Why The Republicans Could Lose The House in 2026

I have written several postings related to Various topics involving elections and voting in America. A list of links have been provided at bottom of this article for your convenience. This article will, how ever address additional issues in these topics.

Who thinks Republicans will suffer in the 2026 midterms?

The midterm elections for Congress won’t take place until November, but already a record number of members have declared their intention not to run — a total of 43 in the House, plus 10 senators. Perhaps the most high-profile person to depart, Republican Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia, announced her intention in November not just to retire but to resign from Congress entirely on Jan. 5 — a full year before her term was set to expire.

There are political dynamics that explain this rush to the exits, including frustrations with gridlock and President Donald Trump’s lackluster approval ratings, which could hurt Republicans at the ballot box.

Rather than get swept away by a prospective “blue wave” favoring Democrats — or possibly daunted by the monumental effort it would take to survive — many Republicans have decided to fold up the beach chair and head home before the wave crashes.

As of now, two dozen Republican House members have either resigned from the House or announced their intent to not run for reelection in 2026. With only two exceptions — Republicans in 2018 and 2020 — this is more departures from either party at this point in the election calendar than any other cycle over the past 20 years.

There is also growing concern within the House Republican caucus that Greene’s announcement is a canary in the coal mine and that multiple resignations will follow.

As a political scientist who studies Congress and politicians’ reelection strategies, I’m not surprised to see many House members leaving ahead of what’s shaping up to be a difficult midterm for the GOP. Still, the sheer numbers of people not running tells us something about broader dissatisfaction with Washington.

Why do members leave Congress?

Many planned departures are true retirements involving older and more experienced members.

For example, 78-year-old Democratic congressman Jerry Nadler is retiring after 34 years, following mounting pressure from upstart challengers and a growing consensus among Democrats that it’s time for older politicians to step aside. Nancy Pelosi, the former speaker who will turn 86 in March, is also retiring.

Sometimes, members of Congress depart for the same reasons workers might leave any job. Like many Americans, members of Congress might find something more attractive elsewhere. Retiring members are attractive hires for lobbying firms and corporations, thanks to their insider knowledge and connections within the institution. These firms usually offer much higher salaries than members are used to in Congress, which may explain why more than half of all living former members are lobbyists of some kind.

Other members remain ambitious for elective office and decide to use their position in Congress as a springboard for another position. Members of the House regularly retire to run for a Senate seat, such as, in this cycle, Democratic Rep. Haley Stevens of Michigan. Others run for executive offices, including governor, such as Republican Rep. Nancy Mace of South Carolina.

But some are leaving Congress due to growing frustration with the job and an inability to get things done. Specifically, many retiring members cite growing dysfunction within their own party, or in Congress as a whole, as the reason they’re moving on.

In a statement announcing his departure in June, Sen. Thom Tillis, R-N.C., mused that “between spending another six years navigating the political theater and partisan gridlock in Washington or spending that time with my family,” it was “not a hard choice” to leave the Senate.

What’s unique about 2026?

In addition, there are a few other factors that can help explain why so many Republicans in particular are heading for the exits leading up to 2026.

The shifting of boundaries that has come with the mid-decade redistricting process in several states this year has scrambled members’ priorities. Unfamiliar districts can drive incumbents to early retirement by severing their connection with well-established constituencies.

In Texas, six Republicans and three Democrats — nearly a quarter of the state’s entire House delegation — are either retiring or running for other offices, due in part to that state’s new gerrymander for 2026.

All decisions about retirement and reelection are sifted through the filter of electoral and partisan considerations. A phenomenon called “thermostatic politics” predicts that parties currently in power, particularly in the White House, tend to face a backlash from voters in the following election. In other words, the president’s party nearly always loses seats in midterms.

In 2006 and 2018, for example, Republican members of Congress were weighed down by the reputations of unpopular Republican Presidents George W. Bush and Trump. Republicans had arguably even greater success in midterm elections during Barack Obama’s presidency.

