Dem
54
GOP
46
Democrats are very nervous. The news is all good and they can't believe it. Texas is in play? South Carolina is in play? Kansas is in play? It makes no sense. They are panicking that half the Republicans refuse to be polled and that the polls are way off. Nate Silver ran this cartoon to express Democrats' feelings.
If the Democrats win big tomorrow, many of them are going to draw the wrong conclusion. Morgan Jackson, a senior adviser to North Carolina U.S. Senate candidate Roy Cooper (D), put it this way: "Don't confuse them losing with us winning." What he means is that many Republicans will stay home tomorrow and many independents will vote blue, but the Democratic brand is still toxic in many places. People will be voting that way simply because gas prices are high. This is not a formula for winning in 2028 when the unpopular president will be out of office in a bit over 2 months.
A veteran Democratic pollster who wanted to remain anonymous said: "This is not an affirmation of the Democratic Party in any which way. It is very much a rejection of Trump." Matt Barron, a Democratic strategist in the Midwest, said: "When your opponents are destroying themselves, just get out of the way and let it happen." Lis Smith, an architect of Pete Buttigieg's 2020 campaign, said that Democrats winning in deep-red territory are doing that by distancing themselves from the national party. That is not an option for the 2028 Democratic presidential nominee. Smith also noted that in a wave election, a lot of average-to-mediocre candidates get swept in by the wave. That won't happen next time, absent another wave.
If Democrats don't deliver next year (which they probably won't, because Trump will veto every bill they pass unless it somehow has a billion dollars for him personally in it), in 2028 many people could switch sides again, saying: "We gave you the keys to the kingdom and you didn't deliver for us." This election is shaping up to be an anti-incumbent election, not a pro-Democrats election. Democrats get that wrong at their peril.
It is likely that the DSA candidates and DSA-adjacent candidates will win their races easily and all of a sudden the progressive wing of the Democratic Party will commence saying: "See, this is the way to go in 2028." If Abdul El-Sayed wins big in Michigan, they will be howling this to the moon. That could be true, but one Senate victory against a weak opponent and half a dozen DSA members winning in D+30 House districts does not a realignment make.
However, there is possibly a different story that we might get out of tomorrow. It is possible, not likely, but just possible that Democrats could win Senate seats in North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, Mississippi, and Texas—a rout in the Sout'. If that happens, or most of it happens, (Mississippi is really a reach), then the message should be exactly the opposite: Democrats can win in 2028 in the South (!) if they pick a moderate who plays well there. That would be music to the ears of Gov. Andy Beshear (D-KY), who is definitely not DSA-adjacent.
Four other Senate races to watch are those in Kansas, Montana, Nebraska and South Dakota. If moderate Democrats (or moderate Democrats hiding in purple clothing) do well, that also sends the message that Democrats can win traditionally red states, but not with "Defund the police" as their slogan. Victories by both DSA(-adjacent) candidates and moderates in the South and Midwest sends a very mixed message for 2028. For Senate and House races it is straightforward to have a candidate in each contest who is a good fit for the local electorate. That doesn't work in national elections. Democrats have to realize that and think about how best to win in swing and red states. We expect that both moderates and progressives will do well tomorrow, so cue the start of the 2028 battle on Wednesday. (V)