Those who insist that the Republican Party does not support racism  and anti-semitism have some fancy ‘splainin’ to do. As Malcom Ferguson reports in “GOP House Nominee Has Bragged About His Copy of Mein Kampf—and More” at The New Republic: “On Thursday, Texas GOP Representative Tony Gonzales dropped his reelection bid in Texas’s 23rd district amid an ethics investigation into reports that he had an affair with one of his staffers who later killed herself. His primary opponent—and now de facto GOP nominee—is Brandon Herrera, who is going viral for being a Nazi apologist…Herrera, a right-wing, pro-gun YouTuber who goes by “The AK Guy,” has plenty of troubling red flags…On Friday, a recent podcast clip began circulating featuring Herrera joking about Adolf Hitler’s Mein Kampf…“That’s my copy at my house next to a bunch of the German stick grenades,” Herrera said, showing a co-host a picture on his phone. “I got the 1939 edition printed in English, just because I thought it was wild that you couldn’t buy it on Amazon, but you could buy The Communist Manifesto and Das Kapital.” Mein Kampf is very much available on Amazon, making Herrera’s lazy and ahistorical equivocation all the more troubling…In other past clips, Hererra has goose-stepped to a Nazi song, expressed affinity toward the white supremacist Dutch settlers who fought against locals and Communists in the Rhodesian Bush War, and referred to the Civil War as the “war of Northern aggression” while wearing a Confederate-flag shirt.”

From The Miami Times, Kevin Harris and Richard McDaniel report that “Trump’s affordability crisis is catching up to Republicans as Black and Brown voters shift.” Harris and McDaniel write, ” Donald Trump won 48% of Latino voters in 2024 – the best Republican showing in half a century. Fourteen months later, 70% disapprove of his performance as President. What changed? The price of groceries…Pew Research found 68% of Latinos say things are worse for them today than a year ago – the first time most Hispanics said this in nearly 20 years of surveys. Trump’s support among Hispanics has fallen to 28%, down 13 points since February, said The Economist/YouGov. And the U.S. Hispanic Business Council reports 42 percent of Latino business owners say things are worse for them under Trump… Black working-class voters face the same squeeze. Trump’s support with Black voters has fallen to just 10%, reports the New York Times. Among Blacks, high prices now poll higher than civil and voting rights concerns…When Black and Brown families can’t get ahead economically, social justice issues like civil rights and immigration tend to fall on their priority list. When rent hikes eat up raises or grocery bills climb 20% while pay stays flat, social issues become a luxury instead of a necessity… Democrats used this to their advantage in 2025 to reverse Trump’s gains with Black and Brown voters. In key races across Virginia and New Jersey, Democrats focused on high prices and showed pocket book messaging works strongly when it’s centered rather than mentioned as an add-on to social issues… Latino voters swung hard toward Democrats – backing Democratic governors by 37 and 34 point margins in New Jersey and Virginia. Kamala Harris only carried Latinos in these states by a razor-thin 3-point margin in 2024. Among Black voters, 89% voted for Democrats for governor in New Jersey and 86% in Virginia, while Harris carried Black voters by a much smaller margin at 68%, according to the Pew Research Center.” More here.

Justin Vassallo makes “The Case for a Radically Simple Democratic Agenda” at The Liberal Patriot: “Like my compatriots, I believe Democrats must develop clear policies that build economic democracy and strengthen existing laws meant to protect ordinary citizens from fraud and exploitation. Working families are not interested in piecemeal measures that do vanishingly little to increase their economic security and the prosperity of their communities, nor are they supportive of new wars for regime change overseas. I agree wholeheartedly, too, that the consequences of the cronyism this administration has indulged will not simply disappear with a changing of the guard. There will undoubtedly be many instances in which the next Democratic administration will have to restore administrative integrity, root out regulatory capture, and otherwise clean house…I’m not so confident, however, in the idea that Democrats, proverbial red marker in hand, must tally up every Trump offense and respond in-kind through an all-encompassing concept like Project 2029. Project 2029 is premised, in part, on reengaging voters who think Democrats have been timid about confronting the nation’s challenges. Democrats insist they want to flip red districts. Yet, while it may energize the party’s educated base, there are reasons to think Project 2029 is not suited to solving Democrats’ regional woes—that it will inevitably carry strong “culture war” connotations that do nothing to attenuate the pattern of fruitless political combat that has defined the better part of this century, in which no epochal majority coalition has been formed. Indeed, neither Project 2029 nor any of its equivalents is likely to fix the party’s image with working-class voters who associate Democrats with professional-class elitism and “woke” dogma.”

