of staying on vacation and doing fundraisers and saying, 'Oh, well, the president's got this under control, we're going to cede our constitutional authority.'' Rep. Warren Davidson (R-Ohio) on Saturday also questioned the legality of Trump's attacks, saying on social media, 'it's hard to conceive a rationale that's Constitutional.' As news of the strikes broke Saturday, Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Georgia), who has also opposed U.S. intervention in Iran, posted on X that 'this is not our fight.' Senate Minority Leader Charles E. Schumer (D-New York) called on the Senate to enforce the War Powers Act - the measure that would reaffirm Congress's right to declare war. Schumer urged Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-South Dakota) to bring the act to a vote on the floor 'immediately.' Schumer said Saturday that confronting Iran's 'ruthless campaign of terror' requires 'strategic clarity.' Trump, he said, must be held accountable by Congress. 'No president should be allowed to unilaterally march this nation into something as consequential as war with erratic threats and no strategy,' he said. Advertisement But Trump's defenders pointed to other authority in the Constitution, with Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-South Carolina) pointing to Article II, which allows the president some war powers. 'You can't have 535 commander in chiefs,' Graham said, referring to the number of lawmakers in the House and Senate. 'If you don't like what the president does in terms of war, you can cut off the funding.' Graham, in an interview on NBC's 'Meet the Press' on Sunday, argued that while Congress has declared war only a handful of times in U.S. history, and has not since World War II, other presidents have launched military operations without congressional authorization. In 2011, for example, President Barack Obama ordered a military intervention in Libya without lawmakers' approval. In other instances, Congress has given the president the power to order limited military attacks by passing an Authorization for the Use of Military Force, or AMUF. Some point out that the 2002 authorization, which gave the president the authority to use armed forces against 'the continuing threat posed by Iraq,' is still active, despite efforts by some lawmakers in recent years to rescind the authority. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said Sunday that congressional leaders were informed of the attack soon after the U.S. planes left Iranian airspace. Various lawmakers also argued that Trump should not have bombarded Iranian nuclear facilities because U.S. intelligence did not show that the country was at risk of an Iranian attack. 'You don't want to take an action like this without a strong basis - that is, that Iran was imminently pursuing a bomb, and we simply don't have the intelligence or, if we do, it hasn't been shared with the Congress,' Sen. Adam Schiff (D-California) said Sunday on CNN's 'State of the Union.' Advertisement The top two Republicans in Congress - House Speaker Mike Johnson (Louisiana) and Thune - were quick to praise what they said was Trump's decisiveness even though the president made the decision to attack Iran without Congress's input. Both Thune and Johnson were briefed ahead of the strike, according to two people familiar with the matter who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss a sensitive military operation. Johnson said Trump's attack should serve as a 'clear reminder to our adversaries and allies' that Trump 'means what he says.' 'President Trump has been consistent and clear that a nuclear-armed Iran will not be tolerated. That posture has now been enforced with strength, precision and clarity,' Johnson said. Other lawmakers warned about the strikes snowballing into a prolonged conflict, as Iran has asserted that it reserved 'all options' to act in self-defense. Sen. Ruben Gallego (D-Arizona), who served in the Marines, warned the nation should not be 'dragged into another endless war in the Middle East.' 'I would know. I saw close friends die next to me serving as a Marine in a high-combat unit in Iraq,' he said in a statement. 'Each of these deaths was needless.' A few House Democrats called for Trump's impeachment over the strikes. 'He has impulsively risked launching a war that may ensnare us for generations,' Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-New York) wrote on X. 'It is absolutely and clearly grounds for impeachment.' But Schiff - who served as impeachment manager during Trump's first impeachment trial - told CNN that congressional Republicans have made it clear that they have a 'high bar' for impeachment processes against Trump. Advertisement 'The better remedy, frankly, is - if Republicans will show any backbone whatsoever - to pass a war powers resolution to prevent any further military action,' he said. At least one Senate Democrat, however, openly applauded Trump's actions on Saturday night. 'As I've long maintained, this was the correct move by [Trump],' Sen. John Fetterman (D-Pennsylvania) said. 'Iran is the world's leading sponsor of terrorism and cannot have nuclear capabilities. I'm grateful for and salute the finest military in the world.' Marianna Sotomayor, Amy B Wang and Niha Masih contributed to this report.

Yahoo

an hour ago

• Yahoo

Rubio: ‘No planned military operations' against Iran unless they attack Americans

Secretary of State Marco Rubio said on Sunday that the United States currently has no military operation planned against Iran but left the door open for future strikes if the country does not demonstrate a meaningful effort to make peace. 'We have other targets that we could hit, but we achieved our objective,' Rubio said in an interview on CBS News's 'Face the Nation.' 'The primary targets we were interested in are the ones that were struck [last night] in devastating fashion,' Rubio continued. 'And we've achieved that objective.' Rubio made clear that the U.S. would retaliate if Iran attacked Americans 'or American interests.' 'There are no planned military operations right now against Iran, unless — unless — they mess around and they attack Americans or American interests. Then they're going to have a problem,' he said. Rubio said he would not 'broadcast what those problems are' but stressed U.S. capabilities to carry out sophisticated attacks. 'Know this: The United States flew halfway around the world, right into the heart of Iran, over their most sensitive locations — these things got rocked — and then we left. And we were out of their airspace, we were over the ocean before they figured out what had happened,' Rubio said. 'And there are plenty of other targets — we don't want to do that. That's not our preference. We want peace deals with them, and that's up to them to decide,' he continued. President Trump announced Saturday evening that U.S. forces bombed three Iranian nuclear sites and said to Iran, in a social media post, 'NOW IS THE TIME FOR PEACE!' The bombs targeted three nuclear sites in Natanz, Isfahan and Fordow, the last of which is located inside a mountain. Six bunker buster bombs were reportedly dropped on Fordow, while more than two dozen Tomahawk missiles were launched at the other two sites. The bombings put the U.S. directly in Iran's crosshairs for retaliation and made it an active participant in the Middle Eastern war, which Israel launched with airstrikes against Iran on June 13. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.