5 (Long) Thoughts on the 2026 Midterms

Well, that was fun.  As is generally a tradition on this blog after a major election, I usually do some reflecting on the election that was, but last night, I'll be honest-I'm truly overwhelmed.  I'm not going to go too closely into my predictions, but I have definitely done better; I did splendidly on Governor's, so far only missing one though we have one still uncalled where I predicted the current frontrunner, but my Senate results were easily the weakest they've been in a while.  But, I don't care-because virtually every race I got wrong was a Democrat proving me wrong by winning a seat I called for a Republican.  So instead, we're going to go into our five thoughts article with broader themes as I'll own that we're going to get long and winding within those thoughts as there's MUCH to discuss in the most surprising national election of my lifetime.  So let's begin!

Sen-Elect Annie Andrews (D-SC)

Overall Reaction

Last night was, in my personal opinion, the biggest win for the Democratic Party on a collective scale since at least 2008, and possibly even 1974.  In all three cases, the country sent a message to a Republican president that he was no longer supported, and they would replace him with someone of the opposite party if they could.  In both 1974 & 2008, they did just that (2008 at the time, in 1974 they did so two years later).  The Democratic Party won everywhere last night-truly, you'd be hard-pressed to find a state where the Democrats didn't make some gains.

I will not delve too much into the data, which is still being released on the why behind it, but I do want to point out (since JD Vance tweeted about it this morning), I don't think it was because Republicans turned out and rejected Democrats entirely...if you look at turnout differentials in, say, a state like Mississippi (the Vice President used Florida as his example, admittedly one of the few states he might actually have a point), the Harris counties had an 83% retention rate in voters compared to 2024...in Trump counties it was only 73%.  This is part of a larger trend last night of Black voters clearly turning out in disproportionate numbers to past  midterms which helped throughout the US South, and is one of the contributing factors to, say, the seismic & unexpected win the Democrats achieved in South Carolina (depending on where Mississippi lands, probably the most surprising win of the night).  We have seen in the past three midterms that there is a contingency of Donald Trump's supporters who only really care about him, and we saw that show up with Trump being disproportionately stronger than the rest of his ticket in 2024.  But never during the MAGA era have the Democrats enjoyed this kind of turnout differential, and boy howdy did it help them out.

The Democrats will now control both the US House, when the cards are settled with probably 255-260 seats, their largest majority since the 111th Congress, and with at least 54 Senate seats, possibly as many as 56 if the Democrats win two outstanding Senate seats (more on that in a second).  It's not entirely clear how much of this is a repudiation of Trump and how much is voters signing onto Democrats' vision of the economy (I suspect it's a healthy mix), but this is a gargantuan middle finger to Donald Trump, and in some ways marks the end of the MAGA Era in its current form.  As he ominously tweeted from the White House Twitter account in what looked like a temper tantrum this morning, Trump will indeed be president for the next two years, but we are now moving into an era where he will be an asterisk.  Trump can't run again (and the Republican leadership wouldn't want him to anyway), and after last night, the GOP will want to move beyond him as quickly as possible, and won't be able to replicate his specific political success again even if they might win in 2028.  We now know the MAGA Era will not survive Trump's time in office (unlike, say, the Obama Era which still feels pretty healthy given our reliance on him this past cycle).

Two larger scale facts I want to talk through before we get into the nitty gritty.  I wrote a few months ago about whether or not the Democrats will finally get 100 women in their House caucus.  As of just a few moments ago, that is officially projected (it will end up being north of it), a huge step forward for gender equality in Congress.  I will also point out that one of my more popular articles in terms of clicks through the years about the longest Senate Democratic losing streaks (read here) had some major shake-ups last night.  Kansas elected a Democrat to the Senate for the first time since 1932, meaning the longest present streak without a Democratic senator passes to Idaho & Utah, but Maine, Texas, and potentially Mississippi will fall from this list as well after last night.  This means we're adding to the list Nebraska, Arkansas, Louisiana, & South Dakota (South Carolina would've been ahead of all four of them were it not for last night).

Sen-Elect Roy Cooper (D-NC)

The Size of the Prize

The scale of last night's win is going to take a few days to digest, both because of the scale of it means I haven't caught all of the victories (what do you mean we won the Indiana State Comptroller race?!?) and because there's still dozens of races that are uncalled, including some major ones in Congress.  But there a few things that call out to me from last night that I want to discuss, and I want to start out with the Carolinas.

In North & South Carolina, the Democrats went into the night expecting one Senate pickup (for NC Gov. Roy Cooper), but they ended up with two.  It's hard to put into words how big of a deal the Andrews win was (I was freaking out and sending it to everyone I know, most of whom I suspect were not getting why I was losing my mind over just one seat), both from a mathematical perspective for the next few years, but also because it's a race pretty much no Democrat actually thought they'd win.  It was clearly potentially competitive, but this is as close as you probably get to a truly normal person (Andrews has never held public office, has served her life largely in the private sector, and her only past House race was a blowout loss to Nancy Mace in 2022) winning a seat in the most exclusive club in the world.  It should be noted that Andrews will probably be a one-term wonder (there's no total way of knowing, but it's a good guess), but Senate terms are long.  Should she serve the full six years, Andrews will outlast the MAGA movement, the Trump presidency, and be a potential ally for a Democratic President throughout their first term if the Dems win in 2028.  People like, say, Mark Kirk felt like a weird outlier toward the ends of their terms, but they stay deeply consequential in the process. Were it not for, say, Mark Begich randomly winning in Alaska in 2008, we wouldn't have the Affordable Care Act.  Andrews now has that potential influence over her term.

Rep-Elect Richard Ojeda (D-NC)

Downballot, though, the Republicans got clobbered in the Carolinas.  We are still waiting on some results here, but between the two states it's possible the Democrats might net as many as 7 House seats here alone.  The NC House map (which is gerrymandered to the hilt), will go from 10R-4D to 10D-4R, a complete reversal.  This size of wave almost always ends up with some really unusual profiles in the next Congress, two of which come from North Carolina.  There's Richard Ojeda, a one-term West Virginia State Senator who ran for Congress (and lost despite huge hype) in 2018, then ran a bizarre & widely-mocked presidential campaign in 2019, and then later that cycle ran a Senate campaign where he lost in the primary to a gadfly; Ojeda last night beat Rep. Richard Hudson (the chair of the NRCC) in a huge upset, and will now serve as a US House member from North Carolina (i.e. not the state he ran those last two congressional campaigns from, which is extremely unusual for an actually successful candidate).  There's also Lakesha Womack, who ten years ago was literally living in her car after a medical emergency-she beat Tim Moore in a huge upset, a man who in 2016 (when Womack was homeless) was the most powerful man in North Carolina state politics.  I don't know how members like Ojeda & Womack end up (people like Tom Harkin, Chris Dodd, & Lindsey Graham became congressional institutions after winning in waves...but people like Steve Stockman, Alan Grayson, & George Santos also won in waves), but they now have a chance to prove themselves and shape the country the next two years.

There's too many states to parcel through (something I've never said the morning after an election like this, proof of how big this wave was as normally I'd want to give a moment for every Democratic victory), but I will mention two other ones.  First, let's talk a state that's not getting much press today, but is a sign of really strong reaction from voters that kind of encapsulates the total country's mood: Missouri.  Missouri a few months ago looked like a death knell for the Democrats.  They had been gerrymandered to remove Emanuel Cleaver from office, and there wasn't much outside the courts that Democrats could do.  But the State Supreme Court stated that the gerrymander was unconstitutional, and after some ridiculous back-and-forth with Brett Kavanaugh, the old map came back, with Cleaver now in a sapphire-blue seat in the Kansas City metro.  The icing on this came last night, though, with not just Cleaver winning, but also the pink district (MO-2) currently held by Ann Wagner becoming a flip (the new map would've shored up Wagner), and the state also passed an amendment ensuring that the current map will stay until the next census.  All-in-all, this is a huge win for the Democrats-they get not just a safe blue seat for the next two cycles, but also got a flip in Missouri and fairer maps sanctioned by the voters.

