It Was a Quarter-Century Flood

The scale of the Democrats' victory is still revealing itself. It is massive. Let's look at the macro aspects now. We will discuss individual winners and losers later this week. The AP has now called 254 House seats for the Democrats and 162 for the Republicans, with 19 still too close to call yet. The Democrats are likely to hit 260 seats.

Here is a map showing the shift per House district since 2024. With only a handful of exceptions, every district in the country moved toward the Democrats. The scale of the Democrats victory is gigantic.

Here are the results of recent House elections. And while we are at it, the Senate ones as well. The percentages are of the popular vote. The difference between the parties' votes in the House this year is likely to be about D+13. The polls were predicting D+8 to D+11. Democratic turnout was unexpectedly high:

House Year Dem seats Dem % GOP seats GOP % 2026 26x 55.7% ca. 170 (?) 42.9% 2024 215 47.2% 220 49.8% 2022 213 47.3% 222 50.0% 2020 222 50.3% 213 47.2% 2018 235 53.4% 199 44.8% 2016 194 47.3% 241 48.3% 2014 188 45.5% 247 51.2% 2012 201 48.8% 234 47.7% 2010 193 44.9% 242 51.7% 2008 257 52.9% 178 42.4% 2006 233 52.3% 202 44.3% 2004 202 46.8% 232 49.4% 2002 205 45.2% 229 50.0% 2000 212 47.1% 221 47.6%

Senate Year Dem seats Dem % GOP seats GOP % 2026 54-56 ? 46-44 ? 2024 47 50.2% 53 47.7% 2022 51 50.7% 49 47.4% 2020 50 47.3% 50 49.3% 2018 47 59.1% 53 38.7% 2016 48 53.6% 52 42.2% 2014 46 45.3% 54 51.5% 2012 55 54.4% 45 41.8% 2010 53 45.3% 47 48.2% 2008 59 52.2% 41 44.5% 2006 51 54.6% 49 41.8% 2004 45 51.0% 55 45.3% 2002 49 46.8% 51 49.9% 2000 50 47.0% 50 47.0%

As you can see, the Democrats are going to have more seats in the House than either party has had in the past 25+ years. That is a huge win. If they get to 56 Senate seats (by winning Alaska and Mississippi) that will be more than either party has had other than what the Democrats had for the 2-year period 2009-2011. By recent historical standards these majorities are huge.

Now, what about governors? If Jonathan Kreiss-Tomkins (D) and Cindy Holscher (D) end up winning the elections in which they are currently leading—in Alaska and Kansas, respectively—the Democrats will have 30 governorships and the Republicans will have 20. How does that stack up in the context of the past quarter-century? Here are the data:

Governors
Year	Dems	GOP	Inds
2026	30	20	0
2025	24	26	0
2024	23	27	0
2023	23	27	0
2022	24	26	0
2021	22	28	0
2020	24	26	0
2019	23	27	0
2018	23	27	0
2017	16	33	1
2016	16	33	1
2015	18	31	1
2014	18	31	1
2013	20	30	0
2012	20	30	0
2011	20	29	1
2010	26	24	0
2009	28	22	0
2008	28	22	0
2007	28	22	0
2006	22	28	0
2005	22	28	0
2004	22	28	0
2003	23	27	0
2002	22	27	1
2001	19	29	2
2000	18	30	2

Since 2000, the Democrats have never had more than 28 governorships, so this would be a 21st-century record for them. The Republicans had 30 in 2000 and a good run with 33 for 2 years after the election of Donald Trump in 2016. Then they lost 6 in 2018.

All in all, this is a high point for Democrats. They haven't had over 260 House seats in a quarter-century and in one election when they more senators than now (2008), they had fewer House seats and fewer governorships. Now it is up to them to do something with this new power. That is a subject we will begin to address in great depth tomorrow. (V)

Democrats Will Probably Have 30 Governorships in January

State governments are important to the daily lives of most Americans. They set the state minimum wage, decide if abortion and marijuana are legal in the state, conduct elections, manage public health, run social welfare programs, the state police, and license a wide variety of professionals to protect the health and safety of people living in the state, allow or don't allow charter schools, and so much more. Oh, and in many states, the state legislature draws the congressional map and maps for the state Senate and House/Assembly. If the Democrats hold their majorities through 2030, the implications of that could be significant.

As we note above, the Democrats are about to reach a high-water mark for governorships, at least by recent standards. Let's dive down now and look at the governors' races in more detail now. Before the elections, Democrats controlled 24 of the 50 state governor's mansions. They probably flipped six or seven states and will have 30—a majority—in January. We say "probably" because Kansas and Alaska haven't been called yet, but in Kansas, Cindy Holscher is leading by 8,000 votes and in Alaska, the ranked choice voting has to play out, but Jonathan Kreiss-Tomkins has 49.1%, which is his floor, and he will probably pick up some second- or third- place votes because the leading Republican, the super-Trumper Bernadette Wilson, is surely unacceptable to some moderate Republican voters. Alternatively, some Republicans may not fill in second and third choices, thus exhausting their ballots on the second or third round. Once those ballots are exhausted, then Kreiss-Tomkins' current 103,837 votes will not be 49.1% of the total, they will be 49.5% or 50% or 51%.

Governors also have the ability to cooperate with ICE or use their powers to oppose ICE in various ways including use of the National Guard to protect the people of their state in an emergency. For people who have been terrorized by ICE, having the governor on their side can be a relief. Governors are important.

