The relationship between the generic ballot and the two parties’ favorability ratings looks different in 2026 compared to any midterm election cycle dating back to 2006.
Just concede the obvious. The Democrats are the beneficiary of an overwhelming sentiment against Trump. And it most acute in the loss of any independents or traditional Republican voters being prepared to vote for Trump governance.
This is not really an affirmation of American socialism or Anti-Semitism when the likes of El-Sayed and Talirico are so easily winning Michigan and Texas.
It is all about who is not voting Republican.
And existing Congressional Republicans only have themselves to blame. They needed to revolt against Trump on tariffs , Ukraine and corruption. But chose not to.
And now they reap the whirlwind.
The Democrats will only create gridlock and impeachment.
The US wil be ever more polarized.
No Democrat can win the 2028 nomination without holding to a line of massive socialist transformation plus overt anti-Semitism.
And they may still win, given the destruction that Trump has wrought.
“… the Democratic Party brand problems could be holding back their performance …” I don’t have the deeper understanding of how polling numbers determine anything but what I can tell you, anecdotally, is the democratic “party” is a disaster. As someone who has voted blue for quite a while it’s been because “that’s the best option” not because they represent me and my liberal leaning interests. Between Super, Corporate and AI-PAC interests to complete divestment in their constituent’s interests this party is looking as corrupt as the GOP. So I can easily see how their brand is holding back their performances.
Democratic leadership from Clinton forward has focused on "free trade", an illusion brought to us by liberal academics. There is NO FREE TRADE. What we have is MERCANTILISM! So Democratic economists, following Greenspan, have allowed massive imports of Japanese and Chinese goods, which strengthened their economies and weakened the US economies. I think that tariffs can be a good economic policy in certain circumstances, (not the Trump way). "I am not a member of an organized political party, I am a Democrat." (Will Rogers)
Democratic leadership has not been willing to limit international military activity. Afghanistan was a bi-party disaster. And Biden ended it on 9/11 as a political parade but the reality it was a Biden failure. Biden didn't understand the situation in Afghanistan, Ghani, or the US military intelligence. The exit was a massive bungle.
Biden's decision to run for reelection was a mistake. But the Democratic party politics enabled Biden. Biden's arrogant, out of touch decision was the key to Trump's election victory. Harris's replacement was a failure as she was ("can't think of any thing I would change had I been president").
Yellen followed the easy money, big spending model that drove the deficit much further than needed to exit the Covid recession. She was the economic leader and failure that help bring
massive inflation and a flood of Chinese goods to the US, spent with fed money.
Democratic leaders have resisted open primaries, ranked choice voting, term limits, and stronger support for women's rights and population control. Biden was OK with massive numbers of undocumented arrivals until it was too late. Another politician to slow to really catch the wind of reality and concerns of American voters.
So, yes, the Democratic party leadership has failed. The explosive growth of independent voters, mostly left leaning, tell us that the Democratic leadership has failed.
Polling has been atrocious the last few cycles, Dems have no money, they have to go into deep red zones to have any chance at picking up the senate, and so on. They might retake the house, but that is due more towards the intra period mean than anything else. And, just like in '22, the nation is far too divided for any party to make huge gains.
Trump hasn't passed any major but hated legislation like Obamacare in'10, so that will not spur things, data centers are too bipartisan with nothing really to tie Trump to the issue solidly, and once you get out of the bubble Trump isn't hated.
forget about the generic poll for a minute and look at the bigger picture ...
The polls and especially senate polls dont seem to make sense, not only are democratic candidates leading in races where they should not even get close but you also have republican candidates getting close in races where democrats should have a double digit lead !
Add to this the fact that democrats favorability rating is worse than republicans and even trumps favorabilty rating and that democratic fundraising being anemic ....
Then a few days ago i was visiting my in laws both of them life long republicans when the phone rang , my father in law picked up the phone , it was a call from a polling firm , i was stunned when he told the guy that he was voting democrat and for talarico this fall and that he disaproved of trump.
When he hung up he just laughed for a minute then he told me that he was telling the guy a bunch of BS.
