Charlie Cook at Cook Political has some interesting election observations.
The Elephant in the Room
Please consider GOP Is Losing Control of Events—and Trump Owns It All by Charlie Cook.
Donald Trump is the elephant in the room for this election; indeed, he seems to be the elephant in every room. A consultant to a Republican gubernatorial nominee last week told me that each of the last two times Trump came to their swing state, they took a hit of a point or two, indicating that they really didn’t want him to come back. In fact, I got the impression that many GOP campaigns had to weigh the cost of a return Trump visit with a potential attack from him on Truth Social if they declined.
Two months ago, this column argued that the political environment for the GOP had deteriorated to the point that the three most likely scenarios for the party were “bad, really bad, or truly horrible.” It should never have gotten there. Republicans were protected by guardrails. Three decades of gerrymandering have left few congressional districts naturally competitive, and the House is less elastic than it was in previous bloodbath midterms. A party cannot lose a seat it doesn’t have; with Republicans holding 220 seats, there were fewer seats they could potentially lose.
In the Senate, rarely has any party gone into an election with a friendlier map than Republicans this year. The oft-cited statistic shows that 20 of the 22 GOP seats up this year are in states Trump won by double digits, plus North Carolina, which he carried three times by narrow margins. It goes even deeper than that: Six of the 22 GOP seats have not voted for a Democrat for president since Lyndon Johnson; five more, not since Bill Clinton carried them in 1996.
Those guardrails now appear to have been dismantled. Eight months of surging energy prices, the result of Trump’s highly questionable and deeply unpopular decision not just to attack Iran on Feb. 28, but to do so without putting together a coalition of allies other than Israel, has resulted in incalculable political damage for Trump’s party. The initial closure and subsequent constriction of the vital Strait of Hormuz shipping lane, and the accompanying damage to energy infrastructure in the region, had the totally predictable impact: sky-high gasoline, diesel, fuel-oil, and fertilizer prices.
This was on top of Trump’s promiscuous use of tariffs, even against our neighbors and closest allies, with the equally predictable retaliation from our trading partners, creating a series of trade wars that jacked up prices on all manner of goods. Even voters who had never taken an economics class could figure out where this was headed.
What makes this situation so damaging to Republicans is that these policies seemed almost calculated to target one of the most loyal elements of the GOP base: those who lived in rural America, smaller cities, or exurbs. They drive the longest distances and are more likely to be driving pickup trucks, own farm equipment, use diesel and, oh yes, be hurt by tariffs and a liberalization on the importation of foreign beef. The fact that it came at the hands of a president that they had repeatedly voted for just made the pain even greater.
Exacerbating the situation is the growing perception that Trump’s real focus is not on the potential impact of his policies, but rather on demolition of the East Wing, construction of a $600 million White House ballroom, renovation of the Reflecting Pool, construction of an arch that would overshadow the entrance to Arlington Cemetery, a takeover of the Kennedy Center, and a goal of naming anything possible after himself.
The irony, of course, is that in our binary political system, when voters decide to severely punish one party, the result rewards the other party, whether they deserve it or not. Democrats have yet to understand why they lost the House in 2022, as well as the Senate and presidency in 2024, so what makes us think they will understand this year that they will be less victors than beneficiaries? They will owe this win to Trump, though they’re unlikely to see it that way.
A Word About Mandates
- In 2016, on a flimsy win in terms of actual votes Republicans thought they had a mandate.
- In 2020, Biden thought he had a mandate. After promising to be a healer and a uniter, Biden flouted the Supreme Court and passed amazingly inflationary free money handouts.
- In 2024, Trump and MAGA took the word mandate to unbelievable heights with executive orders, unconstitutional actions, idiotic tariffs, immoral deportations, and the stupidest war in history.
Is There a Mandate Now?
Yes, in a way. The country voted in an unmistakable message against Trump and his corruption. This was not a narrow win. Unlike 2016 and 2020, this was a legendary massacre.
However, Democrats did not lay out an economic agenda. All they did was smash a well-deserved brick into Trump’s face.
There is no mandate for policies Democrats were too chicken to discuss in the campaign. That includes DEI silliness and inflationary free money programs.
What’s Immediately Fixable?
I can think of a few things. The first is immigration. The farm states need labor and so do homebuilders. There is a shortage of nurses.
Deporting solid workers is economic madness and racist.
Trump has hinted many times that he is willing. Done correctly there should be some bipartisan support. Unfortunately, Trump’s choice of Stephen Miller dictates the immediate outcome.
Regardless, force Trump and Republicans to take some stands. Do something about Tariffs. Trump will veto such legislation, but force Republican Senators to take a stand.
Vote to release the Epstein files. All of them, That’s something that stands a chance of a veto override.
Figure out a fix to Social Security. Everyone knows it’s a problem.
But a radical swing to the Left if going nowhere for at least two years. And it’s not what the country voted for anyway.
A mandate against Trump is not a mandate for a return to the Bidenomics the country threw away just two years ago.
But yes, Trump 100 percent owns this outcome.
Related Posts
November 5, 2026: Did the Endless War Just End? What About the War in Iran?
Endless wars don’t end by definition. So what about Iran?
November 5, 2026: Trump’s Legacy and a Word of Thanks to MishTalk Readers
My reflections on one of the biggest political wipeouts in history, plus a word of thanks.
November 6, 2026: Trump Doubles Down, Appoints White Supremist Stephen Miller to Chief of Staff
Stephen Miller, the architect of Trump’s ICE Gestapo tactics, is the new Chief of Staff.
November 7, 2026: What Impact Did Trump’s ICE Deportations Play in the Midterm Elections?
Vance admits the war, but downplays immigration. He’s wrong on the latter.
Article posted with permission from Mish Shedlock
