Is it 2026 yet? US Mid Term Elections
Looks like the midterm elections 2026 is going to be a nail biter all around. Checking with 270toWin.com. We may just see 25 Democratic Governors and 25 Republican Governors. Then too, there appears to be 20 contested seats in the House of Representatives. Seems like the Republicans just may retain the Senate by at least one vote.
Of course, a lot can happen in one year.
What I am seeing is many of the old guard--both the Democrats and the Republicans--will be facing some more radical challengers in the primary. The Democrats will have to contend with a surge from the Socialist camp, and the Republicans just might have to deal with the--hate to say it--Fascist camp.
Historically, the midterm house election goes to the party opposite of the president, but this president is doing everything he can to tip the scales in his favor by getting Republican states to redraw their congressional districts--something that is not normally done but once a decade.
Of course, Trump may have turned off some of his traditional voters in deep red districts. Look at the soybean farmers of the Midwest losing their markets and cattlemen objecting to Trump buying Argentinian meat. Trump has the lowest approval rating of any modern president. I would hope this will translate into votes against him in the congressional races.
Let's get in on.
Of course, a lot can happen in one year.
What I am seeing is many of the old guard--both the Democrats and the Republicans--will be facing some more radical challengers in the primary. The Democrats will have to contend with a surge from the Socialist camp, and the Republicans just might have to deal with the--hate to say it--Fascist camp.
Historically, the midterm house election goes to the party opposite of the president, but this president is doing everything he can to tip the scales in his favor by getting Republican states to redraw their congressional districts--something that is not normally done but once a decade.
Of course, Trump may have turned off some of his traditional voters in deep red districts. Look at the soybean farmers of the Midwest losing their markets and cattlemen objecting to Trump buying Argentinian meat. Trump has the lowest approval rating of any modern president. I would hope this will translate into votes against him in the congressional races.
Let's get in on.
Comments
Here is how one Democratic opinionator is hoping the New Kings movement will help the Democratic party: https://thehill.com/opinion/white-house/5566458-trump-protests-no-kings-day/
We do need to keep the family in our thoughts and prayers.
🕯 and for the deceased as well.
And maybe it's already dead simply because some people clearly have significant doubts that we will have free and fair elections. People expecting their elections to be tampered with already affects likelihood of voting etc.
I think a situation in which both sides are saying that if they don’t win then the election was rigged is one in which democracy is already dead.
That is an exaggeration. I suspect democracies are often (usually?) like that. It's just that we have come to expect better of the USA.
I don't think this is true, although we're in danger of summoning the Scotsman.
Which countries would you suggest are widely agreed to have functional democracies and also have the major parties believing that the election was rigged when they lose?
I can’t recall a single election in the UK where any of the losing parties even suggested that the election was rigged. Meanwhile, in the USA right now we’ve got Democrats saying that if they don’t win handsomely then it’s because democracy is dead, and a Republican Party that used claims of election fraud to literally try to stage a coup the last time they lost.
That’s not a good position to be in, because if neither side will accept defeat then democracy is indeed dead. It feels like it’s heading towards civil war, frankly.
Really? Because I recall a number of occasions where UKIP/Brexit/Reform have claimed Labour rigged council elections with postal votes.
I think we are spoiled by considering the post-war West as a norm. I would suggest pre-1832 British elections were pretty openly rigged, for example. The candidates were expected to spend heavily on bribing the electorate.
The idea of true "civil war" I also think unlikely. Civil war requires centres of power that have the wherewithal to organise militarily against each other. In 1861 the individual states had enough autonomy to do this. I don't think this is true any longer. I think there could be considerable "civil unrest" and perhaps guerilla activity. But say, for example, Trump and MAGA retain control of the federal government for the next decade or so. Where would the opposing armies come from? How would they organise?
While I agree that a "hot" civil war is probably unlikely, opposing armies could come from:
- splits in the armed forces themselves, either within services or with, say, the Army on one side and the Marines on the other
- national guard vs regular forces or guard vs guard with regular forces refusing to get involved. "Meal Team 6" jokes aside they're more than capable of killing a lot of people, and many will have active duty experience in Iraq or Afghanistan.