Currently, 2026 looks like it will present a poor national environment for Republicans. Trump remains highly unpopular, according to polls, and Democrats are opening up a consistent lead in the “generic ballot” question, which asks respondents which party they intend to support in the 2026 midterms without reference to individual candidates.

Democrats have already been overperforming in special elections, as well as the general election in November in states such as New Jersey and Virginia, which held elections for governor. Democrats are on average running 13 points ahead of Kamala Harris’ performance in the 2024 election.

As a result, even Republicans in districts thought to be safe for their party may see themselves in enough danger to abandon the fight in advance.

Retirement vs. resignation

One final, unique aspect of this election cycle with major consequences is not an electoral but an institutional one.

House conservatives are quietly revolting against Speaker Mike Johnson’s leadership style. That members may be frustrated enough not just to retire but resign in advance, leaving their seats temporarily vacant, is a notable sign of dysfunction in the U.S. House.

This also could have a major impact on policy, given how slim the Republicans’ majority in the lower chamber is already. Whatever the outcome of the midterms in November, these departures clearly matter in Washington and offer important signals about the chaos in Congress.

Republicans’ shaky grip on the House

Four live discharge petitions. Being forced to bargain for GOP support during simple procedural votes. Calls to Cabinet secretaries from the House floor to help win over members. A prolonged debate on health care with a disengaged president. Potential retirements on the horizon.

This is the House Republican majority with less than 11 months until the midterm elections.

OK, we won’t say that the House is in total chaos. Total chaos is when members unleash censure resolutions against each other or a trio of House Republicans publicly claim Speaker Mike Johnson has no business running the chamber. That was last week.

But there’s a very tenuous reality for Johnson, House Majority Leader Steve Scalise and House Majority Whip Tom Emmer as they navigate the post-shutdown climate with a soon-to-be-even-thinner three vote margin.

Fear of President Donald Trump kept everyone in line earlier this year, especially on the One Big Beautiful Bill. Trump’s poll ratings have fallen, however, and Republicans took a bad beating in last month’s elections.

Members are retiring or running for other offices, meaning they have their own agendas. Most importantly, Republicans could lose the House next year, and GOP lawmakers are beginning to think more about their own political survival rather than what party leaders are selling.

There were a pair of episodes this week to demonstrate just how shaky the House GOP leadership’s control is.

House Republicans struggled for more than an hour Wednesday to pass a rule to begin debate on the NDAA, the typically bipartisan Pentagon policy bill.

In order to flip hardline conservatives, including Rep. Anna Paulina Luna (R-Fla.), Johnson had to call Secretary of State Marco Rubio from a room off the House floor. Rubio agreed to look into NGOs that are funneling money to the Taliban. This was just one of a trio of promises made to pass the rule.

Separately, GOP moderates wanted to hear from Johnson on whether he’d put a bill on the floor to extend enhanced Obamacare premium subsidies, a huge political and policy problem for Republicans. Unsatisfied with his answer, these Republican moderates dropped a discharge petition to go over Johnson’s head.

Live discharge petitions — which effectively strip power from the GOP leadership — have become more common than ever in Johnson’s House. The sheer number of successful discharge petitions is stunning and shows just how poor the outlook is for Johnson and his top lieutenants. Remember what happened with the Jeffrey Epstein vote.

Consider this:

— Rep. Jared Golden (D-Maine) will get a vote today on a bill overturning Trump’s executive order barring federal workers from collective bargaining rights. Five Republicans signed onto the petition. The measure will pass the House, delivering a rebuke to Trump, although it won’t pass the Senate. But we’ll see it come up again during January’s government-funding fights.

— Luna is among a bipartisan group of members pushing a discharge petition to institute a stock trading ban for members of Congress, their spouses and dependent children. Johnson disagrees with the bill and doesn’t want it to pass. The petition only has 41 signatures, including 14 Republicans. But during the NDAA standoff, Luna was able to extract a promise from Johnson to put a stock trading ban on the floor.

