World War G in September

 Our most recent book is The Comeback: The 2024 Elections and American Politics. It includes a chapter on congressional and state elections.

The 2026 movie Pressure dramatizes the clash of Allied meteorologists in the run-up to D-Day.  The Americans relied on analog forecasting, looking for past weather maps that matched current conditions, and assuming that the weather would play out the same way.  The British were more alert to differences that the analog maps did not capture. Like the American forecasters in 1944, the Republicans assumed that the patterns of 2024 would remain in place in 2026.  They did not count on the extent to which Trump's actions alienated Hispanics and other voters.

They had similar problems in previous elections.

Andrew Howard and Aaron Pellish at POLITICO:

Republicans are growing increasingly worried their mid-decade gerrymandering push isn’t going to save their House majority.

The norm-breaking plan hatched by the White House last summer to draw new maps to protect the party from an unfavorable midterm environment is not on track to bear the fruits they hoped it would. Two months out from Election Day, Republicans are sweating races they thought they would win comfortably when they redrew district boundaries, according to conversations with a dozen Republican strategists on Friday.

...

Republicans redrew maps in eight states — Texas, Missouri, North Carolina, Ohio, Florida, Tennessee, Louisiana and Alabama — while Democrats only pulled off a gerrymander in California. (They got another seat from a Utah court decision but had their Virginia gerrymander blocked in court.) In a less hostile political environment, that could have netted the GOP more than a dozen seats.

But they’re not all looking so solid. Texas Republicans are growing increasingly worried that newly drawn Latino-heavy seats Trump carried by double digits in 2024 are looking shaky, and the five-seat net they’d hoped out of the state looks increasingly unrealistic by the day.“The Texas redistricting effort will for sure yield a two-seat gain, and more than likely yield a three-seat gain,” said Alfredo Rodriguez, a Dallas-based Republican strategist. “Picking up five seats will be difficult considering the environment and headwinds Republicans face this cycle.”In North Carolina, Democratic Rep. Don Davis looks very much alive in a tough seat redrawn by the GOP to take him out.

And Florida’s new gerrymander isn’t looking bulletproof, either, with Democratic Reps. Darren Soto, Kathy Castor and Jared Moskowitz running hard to hold onto newly red-leaning territory.

10-Point D Lead In Party ID

Our most recent book is The Comeback: The 2024 Elections and American Politics. It includes a chapter on congressional and state elections.

Ruth Igielnik and Caroline Soler at NYT:

The share of Americans who associate themselves with the Democratic Party has grown significantly over the past year, according to data from Gallup. The shift, which signals the party’s largest advantage since 2008, is the latest sign of backlash against Republicans and the president ahead of the midterm elections.

The latest data shows Democrats with a 10-percentage-point advantage over Republicans when voters are asked which party they identify with and when independent voters are asked which party they lean toward.

The findings come as President Trump’s approval rating has been below 40 percent for months, and as polls have found that Democrats are competitive across key Senate races in states that went heavily for Mr. Trump in past years. But shifts in party identification do not necessarily translate directly into votes, because independents, including those who lean toward a party, tend to be less politically engaged and less likely to vote.

Republicans and Democrats have seesawed between which party more Americans leaned toward over the last several years. As recently as 2024, Republicans and independents who lean toward the Republican Party held a slight edge over Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents.

 

Midterm Convention

Our most recent book is The Comeback: The 2024 Elections and American Politics. It includes a chapter on congressional and state elections.

George E. Condon Jr. at National Journal:

One constant in Donald Trump’s 11 years in politics has been his demand for credit for every idea, event, and program. In his telling, no one before him ever was clever enough to conceive of his newest scheme. As he likes to say, “no one’s ever seen" whatever he's currently talking about.

All that is on display again as Republicans, more anxious than excited, plan to gather next week to fulfill the president’s desire to have a midterm convention to showcase his second-term record. When he first proposed it last year, he boasted, “It has never been done before.” He repeated those words in June when he announced the date and location—Sept. 9 and 10 in Dallas.

The only problem is that it has been done before. And it didn’t work out very well, making this an instance when Trump would have been far better served if he had actually talked to Democrats. They’re the only ones with experience at midterm conventions—and the bruises to show for it.