- Militias, either state or independent. There are a *lot* of guns and ammunition around and while trained military might well make short work of irregular forces in pitched battles the lessons of occupation are there for all to see
- international interference. In the event of conflict, it's hard to know how Mexico and Canada would respond, even before opportunities for hostile/rival powers (Russia, China, DPRK) to equip/fund/provide air support to one side or the other.
A lot can happen in a year, and no poll worth paying attention to would attempt to say now what is likely to happen in 12 months.
Thank you for the correction.
Here is another report on the same poll. If the election were held today, it shows just how wide the gap between the parties has become. Of course, things may change in the next year. I am betting the gap will even be wider in the next 12 months.
Of the many things that can change between now and next November, a significant one is that next November, the generic candidates will have been replaced by candidates with names, faces and records. A bad choice by the Democrats in a given congressional district could wipe out any advantage that a genetic ballot poll found.
Or the candidate who simply turns out to have appealed to the majority of primary voters, but who doesn’t appeal to the majority of general election voters, particularly independent voters.
In the discussion on Venezuela, I had mentioned something to the effect that one way to stop Trump is to have the House impeach Trump and the Senate vote to convict him.
You replied:
First, a clarification. The Senate cannot impeach a president, that is the prerogative of the House. The Senate can vote to uphold the house impeachment, actually called a conviction; but it would take 2/3 of the Senate to uphold it.
Frankly, given the current status of the House and Senate, it is highly unlikely.
However, with the midterms coming up. It may be possible, but it is still very much a long shot.
I do think the majority of the House will go Democratic, largely because people of very concerned about affordability; and historically, the House will often flip to the party opposite of the president in the first midterm of his/her administration.
And it only takes a simple majority of the House for an impeacment.
Now to the Senate, it would be a long shot for 2/3 of the Senate to go Democrat, but it is possible to get to the 2/3 vote.
Of the 35 Senate seats up for election, 23 are held by Republicans. Four of those seats might very well go Democrat. Susan Collins of Maine is a vulnerable Republican due to her age and the shifting political climate. North Carolina is an open seat because the Republican senator is retiring. Even Fox News is saying it is a toss-up at this moment. Ohio is a special election. JD Vance resigned when he became the Vice President. The Ohio Governor appointed Joh Husted to fill the seat temporarily. Ohio is a battleground state. The other seat that could go Democratic is held by Texas John Cornyn. Fox News, Austin is saying it could be up for grabs given the shifting political climate.
If those four seats would go Democratic, that would give the Democrats control of the Senate 51-47, which would mean they would still need 9 more votes to convict.
It can be done if one or two other Senate seats become vulnerable and they flip, and then seven Republican senators vote with the majority. Senator Roger Marshell of Kansas, Senator Rand Paul of Kentucky, Senator Shelly Moore Capito of West Virginia have all expressed concerns about Trump. I also think there may be others who are rather uncomfortable with Trump's unilateral military actions.
But again, given the current situation, it would still be a longshot for the Senate to vote for conviction. When I stated that it would take the Senate to convict the president of the impeachment charges brough by the House, I was implying it would be next to impossible, unless the President goes completely off the rails.
And, given Trumps alleged mental health and physical states, that could be possible, but not probable.
"Long shot" is putting it mildly. In order to have two-thirds of the seats in the Senate Democrats would have to retain all currently held seats and win at least twenty out of the twenty-two seats currently held by Republicans.
First off, only 22 Senate seats currently held by Republicans are up for election in 2026, not 23.
Secondly, if the Senate is divided 51-47, Democrats would need at least 16 Republican Senators to vote for conviction. Nine Republican votes would only be 3/5th of the Senate, which is the threshold for overcoming the modern filibuster. 2/3rd of the Senate (as currently configured) is 67 Senators.
I was counting the special election in Ohio as the 23rd seat.
My math is wrong. Not enough coffee this morning.
Granted, I think it’s more than reasonable to anticipate that all senators would, in fact, be present.