Some say the midterm electoral map for Democrats is shrinking. Others that it’s expanding. Meanwhile, both parties are dealing with unruly factional battles.
With the summer primaries largely complete, the fields are (mostly) set for the midterms. Jessica Taylor, the Senate and governors editor of The Cook Political Report, assessed the state of the races in a written conversation with John Guida, an editor in Times Opinion. It has been edited for length and clarity.
John Guida: We’re hearing contradictory messages about the Democrats and their midterm chances. Maybe we can take them one at a time. Some have argued that Democrats are blowing it, based on results in Michigan and, to a lesser extent, Maine. Thoughts?
Jessica Taylor: I do think that Democrats have suffered some setbacks in these two states. Michigan is the more persuasive example. Nominating Abdul El-Sayed was risky. Representative Haley Stevens was the more traditional, safer candidate in such a critical swing state, especially given her strength with Black voters. Democrats need to net four seats to take the Senate, and not keeping Michigan would be a big blow.
In Maine, Democrats may have avoided the worst outcome; had Graham Platner remained on the ballot, he might well have lost. Troy Jackson may prove to be the more generic Democrat the party needs against Susan Collins in what is shaping up to be her most difficult race ever thanks to President Trump.
Guida: Let’s consider the opposite argument: Democrats are not only not blowing it, they are expanding the Senate map. Let’s call this the Chuck Schumer theory. He talked up states like Kansas — where the Rev. Adam Hamilton, the pastor of the largest United Methodist congregation in the country, won a Democratic primary — and, though he admitted it’s a long shot, Mississippi as places where Democrats are on the offensive. Persuasive?
Taylor: Forcing Republicans to play defense in more places is a victory in one way for Democrats, especially if the G.O.P. has to divert resources to these other states. We recently shifted Kansas from solid to likely Republican, and Hamilton gives Democrats a credible, unexpected candidate in a Trump +16 state. As I recently wrote on The Cook Political Report, in 2006 we had another increasingly unpopular president in his second term, mired in a war in the Middle East amid growing economic anxiety, and there were red states like Montana where Democrats outperformed the previous presidential base line by as much as 21 points.
With a worsening political environment for Republicans, some of these more surprising states could come online. They typically break late, but having quality candidates is the first step in the battle. I certainly didn’t think at this time last year that even a state like Iowa could be competitive, let alone Kansas.
Guida: In an environment similar to 2006, what other states would be in play? What about Montana, with an independent (Seth Bodnar) and Democrat (Alani Bankhead) splitting votes in the Senate race? Or Nebraska?
Taylor: Nebraska is more viable than Montana simply because it appears that Dan Osborn will have a one-on-one shot against the Republican senator Pete Ricketts. However, Ricketts is a stronger opponent than Deb Fischer was last cycle, who was caught asleep at the wheel. It’s tough to run the same trick play twice, which is why Osborn has a steeper road than he did two years ago despite 2026 being a more favorable midterm. We rate that race as likely Republican.
I don’t see Montana as competitive given that Democrats couldn’t convince Bankhead to drop out. Democrats have better opportunities in Kansas or even Mississippi.
Guida: On the big picture indicators: Right now, the generic ballot (via Silver Bulletin) is at Democrats +6.7. President Trump’s job approval is around 38.2 percent. Economic news has been mostly meh (jobs reports, inflation). Gas prices are still high (currently over $4 a gallon). Does that suggest a 2006-type environment? Or something more ambiguous?
Taylor: The generic ballot isn’t as bad (yet) as it was in 2006 in some polls, but we’re a more polarized country than we were 20 years ago, so that metric may be a lagging indicator. Gas prices are something so omnipresent to voters. If those prices continue to tick up, the psychological effect on voters is real.
We’ve already seen in primaries that Democrats are far more motivated than Republicans to turn out, and complacency may be Republicans’ biggest problem this cycle. Trump has not proven he can turn out his coalition when he isn’t on the ballot — something President Barack Obama couldn’t do in 2010 or 2014 either, by the way — and the worsening economy will not help drive those G.O.P. and MAGA voters to the polls.
That word “meh” stands out to me though because we use it a lot in our office. My boss, Amy Walter, has written extensively about voters who feel “meh” about first President Joe Biden and now Trump. It’s those voters who somewhat disapprove of Trump — will Democrats be able to convince them to pull the lever for a candidate with a “D” next to his or her name, even if they don’t like everything the Democratic Party stands for? The struggle Democrats still have is that their party is not popular with voters either, but in a worsening climate, being the lesser of two evils may be enough.
Guida: There is at least a bit of evidence that the Democratic Party has taken its sagging approval ratings to heart. It chose what were seen as safer candidates in a couple of states, Maine and Wisconsin most recently. And we’ve seen comments like the one recently from Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (“Woke 1.0 was crazy”). Do you think this will sink in with voters? Or will the factional fights of the summer weigh more heavily?
Taylor: Wisconsin is a perfect example to me of candidates struggling to connect with swing voters in very relatable ways. Francesca Hong pulled off an initial surge because she zeroed in on a data center moratorium (a trend I see in many races across the country) and had a working-class background. But she tripped over herself when asked about Thanksgiving. I had one Democrat tell me the party just needs to come across as “normal” — and being anti-Thanksgiving isn’t normal.
Guida: To a lesser extent, Republicans are dealing with a factional battle of their own. A group on the right led by Tucker Carlson (and also including Marjorie Taylor Greene) has suggested starting a new third party. He recently released a 10-point manifesto with a vision for America. Should Republicans freak out? Shrug?