Vassallo continues: “To be clear, some of the ideas that could constitute Project 2029 are laudable and worth pursuing. Progressives committed to rebuilding shared prosperity and worker power are right to want to figure out how to do things better the next time around after the disjointed reforms and disheartening inefficiencies of the Biden years. The impetus to increase pressure on Democrats to show some spine, name the forces that have gamed the system, and stand up for Congress’s constitutional rights and duties correctly recognizes that Democrats have too often vacillated when given the chance to highlight the shallowness of Trump’s “populism.” To be effective, the core message in 2028 must be frank about the threats to the American dream and unflinching about what is needed to save it—not a banal promise to make life a little more affordable…Still, if Democrats are intent on truly reforming their party, shaking up the party system, and competing boldly in forbidding regions, they should try an experiment. Instead of drawing up a panoply of progressive wish lists dubbed Project 2029, Democrats should ask themselves: can they fit the heart of their agenda on a one-page memo without resorting to vague platitudes? Can they home in on a handful of pledges that would resonate from greater Boston to St. Louis to South Texas? Could they, in the case of projects that are for entirely appropriate reasons tailored to specific economic sectors or demographics, engender a spirit of reciprocity and mutual goodwill in the American people that depolarizes society? In short, can they sow belief that government can be a real instrument of economic progress and that revitalized communities will beget more?…Trump’s support may soon disintegrate, and his potential heirs may face dismal odds come 2028. Democrats, however, will remain at a disadvantage in too many parts of the country if they cannot, in plain, direct language, communicate a powerful vision to heighten the agency and aspirations of working Americans.” More here.

From “Iran conflict could worsen America’s affordability crisis” by Courtenay Brown at Axios: “The Iran conflict abroad threatens to worsen the affordability crisis at home, as an oil price spike ripples through to pump prices Americans see every day…Why it matters: This has become one defining tension of President Trump’s second term — foreign policies that could undercut core domestic promises to lower prices for American consumers, just months ahead of midterm elections…That tension has been on display with global trade: Trump imposed steep import taxes aimed at leveling the trade playing field, but the result has been higher goods prices for consumer staples…The big picture: Gas prices have been a deflationary tailwind for Trump. Prices in January were down more than 7% from a year ago, putting downward pressure on overall inflation…Turmoil in the Middle East could reverse that trend, though it is still unclear how long any price surge will last, or how steep it might be…A $10 rise in crude prices translates into a spike of roughly 24 cents a gallon, according to RSM chief economist Joe Brusuelas…Zoom in: Gas prices are plastered everywhere, making them the most powerful political and psychological signal about the cost of living. Any spike in prices would compound the pressure on Americans’ budgets and further sour their perceptions about the economy…For the past half-century, when gas prices rose consumers’ overall inflation expectations have followed suit. (That link broke down last year: gas prices declined but consumers still expected higher inflation as a result of high tariffs.)” More here.

