Political analysts may place the 2026 midterms in the same company as the major electoral shifts of 1994, 2010 and 2018.
The 1994 election is often considered the most dramatic: Republicans took control of the House for the first time in 40 years, with Newt Gingrich on his way to becoming speaker. This year could be comparable. Democrats outperformed expectations in districts that favored President Donald Trump, overcame Republican redistricting efforts in Texas and Florida, and won races in states including South Carolina and Kansas.
That’s a striking result given the outlook before Election Day. Of the 35 seats considered competitive, 23 were thought to favor Republicans, making the cycle seem well suited to the GOP on paper.
Now the question is how large the Democratic majorities will be—and whether they’ll work with Trump. The president has said he would veto what he considers extreme legislation, while also expressing interest in cooperating on some issues.
Some Democrats will see the results as a clear rejection of Trump and may have little interest in compromise. His term ends in a little over two years, and Republicans lost ground in places where he had won comfortably just two years earlier. Democrats have also threatened investigations into alleged corruption and influence-peddling, telling administration officials to prepare for legal scrutiny.
Progressive newcomers are likely to draw plenty of attention, including Michigan Sen.-elect Abdul El-Sayed and several Democratic Socialists of America-aligned House members. They are expected to advocate for Medicare for All, cuts to funding for Immigration and Customs Enforcement, and opposition to U.S. aid for Israel.
But it’s far from certain how much of that agenda could become law.
Democrats made major gains in both chambers, but many of the candidates who helped them win were moderates. The newly elected Democrats who flipped strongly Republican districts may matter more to the party’s majority than its progressive wing. Proposals from the left, such as expanding the Supreme Court or making Washington, D.C., and Puerto Rico states, would face significant obstacles.
Across the party, candidates campaigned on the cost of living. Democrats will be expected to show progress on everyday expenses, including gas and groceries.
In the Midwest, Democrats picked up seats by defeating Republican incumbents in Ohio, Wisconsin, Iowa and Missouri. Those districts could return to the Republican column in 2028, so the victories may not last. Still, Democrats have made inroads in parts of the Midwest and South where they have struggled for years.
The Senate wins of moderates Adam Hamilton in Kansas, Josh Turek in Iowa and Annie Andrews in South Carolina underline the same point. They did not win by aligning themselves with the party’s left flank, and they may not support some of its more ambitious proposals. Those ideas could therefore have a difficult path forward.
The split between moderates and progressives could become a serious source of tension within the Democratic Party.
The numbers will matter, too. Democrats could win more than 240 House seats and add to their current 54-seat position in the Senate.
If Congress passes legislation that Trump vetoes, a veto override would require two-thirds support: 290 votes in the House and 67 in the Senate. Democrats would need roughly 50 House Republicans to join them, and 13 Republican senators in the Senate. The Senate math may be harder, though the scale of Tuesday’s Republican losses could lead some GOP lawmakers to distance themselves from Trump.
House Republicans will soon face another test: choosing who leads them in the minority. Speaker Mike Johnson of Louisiana has indicated he will not seek the minority leader position. Majority Leader Steve Scalise, also of Louisiana, is expected to announce a bid, while Ohio Rep. Jim Jordan is pursuing the job as well. Majority Whip Tom Emmer of Minnesota has signaled he plans to run for whip again.
It would not be the first time a speaker moved back into the minority leader’s role. Republican Joe Martin of Massachusetts and Democrat Sam Rayburn of Texas each served in both positions at different points in their careers. Nancy Pelosi of California also moved between the roles, serving as minority leader, speaker, minority leader again and then speaker once more.
Jordan’s case for the leadership post rests partly on his history of confronting Democrats. He was a prominent Republican during Trump’s first impeachment and during the Biden administration. Democrats have promised an aggressive slate of investigations into the Trump administration, including scrutiny of family members, cryptocurrency, alleged arrangements involving donors and Trump associates, and several former and current officials. Republicans expect the inquiries to be fierce.
But the mood among House Republicans may be decisive. After such a steep loss, will members stick with the same leadership team that brought them here?
Jordan and Scalise are both close to Trump. Jordan has spent years campaigning and raising money for Republican candidates, and working to rebuild support among House Republicans after they rejected him as their speaker nominee in 2023, following two failed floor votes.
The central question is whom Trump wants in the role—and whether his preference still carries weight with rank-and-file Republicans after Tuesday’s defeat. Whether the party changes direction may be the clearest near-term measure of the president’s influence.
Trump may also have to negotiate soon, particularly while Republicans still control both chambers. Government funding is due to run out on Dec. 11, raising the possibility of a shutdown. Democrats may have little incentive to make concessions when they are set to take control of Congress early next year. Progressive lawmakers who have not yet taken office may also resist any last-minute agreements between Republican leaders and Democratic leaders Hakeem Jeffries and Chuck Schumer.
Another looming issue is Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. Congressional authorization expired in the spring, but the program has continued without it. Intelligence agencies have warned lawmakers that reauthorization is needed later this month to keep the program from running into trouble. Telecommunications companies have continued providing information to intelligence agencies without congressional approval, but that cooperation may not last.
What Congress will accomplish during the lame-duck session remains uncertain. Attendance was already expected to be a challenge because many lawmakers are retiring. After the Republican losses, even more members may have little appetite for returning to Washington.