Sen-Elect James Talarico (D-TX)

Second, you can't have this write-up without acknowledging Blue Texas.  The second-largest state in the country, and the cornerstone of any electoral college plan for the Republicans, Texas not only elected Democrats statewide last night...it only elected them.  Democrats won the Governor's mansion, the Senate seat, all four state constitutional offices, all four of the Supreme Court races in Texas, and the State House, a gargantuan change in the leadership of the Lone Star State, and surely the one that Republicans are most nervous about.  There is no path to the White House for a Republican presidential candidate without Texas, not with the current coalition, and last night Texas showed that it can, in fact, be a purple state.  While other states like South Carolina, Kansas, & Alaska also got more interesting in that way, Texas is the one that seems most likely to join the Swing 7 in 2028, and the Republicans may have woken a sleeping giant in Texas.

Speaking of, it has to be noted that Attorney General Ken Paxton was one of the worst candidates of the cycle...one who probably wouldn't have won if it weren't for Donald Trump's clear adoration for him & support of him over Sen. John Cornyn in the primary.  I'm not saying Cornyn would've won (the chicken and the egg is hard here given Cornyn's loss exacerbated national moods about MAGA Republicans overstepping), but he would've done better than Paxton.  But in general, a big reckoning last night was in terms of GOP candidate quality and Trump stepping into races he had no business stepping into.  You have people like Darline Graham, Vivek Ramaswamy, & David Flippo all personally vouched for by the president in primaries...and all lost winnable races.  Trump has made a habit of this for years, but never before has it been felt quite like this, and I have to assume that the NRSC and the NRCC will put enormous pressure (even publicly rebuking Trump if necessary) after last night if they know what's good for them.

Sen-Elect Abdul El-Sayed (D-MI)

Reflections on the Race

I got asked this morning "were there any good signs for Republicans?" and if we're talking in terms of actual wins, not really.  There are only two seats that feel like potential red flips right now in Congress: the highly-gerrymandered FL-9 (where Rep. Darren Soto is leading, but close enough we won't know a winner for a few days) and Maine's second congressional district, an open seat pitting two-term former Gov. Paul LePage against the left-leaning State Auditor Matt Dunlap (D).  The 2nd district, though, is only competitive because Dunlap beat Joe Baldacci in the primary (Baldacci was more moderate), and the left chased Jared Golden out of Congress (Baldacci & Golden, given how candidates with their profiles fared last night, would've won by now).

This is maybe the biggest silver lining for Republicans-the wave washed over a clear problem for the Democrats, that some of the left-leaning risks they took like Dunlap (another being Abdul El-Sayed) underperformed compared to other candidates.  El-Sayed, for example, ran two points behind Jocelyn Benson (who was already attempting a tough push by succeeding a two-term Dem governor), and didn't do as well as some of the more moderate Democrats in redder states relative to their states' presidential performance.  As we approach the 2028 presidential race, Republicans will be hoping that the left will think that "El-Sayed can win in Michigan, we can win with a candidate like him nationally"...which isn't true.  2026 was a fluke thing, and like Ojeda & Womack above, El-Sayed will now have an actual congressional tenure to get to relate to his voters; this can matter (someone like, say Al Franken became much more assured in office than he was as a candidate, the gravity of the institution maturing him as a public figure so that his 2014 reelection was relatively easy even as Republicans dwarfed Democrats he entered the Senate with six years earlier), but it's worth noting that the under-performance was real, and should be watched.

I will own that I don't think that Florida was a huge missed opportunity, even if it's where most of the Democratic complaining (how the hell you can complain about last night as a Democrat is beyond me, but they are definitely online & some in public) is centered.  Here's my frank take: if you can't win in Florida on the same night that candidates in South Carolina, Kansas, & Texas are winning...you just weren't that good to begin with.  Some have said Democrats should go all-in with Angie Nixon in 2028, which I don't have a problem with if she runs, but mostly because I don't think she can win, and I would have a problem wasting money on her (she had her chance, she lost, move on).  If there was a seat that got away from us this cycle, it was honestly Louisiana, where a staggeringly strong Black voter turnout nearly ousted Rep. Julie Letlow from her Senate coronation.  The party in the state was ringing their bells loudly that this was competitive, and it's clear Schumer (who otherwise had great instincts this cycle with recruitment & spending) should've listened as we left a seat on the table there.

The other seat that I don't think we let on the table this cycle is Montana, but that's because of a dirty trick the Senate Republicans pulled (and the Democrats pulled it in Illinois-I acknowledge both sides were terrible for this one).  When Steve Daines declared last minute that he wasn't running, and subbed in US Attorney Kurt Alme at the very last minute, it prevented the Democrats from getting a ringer into the Montana US Senate race.  Given Alme is below 50%, and the Democrats were stuck with both an Independent and a Democrat (combined they were about 0.4 points bigger than Alme as of the current count), had we been able to sub in someone like Jon Tester or Steve Bullock (I think Schumer could've talked one of them into doing it) we probably would've won another Senate seat last night.

Rep. Jasmine Crockett (D-TX)

But the Independent candidate, while he did better, is also me putting my foot down on a trend that the Democrats have insisted works but just doesn't: running an Independent as a surrogate Democrat.  These races occasionally result in that candidate over-performing a normal Democrat, but it never results in us actually winning.  Greg Orman, Al Gross, Evan McMullin, Dan Osborn, and Osborn again this year along with Brian Bengs, Bill Hill, & Seth Bodnar-you know what none of these men have in common?  None of them have ever served in Congress, and none of them will next year.  In retrospect, the Democrats should've ditched Osborn the second he didn't win in 2024, and gone with someone like Adam Hamilton or Annie Andrews or Scott Colom...someone who could run as a moderate Democrat and a new fresh voice for the state.  Because these are candidates who actually (or, well, Colom is still TBD but close enough he should still be studied as an example even if he loses) will serve in Congress.

Lastly, I want to say goodbye to two of the worst Democrats of the cycle, who will leave Congress in January: Haley Stevens & Jasmine Crockett.  In both cases, these women purposefully made life harder for their opponent after the primary, and put a win at risk.  This was not a universal situation or a left wing/establishment thing (Angie Craig & Francesca Hong both actively campaigned for their opponents after the primary, Janet Mills at least endorsed Troy Jackson), but something specific to these two women valuing their own self-interest over helping the cause they claimed to believe in.  Stevens is now done with politics-the bizarre stories about her personal life right now (and questionable public behavior & statements from friends that honestly makes me question some aspects of her mental state) aside, endorsing a Republican is a nonstarter for any Democrat in the Trump Era, and she'd never survive a Republican primary.  Crockett might run for office (I wouldn't be shocked if she ran for Mayor of Dallas next year), but it's clear her path in this race was to run for the US Senate, and use the fame & connections of that to translate into a media career after she lost.  Now, she's in the position of not just being a sore loser, but the man who beat her in the primary won the Texas US Senate election without her help...as did every other Democrat in Texas.  Crockett chose the wrong time to not bet on a healthy Texas Democratic Party, and will probably become an asterisk from that miscalculation.

Gov-Elect Amy Klobuchar (D-MN)

The Next Congress

Three things I'm looking for in the next few weeks around Congress, and no it's not who will lead the Democrats (it'll be Schumer & Jeffries) or Republicans (okay, I actually am curious here now that Mike Johnson is out...but it won't be as thrilling as all of those Kevin McCarthy votes given you just need a caucus majority to lead the minority party, and it'll probably be someone like Jim Jordan).  First is that while we don't know who won every race (more on that in a second), there's two races that are just beginning: who will succeed Marsha Blackburn & Amy Klobuchar to their Senate seats?  Both will stay within their party, and both women (their respective states' first female governors) will get to appoint them, but I am curious whom they pick.  I suspect that Klobuchar, particularly after the Minnesota statewide ticket honestly underperformed the wave (including Klobuchar herself) will favor a more establishment candidate like Steve Simon, Kelly Morrison, Angie Craig, or someone from the state legislature like Zach Stephenson, rather than a liberal like a Keith Ellison (I don't buy she'll appoint a big-city mayor).  Whomever she picks will be up for reelection in an off-cycle special election in 2027 (and serve until they are up again in 2030).