I asked why and he asked " how do i know this was really a pollster ? "
he went on to explain that he had gotten downright hateful and threatening responses to some facebook posts that he made and that as a result he considered it a smart move to " play democrat" if somebody asked .
My reading of the polls, the arguments made above, and the public mood is the Democrats will have a good fall this year, winning back control of the House and very likely the Senate, perhaps with more than the minimum 51 senators needed.
2028 however is another question entirely and I expect the Democrats to struggle, as the current vote is against the GOP far more than for Democratic policies or proposals. That will work for this cycle, but in two years the Democrats will need new leadership and ideas to be competitive, particularly since Trump won't be on the ballot.
I'm quite motivated to restored divided government to put a check on some of the current GOP insanity from the White House and the feckless and enabling Republican congress. I'll gladly vote blue in a month or so to do so.
I'm also quite hostile towards much the current Democratic Party elite represents: an aged leadership unable to meet the stresses of our time, beholden to financial elites and indifferent to the needs of the working class, focused on dubious social causes, from trans rights to gun control, inclined to elevate symbolic changes (the first black Speaker of the House!) over needed changes (higher taxes on the wealthiest, higher minimum wage, reduced government waste and fraud).
For the moment the party needs to first win the midterms and then prove themselves able public servants.
first of while 51 seats are technically give you a majority it is still useless in a legislative sense unless you hold the house AND the WH ....
You need 60 votes to overcome a fillibuster and even if you kill the fillibuster trump will most likely veto whatever democrats pass and you need 67 votes to override a veto !
Second i want to remind you that trumps win in 24 was a direct result of democratic actions after 2018 and the demonstrated incompetence of the biden administration and democrats.
Trumps approval rating may be dismayal but there are many republicans who disapprove because they think he has not done enough and the approval rating of the democratic party actually is even worse .
Last but not least democrats so far have failed to come up with any proposals on how they plan on lowering the cost of living or make life better for americans .
This of course is hard to do because they have no credibility on this issue , if CA their poster child state would have the lowest cost of living in the union than they may have a leg to stand on but thats not the case
1) The usual thermostatic reaction against the president's party in midterms; it literally takes something like 9/11 to stop this entirely and reverse it
2) Trump and his BS
3) A tremendous GOTV effort, coupled with not-insignificant MAGA disgust among many usual GOP voters, who might stay home
4) Some really terrible Republican candidates
The following factors are Dem headwinds:
1) A worsening national brand; I'm surprised the GOP hasn't tried to nationalize this election more than they have, to prevent reluctant Trump voters from running to the exits. The Dems have already done this with Trump; I don't see any downside in the GOP going nutpicking and doing this as well.
2) A Senate map somewhat favorable to the GOP as a practical matter
3) Some really terrible Dem candidates
The Dems should be wiping the floor with the GOP this year. Their brand problems and extremists will make this a much closer race than it would normally be.
I think the Senate is too close to call; if I had to put my money down, I would say the GOP retains control, but barely.
I do see the Dems flipping the House, but barely. Moderate swing-state reps of both parties will have tremendous power. Both parties' members will have to consider their electoral life after Trump, and avoid extremist or controversial positions.
If the Dems win, they will be on the clock. If they screw things up much as Trump and MAGA have, they will be in a terrible position in 2028. Of course, if they play their hand well, they will be in great shape in 2028.
If the GOP manages to hold on to both houses (doubtful), you may see an utter revolt against Trump since he will be gone in '28 and, again, they will have to think about their post-Trump, post-MAGA political lives.
I think we see a blue ripple, much like the red ripple in 2022. How do those numbers compare?
Side note: the Georgia GOP has had some success with "nationalizing" the state elections due to Keisha Lance-Bottoms' gubernatorial candidacy. Lance-Bottoms is easily the worst mayor that Atlanta has had in the last 60+ years; except maybe Bill Campbell who actually did time. The GOP has been going after her with fists of receipts.
Similar to the Dems' situation nationally, GOP Jackson should be wiping the floor with KLB in the governor's race. The fact that he's not shows how weak he is. I think he pulls it out, though; there are only so many "vote blue no matter who" type demos in Georgia, which has effectively put a ceiling on her votes.