E. J. Dionne, Jr. explains why “Why Trump’s Fearmongering Is Falling Flat With Voters” at The New York Times: In his State f the Union speech “Mr. Trump demonstrated something too often overlooked: He can win when he’s not the incumbent and can go on the attack (2016, 2024), but he leads his party to defeat when he has to govern and fails to deliver (2018, 2020)…The lesson for Democrats here is obvious: They need to get over their terror of Mr. Trump’s assumed magic and mastery — they’re ebbing — and their anxiety that the voters who decide elections share his contempt for so many of our fellow Americans. For the next eight months, Democrats must shelve their affection for gloomy self-analysis and needless arguments over which word to pick between “oligarchy” and “authoritarianism.”…Between now and November, their task is to keep the country focused on Mr. Trump’s failures on the issues that elected him: The economy (especially prices) and immigration. They are failures bred by what everyone outside the “Make America Great Again” base knows: Mr. Trump reserves his energies for his own interests and those of his allies. Everyone else — a majority of our fellow citizens — amounts either to an extra he occasionally brings onto the set for his performances or a villain he invokes to make himself the hero of the story.”

Dionne continues, “This is why the Democratic response to Tuesday’s speech, from Gov. Abigail Spanberger of Virginia, was in exactly the right key. She summed up this year’s midterm elections in three questions: “Is the president working to make life more affordable for you and your family? Is the president working to keep Americans safe — both at home and abroad? Is the president working for you?” That’s it. That’s the campaign. For good measure, Ms. Spanberger explained how voters can tell that Mr. Trump’s focus is not on working Americans. “Who benefits from his rhetoric, his policies, his actions and the short list of laws he’s pushed through this Republican Congress?” she asked. “He’s enriching himself, his family, his friends. The scale of the corruption is unprecedented.”…As important, she went straight at Mr. Trump’s cruelty, confident that most Americans don’t share it. She reframed the immigration debate in one sentence: “Our broken immigration system is something to be fixed — not an excuse for unaccountable agents to terrorize our communities.” Repair something that’s not working? Yes. Rip “nursing mothers away from their babies”? No.”

Dionne adds, “If there’s one thing Democrats in the center and on the left agree on, it’s that the party has to reverse its declines among working-class voters. Mr. Trump is making their job a lot easier. The president used to be quite good at hiding his solicitude toward the very wealthy who contribute to his political and personal coffers. Not anymore. How many clips and photos have you seen of Mr. Trump happily hobnobbing with the superrich? And how many with men and women toiling on assembly lines or in warehouses? His alignment with billionaires is so obvious that even his loyal white working-class supporters are beginning to break away…The left’s anti-oligarchy messaging is often seen as conflicting with the anti-authoritarian, pro-institution messaging of more moderate Democrats. But Mr. Trump is leading an increasingly authoritarian government dedicated, above all, to his own narrow interests and to those of very wealthy people who help him achieve his ends…To distract attention from this battle, Mr. Trump regularly tries to provoke hostility toward the groups he hates. Maybe he could pull it off if Americans were happier about the economy. But since so many feel let down, the message of his diatribes is that the only thing he can deliver after 13 months in office is fear itself. It’s a tired act. A presidency built on reruns is rapidly losing its audience.”

Domenico Montenaro’ “5 takeaways from Trump’s State of the Union address” at npr.org include: “1. Trump ignored the difficulties people are facing with the economy…2. Trump’s midterm message is … not new…3. There was no legislative agenda…4. The Democratic response had a wide range; and 5. None of this will likely matter much politically because views of Trump are “baked in.” Here’s an excerpt from 4: “State of the Union speeches have turned from staid to raucous in the past 16 years. Outbursts and protests have become more common. That was certainly the case Tuesday night. Some Democrats boycotted. Others, like Minnesota Rep. Ilhan Omar, shouted at the president about things she found outrageous during the speech. Rep. Al Green of Texas carried a sign that read, “Black people aren’t apes,” a reference to a Trump social media post featuring a video that depicted former President Barack Obama and former first lady Michelle Obama as apes. For the second year in a row, Green was removed from the chamber…Then there was Abigail Spanberger, the governor of Virginia, who had the task of delivering the official Democratic response. Channeling the campaign message that got her elected in November, she focused on the economy. Trump, by not addressing the difficulties people are feeling about the economy, gave Spanberger an opening, and she took it…She hammered home a sharp message that many Democratic candidates in swing districts will likely aim to emulate. It has a good chance of success, as Democrats look to flip only a handful of seats to take control of the House, and midterm elections are not kind to the party in power — especially when the president is unpopular…Come 2028, though, there could be a reckoning on the horizon for the Democratic Party on what it stands for and what direction it wants to take the country in a post-Trump world.”