Starting in January, 75% Americans will have a Democratic governor and 53% will live in a state with Democratic trifecta. The states that will have a Democratic governor in January together have 385 electoral votes.

This shouldn't be important, but it unfortunately it is. After a presidential election, the governor signs the certificate of ascertainment, which specifies who the presidential electors are and sends copies to the archivist of the United States, the president of the U.S. Senate, and other officials specified by federal law. Any attempt to monkey with election results will need the governor's signature or it will be discarded immediately as fake. Having Democratic governors in 30 states, including 13 of the 14 most populous ones (the exception being Florida) means Republican attempts to interfere with the election results will be blocked at the source in these 13 states.

In addition, sitting governors have mailing lists of donors and a pretty good knowledge of the state and its politics, certainly after they've been in office for a couple of years. Many governors have a state political machine they control. The 2028 Democratic presidential nominee will be able to call on these resources in a major part of the country, which will surely be helpful. The Republican nominee will get this kind of help in only one state with a population greater than 7.5 million: Florida.

Here is a table showing the 2026 election results for governor, with the old governor, the new governor, and the margin of victory for each race:

State	Old governor	New governor	Margin	Result
Alabama	Kay Ivey (R)	Tommy Tuberville (R)	R+4	New Republican
Alaska	Mike Dunleavy (R)	Jonathan Kreiss-Tomkins (D)	D+20	Flipped R to D
Arizona	Katie Hobbs (D)	Katie Hobbs (D)	D+13	Democratic hold
Arkansas	Sarah Huckabee Sanders (R)	Sarah Huckabee Sanders (R)	R+15	Republican hold
California	Gavin Newsom (D)	Xavier Becerra (D)	D+29	New Democrat
Colorado	Jared Polis (D)	Phil Weiser (D)	D+29	New Democrat
Connecticut	Ned Lamont (D)	Ned Lamont (D)	D+19	Democratic hold
Delaware	Matt Meyer (D)	(No election)
Florida	Ron DeSantis (R)	Byron Donalds (R)	R+1	New Republican
Georgia	Brian Kemp (R)	Keisha Lance Bottoms (D)	D+9	Flipped R to D
Hawaii	Josh Green (D)	Josh Green (D)	D+45	Democratic hold
Idaho	Brad Little (R)	Brad Little (R)	R+15	Republican hold
Illinois	J.B. Pritzker (D)	J.B. Pritzker (D)	D+23	Democratic hold
Indiana	Mike Braun (R)	(No election)
Iowa	Kim Reynolds (R)	Rob Sand (D)	D+11	Flipped R to D
Kansas	Laura Kelly (D)	Cindy Holscher (?)	D+1	Probably new Democrat
Kentucky	Andy Beshear (D)	(No election)
Louisiana	Jeff Landry (R)	(No election)
Maine	Janet Mills (D)	Hannah Pingree (D)	D+17	New Democrat
Maryland	Wes Moore (D)	Wes Moore (D)	D+31	Democratic hold
Massachusetts	Maura Healey (D)	Maura Healey (D)	D+27	Democratic hold
Michigan	Gretchen Whitmer (D)	Jocelyn Benson (D)	D+11	New Democrat
Minnesota	Tim Walz (DFL)	Amy Klobuchar (DFL)	D+13	New Democrat
Mississippi	Tate Reeves (R)	(No election)
Missouri	Mike Kehoe (R)	(No election)
Montana	Greg Gianforte (R)	(No election)
Nebraska	Jim Pillen (R)	Jim Pillen (R)	R+8	Republican hold
Nevada	Joe Lombardo (R)	Aaron Ford (D)	D+8	Flipped R to D
New Hampshire	Kelly Ayotte (R)	Kelly Ayotte (R)	R+4	Republican hold
New Jersey	Mikie Sherrill (D)	(No election)
New Mexico	Michelle Lujan Grisham (D)	Deb Haaland (D)	D+15	New Democrat
New York	Kathy Hochul (D)	Kathy Hochul (D)	D+20	Democratic hold
North Carolina	Josh Stein (D)	(No election)
North Dakota	Kelly Armstrong (R)	(No election)
Ohio	Mike DeWine (R)	Amy Acton (D)	D+8	Flipped R to D
Oklahoma	Kevin Stitt (R)	Mike Mazzei (R)	R+6	New Republican
Oregon	Tina Kotek (D)	Tina Kotek (D)	D+8	Democratic hold
Pennsylvania	Josh Shapiro (D)	Josh Shapiro (D)	D+22	Democratic hold
Rhode Island	Daniel McKee (D)	Helena Foulkes (D)	D+30	New Democrat
South Carolina	Henry McMaster (R)	Alan Wilson (R)	R+5	New Republican
South Dakota	Larry Rhoden (R)	Larry Rhoden (R)	R+27	Republican hold
Tennessee	Bill Lee (R)	Marsha Blackburn (R)	R+3	New Republican
Texas	Greg Abbott (R)	Gina Hinojosa (D)	D+7	Flipped R to D
Utah	Spencer Cox (R)	(No election)
Vermont	Phil Scott (R)	Phil Scott (R)	R+7	Republican hold
Virginia	Abigail Spanberger (D)	(No election)
Washington	Bon Ferguson (D)	(No election)
West Virginia	Patrick Morrissey (R)	(No election)
Wisconsin	Tony Evers (D)	David Crowley (D)	D+8	New Democrat
Wyoming	Mark Gordon (R)	Eric Barlow (R)	R+52	New Republican