In Tennessee, Blackburn's successor will serve until the 2028 general election, and she has made very clear she wants to pick the successor, which makes me think she'll want someone who will run in 2028 rather than a placeholder.  Rep. Tim Burchett has already publicly confirmed he's interested (as a general rule this is a bit like wanting to be Prom Queen...you're supposed to pretend you don't want it even though you do), but Blackburn has sole discretion (a name being floated around is CEO Damon Hininger, who was a top donor to Blackburn's campaign)...provided that Donald Trump doesn't butt in, which he has been wont to do with Senate appointments.  There are a lot of rumors that Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth is looking for an exit ramp out of the administration, and really, really wants this job.  If Trump publicly starts backing Hegseth for it, it'll put a bit of pressure on Blackburn to go along, though given how little he helped her last night (Blackburn only won what was seen as a Safe R race by less than 3-points), she might not care as she's now guaranteed to be in office longer than Trump.

Speaking of Hegseth, I'm curious to see how many retirements we see or attempts to get through administration officials in the next few weeks.  With a 54+ seat Senate majority, Republicans will need at least four Democrats to get anyone appointed to the administration, and someone like a Hegseth (who didn't get a single Democrat to back him during his confirmation) would be a nonstarter going forward.  There are also a lot of rumors that we could see a Supreme Court retirement from either Samuel Alito or Clarence Thomas given that (with 54+ Senators), it's improbable that Schumer would allow a Supreme Court nominee to get to the floor for Trump should an opening emerge (any Democrat who would back such a maneuver would be primaried), but that's a ticking clock.  Sherrod Brown will become a senator pretty quickly (no later than December 15th) and will serve for part of the lame duck, and there are stalling techniques that will make it harder for John Thune to get a candidate through, one who would need the support of (if Brown is in office) at least one of Thom Tillis, Lisa Murkowski, or Susan Collins (side note because I need to say it at least once in this article-can you believe Susan Collins lost...the last bastion of New England moderate Republicanism whose teflon federal electoral record has mystified Democrats is now gone from Congress).

Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-AK)

Murkowski is one of two senators (John Fetterman being the other) whom I'm also watching right now.  Murkowski has spent years being the most moderate Republican in the Senate (she's far more willing to stick her neck out in a way that Collins has never done), even endorsing a Democrat for governor in Alaska this year.  It's not clear whether or not Mary Peltola will win the Senate race yet (at this moment she looks favored, but not by enough to say with certainty), but Murkowski, who turns 70 in May, will have to acknowledge the cold truth that not only is she in office largely because Democrats have supported her in her last three elections at a larger percentage than Republicans (the only member of the current Congress who can claim that, and I'd honestly be willing to bet that's true for the next Congress too), but also that she holds this job that two Democrats proved in 2026 can be held by an actual Democrat.  If she runs again as a Republican, there's little reason for the Democrats not to challenge her with a real candidate (like State Sen. Tom Begich), but she has (so far) not said she'll switch parties, even if that Alaska governor's endorsement feels like something she'd consider it for (also Trump hates her, and if you've read her memoir she clearly hates him too).  On top of that, her two most ardent allies (Mitch McConnell & Susan Collins) are leaving in January.  I think she'll retire in 2028, but be very willing to work with Schumer (and Peltola, should she win) in the next two years in a way she hasn't been, even as a Republican.  If she runs again, though, watch this space over whether she might try being an Independent who caucuses with the Democrats, as her normal coalition won't work unless she does.

Another surefire retirement is John Fetterman.  Fetterman suffered a similar hubris to Kyrsten Sinema in the sense that she guessed wrong on what would happen in an election and paid a price.  With Sinema, she clearly thought the Democrats in Arizona would lose overwhelmingly in 2022, and the state party would be forced to back her because "she's the only one who can win," but Katie Hobbs & Mark Kelly stopped that, and it became impossible for her to win a Democratic Primary.  In Fetterman's case, he was hoping to be Senator #51, someone who could lord over Chuck Schumer & the Democrats "either back me, or I'll give the Senate back to the Republicans."  But with 54+ seats, Chuck Schumer doesn't really need John Fetterman.  Fetterman is still powerful (Schumer knows that he could make life harder for him the next two years, especially to hold the seat in 2028, and I do think he'll give him some room for concessions like he did Joe Manchin before him), but he's not powerful like he thought he would be, and he's going to give off the air of someone who largely disappears into being a backbencher again in my opinion.  I doubt he switches parties after last night, but I also am really confident that like Sinema he's going to retire after just one term in office, having made a bad bet on the future of his state & party.

Rep. Mary Peltola (D-AK)

The Future

First, I will point out that the 2028 presidential cycle surely will start before Christmas, but I'm not engaging until next year unless something big happens (like Kamala Harris or JD Vance making a decision).  It's too early to care, and there's too many question marks (like the Blackburn/Klobuchar seats) to figure out first.  But I will say that the lesson yesterday (for me) was that it matters more if you can get great margins in Congress than if you can have a left-leaning president, and I wish/hope/pray that Democrats realize that.  If someone like, say, a Jon Ossoff can carry with him an additional 3 Senate seats and dozen House seats, that's worth FAR more than if Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is more liberal than him in an office she needs Congress to actually do something real, because it means you have more actual legislation.  I imagine you'll see why this is my point in the coming months as you see what Jeffries & Schumer can cook in office.

More so, I'm thinking about the seats that are still uncalled.  There are several very high-profile Republican members of Congress (specifically Lauren Boebert, Virginia Foxx, & Scott DesJarlais) whose races have not been called by major networks, and would be another stake through the heart of Trump's MAGA if they were to lose (which currently all three are behind in the count).  Mary Peltola, it has to be noted, underwhelmed compared to the performances of people like James Talarico & Adam Hamilton, but I have a bit of a maxim the day after an election-at this point no one cares about the margin of an uncalled race, just if you get the checkmark, and I think Peltola will get the checkmark, and we can worry about her reelection prospects at a different time.  Scott Colom's race in Mississippi is razor thin, and could honestly go either way depending on what vote is left outstanding, and how much Colom can gain in the provisionals.  Like Andrews, Colom would start out as a probable one-term wonder, but he'll also be a vote to help Schumer and Senate Democrats for the next six years.

And he'll help the math in 2028 & 2030.  I won't get too far into the Senate math in the same way I won't the presidency, but if Peltola & Colom both win, the math for the Senate Republicans to get a majority in 2028 is insane.  In 2028, the Democrats have to defend seats in Georgia, Arizona, Nevada, Ohio, & Pennsylvania, while the GOP needs to hold seats in Wisconsin & North Carolina, but if Republicans still won all of those seats, with Colom & Peltola in office, they still wouldn't have a majority even if they held the White House.  It's likely that they'd need a fluke in, say, New Hampshire or Minnesota to get their majority.  That is going to be incredibly challenging with Trump still in office.  Lest we forget, in 1976 the Senate didn't exchange a single seat between the Dems and the GOP, and in 2008 (following the last two major waves) the Democrats actually gained nine seats.  If Trump is still as unpopular as he was today (and he might be...Bush never recovered after 2006), you'd be looking at Republican-held seats in newly minted pink/purple states like Kansas, Alaska, & Iowa as becoming competitive, and the Republicans can only lose so many of these races without making 2030 (which looks like a good cycle for them on paper, much better than the Democrats) too steep to climb.