Far from being an idea that sprang from the fertile mind of Trump, midterm conventions were first suggested by Republican National Chairman John Hamilton in the wake of Franklin D. Roosevelt’s 24-point shellacking of GOP nominee Alf Landon in 1936, according to Hamilton College professor Philip Klinkner in his 1994 book, The Losing Parties: Out-Party National Committees, 1956-1993. Twenty years later, Sen. Estes Kefauver championed midterm conventions after Dwight Eisenhower’s 15-point thrashing of the Democratic ticket, which included Kefauver as vice presidential nominee.

Both Hamilton and Kefauver failed to sell the idea. But another 20 years on, a reform-minded Democratic Party, stung by its 23-point clobbering by Richard Nixon in 1972, revived the idea, even managing to stage events in Kansas City in 1974, in Memphis in 1978, and in Philadelphia in 1982.

They did not go well.

“Trump doesn't understand what came before. He just doesn't know history,” said Al From, an adviser in the Jimmy Carter White House and a loud voice for moderating the Democratic Party after Ronald Reagan’s two victories. From attended the Democratic midterm convention in 1982, which, he said, along with the editions in 1974 and 1978, “didn’t work out very well.”

That understates how disastrous the gathering was in 1978. In that year, like this one, it was the party that won the most recent presidential election that proposed the gathering—although, in a key difference, the Democrats assembled weeks after the midterms.

Carter gave a speech on the opening night to a tepid reception and then returned to the White House. He was not there on the concluding night when Sen. Edward Kennedy gave one of the most rousing speeches of his career, urging his party to “sail against the wind,” signaling he would be a likely primary opponent to Carter in two years.

It is an item of faith today that Carter was deeply unpopular at the time of that convention. The numbers tell a different story, though. While his approval, as measured by Gallup, was only 39 percent in August 1978, it was at 49 percent by the November election and at 51 percent when the convention started on Dec. 7.

The contrast with Trump’s current unpopularity is sharp. The University of Massachusetts poll conducted in late August showed 64 percent disapproving of his performance and only 32 percent approving. That is slightly worse for the president than other current polls—42 percent approval in Quantus Insights, 36 percent in YouGov/The Economist, and 33 percent in Reuters/Ipsos.

Democrats killed off their midterm conventions in 1985 when new party chairman Paul Kirk declared them “places for mischief” and a waste of party time, money, and energy.

The abiding lesson from the three mini-conventions was that they could prove to be boons to future candidates, but debilitating for incumbents. Jimmy Carter, the loser in the 1978 event, had been the star in the 1974 convention, laying the groundwork for his later campaign. Similarly, Bill Clinton effectively used the meeting in 1978, and Walter Mondale was a star in 1982. Indeed, as The Washington Post put it, Kirk said the conventions mostly just "kick off speculation about presidential contenders when Democrats should be focusing on electing senators, House members and governors."

Prop 40

Our most recent book is The Comeback: The 2024 Elections and American Politics. It includes a chapter on congressional and state elections.

Mark Di Camillo at the Institute for Governmental Studies:

The state ballot initiative that is drawing the most attention in California’s upcoming general election is Proposition 40, the Billionaires Tax initiative. Nearly three in four likely voters report having already heard of the initiative, and when presented with its official ballot title and summary, slightly more are inclined to vote Yes (48%) than No (41%). The controversial initiative calls for imposing a one-time 5% tax on the assets of the state’s billionaires, with most of its funds devoted to health care.

The poll finds voting preferences on Proposition 40 to be highly partisan and related to the ideological leanings of the electorate. Support is greatest among Democrats and strongly liberal voters, while Republicans and conservatives are solidly on the No side. On a regional basis, Proposition 40 is receiving strong support from voters in the San Francisco Bay Area and Los Angeles County, but trails among voters in Orange County, the Central Valley, and the state’s North Coast/Sierras region. D fferences in support are also observed by age, gender and the race/ethnicity of voters, with majorities of younger voters, women and voters of color voting Yes, while pluralities of voters ages 65 or older, males, and whites are voting No.

