The 2026 midterm elections have several interesting dynamics. We have a president who has been elected twice, is considered unpopular, and has rarely polled above 50 percent popularity during his six years in office.
The economy is growing, but food prices are elevated, and inflation is creeping up. America has been fighting an off-and-on war against Iran. Plus a growing socialist movement has latched onto the face of the Democrat party like an alien egg-layer from a science fiction movie. We still don't know what will pop out if they win seats in Congress.
I have discussed the phenomenon of the silent Republican voter, or the hidden Trump vote, several times, notably here, here, and here. This phenomenon is real and occurred recently in the 2016, 2020, and 2024 presidential elections and the 2018 midterms.
Polls show Democrats leading most Senate races, and many pundits claim they are a shoo-in to win the House of Representatives. According to Gallup, in the 3rd quarter of 2026, political party affiliation is Democrat 30 percent, Republican 24 percent, and independent 46 percent. In 2024, Q3 numbers were D 30 percent, R 29 percent, and I 41 percent, indicating that 5 percent of the electorate switched from Republican to independent.
If we include leaners, things look even worse. The 2026 numbers show Democrats at 50 percent and Republicans at 37 percent. According to Gallup, Democrats gained 4 points over the past two years, while Republicans lost 10 points. Pew Research paints a slightly different picture. Here, Democrat affiliation is up 2 points, while Republicans are down 4.
There are two ways to look at this. One is that Democrats are doing a bang-up job of persuading voters that the economy sucks, and a significant fraction of Republicans agree.
The other is that Republicans are still there, but they aren't participating in political polls and may not want to admit they are Republican or leaning that way. Why? Social pressure may be the answer. Some poll respondents may refuse to admit they are voting Republican because they fear being judged by the polling organization, their friends, their family, or their employer.
So what does Republican poll bias have to do with Democrats?
The answer is that Democrats are no longer one big, happy voting bloc. They have been infected by a socialist movement that wants to eliminate Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), defund various police agencies, end private property, and pack the Supreme Court with leftists. This new contingent is generally pro-Palestinian and anti-Israel, among many other things.
Will all Democrats vote for this?
According to a Pew Research survey, 11 percent of Democrats or those leaning Democrat dislike their socialist brethren. The most interesting part is that the dislike is a solid 10 percent across all demographics. Among conservative and moderate Democrats, the dislike rises to 15 percent.
Could a significant number of Democrats jump the fence and vote Republican? Possibly. Since the socialists tend to be an unforgiving bunch, would right-leaning Democrats want to shout this from the rooftops? Probably not.
How would this affect the elections? My first thought is that the polls miss about 2 percent of Republican voters, since that seems to be the average number they miss for various reasons. Also, up to 10 percent of the Democrat vote could go against a socialist candidate, but that depends on the state.
Let's look at the Senate races that matter. All numbers come from Real Clear Polling as of 12 noon on October 29 and use multi-candidate polls unless otherwise stated.
Alaska: Peltola D 49.4, Sullivan R 48.2, Peltola +1.2. First, I am going to exclude the PPP survey because it includes registered voters, which is usually less accurate than likely-voter polls. Averaging the three most recent surveys gives us Peltola +1.0. Alaska is normally a Republican state and is difficult to poll because voters are spread in small pockets across the state. Both Peltola and Sullivan are known quantities. Add in the hidden R vote and the "two Sullivans" controversy, and the incumbent Sullivan squeaks it out by half a point.
Iowa: Turek D 45.7, Hinson R 46.0, Hinson +0.3. Averaging the three most recent polls gives Hinson +2.0 with about 5 percent undecided. Trump won Iowa by 13 points in 2024, and Republican messaging seems to be working. Hinson wins by 2.
Kansas: Hamilton D 44.8, Marshall R 45.5, Marshall +0.7. Averaging the three most recent polls gives us Marshall +0.3, with about 6 percent undecided. This suggests the race may be tightening. Given that Kansas hasn't elected a Democrat to the Senate in forever and Trump is trying to appease Kansas farmers, Marshall wins by 2.
Maine: Jackson D 48.7, Collins R 47.5, Jackson +1.4. Averaging the three most recent polls yields Jackson +2.0, suggesting Jackson is widening his lead. But this is driven by the latest CNN poll, which puts Jackson at +4. Averaging the three previous polls gives Jackson at +0.7, suggesting that the race is actually tightening. Maine is difficult to poll because of its population distribution, and Collins has a reputation for coming from behind. Add in the hidden Republican vote, and some potential Democrat crossover votes, and Collins wins by 2.
Michigan: El-Sayed D 46.8, Rogers R 43.8, El-Sayed +3.0. An average of the three most recent polls gives us El-Sayed +1.7, with about 6 percent undecided. One problem for El-Sayed is that he calls himself a Democratic Socialist and holds some highly controversial positions. Something tells me Democrat crossover votes will close the poll gap. Rogers wins by one.
Ohio: Brown D 46.8, Husted R 44.3, Brown +2.5. The three most recent polls average to Brown +2.3 with about 4.5 percent undecided. I am not sure whether this slight difference indicates a trend or reflects poll variation. There is enough undecided to give Husted a victory, along with the hidden Republican vote. However, Brown is a known personality and has served in the Senate before. Brown by one.
Texas: Talarico D 48.1, Paxton R 46.3, Talarico +1.8. Averaging the three most recent polls yields Talarico +1.0, so the race may be tightening. One thing I noticed in the University of Houston poll from 10/14 was the crosstab showing the split between party affiliation for each Senate candidate. Supposedly, 98 percent of Democrats support Talarico, and only 1 percent support Paxton. I find this difficult to believe. Remember the Pew survey that claims that 15 percent of conservative and moderate Democrats dislike socialists? If there is one state with conservative Democrat voters, it's Texas. Given that Talarico has previously made statements that paint him as a socialist, I suspect this race may come down to the wire, with Paxton winning.
Minnesota: Flanagan D 47.8, Tafoya R 42.7, Flanagan +5.1. This is from the head-to-head polling. One big problem is that the N.Y. Times–Siena Poll is way out of line at Flanagan +14. If we average the previous three polls, we get Flanagan +3. What is going on here? I know that the Times polls tend to lean left, but this seems suspicious. Perhaps the nice people of Minnesota have had enough of the rampant corruption, and there are enough Democrat crossover voters to push Tafoya to within striking distance. Is the Times worried that Flanagan will lose? Is this an attempt at voter suppression by making it look as though Tafoya doesn't have a prayer, or is it a mistake? I would love to call this for Michelle Tafoya, but Minnesota is a blue state, and I'll believe it when I see it. Right now, I think Flanagan wins by one.
Conclusion: My best guess is that Democrats pick up two Senate seats, perhaps even three. They are going to flip North Carolina, maybe Ohio, and possibly one of the others. I believe that Republicans will pick up Michigan. In any of these scenarios, Republicans keep the Senate. We'll see in a few days.
Image via Picryl.
Source link