Ted Johnson reports that “Donald Trump’s State Of The Union Drew Around 28 Million Viewers Across Major Networks, Per Early Nielsen Data” at deadline.com. Johnson adds, “Donald Trump‘s State of the Union address drew around 28 million viewers across eight major news networks, according to preliminary data from Nielsen…The final numbers will be available on Thursday. Last year, when the president delivered a speech to a joint session of Congress, the final data showed that he drew almost 32 million viewers across those networks…Per the early data from Trump’s Tuesday’s speech, Fox News topped all networks in total viewers, drawing 9.1 million. ABC News was the top broadcaster, with 5.1 million. Other networks included NBC News with 3.6 million, CBS News with 3.3 million, MS NOW with 2.4 million, CNN with 2.2 million, Fox Broadcasting with 2.1 million and Fox Business with 269,000…In the 25-54 demo, Fox News drew 1.47 million, followed by ABC News with 1.22 million, NBC News with 1.02 million, CBS with 815,000, MS Now with 323,000, CNN with 655,000, Fox Broadcasting with 560,000 and Fox Business with 73,000…When Trump addressed Congress in March, 2025, in the final numbers Fox News topped all networks with 10.7 million viewers, followed by ABC News with 6.33 million, CBS with 4 million, NBC with 3.9 million, Fox Broadcasting with 2.65 million, CNN with 1.93 million, MSNBC with 1.92 million and Fox Business with 245,000…The final Nielsen numbers will offer a more complete picture, as it collects a number of other networks that carried the president’s speech…The figures are from Fox News via Nielsen. The measurement is from 9:15 p.m. ET to 11 p.m. ET.” None of that tells you how influential the SOTU was, nor in which direction any hearts and minds were changed. Nor how many people sat through the entire thing. Nor how many people screamed “motherfucker” at their TV sets. It’s a laundry list speech. traditionally. No doubt Trump spices it up with his numerous expressions of contempt. I’m astonished that 28 million tuned in at all. Not so many in percentage terms, I guess, in a nation of 340 millions. I don’t know. I went with “Fried Green Tomatoes,” which was free on Tubi.

Meanwhile, over at The Hill, Julia Mueller scribbles that “Trump’s economic moves risk eroding GOP’s working class support,” and notes: “President Trump’s economic moves risk alienating even some of his party’s core voters…Trump is heading into his State of the Union on Tuesday with dismal approval ratings that show a reversal of 2024 gains among independents, young voters and Latinos. Now, new polling signals a possible slip in support from the white working class, or white voters without college degrees — a bloc that made up more than half of Trump’s coalition in each of his three White House bids…Though working class voters are the cornerstone of Trump’s base, enduring concerns about the economy and cost-of-living issues could signal trouble for Republicans heading into this fall’s high-stakes midterms…“The Republicans in general have given up ground, they’re no longer nine or 10-point favorites to handle the economy,” said Scott Tranter, director of data science for Decision Desk HQ. “People are most worried about the economy and affordability. That generally doesn’t bode well for the party in power.”…“How does that translate to the working class?” he added. “Look, if the general voter has a problem with [being] worried about keeping their job or paying for that vacation, that mostly hurts the working class vote. And we’ll see how that plays out…Trump’s overall approval rating was roughly 15 points underwater ahead of his first State of the Union of his second term, according to DDHQ’s polling aggregate — about the biggest gulf he’s logged since returning to the Oval Office. Approximately 42 percent approve of his presidency, while 56 percent disapprove… His disapproval numbers among independent, African American and Hispanic voters have also climbed since his last address to Congress, by roughly 10 points, 11 points and 16 points, respectively, according to DDHQ…Disapproval of Trump’s economic handling hit a new high in a recent NPR/PBS News/Marist poll. Nearly 60 percent of respondents, including 65 percent of independents, to a February Washington Post/ABC News/Ipsos survey disapproved of the president’s handling of the issue.”

