THE ANTI-TRUMP BACKLASH IS BIG, BUT IT COULD BE A LOT BIGGER

I thought the hype might be real. I thought frustration with the status quo might give Democrat Aftyn Benn a win, or at least a photo finish, in yesterday's special congressional election in Tennessee's 7th district, where Donald Trump won by 22 points last year.

It didn't happen. The Republican candidate, Matt Van Epps, won by 9. That's very good news for Democrats -- a 13-point swing since 2024 is huge -- but it isn't better news than Democrats got on Election Day and in other special elections this year. In The New York Times, Nate Cohn tells us that the numbers suggest a typical power swing in 2026 and 2028, not a massive realignment:

... the winning party in the last five presidential elections has gone on to lose each of the next five midterms — and four of the next five presidential elections.

... the backlash against Mr. Trump and simmering dissatisfaction has yielded a familiar political landscape:

* Mr. Trump’s approval rating is at 41 percent; on average, the prior five presidential winners were at 42 percent at this point in their terms.

* The Democrats lead by about five points in the early generic midterm polls; on average, the party out of power led by four points at this stage after the last five elections.

* The Democrats ran about eight points better in the governor’s races in New Jersey and Virginia than those states’ lean with respect to the country in the last election; on average, the party out of power ran seven points ahead in New Jersey and Virginia governor’s races without incumbents.

There's only one data point that seems unusual:

* Democrats have run 17 points better in special congressional elections than those districts’ lean in the last election; on average, the party out of power ran six points ahead over the last two decades. This lopsided Democratic advantage at least partly reflects the party’s edge in low-turnout elections, but that will still help the party fare well in the relatively low-turnout midterms.

What this suggests is that Democrats should do well in the next election cycle or two. Republicans and the gatekeepers of conventional wisdom agree on this: Politico's headline is "GOP Frets ‘Dangerous’ Result in Tennessee." A few quotes from that story:

“Tonight is a sign that 2026 is going to be a bitch of an election cycle,” said one House Republican, granted anonymity to speak candidly. “Republicans can survive if we play team and the Trump administration officials play smart. Neither is certain.” ...

“I’m glad we won. But the GOP should not ignore the Virginia, New Jersey and Tennessee elections,” Rep. Don Bacon (R-Neb.), who is retiring from his swingy Omaha-based district, said. “We must reach swing voters. America wants some normalcy.” ...

“It was too close,” said one House GOP leadership aide, who was also granted anonymity to candidly discuss the race.

But the numbers aren't pointing to a transformative change in American politics -- a wipeout that consigns the GOP, or at least the Donald Trump/Stephen Miller/Russell Vought/Mike Johnson GOP, to the dustbin of history, and opens the door for truth and reconciliation commissions, Nuremberg-style trials, and significant progressive change. None of that seems likely right now. What seems likely is a fairly ordinary party swing.

A recap of tonight's special election in TN-07 (plus a WAY-TOO-EARLY model of the 2026 midterms). A swing of 13 points would put Dems over 250 seats in the U.S. House. A more reasonable scenario—say, D+6—still gives them the House, and maybe the Senate. www.gelliottmorris.com/p/what-the-s...

[image or embed]

— G Elliott Morris (@gelliottmorris.com) December 2, 2025 at 10:56 PM

We know that Republicans pursue transformative agendas even after close wins -- see 2000, 2016, and 2024. Democrats don't. Maybe that will change if Democrats manage a trifecta in 2028 -- but that's a tall order because Republican dominance in small rural states gives the GOP a Senate advantage.

But will Republicans continue to sink? Jamelle Bouie seems to think so.

a thing to ask yourself re: the GOP's electoral position is what could happen over the next year that could *improve* its position? and what could trump do, plausibly, that might *boost* his numbers with the public?

— jamelle (@jamellebouie.net) December 2, 2025 at 9:44 PM

if you struggle to answer either then you have a good sense of how fucked the republicans are right now

— jamelle (@jamellebouie.net) December 2, 2025 at 9:44 PM

The one thing President Trump could do is accept defeat when, as seems likely, the Supreme Court's Republicans do the bidding of their corporate masters and rule that Trump can't impose tariffs using the International Emergency Economic Powers Act. As I've noted a few times, Trump will be able to reinstate most of the tariffs under the terms of other laws that aren't at issue in this Supreme Court case. If he takes the loss and gives up on the tariffs, he'll improve his party's chances in future elections. But I assume he has so much emotional investment in tariffs that he'll reinstate them and wait to be sued again.

Trump and congressional Republicans really might make life in America so awful that Republican electoral losses in the future will be far worse than projected. The loss of Obamacare subsidies for 2026, which seems all but inevitable now, could be a transformative event, as could an AI crash in the financial markets. But for now, I think we're looking at normal politics, not an upheaval.

(And although Trump doesn't seem to be trying to prevent free and fair elections yet -- probably because his ego won't let him admit that his party is hurting -- that could change if the 2026 numbers look really bad for the GOP.)

*****

One last point I want to make: I see that there's some debate over whether the progressive Aftyn Behn was the right candidate for her district.

Despite @aftynbehn.bsky.social generating real excitement with an authentic progressive anti-corruption message and getting closer than anyone in #TN7, *experts* are already dropping predictable “a centrist would’ve done better” takes - as though that hasn’t been tried here many times.

[image or embed]

— The Tennessee Holler (@thetnholler.bsky.social) December 3, 2025 at 8:02 AM

I don't believe that the 13-point swing happened exclusively because Behn ran a progressive campaign that excited voters. I think the major reason it happened is that there's more interest in voting for Democrats of all stripes than there was in 2024. Progressive campaigns inspire some voters -- Zohran Mamdani's campaign was extraordinary, and Behn's campaign clearly created some excitement -- but they also inspire backlash. (Mamdani didn't win by double digits. Abigail Spanberger and Mikie Sherrill did.)

If you wanted to build the ideal Democratic candidate in a lab, I suspect you'd want to create someone who sounds like a transformative progressive (to motivate progressive voters) but also projects a belief in normie-ness and incrementalism. What you'd create, in other words, is Barack Obama in 2008. It's no surprise that he won the largest victory of any presidential candidate in this century.

I'm sorry this is the case. I'd like to believe that more progressive candidates can win huge victories. I just don't see it. I think America needs transformative change, and I think unashamed progressives can win elections outside super-liberal enclaves -- New York City isn't as left-wing as you think -- but I think the excitement advantage is at least partly offset by normie voters' fear of radicalism. I wish it were as easy to elect a left-wing radical in America as it is to elect a right-wing radical, but that's not the country we live in.