Taylor: To me it’s a sign that Trump’s influence is waning, even though he’s clearly still the most powerful figure in the G.O.P. He’s broken some of his promises, including no new wars, and doubled down on tariffs, which are hurting many of his core voters.
MAGA voters still respect the president, but some of them are hewing closer to the ideals he set out than complete fealty. That sets up an interesting phenomenon to watch as we look toward the post-Trump era: Do the MAGA principles hold up more than the principal?
Guida: That clash — principles versus principal — seems to be the basis, or at least a basis, of the Carlson et al. movement. Are you thinking of any particular principles that MAGA voters feel strongly about and that the president may not have kept faith with, in some capacity? The war in Iran is an obvious example. You mentioned tariffs.
Taylor: Trump bluntly promised to make the economy and inflation better, and he hasn’t, polls show, at least not quickly enough. It’s not as simple as he made it sound on the campaign trail — it rarely is for any politician — but Trump has often overpromised.
Voters aren’t seeing more money in their pockets — a line El-Sayed has used effectively — and Trump has dismissed the effect the Iran war in particular is having on the economy, giving Democrats a key sound bite to use this fall. Republicans will privately acknowledge that their principal has been off-message at a time they need him to be focused on affordability concerns.
Guida: Earlier you mentioned that data centers (and data-center moratoriums) have emerged as a big issue. It seems to have scrambled the parties. Many Democratic candidates have run against them, but other Democrats (like Gov. Josh Shapiro of Pennsylvania) have in some ways embraced them. Recently the Republican governor of Texas, Greg Abbott, called for limits on new data centers, and Trump criticized him for it. How is this playing out?
Taylor: Trump is close to the tech industry; at one point, he even called data centers a “tremendous thing.” The battle to stop their construction has emerged as a rare populist cause that seems to resonate across the traditional red and blue lines. In Ohio, the Democrat Sherrod Brown has hammered the Republican senator Jon Husted on the issue repeatedly. In Kansas, Cindy Holscher notched an upset in the Democratic primary over the outgoing governor’s preferred candidate and is hoping to keep the governor’s seat blue, against tough odds, by focusing on the issue.
I see data centers percolating far more in gubernatorial contests, and we’re just starting to see it as an issue playing out with 2028 hopefuls. Abbott has been under pressure from a surprisingly strong Democratic challenge by Gina Hinojosa, so his stance shows how vulnerable he might be on the issue.
Guida: There has been a lot of focus on Democratic candidates. Are there Republicans that impress you? Interesting voices? Surprises?
Taylor: One of Republicans’ best Senate recruits has been John E. Sununu, who is trying to win back his old Senate seat and testing whether New Hampshire voters’ fondness for his family can overcome federal partisanship. He’s a big reason Democrats can’t take their eyes off the Granite State. In Minnesota, the newly minted Republican Senate nominee Michele Tafoya is the type of candidate who should be competitive — a former sportscaster who claims she is pro-choice — but the state has been a tinderbox for the G.O.P., given Operation Metro Surge there this year.
In Maine, Susan Collins still has a fighting chance because of her seniority and her attention to her state and constituent services. In Iowa, Representative Ashley Hinson is actually a better candidate than the incumbent senator, Joni Ernst, would have been, but Trump’s tariffs and their effect on agriculture are hurting her. Even with good candidates, Trump remains the biggest hurdle for Republican candidates to overcome.
Guida: What are some of the most interesting gubernatorial races? Maybe ones that point to 2028, others that suggest where politics is heading in the future?
Taylor: Speaking of races being able to overcome partisanship, Iowa (Rob Sand) and Ohio (Amy Acton) are two of the most fascinating races to me this cycle because you have very viable Democrats running uniquely strong campaigns in red states. Their G.O.P. opponents have weaknesses they’ve been able to exploit, and both Democrats have broken with their parties on issues and rhetoric.
It goes back to the idea that Democrats just need to come across as normal and not woke. Josh Shapiro has done that in Pennsylvania. Andy Beshear did it in Kentucky, but is that what the party will be looking for in 2028? I’m not so sure.
Guida: You have covered races across the country. Has any particular region this election grabbed you? For its variety of races, characters — you name it?
Taylor: For me it’s the Midwest and whether Democrats can take advantage of how Trump has hurt the region. In Iowa, the Senate nominee Josh Turek talks about “prairie populism,” and that approach extends to longer-shot races in Kansas and Nebraska. Plus, in Michigan, does the tough environment for Republicans outweigh El-Sayed’s vulnerabilities? It may be harder for the Republican nominee, Mike Rogers, given his ties to Trump, to attack El-Sayed.
Guida: The midterm playing field is largely set. From where we are in August, what’s your best guess as to where the Senate races are trending? Your answer can be short — blue wave, shades of light blue, shrug emoji, red holds, shocking shade of red?
Taylor: I think we will see a light shade of blue, absent some resolution in Iran and gas prices and Trump’s approval rating stabilizing. North Carolina is the best chance of a pickup for Democrats, and Georgia is moving off the table as a hope for Republicans. The map still isn’t easy for Democrats, who have to win at least two states that Trump carried by double digits. But as our research and analysis at Cook shows, it can be done with the right circumstances. Democrats have to — and can — pitch a perfect game. But flipping a net of four seats or more is still tough.