With that, I'm closing out.  I will definitely sneak back onto the blog if something interesting happens with the uncalled races, or if we learn something noteworthy from Blackburn, Klobuchar, or the congressional leadership races, but I will own that after the last month (which I give a lot of my free time to following the election, and writing the very lengthy election guide & recap article) I need a rest from politics.  I'll still be here, don't worry (we have Sigourney Weaver month, and I should have two OVP Ballots out before the end of the month), but expect a slowdown as I enjoy the holiday season & recharge for a bit and we gear up for the next presidential cycle.

Election Night Guide: Texas through Wyoming

I am doing a final predictions series for the November 3rd general elections.  If you've missed previous articles, they're listed right here: Alabama-Arkansas, California-Hawaii, Iowa-Louisiana, Maine-Montana, Nebraska-North Dakota, Ohio-Tennessee

State Rep. James Talarico (D-TX)

Texas

Governor: Normally when I write these articles, I start the last states with U through W, but given that the picture for the article is always the first one on the page, it felt bizarre to pick some random person in Utah or Vermont or Virginia...and not one of the most famous figures to emerge in American politics in 2026 to headline the seventh and final article in this series.  First, we get to the governor's race.  State Rep. Gina Hinojosa (D) has run a helluva race against incumbent Gov. Greg Abbott, one that pretty much no one thought she could win...but she is still slightly down, and at this point (like Keisha Lance Bottoms and Aaron Ford in preceding days) she'll need a polling error in her favor to win.  Those happen, but this is Texas...the quintessential red state.  I think it'll be close, but she won't be able to seal the deal.

Senate: But I do think there's a real possibility that Sen. James Talarico (D) does.  I have watched politics since as early as 1996 (much more closely 2000 and after), and in that time I have never seen a statewide Democrat win the Lone Star State.  But the polling is strong for Talarico-unless something bizarre happens in the final week of the campaign, he will go into Election Night the winner of the aggregate polling from every single major polling aggregator (something, say, Beto O'Rourke never even came close to doing).  It is possible that Attorney General Ken Paxton (R), who has made serious missteps throughout the campaign but does have an "R" behind his name, will win.  This is still Texas we're talking about-Blexas has been a mirage for decades, one that Democrats have repeatedly fallen for just to come up short.  But while I have said for years that "I won't believe it until I see it" I also am not going to predict this race red just because I'm feeling anxious.  If I looked at the facts of this race, I'd predict Talarico.  And so I will. D+1

House: An aggressive mid-decade redraw in Texas likely will not be a dummymander in the way North Carolina would have (they won't get as many seats as they wanted, but they'll get more than they would've without the redraw).  As I've said for other redraws, we'll go by current numbering, so the 32nd (where Julie Johnson, who lost a primary for a nearby district to returning Rep. Colin Allred was drawn into a Trump +18 district) will flip to the Republicans.  I also think some of the nonsense about competition in the 9th district (where Al Green was drawn into a Trump +20 seat) is just that, and it will flip too.  Rep. Henry Cuellar should win again, and I feel the same way about Vincente Gonzalez despite Trump winning both their seats by 10-points.  This leaves three seats: 15th, 23rd, & 35th, the first two held by Republicans presently while the latter is a blue seat.  Weirdly, the reddest of these seats (the 15th) feels like the most probable flip, as Democrats struck gold with Tejano music legend Bobby Pulido, and I think he'll beat incumbent Rep. Monica de La Cruz (possibly the only person who could, but you only need one to get there).  For the last two, we have maybe the most horrifying Republican running for Congress this year in a swing seat, Brandon Herrera (a YouTuber whose celebration of gun violence was referenced in the Annunciation Catholic Church Shooter's manifesto) in the 23rd, while in the 35th we have a much more straight-forward race where it's probable they're on more even-footing in voter impressions, but it's also a seat that Trump won by only 10-points.  I'm going to guess that the parties split here, with the 35th staying blue and the 23rd going red (I'm kind of hoping for the reverse given how awful Herrera is, as I do not relish him getting this platform), which means that after all that Texas will just be R+1.

Utah

House: The only redraw this year that wasn't a gerrymander (but instead undoing a gerrymander), former Rep. Ben McAdams will cruise to an easy win in a Harris +24 district around the Salt Lake City metro area, and we get D+1.

Vermont

Governor: Perpetually popular moderate Gov. Phil Scott (R) has won reelection in Vermont largely by being the last true left-of-middle member of his party, but some of his moves this past Congress have been a bit more conservative than the Green Mountain State usually allows, and so I think this will be his closest shave against economist Amanda Janoo (D), though he'll win (and surely retire in 2028 to avoid an actual loss).

County Attorney Shannon Taylor (D-VA)

Virginia

Senate: Sen. Mark Warner will be running for another term, and he'll be winning one as well (another Senator I kind of wish had retired this cycle, but at least he'll win again).

House: The redraw that would've delivered Democrats four more seats in Virginia didn't come to fruition, but they'll still take some seats regardless.  The most vulnerable Republican is Rep. Jen Kiggans (R), who won this seat in 2020 against Rep. Elaine Luria (D)...and now Luria is going to win it right back.  I also think that the Democrats are going to take the 1st district, where County Attorney Shannon Taylor (D) is running a great campaign after losing the 2025 Attorney General primary, and Rep. Rob Wittman (R) is giving off the vibes of a longtime Safe R congressman who doesn't know how to run a competitive race.  Former Rep. Tom Perriello is also on the bubble in the 5th, and while I'm not predicting him against Rep. John McGuire, if the polling that shows Democrats at D+20 on the GCB in Virginia is right...that's what it'd take to get Perriello back into Congress.  For now, D+2

Rep. Marie Gluesenkamp Perez (D-WA)

Washington

House: Similar to Marcy Kaptur in Ohio, Rep. Marie Gluesenkamp Perez (D) has done few things to stop Democrats from hating her guts for siding with Republicans on major issues.  But even though Dems are mad, and this is the first election she'll run in without facing Joe Kent, I still think she gets her victory here (an annoyed vote is still a vote).  This is a Trump seat, but it's one trending toward the Democrats (thanks to continued blue voter growth in the Portland metro area bleeding into Washington), and I don't see a reason she can't win...honestly, this is on my list of districts likely to flip on a presidential level in 2028.

West Virginia

Senate: Shelley Moore Capito continues to avoid primary challenges despite a relatively moderate profile (not necessarily a moderate voting record, but a profile) and so she'll get a third term.

County Executive David Crowley (D-WI)

Wisconsin

Governor: Democrats avoided disaster earlier this year when Milwaukee County Executive David Crowley defeated State Rep. Francesca Hong after a truly horrendous Democratic Primary.  This likely cost Rep. Tom Tiffany his only shot at the governor's mansion.  Eight years of Gov. Tony Evers might induce some people to say "we need a change" but I don't think it'll be enough to overcome the Trump unpopularity in the Badger State, and so we should see a win for Crowley here.

House: Pundits seem more confident that businesswoman Rebecca Cooke (D) is headed to victory than Rep. Derrick Van Orden (R), and honestly it does feel like this Trump +7 seat might be closer than it looks (Wisconsin's electorate is weirdly inflexible in the Trump Era...always close, but inflexible).  Don't be surprised if Cooke loses her rematch in a surprise, but I'm going to pick her as I do think she'll win by some margin.  I don't think the same for nurse Mitchell Berman in the 1st district against Rep. Bryan Steil, even though this is a bluer district.

Wyoming

Governor: State Sen. Eric Barlow continues the long string of Republican governors (where have you gone, Dave Freudenthal?).

Senate: And Rep. Harriet Hageman (R) continues a long line of Republican senators.

House: For some reason Secretary of State Chuck Gray is being highlighted as a terrible candidate for the GOP here, and Inside Elections moved this race to Likely R.  I'm only mentioning because in the last sixth-year midterm of a Republican president, the Democrats inexplicably almost won a House seat in the Equality State, so it'd be funny if the same thing happened here.