— Frustrated with Johnson’s inaction, Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick (R-Pa.) has a discharge petition to extend the enhanced Obamacare premium subsidies. Fitzpatrick, a swing-district centrist, has enough Republican signatories to win a floor vote. What Democrats do here remains to be seen, lending credence to the argument that the minority has major sway on the House floor.

— Five Republicans have already joined Rep. Josh Gottheimer (D-N.J.) on a different discharge petition for a bill that would extend the Obamacare subsidies for one year. That means this effort also has enough GOP backing to be successful if Democrats universally back it. The House Democratic leadership prefers this petition to Fitzpatrick’s.

This new petition or Fitzpatrick’s measure could feasibly reach 218 signatures, starving Johnson of his ability to set the party’s course on health care.

Johnson rightfully understands that the vast majority of House Republicans aren’t in favor of extending the Obamacare tax credits that have been at the heart of the House tumult over the last few months. But there are certainly enough House Republicans who could pair with Democrats to renew the subsidies at some point in the next few months.

Johnson, Scalise and Emmer are trying to create their own plan. They’ve given Republicans a menu of options from which he will build a bill for floor consideration next week. It’s not clear whether any package can pass. As Trump once said, health care is complicated.

What’s concerning many House Republicans in the GOP leadership: Johnson has said he will stretch the health care debate straight into the second quarter of next year. There isn’t any Republican who thinks it’s a good idea for the GOP to be talking about health care — their worst issue — during an election year.

Also. The Indiana Senate is expected to vote on the state’s new congressional map today. This is a big moment for the GOP and the 2026 midterms. The map that the Senate is considering wipes out two Democrats to give the GOP a clean, nine-seat sweep in the Hoosier State. It also could trigger Democrats to act in Maryland and potentially Illinois.

Forecasting suggests the Republicans will lose 28 seats and the House in the 2026 midterm elections

In the United States, election forecasting has expanded to cover more elections. A political institution that has received special attention is the midterm elections for the US House of Representatives. Since 1950, the party of the president has gained seats in these contests only twice, in 1998 and 2002. On average, across these 75 years, the president’s party loss has been, on net, 25 seats. This regular pattern over the congressional electoral cycle has come to be known as the midterm “iron law.” What drives such a rhythm of decline in presidential power? In 1975 the statistician, Edward Tufte argued that the midterms amount to a voter referendum on the performance of the president and the state of the economy. Forecasting seat changes in the US House, in the past we have relied on referendum models to provide predictions of what the result is likely to be. Even during recent turbulent campaigns, the model has correctly forecasted net midterm losses for the presidential party (e.g., 2014, 2018, 2022).

Now with barely a year ahead before the 2026 midterm elections for the House of Representatives, we have used a simple model to forecast the net seat change for the incumbent Republicans. Our forecast shows that the Republican Party are likely to lose control of the House.

Using a referendum model to explain House seat changes

In our attempts to forecast congressional elections, we have stressed the critical role of theory. As Tufte observed in the 1978 book, Political Control of the Economy, congressional elections, particularly at the mid-term, are “a referendum on the incumbent administration’s handling of the economy and of other issues.” Our political economy model, to achieve predictive accuracy, must properly measure fundamental structural variables. With this in mind, we focus on two measures, Presidential Approval and Disposable Personal Income, from 1950 to the present. When Presidential Approval is low (< 50 percent), midterm incumbent loss averages 34 seats. When Disposable Income growth is low (< one percent), midterm incumbent loss averages 30 seats. The data as of June 2025 suggests the important influence of both variables as determinants of House seat change.

By running these variables through our model, we determine that the Republican Party are likely to lose 28 seats in next year’s midterm elections, with control of the House then likely returning to the Democrats. The almost inevitable downward pull of the electoral calendar itself, coupled with Trump’s currently lackluster approval score, would appear to pave the way to victory for the Democrats. After all, the model forecasts a Republican net loss of 28 seats, when to change the House majority only a net loss of two Republican seats is needed.