Below is a table summarizing how the gubernatorial elections went from a partisan viewpoint, again assuming Cindy Holscher (D-KS) and Jonathan Kreiss-Tomkins (D-AK) ultimately win their elections:

Description of what happened	#
No election in 2026 (Incumbent Democratic governor)	6
Incumbent Democratic governor was reelected	9
New Democratic governor	8
Flipped Republican to Democratic	7
Total Democratic governors	30
No election in 2026 (Incumbent Republican governor)	8
Incumbent Republican governor was reelected	6
New Republican governor	6
Flipped Democratic to Republican	0
Total Republican governors	20

The governors are quite diverse. Seventeen (or eighteen, if Holscher wins) governors are women. Four governors are Black. These two sets intersect in Georgia, with the first Black woman ever to serve as state governor (Keisha Lance Bottoms). There will be two openly gay governors (Tina Kotek, D-OR and Maura Healey, D-MA), down from three with the retirement of Gov. Jared Polis (D-CO). There will be five Jewish governors (Amy Acton, D-OH; Josh Green, D-HI; J.B. Pritzker, D-IL; Josh Shapiro, D-PA and Josh Stein, D-NC). Six are Catholics (Kelly Ayotte, R-NH; Xavier Becerra, D-CA; Deb Haaland, D-NM; Gina Hinojosa, D-TX; Kathy Hochul, D-NY and Jim Pillen, R-NE). Also, two Latinos (Gina Hinojosa, D-TX and Xavier Becerra, D-CA) and one Native American (Deb Haaland, D-NM). Twenty-five of the governors in Jan. 2027—only half—will be straight, white, Christian men. That demographic used to be the overwhelming majority.

Governors have a lot of power in some states, less in others. When Republican administrations give money to states, it is often in the form of block grants that give the governor the power to decide how to spend the money within broad limits. For example, a Republican governor might use a block grant in healthcare to open yoga centers in wealthy counties. A Democratic governor might use that money to open free urgent-care clinics in poor counties. These are things voters actually notice.

Three states have a gubernatorial election in 2027: Kentucky, Louisiana, and Mississippi. One of those states (Kentucky) has a term-limited Democratic governor, one (Louisiana) had a Democratic governor (John Bel Edwards) immediately before the current governor, and one (Mississippi) may be on the cusp of electing a Black U.S. Senator. So, if this was 2016, you would have to guess there would not be much for us to write about next year. But in 2026? There's reason to believe any or all could be quite interesting. (V)

Democrats Also Won Downballot

The blue tsunami was deep, as well as wide. Senators and governors had coattails that pulled in a variety of candidates for lower offices. Forty-five states have a lieutenant governor, although most of them have nothing to do all day. In a few states, the lieutenant governor has another function other than waiting for the governor to die. Sometimes that is presiding over the state Senate, sometimes it is doing the work of a secretary of state since there is no actual secretary of state. But on the whole, it is a thankless job other than sometimes being a stepping stone to the governorship. In 26 states, the governor and lieutentant are elected on a joint ticket (like president and vice president), but in 17 states, the LG is elected independently of the governor. In two states, the president of the state Senate also holds the title of lieutentant governor and becomes governor if the governor dies or resigns.

Having a separate election for lieutenant governor means that the governor and lieutenant are sometimes from different parties, with the lieutenant constantly trying to undermine the governor. Sometimes they are from different wings for the same party and are also taking potshots at each other all day. Nine states had an election for LG last week. If you have nothing better to do and want to learn more about them, here is a link.

Here is some evidence of how unimportant the LGs are. As readers probably know, when one party holds the governorship and both chambers of the state legislature, it is called a trifecta (except in unicameral Nebraska, where it is a bifecta). When one party holds the top three executive offices in a state, it is called a triplex. And what might those offices be? They are the governor, attorney general, and secretary of state. Lieutenant governors are so unimportant that there not even a name for a party holding the governorship, lieutenant governorship, and AG position. Enough said about the hapless LGs.

In 44 states, the AG is elected in a partisan election. In four, the AG is a gubernatorial appointee. In Maine the state legislature does the appointing and in Tennessee the state Supreme Court appoints the AG.

The tsunami allowed the Democrats to flip the AG office in five states: Georgia, Kansas, Iowa, Ohio and Texas This means that the new AGs (yes, technically AsG, but please) will work together with the Democratic governors of those states and file endless lawsuits against the administration, often together with the new and continuing Democratic AGs in the blue states. All in all, 28 states plus D.C. will have Democratic AGs and the lawsuits will fly like 17-year cicadas in the 17th year. Of course the Democratic AGs will also work on "normal" issues like consumer protection, algorithmic price setting, misuse of AI, price gouging and fixing, and more. The AGs can also decide if prosecuting people for violating abortion laws or for violating tax laws has the higher priority. Here is a list of the winning AGs. We'll have an item later this week with more on the implications of the Democrats taking over some of these attorney generalships.

Before getting into the state legislatures, let's take a quick look at other statewide elected offices. Most states typically have six to eight offices, including governor, lieutenant governor, AG, secretary of state, treasurer/auditor/comptroller, school superintendent, and in some states agricultural commissioner, commissioner of public utilities, insurance commissioner, and a few random others, depending on the state. Democrats swept every single statewide executive office on the ballot in Arizona, Georgia, Nevada, Ohio, Texas, and Wisconsin. TEXAS!!! They now hold every state office in all these states except the Ohio auditor, who escaped because he wasn't on the ballot. Here are the offices in these states:

Democrats flipped the secretary of state position in Georgia, Indiana, and Ohio, and those secretaries will run the elections in 2028.