The Lowdown

Governors: My end result here is a Democratic net gain of 4 seats, with them flipping Alaska, Georgia, Ohio, Nevada, & Iowa while the GOP gets back Kansas.  This would put the Democrats in the majority of the nation's governorships for the first time since the 2010 election (28D-22R), a 16-year drought.  Of the races, I'm feeling least confident about Nevada & Georgia, followed by Kansas, Alaska, & Wisconsin, in that order, but I do feel like the Democrats are headed for a majority.

Senate: Unthinkable a few months ago, I have not just a Senate majority for the Democrats on the books here, but one that even a John Fetterman party switch wouldn't hurt (52D-48R), with flips in Alaska, North Carolina, Ohio, Texas, & Maine (and not in reverse).  I'm not confident in this, and there was a part of me that wanted to go with a Republican in either Texas or Alaska (the two states I'm most nervous about overall), but that feels, again, like a Democrat being wimpy about what is clearly looking like a wave (but not a tsunami).  Deciding these things in a vacuum is the most authentic, and how I always do it, and will hold that again in 2026 even if I'm nervous.  Either of the AK/TX seats (honestly any other than North Carolina would surprise me) are vulnerable, but in the opposite direction, I feel good about our weaker candidates in Michigan & Minnesota getting through so honestly if all those are right but I still got a race wrong, I probably under-estimated the Democrats in places like Iowa, Kansas, or maybe even South Carolina or Nebraska, all of which could have a surprise in store (specifically IA or KS), though I can't bring myself to call them at the same time I'm already predicting blue results in Alaska & Texas.

House: Finally, the House.  As you can imagine, the easiest of the three to get a majority also goes blue for me.  If my counting is correct, I have it at D231-R204, for a net gain of 16 seats for the Democrats, and perhaps most notably a large enough margin Hakeem Jeffries should have no issue winning on the first ballot.  I don't think the majority is up for debate here, but it's possible I'm over-estimating with close races for the Democrats in places like IA-2, OH-9, & TX-35 definitely ones that could stay red, but on the flip side there's honestly a lot of room for the Democrats to gain on that number and maybe even push Republicans below 200 if they can find the magic combination in states like Florida, Texas, Kentucky, & Michigan (all of which I left flippable seats on the table).  Regardless, the last two years of Trump's presidency and times in politics will go out similarly to George W. Bush's...with a Congress that truly hates him.

The Betrayal of Haley Stevens

Michigan Reps. Haley Stevens (D?) and Mike Rogers (R)

This morning, Rep. Haley Stevens threw a gigantic wrench into one of the tightest Senate races of the cycle by endorsing Rep. Mike Rogers, and so we're going to do a hot-off-the-presses sort of blog post with my initial thoughts on this (spoiler alert: I'm fucking pissed off).

The Michigan Senate race has been the ugliest of the cycle (for the Democrats...Republicans in Texas can compete with this).  While Democrats had tough primaries in states like Texas, Wisconsin, & Minnesota, the party has largely moved past it, and to be honest-so had Michigan.  If you look at internal partisan numbers in most polls, Abdul El-Sayed, the Democratic nominee for the Senate, actually does better with Democrats than former Rep. Mike Rogers (the GOP nominee) does with Republicans.  This doesn't feed into preexisting belief systems about the race (the media more often portrays the Democrats as divided than the GOP in the Wolverine State), but it is in fact fact: El-Sayed has coalesced the Democratic Party behind him.  You've seen that in the way that major establishment figures like Barack Obama & Gretchen Whitmer have made a point of campaigning for him in the past few months since the primary.

The sole exception to this has been Rep. Haley Stevens (D), his main opponent in the primary (their other opponent, State Sen. Mallory McMorrow, has heartily backed El-Sayed and has campaigned for him).  Stevens had done a unity breakfast with El-Sayed after the primary, but otherwise had avoided campaigning with him.  This was not the case for people like McMorrow, Angie Craig (MN), and Francesca Hong (WI) who not only did the unity breakfast, but also made a point of campaigning for their opponents.  McMorrow has been all over the media for El-Sayed, Craig recently went door-knocking with Peggy Flanagan in Burnsville, and Hong has done events for David Crowley throughout the fall.  But Stevens has largely avoided El-Sayed, and offered tepid praise (though always still an endorsement)...

...that is until this morning.  This morning, Stevens appeared with Rogers at a Detroit church, and afterward issued a short video on social media declaring that she was going to be voting for Mike Rogers, not the Democratic nominee.  She said in the video that "education was on the ballot," and that this is "Phil Hart's seat"...side bar, and totally not the point but I'm going to make it the point for a second: this isn't Phil Hart's seat.  Phil Hart served in the Class 1 seat currently held by Elissa Slotkin presently...he never held the seat currently up on Tuesday (and now held by Gary Peters).  Really not a big thing, but if Stevens was going to betray her party, she at least could've checked Wikipedia first.  End side bar.

Stevens move is shocking, to say the least, and honestly feels a bit erratic.  As recently as Wednesday (yes, four days ago Wednesday) she said publicly in an interview on CNN that while her fiancee was voting for Rogers, she would be backing the entire Democratic ticket.  Her exact quote was "I still very much want our Democratic nominee, his name is Abdul, to win this race."  Rep. Jamie Raskin, one of Stevens' colleagues went on Meet the Press this morning and stated he'd spoken with Stevens, and she had every intention of voting the full Democratic ticket.  For the record, I don't believe that Raskin lied here-I feel confident that Stevens did, in fact, assure him that she was voting this way, and honestly I will admit I'm getting some Nancy Mace vibes from Stevens that feel very odd in the past couple of weeks (which also aligned with the announcement of her engagement) given how inconsistent she's been in her public behavior.

The fallout of this feels questionable.  As I said, El-Sayed has overwhelming Democratic support and while he's running behind Jocelyn Benson, he's led in virtually every poll for months.  Stevens insinuates she's just acting as one in her video, but honestly...she might be.  Statements this morning rallying behind El-Sayed were issued by everyone from Chuck Schumer to the Congressional Black Caucus.  I don't think this moves the needle to Rogers, and if it does, I don't think this was what did it...but I do think that the media (and the Left) will blame her for it if Rogers wins, which honestly feels calculus that Stevens appears to be too foolish to have factored into this decision (or she doesn't care).

Stevens has not hurt El-Sayed, but she has definitely hurt the case for moderate Democrats going forward in uniting the party.  Never mind that most moderates who lost acted like Angie Craig this cycle, endorsing their primary opponent.  Never mind that someone like, say, John Fetterman was the candidate not of the establishment (that was Conor Lamb), but of the right (not to mention Bernie Sanders supporters like Graham Platner, Nina Turner, & Tulsi Gabbard who have had similar issues with backing the Democratic nominee).  Stevens has fed into a preexisting paranoia that moderate Democrats won't welcome the Left into the party, and made it reality.  What she did was wrong (I think Jeffries should kick her out of the caucus on Wednesday, and I never want her to be on a Democratic ticket again...I half wonder if she'll run for her old seat as a Republican now in 2028), but the damage is going to hurt candidates like her way more than it'll hurt El-Sayed.