The GA GOP won't beat Ossoff, due to incumbency, and the fact that he's a Clinton-level retail politician, and has wisely avoided extreme positions, and has proven to be Mr. Clean--and that's before factoring in GOP headwinds nationally due to Trump, etc. But the GA GOP may have a lot of success elsewhere on the ballot, at least with other intra-state offices.
Reps being crushed is a given, but does anyone have thoughts on the polling spread?
In Texas, polls show Greg Abbott up by 5, and then down by 5, in a matter of days. That is a 10 point swing, that keeps swinging both ways, sometimes in 24-72 hours. Sometimes the spread is smaller, but not always. Someone is wrong. Or is the game, as long as it is a 1 point race, either side can claim to be within the margin of error?
Nor is the Texas Governor's race an outlier. Different polls produce largely different results for many races, that swing in both directions, over both short and long periods of time.
The Math is beyond my rudimentary skills, and I understand polling the right mix of a few people is suppose to produce an accurate poll, but it seems a little counter intuitive that the 650-1000 person sample size utilized in New Hampshire, with a less than 1.5 million residents, will also be accurate in Texas, with a population of 32 million.
The article seems to suggest that many people remain unhappy about certain Democratic leaders and features, like Biden, DEI, easy immigration and inflation. I suspect that the explosive growth of voters registered as independents reflects many people's feelings that the Democratic party is authoritarian and controlling and doesn't want more voter control. The advance of certain progressives, not welcomed by mainstream Dems, suggests that the left leaning electorate is diverse and wants more choices. Instead, we have closed or semi-closed primaries in many states and political party leadership that doesn't support ranked choice voting or some better form of proportional representation at the state and federal level. "New" Democrats and independents want more choices and for the Democratic party leaders to have less choices. Unfortunately, Biden / Harris gave us a good primer on the need for more and better choices.
Just concede the obvious. The Democrats are the beneficiary of an overwhelming sentiment against Trump. And it most acute in the loss of any independents or traditional Republican voters being prepared to vote for Trump governance.
This is not really an affirmation of American socialism or Anti-Semitism when the likes of El-Sayed and Talirico are so easily winning Michigan and Texas.
It is all about who is not voting Republican.
And existing Congressional Republicans only have themselves to blame. They needed to revolt against Trump on tariffs , Ukraine and corruption. But chose not to.
And now they reap the whirlwind.
The Democrats will only create gridlock and impeachment.
The US wil be ever more polarized.
No Democrat can win the 2028 nomination without holding to a line of massive socialist transformation plus overt anti-Semitism.
And they may still win, given the destruction that Trump has wrought.
you are confusing polling numbers with election results , talarico and el sayed have a polling lead but they havent won the election just yet .
Delusional at this point to think they will not win.
Read what I said.
Will Rogers comes about against Trump tariffs? No of course not.
Will Paxton? Of course not.
Maybe Susan Collins.
“… the Democratic Party brand problems could be holding back their performance …” I don’t have the deeper understanding of how polling numbers determine anything but what I can tell you, anecdotally, is the democratic “party” is a disaster. As someone who has voted blue for quite a while it’s been because “that’s the best option” not because they represent me and my liberal leaning interests. Between Super, Corporate and AI-PAC interests to complete divestment in their constituent’s interests this party is looking as corrupt as the GOP. So I can easily see how their brand is holding back their performances.
Democratic leadership from Clinton forward has focused on "free trade", an illusion brought to us by liberal academics. There is NO FREE TRADE. What we have is MERCANTILISM! So Democratic economists, following Greenspan, have allowed massive imports of Japanese and Chinese goods, which strengthened their economies and weakened the US economies. I think that tariffs can be a good economic policy in certain circumstances, (not the Trump way). "I am not a member of an organized political party, I am a Democrat." (Will Rogers)
Democratic leadership has not been willing to limit international military activity. Afghanistan was a bi-party disaster. And Biden ended it on 9/11 as a political parade but the reality it was a Biden failure. Biden didn't understand the situation in Afghanistan, Ghani, or the US military intelligence. The exit was a massive bungle.