In addition, Democrats did well in elections for seats on public utilities commissions, which gives them power to approve or reject proposed rate changes for electricity, always a hot topic. Democrats also won four seats on the Texas Supreme Court, which is now 5-4 for the Republicans instead of 9-0. The five remaining Republican justices also now have an excellent idea of which way the wind is blowing, which could impact upcoming decisions. The Democrats winning the Texas Senate race and all the statewide offices is going to force the Republicans to spend a lot of money in 2028 in a very expensive state. And, as Elon Musk learned the hard way, spending a lot of money is no guarantee of winning. Or even making it close.

Now onto the state legislatures, where the Democrats also triumphed in many states. The Democrats are set to flip about 12 state legislature chambers, dismantle five Republican trifectas, break 11 Republican supermajorities, and construct 12 of their own supermajorities. In January, Democrats will control 51 of the 99 chambers, up from 39 now. One of the chambers with a new Democratic majority is the Texas House, but Republicans held the Texas Senate. Republicans will drop from 57 to 46 chambers they control. The others were tied or had bipartisan coalitions.

Of course, winning many gubernatorial races and flipping state legislative chambers like pancakes brings up the subject of trifectas. Right now, Republicans have 22 trifectas and the Nebraska bifecta vs. the Democrats' 16. The other 12 states have divided government. Starting in January, Democrats will probably have 22 trifectas to the Republicans' 18. Some state races haven't been called yet, but here are the most likely results for states where something changed:

Democrats can use their new trifectas to pass many bills that will directly affect millions of people. They can raise minimum wages, give public workers the right to form unions, mandate paid sick and child care leave, change election laws to make it easier to vote (e.g., more days and hours for early voting, same day registration) and faster to count the votes (by allowing absentee ballots to be counted the day they arrive), expand Medicaid eligibility, increase or decrease sales taxes (and what items are exempt from them), and much more. While the federal government is unlikely to pass many laws helping people in the next two years, if 20 new free urgent-care clinics are opened in a state or a state decides to accept the ACA Medicaid expansion, a Democratic governor can make sure the voters know which party did that. If done right, Democrats may not be able to deliver many goodies at the federal level, but they certainly can in many states starting in January. Not to keep beating a dead horse, but look for a more detailed piece on this subject in the near future.

The executive summary here is this: Republicans spent 16 years building power in state legislatures and the voters erased it all in one frantic night. In this way, the Democrats have finally reversed the single-biggest error Barack Obama made as a party leader, as he allowed the blue team to focus almost exclusively on high-profile and/or federal offices at the expense of downballot state offices. (V)

Ballot Measures: The Voters Decide

There were controversial ballot measures in many states. Here is a summary of the results. See also here.

Elections

• Maryland: Measure to redraw the map to capture the only GOP House seat passed 61/39.
• Missouri: Measure to change the map to eliminate a Democratic House seat failed 38/62.
• Alaska: Measure to repeal ranked-choice voting failed 48/52.
• Alaska: Measure to require U.S. citizenship to vote in state elections passed 70/30.
• Arizona: Measure to require voter ID passed 53/47.
• Arkansas: Measure to require U.S. citizenship to vote in state elections passed 69/31.
• Colorado: Measure to require midcycle redistricting to be approved by state Supreme Court failed 47/53.
• Michigan: Measure to ban utility companies from making political donations passed 82/19.
• Montana: Measure to ban campaign spending by artificial persons (e.g., corporations) passed 65/35.
• South Dakota: Measure to require 60% supermajority for future constitutional amendments failed 42/58.
• Virginia: Measure to automatically restore voting rights to felons upon release from prison passed 57/42.

Note that voting in federal elections is already limited to U.S. citizens, but some localities allow noncitizens to vote in municipal elections. Some of these ballot measures are rather subtle. For example, Colorado Democrats are planning to regerrymander the congressional districts next year to pick up another seat. The ballot measure was put up by Republicans who hoped it would pass and then the state Supreme Court would block the new map.

Abortion

• Idaho: Measure to establish a legal right to an abortion failed 44/56.
• Missouri: Measure to repeal abortion rights failed 45/55.
• Virginia: Measure to create a constitutional right to an abortion passed 63/38.
• Nevada: Measure to create a constitutional right to an abortion passed 64/37.

Taxes

• Arizona: Measure to limit taxes on groceries passed 62/38.
• California: Measure to tax the wealth of billionaires failed 47/53.
• California: Measure to permanently extend tax on high earners ($371,000+/year) passed 60/40.
• California: Measure to require future measures that increase taxes to get two-thirds majority failed 43/57.
• Washington: Measure to repeal the 9.9% income tax on annual income above $1 million failed 42/58.

Gender

• Arizona: Measure to restrict school bathrooms and sports by sex at birth passed 59/41.
• Colorado: Measure to restrict school sports teams by biological sex passed 52/48.
• Colorado: Measure to ban gender reassignment surgery for minors passed 52/48.
• Washington: Measure requirng schools to notify parents before providing medical services to children failed 48/52.

Immigration and Crime

• Arizona: Measure to declare drug cartels terrorist organizations passed 57/43.
• Colorado: Measure to require the state to notify DHS after charging an undocumented immigrant failed 45/55.

Schools

• Alabama: Measure requiring students to recite the pledge of allegiance passed 63/37.
• Alabama: Measure requiring schools to play the national anthem once a week passed 59/41.