Election Night Guide: Ohio through Tennessee

I am doing a final predictions series for the November 3rd general elections.  If you've missed previous articles, they're listed right here: Alabama-Arkansas, California-Hawaii, Iowa-Louisiana, Maine-Montana, Nebraska-North Dakota

Dr. Amy Acton (D-OH)

Ohio

Governor: The Ohio governor's race, up until a few days ago, felt like one where the Democrats were probably going to win the race by a slim margin, maybe even seeing it go down in the final stretch as the increasingly Republican nature of the Buckeye State cost them.  But after Vivek Ramaswamy (R) launched the worst self-inflicted October surprise I've seen in a while, that's all out.  Some Republicans have claimed the ad featuring Dr. Amy Acton's (D) mother refusing to endorse her will play well with low-context voters, but they're deluding themselves (we've seen Ohio Republicans like Mike DeWine & Jon Husted criticize the ad for a reason), given that Acton's mother lost custody of both she and her brother after it was revealed that Acton's stepfather (her mother's husband) had raped her repeatedly.  Ramaswamy's refusal to back down on this attack proves how truly heartless he is, and I expect an eleventh hour rally from Democrats to lock in for Acton, who will win a race she probably would've won anyway (but now with more ardent admirers & a bigger national following). D+1

Senate: Ramaswamy, though, has put the rest of the ticket at risk, forcing nominees to choose between him and common decency (and in both cases, potentially risk alienating voters on the finish line).  This could impact the Senate race, pitting former Sen. Sherrod Brown (D) against incumbent (appointed) Sen. Jon Husted.  I was honestly toying with dropping this race for the Democrats as I have been to this dance with Ohio before, and Brown has not locked into 50%+1 as well as Acton in the post-Labor Day polls.  But I also think he's leading by more than he did when he lost in 2024 and it's a more favorable environment, and I think he'll D+1 this race.  This sets up a few notes.  First, if (as predicted) Brown wins, he'll become a senator pretty much immediately given that appointed senators have to vacate seats for elected senators right away, giving Chuck Schumer a vote for the lame duck.  Second, Brown will become the first person since Slade Gorton in 1988 to lose a Senate race as an incumbent and then win a subsequent race (it's very rare-before that it was Howard Metzenbaum in 1976...if you want to know the full history we actually did an article about it last year).  And lastly, because it's an appointed seat, Brown will need to run for reelection right away in 2028; I assume he'll do that, but it'll be a much harder road, and will risk him repeating 2024 rather than 2026 (but that's a problem for the future...right now the focus is on a midterm win, which I think he gets).

House: Ohio's redrawn House districts really won't do much in the midterms.  Greg Landsman & Emilia Sykes might be vulnerable in a red environment, but this isn't one, and while there is the possibility that Mike Carey and/or Mike Turner (the Ohio Mike's) go down, that's another Blue Tsunami situation that I can't pull the trigger on (late-breaking House polling, though, is giving me pause on if a blue tsunami could be in the works).  That leaves two seats that I think are solid bets for flipping.  The first is the 7th district, where Rep. Max Miller's allegations of abuse (he has been accused of throwing boiling water at his ex-wife, of breaking his 2-year-old daughter's collarbone, and had a restraining order put against him by former White House Press Secretary Stephanie Grisham, one of Miller's ex-girlfriends).  This is a Trump +11 district, so that might not all matter, but I think it will, and City Councilman Brian Poindexter (D) will win as a result.  The other seat is pitting Rep. Marcy Kaptur (D), the longest-serving woman in the US House, against former State Rep. Derek Merrin.  I have had Kaptur losing the entire year-her moderate politics make it harder for Democrats to rally around her in the way they might Brown, and this is a pretty red district (Trump won it by nearly 11-points).  But the national environment, and the blue-friendly backing of Ohio probably being a little stronger thanks to Acton/Brown...I'm going to go against what I initially thought here and think Kaptur barely hangs on in this race, which results in a D+1 (I do that with a lot of trepidation and little confidence, it's just a gut feeling).

Rep. Kevin Hern (R-OK)

Oklahoma

Governor: With Gov. Kevin Stitt retiring (and quite unpopular), some national organizations have thrown cash at this race unexpectedly between former State Sen. Mike Mazzei (R) and House Minority Leader Cyndi Munson.  I will note that this is an under-polled race, and in a Blue Tsunami it's the sort of random race that you'd look at: Munson is the rare A-tier candidate in Oklahoma, this is a state that has struggled disproportionately due to tariff & gas prices, and as a rule if a red state hasn't had a Democratic governor in a couple of decades (and isn't South Dakota) you should watch it in a wave as sometimes things surprise (mostly because voters eventually hit a breaking point with public education cuts).  I don't expect this to flip (or be that close), but I am watching it is what I'm saying.

Senate: Sen. Markwayne Mullin became Homeland Security Secretary in March (succeeding Kristi Noem), and now-Sen. Alan Armstrong (R) is ineligible to run again due to a quirk in Oklahoma election laws that don't allow appointed senators to run for reelection.  As a result, we'll get a new senator in Rep. Kevin Hern (R) when he takes this seat.

House: Similar to the Governor's race, in a Blue Tsunami you'd probably watch Rep. Stephanie Bice's (R) race not because she'll beat educator Jena Nelson, but because the margin could get interesting.

Gov. Tina Kotek (D-OR)

Oregon

Governor: One of the few Democratic-held seats on the map that feels genuinely at risk of flipping, Gov. Tina Kotek (D) is wildly unpopular and honestly if it were a redder race, I'd assume she'd be taken down by State Sen. Christine Drazan, who ran in 2022, and polling shows in striking distance of victory.  At some point this seat is going to have to flip-the Democrats have had a series of unpopular governors, and even in blue states, that just doesn't hold forever.  But I don't think it'll be this year, particularly with Trump in office and Drazan making some missteps (what the hell is she doing in the closing days of the campaign on Laura Ingraham in a state where she'll genuinely need thousands of Obama/Clinton/Biden/Harris voters to win?).  Dems hold, but watch this space for 2030.

Senate: Truly wish Jeff Merkley had chosen 2026 to retire as it'd have been nice to have the House bench bottleneck break in a cycle where none of the seats were at risk of flipping, but alas, he held on (and will win another six years).

Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick (R-PA)

Pennsylvania

Governor: Josh Shapiro (D) is going to win by margins we have not even seen before in his reelection campaign against Treasurer Stacy Garrity.  Seriously-what was she thinking choosing 2026 to run a sure-loss campaign and not just waiting four years?

House: Pennsylvania is not billed nearly as often as states like Ohio, Texas, & Iowa as consequential for the 2026 congressional majorities because it doesn't have a sexy Senate race to headline, but four crucial Republican-held seats are going to be huge determinants in whether or not Hakeem Jeffries gets the Speaker's gavel.  I think of the bunch the 7th district, where Union President Bob Brooks seems on track to best Rep. Ryan Mackenzie, is the top of the list, but close behind appears to be the 10th district, where Rep. Scott Perry (who nearly lost in 2024) will be taken down in a rematch by newscaster Janelle Stelson.  I also think we're looking at a win for the Democrats in the 10th district, where Scranton Mayor Paige Cognetti (D) will best Rep. Rob Bresnahan, possibly the only Democrat who could win this red seat (I think she'll be a tough hold in 2024), but she'll win regardless.  Which leaves us with Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick, the consistently popular Republican who is one of only three Republicans holding House seats won by Kamala Harris last cycle.  Bucks County Commissioner Bob Harvie has run an excellent campaign, and honestly this would be the only cycle Fitzpatrick probably would ever go down...but I can't see it yet.  Or at least, I won't predict it yet-at least one Harris Republican will remain in the next Congress. D+3

Rhode Island

Governor: The excitement in this race already happened earlier this year when Helena Foulkes, a corporate executive, beat the sitting Gov. Dan McKee (D) in a primary, and will soon succeed him as governor.

Senate: Jack Reed, a 36-year congressional fixture, will win reelection, and may well get back the Senate Armed Services gavel at this rate if Democrats can break through in the Senate.

Dr. Annie Andrews (D-SC)

South Carolina

Governor: Weirdly, the open gubernatorial election here has gotten absolutely no political attention as Attorney General Alan Wilson gets a promotion.