Biden's decision to run for reelection was a mistake. But the Democratic party politics enabled Biden. Biden's arrogant, out of touch decision was the key to Trump's election victory. Harris's replacement was a failure as she was ("can't think of any thing I would change had I been president").
Yellen followed the easy money, big spending model that drove the deficit much further than needed to exit the Covid recession. She was the economic leader and failure that help bring
massive inflation and a flood of Chinese goods to the US, spent with fed money.
Democratic leaders have resisted open primaries, ranked choice voting, term limits, and stronger support for women's rights and population control. Biden was OK with massive numbers of undocumented arrivals until it was too late. Another politician to slow to really catch the wind of reality and concerns of American voters.
So, yes, the Democratic party leadership has failed. The explosive growth of independent voters, mostly left leaning, tell us that the Democratic leadership has failed.
I just read the beginning and it tells me that nobody knows what is going to happen lol
I am going to leave my marker here: no blue wave.
Polling has been atrocious the last few cycles, Dems have no money, they have to go into deep red zones to have any chance at picking up the senate, and so on. They might retake the house, but that is due more towards the intra period mean than anything else. And, just like in '22, the nation is far too divided for any party to make huge gains.
Trump hasn't passed any major but hated legislation like Obamacare in'10, so that will not spur things, data centers are too bipartisan with nothing really to tie Trump to the issue solidly, and once you get out of the bubble Trump isn't hated.
forget about the generic poll for a minute and look at the bigger picture ...
The polls and especially senate polls dont seem to make sense, not only are democratic candidates leading in races where they should not even get close but you also have republican candidates getting close in races where democrats should have a double digit lead !
Add to this the fact that democrats favorability rating is worse than republicans and even trumps favorabilty rating and that democratic fundraising being anemic ....
Then a few days ago i was visiting my in laws both of them life long republicans when the phone rang , my father in law picked up the phone , it was a call from a polling firm , i was stunned when he told the guy that he was voting democrat and for talarico this fall and that he disaproved of trump.
When he hung up he just laughed for a minute then he told me that he was telling the guy a bunch of BS.
I asked why and he asked " how do i know this was really a pollster ? "
he went on to explain that he had gotten downright hateful and threatening responses to some facebook posts that he made and that as a result he considered it a smart move to " play democrat" if somebody asked .
My reading of the polls, the arguments made above, and the public mood is the Democrats will have a good fall this year, winning back control of the House and very likely the Senate, perhaps with more than the minimum 51 senators needed.
2028 however is another question entirely and I expect the Democrats to struggle, as the current vote is against the GOP far more than for Democratic policies or proposals. That will work for this cycle, but in two years the Democrats will need new leadership and ideas to be competitive, particularly since Trump won't be on the ballot.
I'm quite motivated to restored divided government to put a check on some of the current GOP insanity from the White House and the feckless and enabling Republican congress. I'll gladly vote blue in a month or so to do so.
I'm also quite hostile towards much the current Democratic Party elite represents: an aged leadership unable to meet the stresses of our time, beholden to financial elites and indifferent to the needs of the working class, focused on dubious social causes, from trans rights to gun control, inclined to elevate symbolic changes (the first black Speaker of the House!) over needed changes (higher taxes on the wealthiest, higher minimum wage, reduced government waste and fraud).
For the moment the party needs to first win the midterms and then prove themselves able public servants.
here are a few things you tend to forget .
first of while 51 seats are technically give you a majority it is still useless in a legislative sense unless you hold the house AND the WH ....
You need 60 votes to overcome a fillibuster and even if you kill the fillibuster trump will most likely veto whatever democrats pass and you need 67 votes to override a veto !
Second i want to remind you that trumps win in 24 was a direct result of democratic actions after 2018 and the demonstrated incompetence of the biden administration and democrats.
Trumps approval rating may be dismayal but there are many republicans who disapprove because they think he has not done enough and the approval rating of the democratic party actually is even worse .
Last but not least democrats so far have failed to come up with any proposals on how they plan on lowering the cost of living or make life better for americans .