Miscellaneous

• Arizona: Measure to expand the ban on preferential treatment by race (this would forbid DEI) passed 60/40.
• Arizona: Measure to restrict Flock and other traffic cameras passed 62/38.
• Arkansas: Measure to expand state right to keep and bear arms passed 71/29.
• D.C.: Measure to ban force-feeding of birds and the sale of foie gras passed 73/27.
• Idaho: Voters selected the Winchester Model 1873 as the official state gun over five others.
• Kentucky: Measure to amend the Constitution to limit the power of the governor to issue pardons passed 71/29.
• Massachusetts: Measure to repeal the law legalizing the sale of marijuana in the state failed 24/76.

There were 41 local ballot measures banning or restricting the construction of new data centers in 10 states. 40 of them passed. Only the one in Harwood, ND, failed. Over half were in Ohio, where Sherrod Brown opposed data centers and blamed them on Sen. Jon Husted (R-OH).

This is just a small sample of the hundreds of state an local ballot measures. But the recurrent themes are that people are generally not happy about concentration of wealth, restrictions on abortion, and data centers. (V)

Will the Electoral College Go the Way of the Rotten Boroughs?

You may recall briefly hearing about the rotten boroughs in England in a high school class on European history. The boroughs (analogous to congressional districts) used in England in the 19th century to elect members to the House of Commons were frozen in time for hundreds of years. In many cases, nearly all the peasants around some castle left over the years, leaving the lord of the manor as the only voter, who was nevertheless entitled to an M.P. for that borough. The Reform Act of 1832 got rid of them.

The Electoral College in the U.S. is America's answer to the rotten boroughs. A presidential elector in California represents 740,000 people whereas one in Wyoming represents 196,000 people, meaning that a vote in Wyoming counts 3.8x more heavily than one in California. The Electoral College also means that presidential candidates campaign in only about seven states, ignoring the other 43, except for quick fundraising trips once in a while.

Eliminating the Electoral College would require amending the Constitution, which needs a two-thirds majority in each chamber of Congress and ratification by three-fourths of the state legislatures and the governor's signature. Since passing such an amendment would take political power from underpopulated rural states (which vote Republican) and give it to heavily populated urban states (which mostly vote Democratic, especially these days), there is no way on God's green earth this is ever going to happen.

However, some clever Democratic lawyers thought of a workaround. It is called the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact (NPVIC). It relies on two clauses on the Constitution. Art. II Sec. 1 Clause 2 reads:

Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress: but no Senator or Representative, or Person holding an Office of Trust or Profit under the United States, shall be appointed an Elector.

This means the legislature, by law, can decide how its presidential electors are chosen. It can run an election with slates of electors pledged to a presidential candidate with the statewide winner getting all the electors, but it doesn't have to. Maine and Nebraska don't do this. If Virginia passed a law saying that any Virginia voter who wanted to run for elector could pay a $100 filing fee and get on the ballot, then people would vote for their favorite elector and the top 13 vote getters would be the 13 official electors. Or the legislature could skip the election altogether and appoint the 13 electors itself. This was actually the norm in most states from 1789 to the 1830s. The last state to introduce popular elections for elector was South Carolina in 1860.

Meanwhile, here is Art. I, Sec 10, Clause 3 of the Constitution:

No State shall, without the Consent of Congress, lay any Duty of Tonnage, keep Troops, or Ships of War in time of Peace, enter into any Agreement or Compact with another State, or with a foreign Power, or engage in War, unless actually invaded, or in such imminent Danger as will not admit of delay.

In a somewhat backhanded way, the Constitution says that states may form compacts (agreements) among themselves, subject to congressional approval. For example, states bordering a river could make an agreement how much water each state may take from the river.

What the NPVIC says is that the legislatures in the signatory states have agreed to cast all of their electoral votes for the winner of the national popular vote for president, regardless of who won the state vote. However, it kicks in only when the total number of electoral votes in the member states hits 50% + 1 of the total number of electoral votes (currently 270). Eighteen states and D.C. have signed on. Together they currently have 222 electoral votes, although that can change after each census. States with another 48 electoral votes are needed to activate the Compact. Here is a map showing the signatory states:

In the map, green means enacted and yellow means pending.

Here's where it gets interesting. Democrats suddenly have the trifecta in new states. Here they are, with the respective numbers of electoral votes: Arizona (11), Michigan (15), Nevada (6), Pennsylvania (19), and Wisconsin (10). Together they have 61 electoral votes. If states with at least 48 EVs sign up, the Compact will be ready to go. So for example, Pennsylvania + Wisconsin + Michigan is 44. Add in either of Arizona or Nevada and bingo, you hit the magic number.

Michigan and Nevada have tried to join before, but the votes weren't there, even though Democrats had the trifecta. But with the 2030 census looming, and a major loss of electoral votes in the blue states virtually certain, they could try again.

Approval of Congress is needed. That's in the text. However, there is nothing there about presidential approval or a possible presidential veto. This means if the Democrats decide to play hardball—and given all the illegal things Donald Trump has done, why wouldn't they?—the 120th Congress could approve the Compact next year.