Opponents of Proposition 40 have qualified two counter initiatives, Propositions 41 and 42, for the November election ballot that are primarily aimed at nullifying the Billionaires Tax should it pass. Yet, voter awareness of these two counter measures is low and when presented with the official ballot titles and summaries of each initiative voters are divided, with many undecided.

Newsom's opposition to Prop 40 is significant. 

In 2022 (updated 2024), Ben Christopher wrote at KQED:

Voting down Proposition 30 might seem a little off-brand for the California electorate.

These are the voters, after all, who showed no qualms just a decade ago about hiking income taxes on top earners and who also hit up millionaires in 2004 to pay for mental health services. These are the California majorities who, as recently as June (PDF), told pollsters that they were either considering purchasing or had already purchased an electric car. Most named air pollution, wildfires and climate change as areas of major personal concern.

And yet the ballot measure that would have increased taxes on about 43,000 multimillionaires (on income above $2 million a year) to fund electric-car rebates and to combat wildfires has suffered an unambiguous defeat. In the statewide vote count as of late Wednesday, 59% rejected the proposal.

At first glance, the fate of Proposition 30 may be the most compelling head-scratcher of the 2022 California election. But for the campaigns on both sides of the highly contested measure, and for many independent political observers to boot, there’s an obvious answer to this electoral mystery — and its name is Gov. Gavin Newsom.

“You can’t remove the governor from it,” said Matt Rodriguez, campaign manager for No on 30. “He’s a credible messenger on the opposition side, simply because I think a lot of people and a lot of Democrats take their cues from him.”

Campaign Influencers for Hire

Our most recent book is The Comeback: The 2024 Elections and American Politics. It includes a chapter on congressional and state elections.

 Ken Bensinger and Stuart A. Thompson at NYT:

[Josh] Greene, who lives in Southern California and is best known by his handle @joshtheprogressive, is among a growing number of influencers who, at a moment when campaigns are increasingly willing to pay for online attention, appear willing to put their mouth where the money is.

As more people spend time scrolling on their phones, campaigns view these shows of support from influencers as a vital way to reach voters. They are also significantly less expensive than traditional advertising.

But unlike campaign mailers, billboards and television spots, these messages fall into a legal gray area.

There are no federal regulations requiring disclosure of payments for political support on social media, and only a few states have such rules. That allows influencers, in most instances, to endorse candidates for a fee without ever disclosing those payments in their posts. Creators say some campaigns have even asked them to actively conceal the fact that they’re being compensated, making it impossible to know what’s genuine support — and what is pay-for-play.

In most cases, the only way a viewer would know an influencer is being paid would be to search a candidate’s campaign finance reports, as The New York Times did to discover the payments. Even then, such compensation is regularly obscured by funneling the payments through middlemen.

...

Other political efforts have employed a different strategy, contracting private firms that pay little-known content creators smaller sums to put out a large volume of posts. Those companies, known as user generated content platforms, or U.G.C.s, operate on the principle that carpet bombing the internet with hundreds of nearly identical posts is more likely to generate viral content than paying one large influencer the same amount of money to make a single post.

Downward Optimism

Our most recent book is The Comeback: The 2024 Elections and American Politics. 

War and economic woes will hurt the GOP in November.  The only question is how much.

Erica Pandey at Axios:

The big picture: Your grocery store is fed by a vast global supply chain, and pressures are building all along it.The Iran and Russia-Ukraine wars have driven up diesel prices, making it more expensive to operate farm equipment for harvesting and to truck food from suppliers to stores.

The war in Iran has also disrupted fertilizer supply and price, as a large share of the world's fertilizer passes through the Strait of Hormuz.

Corn and wheat prices are surging, this week hitting their highest level in three years. Bad weather has hit corn crop yields, and the Russia-Ukraine war has roiled wheat exports.

Friction point: Wheat's a key ingredient in pantry staples and corn is a major animal feed, so as they go up, so can meat, dairy and eggs.

The intrigue: Don't assume those soaring commodity prices are a bonanza for farmers, either.They're still getting squeezed by all the other crises. Even the president of the National Corn Growers Association told Axios Future of Energy author Ben Geman that he himself wouldn't be profitable this year.