Adding some fuel to the fire, Alex Hogan makes “The Case for Working-Class Nationalism” at Compact, and writes “On a warm July afternoon in 1935, four thousand steel and coal workers carrying American flags gathered at a playground in Homestead, Pennsylvania to commemorate the great strike of forty-four years earlier, and to send a message to US Steel, the corporation that had run the town since the 1870s…In the crowd that day, one could hear Slovak, Lithuanian, Italian, and heavily accented English, expressing the enormous ethnic diversity of the local steelworkers. Immigrants from Eastern and Southern Europe, arm in arm with their American-born children, were brought together by a collective commitment to assert their rights as workers—and as Americans… US Steel founders Andrew Carnegie and J.P. Morgan had long used workers’ diversity to their advantage. They built their empire on largely uneducated immigrant labor—not only to justify low pay and brutal working conditions, but to keep the workforce divided along lines of language and nationality, so that it would be unable to organize collectively…For the Homestead workers gathered that day, the union was more than a vehicle for asserting workplace rights. It was a means of asserting their Americanness.” Hogan adds, “Influenced by the 1960s New Left’s disdain for patriotism, today’s college-educated progressives tend to be wary of national pride. While 69 percent of working-class voters said that America is the greatest country in the world, only 28 percent of progressive activists agree…And it’s not just white working-class Americans who continue to have a strong sense of national belonging. More than 60 percent of Asian Americans, 70 percent of black Americans, and 76 percent of Hispanic Americans said they were “proud to be an American,” compared with just 34 percent of progressive activists. Despite what both the MAGA right and radical left suggest, immigrants, on average, are more patriotic and prouder of Americaninstitutions than the native-born. Even a Marxist like Schmetz found much to admire in the United States regarding freedom of speech and the rule of law compared to his native Belgium…So, the roots of working-class nationalism can’t be chalked up to xenophobia. It reflects a desire for solidarity and belonging. The populist left has an opportunity to reclaim this tradition.”

From “The Death Of Class Consciousness In America—And How To Revive It” by Brian Beutler at Off Message: “…I don’t suspect Dems have unleashed the liberal equivalent of Paul Manafort or Roger Stone to deceive and manipulate the Republican electorate into abstaining or voting third party. Nor do I think they’ll try to judo flip Republicans with the SAVE Act. They’ll try to divide the GOP the old fashioned way, through normal campaign appeals and legislative tactics, and they’ll weigh in on GOP primaries in the hope of drawing unelectable opponents. But that’s about it…There are a bunch of reasons people don’t vote, and disaffection with policy is only one factor. Voting is needlessly hard in some places, and could be made easier for everybody. Presidential election votes don’t really count for much outside of a handful of swing states. Our political institutions are sclerotic, so voting doesn’t strike many people as a good way to solve big problems quickly…Even if we corrected all those systemic defects, and Democrats swung into action to enact a sweeping egalitarian policy agenda—and it had the intended effect of awakening the nonvoting electorate—well, Republicans would probably adjust. Maybe they’d be content with permanent irrelevance like the California Republican Party. But my suspicion is that they’d move left on some issues and experiment with new ways to appeal to voters on other issues. And, thus, over time, class solidarity would weaken…Part of the standard error in progressive thinking is the idea that class consciousness exists in latent form throughout society already, perhaps particularly among non-voters, such that if Democrats promised and delivered them more robust safety nets and worker power, they’d become regular Democratic voters for life, and put national elections out of reach for the GOP…We are a less solidary society than we ought to be, and should of course encourage efforts, in and outside of politics, to build bonds across class. But if workers won’t vote in solidarity with members of their economic station and won’t prioritize their personal economic wellbeing, then politics becomes a pure contest of reason against might. Morally upright ideologies, bare-knuckling it against lies and conspiracy theories and threats of violence and tribal claims to dominance.” More here.

