A blue wave that was widely predicted to lift Democrats in Tuesday’s midterms turned into a blue tsunami, sweeping across nearly every corner of the electoral map, capturing control of both houses of Congress and delivering a decisive rebuke to President Donald Trump.
The rout was thorough and historic. At press time, Democrats had flipped seven Republican-held Senate seats—some of which had been red for decades. One, Kansas, hadn’t elected a Democratic senator in nearly 100 years. In the House, Democrats won 228 seats—a majority that will likely widen as more votes are counted.
Across the country, Democrats also notched landmark victories in governors’ races—including electing the first Black female governor (Keisha Lance Bottoms in Georgia) and the first Native American female governor (Deb Haaland in New Mexico) in U.S. history. GW alumna Gina Hinojosa, J.D. ’99, is the first Hispanic governor ever elected in Texas. Former GW international education major Aaron Ford, M.A. ’97, became the first Black governor of Nevada.
As election results continue to take shape, political watchers are already parsing the outcomes for clues to what comes next. In an interview with GW Today, Political Science Professor Danny Hayes discussed the Democrats’ big night, what it means for the future of the Republican Party and whether it signals the beginning of the end for the Trump political era.
Q: Can you frame the scope of last night’s victory for the Democrats? Just how big was it?
A: It’s giant. It’s hard to characterize it in any other way.
In 2010, Republicans gained something like 60 House seats after Obama had won in a landslide in 2008. In 1994, Republicans picked up dozens of seats and took the House after decades in the wilderness. That was described as a political earthquake.
Last night is on the order of magnitude of those elections. When the dust settles, the Democrats are likely to have picked up more than 40 House seats, which is pretty remarkable given how safe for one party most of our Congressional districts now are—and given that Republican redistricting efforts were expected to oust a number of Democrats who ended up holding on. By one measure, the Democrats are going to win the national vote by something like 12 or 13 points. That’s a margin that no party has achieved in 40 years.
So if you look at the modern history of American elections, there are not very many comparable victories by parties—and especially in such a polarized moment where partisanship is so strong.
Q: What outcomes can you point to that illustrate this swing?
A: The obvious ones are Texas, Iowa and Kansas, where Republicans have held most statewide offices for decades. And it’s not just that Democrats won in Iowa, Kansas and Texas—it’s that they won by pretty substantial margins. The margin in Iowa and Kansas can be something like four or five points. In Texas, [James] Talarico is going to win by perhaps double digits. He ran against a flawed candidate in Ken Paxton. But the fact that Democrats also won the governor’s race in Texas—Gina Hinojosa defeated [incumbent Republican] Greg Abbott by six or seven points—is a really stunning result.
I think it’s a sign of the extent to which Democrats are angry, Republicans are demobilized and Trump and the Republicans have lost a lot of the support from independents and marginal voters that powered him to victory in 2024.
Q: We need to talk about some of these historic firsts that appeared all over the electoral map—first female governors, first Native Americans, first Black and Hispanic governors. Michigan elected the first Muslim senator in Abdul El-Sayed and New Hampshire sent the first openly gay man to the Senate in Chris Pappas. What does this mean?
A: There were a remarkable number of firsts last night that flew under the radar because of the focus on the Senate. But also because the Democratic candidates who are achieving these firsts didn’t really emphasize it in their campaigns in the way that Democrats had [in the past].
Some of that is strategic—not wanting to play identity politics at a time when voters seem somewhat tired of that. But all of those victories are also indicators of what happens when Democrats have a good night. Because the Democratic Party has a pretty diverse coalition—racially, ethnically, by gender—a good night for Democrats often means a good night for diversity in the composition of political office.
Q: Was this victory all about Trump?
A: It wasn’t all about Trump—but it was mostly about Trump. Over the course of the last 40 or 50 years, American elections have become increasingly nationalized. When times are good, voters reward the party of the president, even in down ballot races. When times are bad, or the voters feel bad about things, they punish the party of the president. Trump begged for people to pretend that he was on the ballot. He got what he wanted. It just didn’t turn out the way that he hoped it would.
Q: So what message were voters sending?
A: The best way to understand it is that people are dissatisfied with American politics right now. There are a bunch of ingredients to that. It’s a sort of soup made up of disenchantment over the Iran war and the effect on gas prices, the tariffs that the Trump administration imposed, the aggressive immigration enforcement and the killing of civilians in a few high-profile incidents.
You have the juxtaposition of people’s frustration with the cost of living—feeling like things are not going well in the country amid credible allegations of corruption within the White House and in the government that seem to prioritize the interests of wealthy people over ordinary citizens.
All of that has led to real anger and frustration by voters. I think the message that Trump was sent last night was that voters don’t want this. Whether Trump changes course remains to be seen. Most politicians have an instinct for when they need to change course, but Trump doesn’t really. That came back to bite him pretty hard last night.
Q: Trump did plenty wrong, but what did Democrats do right?
A: This is a backlash to the Trump administration more than it is an endorsement of the Democratic Party itself.
But that said, I think the Democratic victories in Iowa, Kansas and Texas in particular demonstrate that there is a real advantage to being strategic and running candidates that are more moderate in places where you’ve got to win over swing voters or voters from the other side.
All the different elements of the Democratic Party—the progressives and the moderates—will point to things that seem to be a good case for their argument of where the party should go. But Talarico in Texas, Adam Hamilton in Kansas and Josh Turek in Iowa did not campaign on what you would describe as progressive positions. They’re not conservative by any means. But stylistically, the fact that they’re all people of faith is meaningful and important.
Q: Where do we go from here? What’s next for both parties? Is the Trump era officially over?
A: We’ll see. Trump is going to remain the most prominent figure in American politics for a couple more years, even as his influence is almost certain to wane. He’s not going to have a compliant Congress like he’s had for the last two years, however.
There will be efforts by Republican candidates to distance themselves from Trump to some extent. I don’t think we’ll see candidates trying to defend the Iran war or promising to reimpose tariffs or promoting aggressive immigration enforcement the way the Trump administration has.
But it will still be very difficult for any candidate to win the 2028 primary without Trump’s support. There is no comparable figure within the party who has the same appeal among Republican voters—despite what happened last night.
Still, he’s going to face resistance to anything that he does. Democrats are likely to launch investigations regarding allegations of corruption and self-dealing. I think there will be a lot of fighting between Trump and the Democrats over the next couple of years, all against the backdrop of the 2028 election. A number of Democrats who did well last night will probably position themselves to run for president too.
Q: So we are in for two more dramatic years?
A: Yeah, I think we better buckle up and use the shoulder harness.