Speaker Johnson’s narrow majority will shrink further with Marjorie Taylor Greene’s resignation

House Speaker Mike Johnson’s narrow majority will shrink a bit further with the resignation this week of Marjorie Taylor Greene, a close ally-turned-critic of President Donald Trump.

Greene announced in November that she would resign from office, with her final day on Jan. 5, a move that stunned some in her party and that followed a falling out with Trump.

With her departure, the partisan breakdown in the House will stand at 219 Republicans and 213 Democrats, with three seats vacant. As a result, Johnson will only be able to lose two Republicans on any party-line vote — needing the near-unanimous support of his party to advance legislation.

The GOP House leader’s majority is poised to contract even more after a special election at the end of the month, when two Democrats will face off in a Texas runoff.

A special election for the New Jersey seat held by former Democratic Rep. Mikie Sherrill, who was recently elected to serve as the state’s next governor, will be held in April.

At the start of the 119th Congress, Johnson was already facing the narrowest House majority in nearly 100 years. The tight margin has created a major challenge for congressional Republicans as they seek to enact Trump’s legislative priorities, leaving little room for error.

Republicans won 220 House seats in the November elections, while Democrats won 215, the most narrowly divided House majority since the outset of the Great Depression, almost a century ago.

At the start of the new session of Congress, however, the partisan breakdown stood at 219 to 215, because former GOP Rep. Matt Gaetz of Florida opted not to return to Congress.

Passing a bill in the House requires a majority of all members present and voting. The magic number is 218 if every member shows up to vote and all 435 seats are filled, but that can change if there are vacancies or absences. A tie vote in the House is a fail.

How the House majority ranks in history

The last time a minority in the House held 215 or more seats was after the 1930 elections, when Republicans won 218 seats, Democrats won 216 and the Farmer-Labor Party won one.

The 72nd Congress — which took place in the early years of the Great Depression era — officially started in March 1931, but did not actually convene to conduct legislative business until months later, in December 1931.

At the official start of that term, in March, the House margin had narrowed even further — to 217 seats for Republicans to 216 for Democrats with one seat for the Farmer-Labor party and one vacancy as a result of the death of one Republican.

In an unusual turn of events, however, the partisan breakdown changed significantly by the time Congress convened when a series of additional deaths and ensuing special elections flipped control of the chamber to Democrats, though the margin remained narrow.

According to House historical records, the 65th Congress had the closest party split in American history, but in that case, the partisan division was so narrow that neither party secured an outright majority in the House based on election results, which left Republicans with 215 seats and Democrats with 214. As a result, a handful of third-party lawmakers played a decisive role when the House convened to elect a speaker.

Challenges created by a narrow majority

Johnson won the speakership in a nail-biter of a vote at the start of the 119th Congress.

The election took place with the majority at 219 to 215, which meant that Johnson could only lose a single Republican vote if every lawmaker voted and all Democrats voted against him.

The partisan breakdown in the House has shifted several times since then as a result of vacancies that have arisen due to lawmaker deaths and resignations.

Johnson has at times had a bit more breathing room and congressional Republicans have gone on to pass major legislation – most notably Trump’s massive tax and spending cuts package in July – but not without challenges uniting their conference.

GOP leaders lost two Republican votes on final passage of the tax and spending cuts bill in the House. Reps. Thomas Massie of Kentucky and Brian Fitzpatrick of Pennsylvania voted alongside Democrats against the measure.

Why Republicans in Congress are turning against Trump

For most of this year, Republican members of the House of Representatives seemed to move in lockstep with President Donald Trump, not hesitating to back him on controversial measures on immigration and the economy.

But now they seem to be breaking ranks.

Some Republican members of Congress have stood up to Trump on the release of the Epstein Files, tariffs, health care subsidies, boat strikes in the Caribbean, and other issues.