An excerpt from “The Democrats’ Blue-Collar Brigade” by Julia Terruso at Time magazine: “If 2018 was the Democrats’ year of the woman, 2026 may be the year of the tatted-up tough guy. Oyster fisherman Graham Platner is running for Senate in Maine. Dan Osborn, an industrial mechanic, is running for Senate as an independent in Nebraska, while former Secret Service agent Logan Forsythe talks about growing up in poverty as he campaigns for the Democrats’ Senate nomination in Kentucky. Before recently dropping out, military veteran Nathan Sage was running for Senate in Iowa as a “tattooed, hairy, fat guy who says it how it is.” It’s not just men, either.Kaela Berg, a single mom and flight attendant, is currently running for congress in Minnesota. JoAnna Mendoza, a retired US Marine who grew up on a farm, is running for an Arizona House district…After years of hemorrhaging working-class voters to Trump—while bumping up against the ceiling of their share of college-educated suburbanites—Democrats are trying to compete harder for voters who feel culturally alienated and economically squeezed. “The Democratic Party is at its best when it’s fighting for working-class people against the powerful,” says Tommy McDonald, an ad maker with the FIGHT Agency, who is working with Brooks and Osborn and previously cut ads for John Fetterman’s Senate campaign. “This year we have a chance to run actual candidates who experience the impact of the policies made in D.C., who can speak to the lives of the people they are trying to represent and the challenges they’ve faced.”

“Tomorrow night, President Trump will stand before Congress and deliver the State of the Union,” Matt Hildreth writes in “Speeches Don’t Pay the Bills: The Real State of Rural America: Ahead of President Donald Trump’s State of the Union, rural families are confronting rising housing costs, job losses, increasing farm debt, and climbing energy bills” at RuralOrganizing. “He’ll brag about his “accomplishments,” but the reality is a legacy of soaring costs, chaos, and corruption. That’s the real state of rural America: Skyrocketing expenses for families while incomes aren’t keeping pace…Housing is the clearest example. Rural home prices are up 61% since before the pandemic, compared to 49% in suburban areas and 46% in urban areas. Meanwhile, rural household income has grown just 33%, the slowest growth anywhere. The income needed to afford a home in rural America has jumped nearly 106% since 2019. In short, rural America is facing the steepest housing cost increases while their income has grown the least…That’s not politics. That’s reality. That’s a young family realizing they can’t afford to live in their hometown. It’s a paycheck that no longer covers the mortgage…President Trump and the MAGA Republicans in Congress promised that manufacturing would come roaring back, but manufacturing jobs have been tankingsince Trump announced his tariffs in April, with more than 77,000 jobs lost. That’s eight straight months of losses — the kind of trend economists usually associate with recessions. In 2025, in fact, many rural counties saw no job growth at all…Manufacturers themselves are pointing to tariff instability and rising input costs. And all the while, orders are being canceled. Supply chains are disrupted. Companies are passing higher costs on to customers…Farmers are feeling it too, going further into debt even as farm bankruptcies grew 46% in 2025. Tariffs have destabilized export markets and pushed our trading partners away, and Trump’s immigration policies are fueling a major farmworker shortage. Farm incomes are down. Labor shortages persist. Support programs have been frozen or cut. You cannot scramble global markets and gut the workforce and expect farm country to absorb the damage without consequences.” More here.