Senate: This cannot be said for the Senate race, pitting appointed-Sen. Darline Graham (R), the sister of the late Sen. Lindsey Graham, against Dr. Annie Andrews, a pediatrician & 2022 House candidate.  Andrews started this race as a reputable loser option, the kind of respectable candidate who maybe gets endorsed by Emily's List but doesn't go further & makes the party look okay for putting forward a competent adult, but she's been able to breakthrough mostly on the back of Graham's truly, aggressively bad political skills (which are apparently not inherited).  It's clear at this point that Graham is coasting solely on hard-core Republicans not being able to vote for a Democrat, as no one really seems to like her or think she's capable of doing this job (and almost certainly is only going to serve one full term).  Polling here has been close, but weirdly limited (for all of the polls in Florida, Ohio, & Texas, my kingdom for some pollster with an A-rating to head to the Palmetto State).  I don't think Andrews can win, but I do think this is a race that, in a Blue Tsunami, we should be paying attention to, and if it's not called in the first half hour of election night the Democrats might have dropped the ball here.

House: The same can be said for the 1st district, which pitches County Councilwoman Jenny Honeycutt (R) against Vice Admiral Nancy Lacore (D) after Nancy Mace's failed bid for governor.  Either way, I'll be glad to see Mace gone from the halls of Congress (her last few years in the House have been hard to watch), and I assume it'll be Honeycutt replacing her though there seems to be some momentum for Lacore.

South Dakota

Governor: Gov. Larry Rhoden fought off contenders from both his left and right to get the nomination for the GOP, and that's the general election in the Mount Rushmore State.

Senate: The Democrats are once again trying the "run a moderate Independent to avoid the party label" option with Lt. Colonel Brian Bengs (I), but I don't think it's going to work as well as it did in Nebraska, mostly because Sen. Mike Rounds (R) isn't close to as conservative as someone like a Pete Ricketts.

Tennessee

Governor: Like her colleague Amy Klobuchar, Sen. Marsha Blackburn will become the first woman ever elected in her state and will also get to appoint her successor (anyone know the gossip on whom she'll select?).

Senate: Sen. Bill Hagerty will easily win a second term here after declining a run against Blackburn in the gubernatorial primary.

House: A mid-decade gerrymander has ousted Rep. Steve Cohen, and will mean that Tennessee will have no Democratic representation in Congress probably for the first time since the founding of the party (by Andrew Jackson, a Tennessean).  Truly heinous corruption of democracy given how blue Memphis & Nashville are, and now don't have a voice. R+1

Saturdays with the Stars: Sigourney Weaver

Each month of 2026 we are looking at an actor or actress who found their fame in action films, fighting bad guys & saving the day.  Last month, we talked about Tom Cruise, oftentimes billed as the "Last Great Movie Star."  This month, we're going to make sure that "actress" intro I've said to every one of these biographies isn't just name-checking.  Despite action films being largely a male-dominated field, we're going to talk about a woman who made her initial fame in action films, but still managed to have a really impressive career as a dramatic performer, gaining Oscar attention while headlining several big-name franchises.  This month's star is Sigourney Weaver.

Many of the men we've talked about this year had rough childhoods, ones that it's hard to see how they exactly got to Hollywood.  That is not the case for Sigourney Weaver, born Susan Alexandra Weaver, whose mother was a character actress (who made films with Alfred Hitchcock, Bette Davis, & Edward G. Robinson) and her father was Pat Weaver, the president of NBC, who was the initial creator of The Today Show, The Tonight Show, and who ended up saving Meet the Press from cancellation.  She got her unusual name from The Great Gatsby, an erudite moniker that would complement her Yale education.  While at school, she'd originate a role in Stephen Sondheim's The Frogs, where she'd play opposite Meryl Streep, whom she'd have a friendly professional rivalry with in her early career.

That rivalry led to what would end up being Weaver's first really big role: as Ellen Ripley in Alien.  Streep was considered for the part, but had to turn it down as she was still recovering from the death of her boyfriend John Cazale, and so Weaver got the film, and it would end up becoming one of the biggest movies of the year (it's worth noting that the biggest film of the year, Kramer vs. Kramer, not only starred Streep but won her an Oscar, a distinction Weaver still hasn't achieved).  For decades, Weaver would alternate between big-screen starring roles and character work in smaller dramas.

As a result, it feels to a degree that Weaver might be cheating to include this year.  With the very big exceptions of the Alien and Avatar franchises, Weaver has rarely had major roles in action films, and is probably better known as a dramatic performer than an action star.  One could argue I should be picking someone like Linda Hamilton, Angelina Jolie, or Michelle Yeoh, all of whom have been parts of more varied action films, for this distinction.  But I am picking Weaver because I think she's a fascinating prototype of the women who came after-because it's almost impossible to imagine any of those women getting the opportunities that they did without her Ripley suiting up first.

Jack Reacher (2012)

Film: Jack Reacher (2012)

Stars: Tom Cruise, Rosamund Pike, Richard Jenkins, Werner Herzog, David Oyelowo, Robert Duvall

Director: Christopher McQuarrie

Oscar History: No nominations

Snap Judgment Ranking: 3/5 stars

Each month, as part of our 2026 Saturdays with the Stars series, we are looking at the men & women who created the Boom!-Pow!-Bang! action films that would come to dominate the Blockbuster Era of cinema.  This month, our focus is on Tom Cruise: click here to learn more about Mr. Cruise (and why I picked him), and click here for other Saturdays with the Stars articles.

While Tom Cruise peaked as a movie star in the 1990's & early 2000's, he's never really ended his tenure as a headliner, to the point where many have referred to him as "the Last Movie Star" (a title the cinema-adoring Cruise has downplayed and actively said he doesn't want).  But it's worth noting that Cruise, post roughly The Last Samurai/Collateral, when his very public courtship and then divorce from Katie Holmes threatened to overtake his manicured public perception in a way that not even his connections to Scientology was able to do, has largely focused on films that are incredibly "safe."  Gone are the political statements of films like Born on the Fourth of July or the avant garde thrillers like Vanilla Sky.  It's hard to honestly recognize, even in the era of Digger (for good or bad, his most provocative film in decades), someone taking as big of a swing as Eyes Wide Shut.  Mostly, Cruise, once clearly on a different track than the rest of the action stars of his era, has largely joined Arnold & Sly as a man who forever was making shoot-em-up pics, and legacy sequels.  Since 2004, we've had a new installment of Top Gun and countless additional Mission Impossible pictures (eight in all).  But he did do something those guys couldn't in the 21st Century: launch a new action series with the Jack Reacher pictures, which is how we'll close out our time with him.

(Spoilers Ahead) Jack Reacher starts extremely provocatively (and in a slam to what's to come, with its most interesting scene) as a shooter (whose face is obscured to the point where it's impossible to identify the actor) shoots a few people at random from long range.  The police arrest a man named James Barr, whose fingerprint is on a coin that was dropped in the parking garage the shots came from, and he pleads "GET JACK REACHER" on a legal pad, which is precisely what his attorney Helen Rodin (Pike), assigned while he's comatose, does.  Initially Jack (Cruise), a mysterious man with virtually no paper trail, declines to help the alleged shooter, whom he has a complicated relationship with, but eventually does help, and we learn through Helen's investigations into the families that one of the women shot was not shot at random at all, and the other murders were a cover-up for the death.  We also learn that someone, potentially even Helen's own father, is helping to frame the innocent man (though it turns out its his assistant, played by David Oyelowo).

The film, like a lot of Cruise's late-stage action flicks, is pretty standard issue if still enjoyable.  Cruise plays a strong, silent type who is clearly modeled at least in part on Ethan Hunt, someone unknowable and impossibly savvy, and he's good.  I liked the chemistry he had with Pike, though their relationship does not turn romantic in this movie (I haven't seen the sequel yet to know if she's even in it).  Side note, by the way-watching Cruise's films this month, it's striking how many of his films have him paired with attractive leading woman whom he never ends up with romantically.  Born on the Fourth of July, A Few Good Men, and Jack Reacher all have potential love interests for him that he never ends up with, and this is on top of largely asexual action flicks like Minority Report, War of the Worlds, and Mission Impossible where most of his love interests are either dead or nonexistent.