Of course, the filibuster is an issue, but it is easily dealt with. Senate rules specify that many kinds of votes cannot be filibustered. These are known as carve-outs. They include budget reconciliation, confirmation of judges and justices, fast-track trade agreements, impeachment procedures, debt limit, and many more. New carve-outs can be added by a simple majority vote of the Senate. So if enough new states join the NPVIC in 2027, Congress could add a carve-out and then approve the Compact. Alternatively, the Democrats could force the Republicans to stand in the well of the Senate and read the Bible, Macbeth, or the Dallas phone book for days on end until they physically dropped on the floor and there was a big pile of senators lying there. This approach would bring public attention to the fact that Republicans were actively trying block election of the president by popular vote, something the public supports 56% to 23%. Making the Republicans the "bad guys" here would probably help the Democrats in 2028.

One possible way this could go wrong is that Republicans could appeal to the Supreme Court, which could rule that yup, the president must sign the bill to approve the Compact, even though the Constitution doesn't give the president any role here. If that happened and if the Democrats have the trifecta in 2029, Congress could try again and get the president's signature. Alternatively, it could expand the Supreme Court and/or strip it of the jurisdiction to rule on cases involving interstate compacts. (V)

How Long Can the Democrats Hold the Senate?

This year's elections upended everything. Could the 2028 elections upend everything again—and go the other way? Since the entire House is up in 2028, a massive red tsunami (which is different from a red tide, but almost as dangerous) is definitely possible, with a Republican capturing the White House and Republicans getting 250+ seats in the House. However, if a Democrat is elected president it is exceedingly unlikely that the Democrats will simultaneously lose 40+ seats in the House. In that case, they are more likely to hold most of their own House seats and maybe pick up more.

However, the Senate is a different story. Since only one-third of the Senate is up every cycle, there are limits on how much it can swing in any election year. In particular, could Republicans capture the Senate in 2028 and potentially get a trifecta, or could the Democrats hold the Senate even in the event of a red tsunami? Nate Silver already took a look, but here is our take.

First, here is the final 2022 election map for the Class III senators, all of whom will be up in 2028:

After the 2022 election, there were 14 Democratic senators and 20 Republican senators in the class. There were also special elections for Kamala Harris' seat in California and Jim Inhofe's seat in Oklahoma. They won't be back in 2028. A couple of the winners are no longer in the Senate. Marco Rubio has been replaced by Ashley Moody (R-FL) and J.D. Vance has been replaced by Sherrod Brown (D-OH), so Democrats will be defending 15 seats and Republicans will be defending 19 seats, a small advantage for the Democrats.

Now let's look more closely at the list of Class III senators up in 2028. Here is the list, sorted by party:

State	Incumbent	Age in 2028
Democrats
Arizona	Mark Kelly (D)	64
California	Alex Padilla (D)	55
Colorado	Michael Bennet (D)	64
Connecticut	Richard Blumenthal (D)	82
Georgia	Raphael Warnock (D)	59
Hawaii	Brian Schatz (D)	56
Illinois	Tammy Duckworth (D)	60
Maryland	Chris Van Hollen (D)	69
New Hampshire	Maggie Hassan (D)	70
Nevada	Catherine Cortez Masto (D)	64
New York	Chuck Schumer (D)	78
Ohio	Sherrod Brown (D)	76
Oregon	Ron Wyden (D)	79
Pennsylvania	John Fetterman (D)	59
Vermont	Peter Welch (D)	79
Washington	Patty Murray (D)	78
Republicans
Alaska	Lisa Murkowski (R)	71
Alabama	Katie Britt (R)	46
Arkansas	John Boozman (R)	78
Florida	Ashley Moody (R)	53
Iowa	Chuck Grassley (R)	95
Idaho	Mike Crapo (R)	77
Indiana	Todd Young (R)	56
Kansas	Jerry Moran (R)	74
Kentucky	Rand Paul (R)	65
Louisiana	John Kennedy (R)	77
Missouri	Eric Schmitt (R)	53
North Carolina	Ted Budd (R)	57
North Dakota	John Hoeven (R)	71
Oklahoma	James Lankford (R)	60
South Carolina	Tim Scott (R)	63
South Dakota	John Thune (R)	67
Utah	Mike Lee (R)	57
Wisconsin	Ron Johnson (R)	73

If every incumbent is reelected, the Democrats will continue their majority of 54-56 seats, depending on who wins Alaska and Mississippi.

Now let us look at possible flips. The most likely reason for a flip is that the incumbent barely won last time and the other side finds a bang-up candidate this time, or else a seat becomes open due to a retirement or death. First, which seats could the Democrats lose? We will start out by going on a limb and making a prediction: Sen. John Fetterman (D-PA) will not be a senator on Jan. 4, 2029. He hates being in the Senate, his party hates him being in the Senate, and Pennsylvania Democrats hate him being in the Senate. If he doesn't retire, he will be primaried and lose the primary. There is no shortage of ambitious Pennsylvania Democrats who are interested in challenging him. An open seat in a swing state is a potential Republican pickup.

Next up is Sen. Mark Kelly (D-AZ). Arizona law allows candidates to run for president and the Senate at the same time, so Kelly can file for both. If he gets the Democratic nomination, he will probably resign his Senate seat in late spring and let Gov. Katie Hobbs (D-AZ) appoint an interim Democratic senator, who will have to run (for a full term) in Nov. 2028. That's two potential open seats and Republican pickups.

Sherrod Brown will have to run for a full term in 2028. That makes three potentially competitive seats.

What about retirements? Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-CT) will be 82 in 2028 and might retire. Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) will be 78 and might retire, possibly voluntarily, or maybe involuntarily if Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) decides that an easy Senate run is a better idea than an exceedingly difficult presidential run. Sen. Ron Wyden (D-OR) will be 79 and Sen. Patty Murray (D-WA) will be 78. All of these folks could retire, but it is hard to imagine Republicans winning in blue, blue Connecticut, New York, Oregon, or Washington, even if there open seats there. There are more than enough battle-tested Democrats in those states.