They’ve voiced frustration with House Speaker Mike Johnson, who has let Trump set the agenda for Congress even as the president’s approval rating continues to decline.

Some GOP members of the House, fed up with partisan gridlock, stalled legislation, and threats of political violence, are just calling it quits altogether. They’re either retiring or resigning to seek other offices.

The GOP could potentially lose its razor-thin margin even before the midterms. Once Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene officially resigns in January, Republicans will only have a one-seat advantage.

Today, Explained’s Astead Herndon talked to Leigh Ann Caldwell, chief Washington correspondent for Puck News, about what’s causing the House GOP exodus and what it could mean for the party in power.

Below is an excerpt of their conversation, edited for length and clarity. There’s much more in the full episode, so listen to Today, Explained wherever you get podcasts, including Apple Podcasts, Pandora, and Spotify.

In the last few weeks we’ve heard quite a few Congress people say they’re going to retire, even resign. What is the scope of this angst in Congress? What’s the source of it?

The scope could be pretty big. I’m hearing from Republican sources, lawmakers, aides, and people close to these people who are expecting a lot more retirement announcements in the coming weeks.

There are so many reasons for it, but the most immediate is the political environment. It’s been a really tough fall for Republicans. They had completely underperformed in those November elections. There was a special election in Tennessee in a very red district that Trump won by 22 points. The Republican who won only won by nine points.

It’s just another data point of the political environment and the mood of the country around Republicans right now. People are looking at that and seeing the writing on the wall and believing that the House Republicans are not going to be in the majority after the midterms, that they’ll lose the majority. And it’s not a very fun place to be.

The thing about serving in the House is you get to reevaluate your life every two years, and we’re in that season where people, Republicans especially, are deciding if it’s worth it. And I’m told that many more Republicans are going to say that it’s not.

Does your reporting give you any sense of numbers and how we can compare that possible number to ones we’ve seen previously?

An estimate that one source told me was that close to 20 more Republicans are set to retire.

That’s a seismic number.

It is. We’re already at 23 Republicans who have announced. So it also talks about the mood of the Congress. People are just not happy right now.

Are Democrats retiring in these types of numbers? And when they are quitting, is it for the same reasons?

Democrats are retiring too. It happens every year. But the numbers are lower for Democrats and the reasons are different. For the Democrats, most of them are in their late seventies or eighties, or they have served for decades. Nancy Pelosi is one of the Democrats who is retiring.

Jerry Nadler in New York.

It’s different on the Republican side. Troy Nehls was elected in 2020. Morgan Luttrell of Texas just started serving in 2023. He’s young. A lot of members who are younger, who haven’t been here that long, are deciding to call it quits. And that is really what’s different.

Republicans have had tough moments before. Donald Trump has been unpopular before. What is it about this year, in this time, or the next midterm that might’ve been different than just general other bouts of Trump controversy?

This term, Donald Trump has so much control over this Congress. They govern in fear. They do what he says because they’re afraid. Marjorie Taylor Greene said on 60 Minutes: “I think they’re terrified to step out of line and get a nasty Truth Social post on them.”

Threats of political violence have only increased, and everyone knows that if your name is in a Truth Social and negatively, there will be an uptick for that person. These members have been dealing with that for a long time, and that has led to retirements in the past. The ability to be an independent member of Congress has really, really diminished, and people are feeling that. They are frustrated with Speaker Johnson. They think that he is playing into the demands of the president rather than what the members want and need. They were frustrated that they were out of town for seven weeks during the government shutdown.

It’s also one of the least productive Congresses in modern history. The last Congress was really unproductive, and this one is way more unproductive. In the last Congress, over two years, 274 bills were signed into law. We’re one year into this Congress. Only 47 bills have been signed into law, and that’s big legislation and small resolutions. They are just not doing anything and legislators get frustrated. Many of them actually come to legislate and when they’re not able to deliver for their district, when they’re not able to take home wins and projects and money, people are asking themselves, what is the point?