This of course is hard to do because they have no credibility on this issue , if CA their poster child state would have the lowest cost of living in the union than they may have a leg to stand on but thats not the case
The following factors are in the Dems' favor:
1) The usual thermostatic reaction against the president's party in midterms; it literally takes something like 9/11 to stop this entirely and reverse it
2) Trump and his BS
3) A tremendous GOTV effort, coupled with not-insignificant MAGA disgust among many usual GOP voters, who might stay home
4) Some really terrible Republican candidates
The following factors are Dem headwinds:
1) A worsening national brand; I'm surprised the GOP hasn't tried to nationalize this election more than they have, to prevent reluctant Trump voters from running to the exits. The Dems have already done this with Trump; I don't see any downside in the GOP going nutpicking and doing this as well.
2) A Senate map somewhat favorable to the GOP as a practical matter
3) Some really terrible Dem candidates
The Dems should be wiping the floor with the GOP this year. Their brand problems and extremists will make this a much closer race than it would normally be.
I think the Senate is too close to call; if I had to put my money down, I would say the GOP retains control, but barely.
I do see the Dems flipping the House, but barely. Moderate swing-state reps of both parties will have tremendous power. Both parties' members will have to consider their electoral life after Trump, and avoid extremist or controversial positions.
If the Dems win, they will be on the clock. If they screw things up much as Trump and MAGA have, they will be in a terrible position in 2028. Of course, if they play their hand well, they will be in great shape in 2028.
If the GOP manages to hold on to both houses (doubtful), you may see an utter revolt against Trump since he will be gone in '28 and, again, they will have to think about their post-Trump, post-MAGA political lives.
I think we see a blue ripple, much like the red ripple in 2022. How do those numbers compare?
Side note: the Georgia GOP has had some success with "nationalizing" the state elections due to Keisha Lance-Bottoms' gubernatorial candidacy. Lance-Bottoms is easily the worst mayor that Atlanta has had in the last 60+ years; except maybe Bill Campbell who actually did time. The GOP has been going after her with fists of receipts.
Similar to the Dems' situation nationally, GOP Jackson should be wiping the floor with KLB in the governor's race. The fact that he's not shows how weak he is. I think he pulls it out, though; there are only so many "vote blue no matter who" type demos in Georgia, which has effectively put a ceiling on her votes.
The GA GOP won't beat Ossoff, due to incumbency, and the fact that he's a Clinton-level retail politician, and has wisely avoided extreme positions, and has proven to be Mr. Clean--and that's before factoring in GOP headwinds nationally due to Trump, etc. But the GA GOP may have a lot of success elsewhere on the ballot, at least with other intra-state offices.
Reps being crushed is a given, but does anyone have thoughts on the polling spread?
In Texas, polls show Greg Abbott up by 5, and then down by 5, in a matter of days. That is a 10 point swing, that keeps swinging both ways, sometimes in 24-72 hours. Sometimes the spread is smaller, but not always. Someone is wrong. Or is the game, as long as it is a 1 point race, either side can claim to be within the margin of error?
Nor is the Texas Governor's race an outlier. Different polls produce largely different results for many races, that swing in both directions, over both short and long periods of time.
The Math is beyond my rudimentary skills, and I understand polling the right mix of a few people is suppose to produce an accurate poll, but it seems a little counter intuitive that the 650-1000 person sample size utilized in New Hampshire, with a less than 1.5 million residents, will also be accurate in Texas, with a population of 32 million.
The article seems to suggest that many people remain unhappy about certain Democratic leaders and features, like Biden, DEI, easy immigration and inflation. I suspect that the explosive growth of voters registered as independents reflects many people's feelings that the Democratic party is authoritarian and controlling and doesn't want more voter control. The advance of certain progressives, not welcomed by mainstream Dems, suggests that the left leaning electorate is diverse and wants more choices. Instead, we have closed or semi-closed primaries in many states and political party leadership that doesn't support ranked choice voting or some better form of proportional representation at the state and federal level. "New" Democrats and independents want more choices and for the Democratic party leaders to have less choices. Unfortunately, Biden / Harris gave us a good primer on the need for more and better choices.