So our first guess is that there might be three competitive races for the Democrats, in Pennsylvania, Ohio, and Arizona (but only if Kelly gets the Democratic presidential nomination). If the Democrats lose Alaska and Mississippi this year and all three of these seats in 2028, they will still have at least 51 seats and control of the Senate. This means that unless Justice Samuel Alito resigns within a month (or so), he will have to continue serving until Jan. 3, 2031, if he wants a Republican successor.

But what about the Republicans? Are there any trouble spots there? You betcha. Sen. Ron Johnson (R-WI) promised that he would serve only two terms. He is now in the middle of this third term. Democrats will fight like hell for his seat in swingy Wisconsin. They will also fight for the seat of Sen. Ted Budd (R-NC) in increasingly blue North Carolina. Those are two reasonably good pickup chances for the blue team.

Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA) might retire at 95. Democrats won almost all the marbles in Iowa last week (governor, senator, and three of the four House seats). This could become a competitive race.

Sens. John Boozman (R-AR), Mike Crapo (R-ID) and/or John Kennedy (R-LA) could retire, but none of those seats are likely to be competitive. So we think at most three GOP-held seats are going to be competitive, namely those of Johnson, Budd, and Grassley. This balances the two or three competitive Democratic seats. In the end, the Senate might not change much in 2028, absent an unexpected massive red tsunami, or possibly a blue wave, part II. This means the Democrats will probably hold the Senate until Jan. 2031, possibly giving the Democrats the trifecta or giving President DeSantis a big headache.

What about 2032? Could the Republicans finally flip the Senate? Here are the Class I senators who will be up in Nov. 2032 if they make it that far.

State	Incumbent	Age in 2030
Democrats and independents
Arizona	Ruben Gallego (D)	50
California	Adam Schiff (D)	70
Connecticut	Chris Murphy (D)	57
Delaware	Lisa Rochester (D)	68
Hawaii	Mazie Hirono (D)	82
Massachusetts	Elizabeth Warren (D)	81
Maryland	Angela Alsobrooks (D)	59
Maine	Angus King (I)	86
Michigan	Elissa Slotkin (D)	54
Minnesota	[To be appointed by Gov.-elect Amy Klobuchar]	?
New Jersey	Andy Kim (D)	48
New Mexico	Martin Heinrich (D)	59
Nevada	Jacky Rosen (D)	73
New York	Kirsten Gillibrand (D)	63
Rhode Island	Sheldon Whitehouse (D)	75
Virginia	Tim Kaine (D)	72
Vermont	Bernie Sanders (I)	89
Washington	Maria Cantwell (D)	72
Wisconsin	Tammy Baldwin (D)	68
Republicans
Florida	Rick Scott (R)	77
Indiana	Jim Banks (R)	51
Missouri	Josh Hawley (R)	50
Mississippi	Roger Wicker (R)	79
Montana	Tim Sheehy (R)	44
North Dakota	Kevin Cramer (R)	er
Nebraska	Deb Fischer (R)	79
Ohio	Bernie Moreno (R)	63
Pennsylvania	David McCormick (R)	65
Tennessee	[To be appointed by Gov.-elect Marsha Blackburn]	?
Texas	Ted Cruz (R)	59
Utah	John Curtis (R)	70
West Virginia	Jim Justice (R)	79
Wyoming	John Barrasso (R)	78

On the Democratic side, Sens. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) and/or Mazie Hirono (D-HI) could retire, but neither of those seats is in any danger. Nor is that of Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT). Five potentially competitive races are the seats of Democratic Sens. Ruben Gallego (AZ), Elissa Slotkin (MI). Angus King (ME), Jacky Rosen (NV) and Tammy Baldwin (WI). If a Democrat is elected president in 2028, the usual hit the president's party takes in the midterms could wash these five out to sea and give the Republicans the majority in the Senate.

On the other side, Sen. David McCormick (R-PA) could have a tight race in that swing state. The potential retirees are all in deep red states, although if Scott Colom wins in Mississippi, Sen. Roger Wicker (R-MS) might decide to stay on to keep the seat in Republican hands.

Our conclusion from this little exercise is that the Democrats will probably keep the Senate in 2028 but could conceivably lose it in 2030, especially if there is a Democratic president inaugurated on Jan. 20, 2029. That also means he or she has to move fast to get things done in his first year. (V)

All of a Sudden, 2028 Looks Different

The elections last week are going to cast a long shadow on the 2028 elections. The House could go every which way and we covered the Senate above. And now, what about the race for president? To start with, could reliably red states, like Kansas, Texas, Mississippi, and South Carolina go blue? It seems implausible now, but 2 years ago you could have gotten really good odds on a bet that Democrats would be elected to both the Senate and governorship in Texas in 2026. You might have been able to get 100 to 1. If Gov.-elect Gina Hinojosa (D) does a really good job of governing, Texans might decide that Democrats aren't going to send them off to a gulag somewhere and with the right candidate, Texas could go blue again. It's something Republicans have to consider.