What is Speaker Johnson doing about this? It would seem that if these retirements continue, he would have a little bit of a crisis on his hands. And even when we think about things like redistricting efforts and others, he has really chosen to be on the side of Donald Trump 120 percent. How has that blowback impacted his own caucus? And when they’re upset with him, what exactly is the reason why?

They obviously don’t want to see a lot of retirements because it just looks bad. It’s an indictment of Congress, of the job. It’s also an indictment on Speaker Johnson if he’s unable to keep these members happy, unable to make them feel that they are productive members of society, productive legislators, and that’s just not happening right now. People are really down.

The speakership seems like such a difficult job, because it’s eaten up the last several Republican GOP speakers. If we think about that role as one that holds together many different parts of the Republican party, is it always just destined to be this fraught? Or is that a consequence of our current Congress and polarization? What is the universe that Mike Johnson makes it out on the other side here with a united GOP?

I think every day that becomes a harder and harder task for him, especially when you look at polling. Trump’s approval ratings continue to fall. They’re divided on a message. They’re divided on how to deal with health care and the affordability issue. And so Speaker Johnson coming out on the other side with a united GOP? Maybe, but it’s going to be wounded and exhausted and tired and really cranky. And so the question is, if they don’t win the majority, what does Speaker Johnson do? There are definitely going to be leadership changes. And so there could be a huge shakeup among House Republicans after the midterms.

After all that talk about Democrats and their kind of fractured state, there are certainly some cracks that seem to be appearing on the Republican side too.

Absolutely. And Republicans are really worried about how the party is dealing with these trying times right now for them.

Republican lawmakers grow alarmed over signs of 2026 election wipeout

GOP lawmakers are growing increasingly concerned over signs the 2026 midterm elections could be a wipeout for Republicans that could cost them control of the House and shave down their Senate majority by two or three seats.

Republican senators say the off-year elections in New Jersey, Virginia and other parts of the country on Nov. 4 served as a wake-up call and warn that President Trump and Republican leaders in Congress need to address voters’ concerns about the slowing economy and persistently high prices.

Republicans acknowledge that rising health insurance premiums, the issue Democrats want to put front-and-center in the election year, along with health care costs, more generally, are a major problem for their party.

There’s growing anxiety in the Senate and House GOP conferences that Trump’s sinking approval rating will create a headwind in swing states and districts.

But GOP lawmakers say they still have time to improve their party’s image before next November.

They argue Democrats’ failure to come up with effective solutions to rein in health care costs and the rising power of far-left Democratic candidates gives them a chance to cling onto power in Washington.

“If we are where we are today in the beginning of the second quarter [of 2026], then I think we’re in for a really rough time in November,” warned retiring Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.), who represents a Senate battleground state Democrats are targeting next year.

“We have plenty of time to address it. There’s a lot of positive things that we’re doing here, that the administration is doing. But if you mess with health care … if we don’t get health care policy right, if we don’t get some of the cost policies right, we’re going to have major headwinds next year,” he said.

Most concerning for GOP lawmakers is Trump’s approval rating, which has sunk to 41.9 percent in the most recent polling average compiled by Decision Desk HQ (DDHQ). The president’s disapproval rating has climbed to 55.7 percent.

Another disquieting sign is that Democrats now have their biggest lead of the election cycle on the generic ballot for Congress. The latest DDHQ average shows Democrats beating Republicans 46.8 percent to 41.4 percent on the generic ballot.

One Republican senator who attended a recent GOP conference meeting at the National Republican Senatorial Committee headquarters said concerns about the approaching election year are “high.”

“The numbers are terrible,” the lawmaker said. “Not necessarily for any individual incumbent senator, although some of them aren’t very good. But you saw what happened a couple weeks ago [on Nov. 4]: Republicans didn’t win anything anywhere.”

