I\u2019ve seen enough. It\u2019s time to revise our expectations about the midterms.<\/p>\n
For more than a year now, conventional wisdom has been that Democrats would take back the House \u2014 but not the Senate \u2014 in the November midterms.<\/p>\n
That\u2019s because this year\u2019s Senate map would require Democrats to win numerous seats in red states.<\/p>\n
In fact, if you had asked me a couple of months ago, I would have told you that, yes, Democrats have a shot at the Senate, but in the same way my teenage son has a shot at someday dating Sydney Sweeney. Which is to say, technically possible but cosmically unlikely.<\/p>\n
But recent developments (such as President Trump\u2019s plunging approval ratings on the economy<\/a>) are encouraging me to revise my thinking.<\/p>\n I\u2019m not alone. Independent journalist Chris Cillizza recently observed<\/a> that for the first time ever, prediction markets like Polymarket and Kalshi showed Democrats with a narrow edge.<\/p>\n Now, prediction markets are not scientific. Neither, for that matter, is licking your finger and holding it up to the wind \u2014 but both have outperformed political polling at various times in the last couple of years.<\/p>\n The difference is that in prediction markets, people are wagering actual money, which tends to sharpen the mind in ways that answering a pollster\u2019s call during dinner does not.<\/p>\n Of course, you probably haven\u2019t heard much about this revised political outlook. That\u2019s because nobody has any incentive to shout it from the rooftops.<\/p>\n Democrats don\u2019t want to inflate expectations and risk turning a solid win into a perceived disappointment. Republicans, meanwhile, are not eager to advertise that their Senate majority is wobbling like a shopping cart with a bad wheel. And we pundits, chastened by having been burned, are reluctant to get too far out over our skis.<\/p>\n Even Cillizza still leans Republican on balance. But if I had to bet today \u2014 and I tend to define bet as \u201cregret later\u201d \u2014 I\u2019d put my chips on the Democrats. Not because it\u2019s a sure thing, but because almost every political and economic development seems to be trending in their direction.<\/p>\n History helps. The \u201cout\u201d party in the midterms usually does well. Current events help. Policies, including the war in Iran and rising gas prices<\/a>, tend to sour voters on whoever\u2019s in charge. And candidate quality helps. Voters do occasionally notice who\u2019s actually on the ballot, and Democrats are serving up a semi-respectable offering.<\/p>\n Let\u2019s pause to appreciate what\u2019s at stake. Control of the Senate isn\u2019t just about who gets the nicer office furniture. It determines judicial confirmations, including the possibility that Trump could fill a fourth Supreme Court vacancy (if one opens up in 2027 or 2028).<\/p>\n Now, it would be irresponsible of me to just drop this idea without delving into some logistical details.<\/p>\n For Democrats to flip the Senate, they need to net four seats. That means defending everything they already have while winning four more. The encouraging news (if you\u2019re rooting for the Democrats) is that there are at least eight plausible opportunities for that to happen.<\/p>\n In North Carolina, incumbent Gov. Roy Cooper, a Democrat, is widely expected to win. In Maine, Republican Sen. Susan Collins once again finds herself in a political knife fight \u2014 her natural habitat, though perhaps not her preferred one. She will face Maine\u2019s current governor or a flamboyant and controversial oysterman. I\u2019m not sure who\u2019d be the tougher opponent.<\/p>\n Out in Ohio, former Sen. Sherrod Brown benefits from the rare political skill of being a Democrat who still seems at home in Ohio.<\/p>\n The Democrat running in Alaska is a former member of Congress (and the first Alaska Native elected to Congress). And for the open seat in Iowa, Democrats seem likely to nominate a two-time Paralympic gold medalist who represents the reddest state house seat held by a Democrat.<\/p>\n Then there\u2019s Texas, the perennial Democratic mirage \u2014 always shimmering on the horizon. But this year, it might come into clear view. James Talarico has emerged for Democrats<\/a>, while Republicans are stuck choosing between scandal-plagued Atty. Gen. Ken Paxton and incumbent Sen. John Cornyn \u2014 a process that currently resembles a family feud conducted with vicious attack ads.<\/p>\n Meanwhile, in Nebraska and Montana, Democrats aren\u2019t even pretending to compete. Instead, they\u2019re relying on independents who \u2014 like Sens. Bernie Sanders and Angus King \u2014 would likely caucus with them.<\/p>\n In Nebraska, independent Dan Osborn already proved he can make it close: He lost in 2024 \u2014 a bad year to run against a Republican. And in Montana, the sudden announced retirement of Sen. Steve Daines has created an opening that didn\u2019t exist five minutes ago (in political time).<\/p>\n Let\u2019s not get carried away. The idea that Democrats could sweep all these races is still the kind of thing you say after your third drink. But winning half of them? That\u2019s no longer fantasy. That\u2019s \u2026 plausible. Maybe even more likely than not.<\/p>\n This isn\u2019t a safe bet. It\u2019s not even a comfortable one. But for the first time, it\u2019s starting to look like smart money isn\u2019t laughing at the idea anymore \u2014 it\u2019s quietly sliding chips across the table.<\/p>\n Matt K. Lewis is the author of \u201cFilthy Rich Politicians<\/a>\u201d and \u201cToo Dumb to Fail<\/a>.\u201d<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"I\u2019ve seen enough. It\u2019s time to revise our expectations about the midterms. For more than a year now,…\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":228480,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[27],"tags":[1752,2798,17980,1751,7039,4681,48,52,51,47,50,49,103807,10308,9437,77475,6214,36523,18764,315,72],"class_list":["post-228479","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","category-los-angeles","tag-congress","tag-couple","tag-democrat","tag-democrats","tag-expectation","tag-idea","tag-la","tag-la-headlines","tag-la-news","tag-los-angeles","tag-los-angeles-headlines","tag-los-angeles-news","tag-midterm","tag-montana","tag-ohio","tag-prediction-market","tag-republican","tag-same-way","tag-senate","tag-time","tag-year"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/228479","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=228479"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/228479\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/228480"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=228479"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=228479"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=228479"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}