The George Washington University Graduate School of Political Management hosted a post-election analysis Thursday evening at Jack Morton Auditorium to discuss the message Americans sent at the polls and how the 2026 midterm election results could shape the coming years.
Debbie Mucarsel-Powell, executive director of GSPM and program director of the masters in political management program, opened the event noting the results demonstrated a swing that exceeded what many experts and polls were predicting.
“What we witnessed across this country on Tuesday night was a political shift that many had underestimated,” Mucarsel-Powell said. “An electorate that was sending a message far louder than the polls had predicted. And a reminder that in politics, nothing is inevitable.”
She explained that is why GSPM aims to do more than just to teach its students how to analyze elections and anticipate their outcomes, but prepare them to be the next generation of leaders who will make decisions at the highest levels of government.
“And if there’s one lesson that I have tried to instill in my students, it’s this: The best political strategists aren’t just the ones who can predict what’s going to happen next. They're the ones who know how to lead when everything changes. Because politics is unpredictable,” Mucarsel-Powell said.
Mucarsel-Powell also addressed the absence of Rep. Haley Stevens, D-Mich., who had been expected to participate in the discussion. She said Stevens had been confirmed as recently as Tuesday but ultimately decided not to attend, adding that she respected her decision.
CNN Chief Congressional Correspondent Manu Raju, anchor of Inside Politics Sunday, served as the moderator of Thursday’s discussions.
The first conversation featured Rep. Jamie Raskin, D-Md., who is poised to take over as chair of the House Judiciary Committee.
Raju asked if the election results meant voters were embracing the Democratic party’s agenda or were rejecting the actions of President Donald Trump’s administration.
“If people didn’t like what the Democrats were offering, they could have just stayed home the way that a lot of the Republicans stayed home,” Raskin said.
He said he believes voters are in support of candidates who offered to stand up for democracy, the rule of law and advocate for a system that serves the common good versus only the elites.
Raju asked how Democrats, now holding a massive majority in Congress, would balance pursuing their priorities without overreaching, given that some of their victories occurred in districts Trump had previously carried by double-digit margins.
“There’s a risk of underreaching, too,” Raskin said, arguing against that notion.
Instead, Raskin said, the Republicans should be asked to explain how they plan to find common ground with the Democrats on issues such as how to end the war in Iran.
“Let them come to us,” Raskin said. “We just won a landslide repudiation of their corruption and their authoritarianism. A massive mandate for the Democratic Party’s embrace of healthcare for all the people, defending the environment, defending the federal workforce, promoting peace and taking down corruption and autocrats around the world. That's what we stand for, and that's what people voted for.”
Raju asked Raskin to outline what his top investigative priorities will be.
“Corruption, authoritarianism, violence by the government,” Raskin said. “Let's take seriously the situation we're in, because we're engulfed in government corruption and lawlessness, and it's costing us all money.”
He argued that fighting corruption and making life more affordable are not separate issues, but rather closely linked. He pointed to the billions of dollars spent on the Iran war and the economic costs of tariffs, arguing that both were rooted, at least in part, in corruption.
Raskin outlined how the Trump administration’s decision to abandon the Iran nuclear deal helped set the stage for the war. He also raised concerns about how Trump’s son-in-law, Jared Kushner, has business ties to governments in the region and is simultaneously in a diplomatic role, calling it an “egregious conflict of interest.”
As the conversation wrapped up, Raju asked about the likelihood of the committee pursuing an impeachment inquiry against Trump.
“We’re not afraid to impeach Donald Trump,” Raskin said. “We’ve impeached him twice already. He’s got half of all the presidential impeachments in American history.”
But Raskin said, given the two-thirds Senate vote required to convict, they would need to weigh going through that long process against other priorities.
“I believe he's already committed impeachable offenses ... but is it more important for us to start this politically convoluted and torturous process, or is it more important to get millions of people their healthcare back that was stripped from them by Donald Trump and the MAGA Republicans in the wretched, hideous bill?” Raskin said. “I would tell you tonight it’s much more important for us to get their healthcare now than to launch into that process.”
The second discussion featured GSPM alumnus Nathan Gonzales, M.A.’05, editor and publisher of Inside Elections, and Morris Katz, a media strategist who served on New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani’s campaign.
Gonzales said Democrats began to realize early Tuesday night that the results could be bigger than expected, as Republicans struggled in races they were more confident in. The first signs came in Florida, he said, where statewide races for governor and Senate remained close, and Republicans struggled in congressional districts they had redrawn to their advantage. In Indiana, several Republican candidates were also facing tighter than expected races.
“That was the sign that it was not just going to be a good year, it was going to be a great year,” Gonzales said. “But then, as the bottom fell out of North Carolina, it was like, this is even going to be bigger than what we thought.”
Gonzales, explaining the conditions that led to this blue wave, pointed to a combination of factors that included an energized Democratic base, independent voters shifting blue and a Republican base that appeared less motivated.
He pointed to the economy as a major reason, saying he had heard concerns from agricultural groups about the impact of Trump’s policies. Some voters were conflicted because while they were unhappy with Trump's policies, they were reluctant to put Democrats in charge. But the economic pressures were significant enough to push some voters to cross party lines, Gonzales said.
Raju asked, since the people that have won in a lot of these districts represent the centrist wing of the Democratic Party, if that was a validation of more centrist democratic politics.
Katz said many of the candidates who performed well were campaigning aggressively against issues like a billionaire class, big tech and data centers, and corruption.
“And that is a lot of the same things, that for a long time, we’ve said must be talked about and must be centered,” Katz said
He argued that voters are less concerned with the traditional labels used to describe Democrats than with issues such as an economy they believe is rigged, a corrupt political system and a healthcare system that is not working for them.
“And that’s a uniting thing,” Katz said.
Raju asked how Democrats could avoid wasting this opportunity.
“We should not be scared of failing,” Katz said. “We should not be scared of seeing legislation get vetoed, of seeing Republicans block legislation. Make them vote week after week after week to not raise the minimum wage, to not expand Medicaid.”
He said Democrats should use this as an opportunity to show people what life can look like if they take back the White House in 2028.