In Virginia, for example, former Rep. Abigail Spanberger (D) won the gubernatorial race by 15 points and Democrats picked up more than a dozen seats in the House of Delegates, including some that were not seen as pickup opportunities.

“There are a lot of warning signs blinking,” the lawmaker added. “We’re increasingly on defense on the Senate side. … I think there’s a lot of concern.”

Republicans have a favorable battleground map and a cushion of a three-seat majority on the Senate side, but some GOP lawmakers are already predicting their party will lose control of the House.

“This was not an unexpected development,” a senior Republican senator said of the tough polling numbers for Republicans, noting the party in power — especially when in control of the White House and Congress — historically does poorly in midterm elections.

“Look at the 2018 midterm: We lost 41 seats in the House. The Speaker can only lose three this time,” the senator said, referring to Speaker Mike Johnson’s (R-La.) 219-213 majority.

“I would expect to lose the House; I’m just trying to be objective,” the senator added.

The redistricting math is becoming more complicated for Republicans, who expected to enjoy some gains from new maps the party passed across the country. Republicans, on paper, were expected to gain at least nine pickup opportunities in the House: five in Texas, one in North Carolina, one in Missouri and two in Ohio.

A federal judge panel last week struck down the GOP-favored map in the Lone Star State, but Texas quickly appealed to the Supreme Court.

Justice Samuel Alito granted a stay on the federal judge panel’s ruling, leaving the new Republican-leaning map in place, at least temporarily, as the high court weighs the broader case around the Texas House maps. The ping-pong of events underscores how volatile the redistricting battle has become in recent weeks.

Democrats are projected to gain up to six new blue-leaning seats: five in California and one in Utah.

“The conventional wisdom was Democrats were screwed, and we were going to be in a hole of anywhere from 10 to 17 seats because of redistricting. That was back in the middle of July. Looking where we are now, that’s absolutely not the case,” a Democratic strategist said.

Strategists in both parties caution it’s too early to know with certainty what the net results of redistricting will be next year, given that efforts to redraw congressional lines are ongoing and the courts will have a major say on the final maps.

A big uncertainty for the House’s future control is whether Democrats are able to dramatically expand the field of competitive races.

Republican strategists argue the battleground map will be fairly small compared to past midterm election cycles, while House Democrats believe there will be as many as 60 competitive races.

Former Vice President Kamala Harris won in only three House districts now held by Republican incumbents: Nebraska’s 2nd Congressional District, Pennsylvania’s 1st District, and New York’s 17th District.

Rep. Don Bacon (R) is retiring in Nebraska’s 2nd District, creating a promising opportunity for Democrats.

Democrats, meanwhile, need to defend 13 Democratic-held districts Trump won in last year’s election.

“The map is very, very tiny and, fundamentally, we have the advantage by looking at the battlefield,” a Republican strategist said. “We firmly believe we’re on offense. Back in the 2018 cycle, there were 25 Republicans in [Hillary] Clinton-won districts and 12 Democrats in Trump-won districts. The fundamentals of the map is completely flipped.”

Republican strategists say Democratic efforts to retake the House will be complicated by the rise of left-leaning candidates in key districts such as California’s 22nd District and Colorado’s 8th District, where progressive insurgents are threatening to topple more mainstream candidates favored by the Democratic Party establishment.

Republicans are counting Maine’s 2nd Congressional District as an “automatic pickup” because of the retirement of Democratic centrist Rep. Jared Golden.

The Republican strategist said the recent slump in Trump’s approval rating and the increase of the Democrats’ lead in generic ballot polls is a reaction to the 43-day government shutdown that will dissipate over the next several months.

The good news for Democrats is that the rise of far-left candidates is matched by the rising enthusiasm of the party’s base voters.

“There’s enormous new energy. I saw it in my town halls where I’ve had five times as many people come this year as last year, and last year was an election year,” said Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), who’s up for reelection next year.