Add all these pressures to the list of already inflated food items:Instant coffee is up 15.8% year-over-year; tomatoes, 12.8%; beef roasts, 13.5%; apples, 11.1%.

In the latest Economist/YouGov poll, about three-quarters of people said grocery prices are still rising where they live.

Eleanor Mueller at Semafor:

Consumer sentiment among Republicans and independents is “starting to fade” ahead of the midterm elections, The Conference Board Chief Economist Dana Peterson told Semafor.

The Conference Board said last week that its overall consumer confidence index had dropped to its lowest level since January. Economists had predicted it would remain higher.

“There’s just a general shift of downward optimism,” Peterson said on the sidelines of the Kansas City Federal Reserve’s annual economic policy symposium, pointing to expectations that inflation and interest rates will remain elevated.

“Democrats are the least optimistic, but I’ve noticed that more recently the independents are moving with Republicans” in a negative direction, she continued. Consumers have been citing issues like “oil and gas prices, food, and also war and conflict” on surveys.

Is Trump a Secret Asset of the DSCC?

Our most recent book is The Comeback: The 2024 Elections and American Politics. 

War and economic woes will hurt the GOP in November.  The only question is how much.

Jonathan Martin at POLITICO:

As the traditional start of the campaign season draws near, though, Republicans are increasingly worried they may be consumed by a worsening prairie fire.

“He’s in serious trouble in farm country,” Sen. Kevin Cramer (R-N.D.) told me. “He being Trump — and Trump is us. I’m not very optimistic.”

The triple-whammy of tariffs, expensive diesel and fertilizer and now imported beef has created a crisis for agriculture-state Republicans.

...

The culprits are obvious: the exorbitant cost of living, Trump’s deep unpopularity with the political center and the massive enthusiasm gap Democrats enjoy over Republicans.

The fear, GOP officials tell me, is that these sentiments are increasingly becoming locked in with voters; that the grim political environment — caused by spiking gas prices after the ceasefire with Iran collapsed last month — is close to irreversible. Or to borrow from Haley Barbour, that sage of Mississippi: In politics, good gets better and bad gets worse.

For months, the shorthand conversation among political professionals has not been if this will be a difficult election for Republicans but whether it will be 2018 or 2006.

Which is to say: Will 2026 bring a backlash against the party in power, but one largely confined to House losses because of polarization, limiting Democratic strength in Senate races? Or will there be a greater wave that grows high enough to sweep out Republicans thought to be safe, flipping both chambers of Congress in the process?

Once Iran hostilities restarted and it became clear that there would be no Supreme Court vacancy, as there crucially was in 2018, the answer became clear. Republicans would not be able to get off defense and lacked the court fight that would hand them their best opportunity to go on offense.

 WSJ editorial: 

The November midterm elections will be in part a referendum on President Trump’s border taxes, and most polls show them losing. A new poll by Overton Insights and the Texas Public Policy Foundation finds that tariffs are unpopular in the Lone Star State, especially among Hispanics. Houston, Republicans have a tariff problem.

The survey, which was shared with us exclusively and will be released next Wednesday, shows that Texans overall disapprove of his tariffs, 54% to 46%. Texans who didn’t vote in a party primary—generally independents and folks who are less partisan—disapproved of them, 68% to 32%. Hispanics gave them the thumbs down, 69% to 31%.


The latter is especially notable because Mr. Trump won 55% of the state’s Hispanic vote in 2024, no doubt in part owing to frustration with Democrats’ handling of inflation. But Hispanics also strongly oppose the President’s blunderbuss border taxes targeting trade partners like Mexico and Canada, which raise costs for consumers and businesses.

The Texas economy is heavily exposed to tariffs because of its cross-border trade and integrated supply chains with Mexico. Texas traded $303 billion in goods with Mexico and overall exported $299 billion of manufactured products in 2025. The latter include electronics and computers ($71 billion), chemicals ($55 billion) and transportation equipment ($29 billion).

Because Texas is the largest state exporter of goods, it suffers a bigger brunt from retaliatory tariffs, such as those that Canada plans to levy on the U.S. in response to Mr. Trump’s tariff escalation. In case he hasn’t noticed, the tariffs have become an albatross for Republicans in close races across the country, including Texas.