Cruise still works today, though much of his work in the past few years seems to have been him saying goodbye to Ethan Hunt & Maverick in legacy sequels.  One wonders if Digger will open a new, final chapter of his career where the 64-year-old boy wonder has to graduate into the elder statesmen roles he used to stand alongside for Paul Newman & Robert Duvall.  Next month we will talk about our penultimate action star for our seventh season, an actor who became synonymous with two major action franchises, but unlike a lot of the men we've talked about this season she would have an equally impressive (and lauded) career as a dramatic actress.

Election Night Guide: Nebraska through North Dakota

I am doing a final predictions series for the November 3rd general elections.  If you've missed previous articles, they're listed right here: Alabama-Arkansas, California-Hawaii, Iowa-Louisiana, Maine-Montana

Activist Denise Powell (D-NE)

Nebraska

Governor: The Democrats put up a decent candidate to face Gov. Jim Pillen in State Sen. Lynne Walz, who has done all right, and will probably post the best numbers for a Democrat in this state since Ben Nelson in 1994, but that won't be enough, even in a solid blue year.

Senate: If there's a flip statewide in Nebraska this cycle it's in the Senate, with Dan Osborn (I), who greatly outperformed Kamala Harris in 2024 against Sen. Deb Fischer.  If you go off the polling aggregate here, Sen. Pete Ricketts is extremely vulnerable, only leading in most aggregates by about a point.  But Democrats are not giving this the kind of attention they are other races, and I don't think it's because Osborn is an independent (I think it's because they know this is a reach-too-far).  I think Ricketts hangs on, though I'll be honest-morbid curiosity has this as one of the upsets I'm most hoping for, mostly because Ricketts has said for two consecutive cycles he won't caucus with either party, and I'd be fascinated to see how that works as there's no real modern precedent for it, and I'm a political nerd who'd like to know the answer to how that would happen.

House: Possibly the likeliest flip of the cycle (toward the Democrats), even if the GOP had kept Rep. Don Bacon (R) in the 2nd district, it would've been a stretch.  Without him, it seems impossible that Democratic activist Denise Powell won't end up as one of Hakeem Jeffries first votes for a majority in January. D+1

Gov. Joe Lombardo (R-NV)

Nevada

Governor: Nevada is one of the few states where you can actually get a solid read on who will win based on early vote, so reserving the right to change this, but despite the Democratic wave, I think Gov. Joe Lombardo should be able to over-perform the congressional ballot here and win reelection.  I will note two things here: 1) in an actual wave, close races will frequently go to the lesser candidate, which in my opinion is AG Aaron Ford (who has not run a campaign that rose above the middle, which was needed against Lombardo) and 2) I am keeping a very close eye on the Lieutenant Governor race here, as Nevada is one of the few states that they elect them separately.  Given the likelihood that Lombardo runs against Catherine Cortez Masto in 2028 if there's a Republican LG, it'd behoove Dems to win at least the back half of the ticket as part of the wave. (John Note: I did, in fact, change my mind here based on the early voting in Nevada, and think that Ford will win...this was edited before the election so it still counts for my final prediction D+1).

House: Every cycle there's one longshot race that catches my eye.  In my opinion, NV-2 is that race.  Pretty much every person seems to think this flirts between Lean/Likely Republican, but it has all of the recipes of an upset.  It's a seat Trump won by less than 15-points (thanks entirely to it having Washoe County as part of its makeup), and I do think there's the real possibility that it flips.  But I haven't seen the numbers I think I'd need to see to safely guess that, so I'm going to skip it (for now).

Rep. Chris Pappas (D-NH)

New Hampshire

Governor: Gov. Kelly Ayotte (R), after going down during the 2016 Trump loss in New Hampshire but surviving in the 2024 Trump loss, should be fine running for reelection.  I wouldn't be surprised if she starts getting more national press as the 2028 primaries heat up.

Senate: Rep. Chris Pappas (D) drew a decent opponent in former Sen John Sununu (R), but he got the right cycle to be kind of a middling, backbench congressman who pushes for the Senate.  He'll win (and become the first openly gay man to serve in the Senate), but I do wonder what he'll be like in office given his campaign has left something to be desired.

New Jersey

Senate: Sen. Cory Booker at this point is probably never going to be president (though I give it 50/50 odds he runs in 2028), and one wonders if (at age 57) he might have waited a bit too long to try and fight Brian Schatz for Democratic Senate Leader.  But as it is, he'll surely win another term to sort through it.

House: I will admit I don't buy the "Jeff van Drew might lose the 2nd this cycle" buzz, and Nellie Pou (after the 9th shockingly went red in 2024) will have no issue given the environment.  But the big news here is Tom Kean, Jr. (R), whose bizarre public behavior that was later revealed to be him being hospitalized for clinical depression, still for some reason ran for reelection, and will lose this swingy (Trump won in 2024, as did Mikie Sherrill a year later) district to National Guard Officer Rebecca Bennett. D+1

New Mexico

Governor: With Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham (D) retiring, it seems certain that we will have the first Native American woman to ever run a state with former Interior Secretary & Rep. Deb Haaland winning the position.  This will be only the second time (after Massachusetts in 2022) that an all-female gubernatorial ticket will win (Haaland is running with Public Lands Commissioner Stephanie Garcia Richard.

Senate: So far Sen. Ben Ray Lujan (who before he ran for the upper chamber I had pegged as a possible successor to Nancy Pelosi) hasn't made many waves in his first term, but will still get a second.

House: Rep. Gabe Vasquez (D) will probably go down in there's ever a proper red wave again (maybe 2030), but this is not the cycle he loses the 2nd.

Officer Christopher Gallant (D-NY)

New York

Governor: Few governors have come into their own quite like Gov. Kathy Hochul, who had a tough scrape four years ago but will cruise this cycle, has.  I do think we need to look at the Empire State long-term, as the upstate trends here aren't great, but for now it's not a concern.

House: I also think long-term trends in Long Island need to be examined a bit, but both Tom Suozzi & Laura Gillen should be okay with the blue wave at their back (we need Suozzi to stay in office as long as possible at this point as this seat is moving away from the Democrats).  There is some evidence that NY-21 could flip this cycle, given that Rep. Elise Stefanik has left it open, and honestly if there's a tsunami this is the type of seat that posts a one-term wonder.  I will be watching the results of the NY-1 race mostly out of curiosity, as Christopher Gallant (an absurdly handsome national guard officer & volunteer fireman who also has a history of modeling for BDSM photos), but he's not going to win.  The only race I think is truly at risk is NY-17, one of only three seats won by Kamala Harris that the Republicans hold right now in the House.  Democrats & Republicans alike hold two-term Rep. Mike Lawler's political skills in high-esteem, but I don't think he's special enough to beat back a wave, and so I'll go D+1 with Iraq War veteran Cait Conley ousting him (I wouldn't be surprised if Lawler seeks a rematch in 2028 if he goes down though).

Gov. Roy Cooper (D-NC)

North Carolina

Senate: One of the most striking things about this cycle's Senate campaign is that there's only one absolute, no arguments flip on the calendar.  With Sen. Thom Tillis (R) retiring after two terms, the DSCC got exactly the right candidate in former Gov. Roy Cooper (D), who is cruising to reelection in this seat and will get Democrats their fastest D+1 in the upper chamber. 

House: In what will surely go down as a great example of a dummymander, a mid-decade map drawn to oust Rep. Don Davis (D in the 1st) not only will not oust Davis, it will also take with it the 11th district, where the retirement of scandal-plagued Rep. Chuck Edwards (R) seemed like the Republicans had honestly avoided disaster with State Rep. Jennifer Balkcom, but instead it appears Balkcom is going to lose (Republicans have already started to triage the race) in favor of businessman Jamie Ager. D+1

North Dakota

House: This race isn't actually competitive, but North Dakota has no other races & it felt weird to skip it, so kudos to Julie Fedorchak, the first woman to represent North Dakota in the House, for getting another term.