On the Senate side, Republicans privately acknowledge Democrats have a good shot of picking up three GOP-held Senate seats, given how the midterm election environment is shaping up: Tillis’s North Carolina seat, Sen. Susan Collin’s seat in Maine, and first-term Sen. Jon Husted’s seat in Ohio.

Trump won Ohio by more than 11 percentage points in 2024, but Husted faces a tough race against former Ohio Sen. Sherrod Brown (D), who served three terms in the Senate. There are questions about whether Husted, a lesser-known incumbent, can turn out Republican votes without Trump at the top of the ticket.

Republicans now control a 53-47 Senate majority. A loss of three seats would result in a 50-50 Senate in 2027, but Republicans would retain control by virtue of Vice President Vance holding the tiebreaking vote.

For Democrats to win back the Senate majority, they would need to pick up a seat in the next tier of competitive races.

This tier includes contests in Iowa, where Sen. Joni Ernst (R) is retiring, and Texas, where Sen. John Cornyn (R) faces a tough primary challenge from conservative firebrand Ken Paxton, the scandal-marred state attorney general.

A third Democratic target is Alaska, where Democrats are trying to persuade former Rep. Mary Sattler Peltola (D), who narrowly lost her House seat to Rep. Nick Begich (R) in 2024, to challenge Sen. Dan Sullivan (R).

Republicans have their own Senate pickup opportunities in Georgia, where Sen. Jon Ossoff (D) is a top Republican target and will have to defend his 14 votes against a House-passed bill to fund the government and end the longest shutdown in American history.

Republicans like their chances of winning retiring Democratic Sen. Gary Peters’s seat in Michigan and have rallied behind former Rep. Mike Rogers (R-Mich.), who lost against Sen. Elissa Slotkin (D-Mich.) in 2024.

Democrats face a messy primary in the Great Lakes State, where Rep. Haley Stevens (D-Mich.) faces a competitive race against progressive candidate Abdul El-Sayed, who is backed by Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), and Mallory McMorrow, another progressive who is a frequent guest on MS NOW and has a strong online fundraising base.

Resources

–https://kansasreflector.com/2026/01/03/who-thinks-republicans-will-suffer-in-the-2026-midterms-republican-members-of-congress/, “Who thinks Republicans will suffer in the 2026 midterms? Republican members of Congress.” By Charlie Hunt;

–https://punchbowl.news/article/house/gop-shaky-grip/, “Republicans’ shaky grip on the House.” By Jake Sherman, John Bresnahan, Laura Weiss;

–https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/usappblog/2025/10/13/forecasting-suggests-the-republicans-will-lose-28-seats-and-the-house-in-the-2026-midterm-elections/, “Forecasting suggests the Republicans will lose 28 seats and the House in the 2026 midterm elections.” By Charles Tien & Michael S. Lewis-Beck;

–https://www.wvtm13.com/article/greene-resignation-house-majority/69918254, “Speaker Johnson’s narrow majority will shrink further with Marjorie Taylor Greene’s resignation.” ;

–https://www.vox.com/politics/471929/congress-trump-house-gop-divide, “Why Republicans in Congress are turning against Trump.” By Avishay Artsy and Astead Herndon;

–https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/5618168-republican-midterm-election-concerns/, “Republican lawmakers grow alarmed over signs of 2026 election wipeout.” By Alexander Bolton and Caroline Vakil ;

Voting and Elections

Common Sense and Ramblings In America

Why The Republicans Could Lose The House in 2026

Why do members leave Congress?

What’s unique about 2026?

Retirement vs. resignation

Using a referendum model to explain House seat changes

How the House majority ranks in history

Challenges created by a narrow majority

Like this:

Why do members leave Congress?

What’s unique about 2026?

Retirement vs. resignation

Using a referendum model to explain House seat changes

How the House majority ranks in history

Challenges created by a narrow majority

Share this:

Like this:

Discover more from Common Sense and Ramblings In America