Bill Stepien, Donald Trump's 2020 campaign manager, said: "Last night undoubtedly made the mechanics of winning in 2028 harder for Republicans." By this he meant they are going to have to spend a lot of money in Texas, or at least shake down Elon Musk to ante up even bigger than this time. With Sen. Jon Ossoff (D-GA) winning reelection by 18 points and Gov.-elect Keisha Lance Bottoms (D) winning by almost 9 points, Georgia is becoming a huge problem for Republicans. And now that Black voters in Mississippi have discovered that if they all vote, they can possibly win, Mississippi could become another swing state, strange as it sounds.

Marc Short, Mike Pence's then-chief of staff, compared 2026 to 2006, when the Democrats crushed the Republicans and went on to win the presidency and the trifecta in 2008. Of course, they had a once-in-a-generation candidate in 2008 and there is no guarantee the Democrats can repeat that trick in 2028.

For the presidential race, Ossoff got a big boost, even though he said he is not interested in running. Winning a swing state—in the South, no less—by 18 points is not something a lot of other candidates will be able to bring to the table. Nevertheless, there could be 20-30 candidates for the Democratic nomination. For the debates, they will need an adults' table, a teenagers' table, and a kiddies' table.

But the real impact is on the Republican side. J.D. Vance represents "more of the same," and the voters were pretty clear Tuesday that they do not want more of the same. He can try to distance himself from Donald Trump, for example, by moving to the right and claiming true MAGA has never been tried. Can Vance/Carlson '28 win? We doubt it. We also note it is so hard for a sitting vice president to be elected president that it has happened only four times in history: John Adams (1796), Thomas Jefferson (1800), Martin van Buren (1836) and George H.W. Bush (1988). Other than Bush's win, which was seen as the third term for the popular Ronald Reagan, it has been almost 200 years since a veep pulled it off. And Vance is a terrible politician. He won one election on his own, the Ohio Senate race against Tim Ryan, by 6 points with $15 million of Peter Thiel's money on the books and an unknown amount in dark money. Former WH Press Secretary Ari Fleischer said: "I think if you're Vance you gotta take the nomination and pray you get someone on the other side like Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez." But that strategy won't work if the person on the other side is Ossoff, Gov. Andy Beshear (D-KY), or one of the Arizona senators, both of whom are impressive.

Marco Rubio said he would not run if Vance does, but he can always change his mind—and probably will if he thinks he has a chance. But he is closely tied to the extremely unpopular Iran War. At some point, Trump is going to have to make the surrender official, and as Secretary of State, Rubio may be forced to sign the surrender document. That will be a tough sell in 2028. On Friday, he is going to make a speech at the Federalist Society. He might just use this opportunity to resign from the administration to avoid having his fingerprints all over the surrender. It is unlikely to do the job, though. If he wanted to oppose the war, he should have done it before the midterms.

If Vance and Rubio are too closely tied to a very unpopular president whose approval is probably going to get worse in the next 2 years, who then? Nature Politics abhors a vacuum. Gov. Ron DeSantis (R-FL) can't wait to jump in. DeSantis is starting to attack the administration for its corruption and its love of AI and data centers. He even called the midterms an "extinction-level event for the Republicans." Since he is far from D.C., he can attack everyone there with clean hands. Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) is practically already in, but as one of the most despised people in politics and hated by his 99 Senate colleagues. He doesn't have a steep hill to climb, he has to climb Mt. Everest—blindfolded and barefoot.

In addition, other outsiders who bear none of the responsibility for the Iran War or inflation are certainly heartened by the disaster last week and could see their stars rising. These could include Gov. Brian Kemp (R-GA), and former governors Glenn Youngkin (VA) and Chris Sununu (NH). And probably many more. (V)

The Polls Got the Direction Right but Underestimated the Democrats' Performance

The Pew Research Center has taken a first look at the 2026 polling. The polls clearly captured the voters' dark mood and desire to throw the bums out. They also identified a huge enthusiasm gap, with Democrats far more enthused about voting than Republicans. The generic poll tended to end up around D+8 to D+11. In the end, it was even more, about D+13. The polls correctly foresaw a blue wave, but it was bigger than they had predicted. On the morning of Election Day, we were predicting 54 Senate seats for the Democrats. Currently they are at ... 54 Senate seats, but with the possibility of picking up two more, in Alaska and Mississippi, respectively. We did not see South Carolina or Mississippi as Democratic pickups although we did see them as near misses.

In most of the contentious races, the polls correctly nailed the winner, but in many states underestimated how big the wave would be, by 2 or more points. The average across all Senate races might end up being 4 points, with the Democrats, not the Republicans, being underestimated this time. It wasn't due to "shy Democrats," though. It may have been due to underestimating Democratic turnout. The models for guessing who would vote might have been wrong, with people not expected to vote actually showing up and voting, mostly for Democrats. Those damn marginal voters again.

One group that the pollsters missed was the bro-type low-engagement young male voters who are fans of Joe Rogan. They went for Trump in 2024 but swung massively to the Democrats this time. That was unexpected. Undoubtedly, we will have more polling postmortems as more data rolls in. (V)

---

Previous report         Next report

---

If you wish to contact us, please use one of these addresses. For the first two, please include your initials and city.

• questions@electoral-vote.com    For questions about politics, civics, history, etc. to be answered on a Saturday
• comments@electoral-vote.com   For "letters to the editor" for possible publication on a Sunday
• corrections@electoral-vote.com To tell us about typos or factual errors we should fix
• items@electoral-vote.com            For general suggestions, ideas, etc.
• Guidelines for questions (Saturdays) and letters (Sundays)

To download a poster about the site to hang up, please click here.

---

Email a link to a friend.

---The Votemaster and Zenger