In “The Real State of the Union: Millions of Americans Are Just Disgusted,” Michael Tomasky writes at The New Republic: “The corruption: Its scale is nearly impossible to comprehend, which I suppose is the point. The New York Times found last month that Trump had made at least $1.4 billion since reentering the Oval Office, but the paper emphasized that “we know this number to be an underestimate because some of his profits remain hidden from public view. And they continue to grow.” To watch someone abuse the presidency like this is sickening to many millions of Americans…And worst of all, in a way, is the cocoon of fantasy in which he lives. He surrounds himself with flatterers and flunkies. He spends his weekends surrounded by extraordinarily wealthy people who have no idea what working people’s lives are like and who know that if they want his attention for 10 minutes, they must tell him that he is the greatest president ever. This is ridiculous, but it is not just ridiculous: It’s profoundly undemocratic and destructive. It is not how democratically accountable leaders live…This totalitarian-style toadyism will be on full display Tuesday night. Trump will tell lie after lie about the economy, about his tariffs, about America being the “hottest” country in the world, about countless other things, and congressional Republicans will interrupt him 40 or 50 times with rapturous applause. Yes, Democrats interrupt their presidents with applause excessively too, but Barack Obama and Joe Biden—and for that matter George W. Bush—weren’t openly engaged in a war on democracy. Trump is, and Republicans in Congress are cheering him every step of the way.”

In his latest NYT essay, “Has Trump Thrown the Democrats a Lifesaver?,” Thomas B. Edsall writes: “The 2024 election likely illuminated longstanding trepidation among Black voters about the Democratic Party,” Candis Watts Smith, a political scientist at Duke, wrote by email in response to my questions…“As an increasing number of Black people feel a sense of distance from the civil rights era and/or suffer from a lack of understanding of structural racism,” Smith said, “we would expect an increasing number of Black voters to rely on some other decision-making rules — be it self-interest, sexism, anti-immigrant sentiment, machismo, prosperity Gospel or misinformation.”…What does the future look like for Black voting? Udi Sommer, a political scientist at Tel Aviv University and an author of the 2025 book “The Emerging Republican Minorities: Racial and Ethnic Realignment in the Trump Era,” wrote by email: “As we approach November 2026, the Republican Party faces a paradox. While they have successfully demystified the idea of voting Republican for a segment of Black men, they are struggling to maintain that momentum as the reality of Trump’s second-term policies takes hold (e.g., deportations, inflation and federal-state friction)…The 2024 election signaled the end of racial tribalism in voting: the idea that a group must vote as a monolith to protect its interests. It did not, however, signal a permanent migration to the G.O.P. Rather, it created a competitive marketplace where Democrats must now earn Black votes through performance rather than historical loyalty.”…In her August 2025 paper, “Beyond the Bloc: Black Voter Subgroups & Declining Democratic Support,” Arica Schuett, a doctoral candidate in political science at Emory University, made the case that a new generation of Black voters with weaker ties to the civil rights movement is changing African American partisanship…“Black Americans who came of age during or shortly after the civil rights movement now cast fewer votes as a result of generational turnover,” Schuett wrote. “Weakening sociopolitical norms — specifically, a decline in the social pressures that have historically reinforced Democratic voting among Black Republicans and conservatives.”…To buttress her argument, Schuett pointed out, “Today, half of the Black population was born after 1990, ushering in a cohort too young to vote in Obama’s first election or to have experienced 20th-century race-conscious policies.”

“How about Latino voters?, asks Edsall. “The evidence from elections held in 2025 suggests that Hispanic support for Republicans will drop from 2024 levels, but how much remains uncertain…Marcel Roman, a political scientist at Harvard, wrote by email: “Precinct-level analysis of predominantly Latino areas in New Jersey and Virginia during the 2025 elections shows large swings back to the Democratic Party, which may generalize to the 2026 and 2028 elections if Trump maintains his current course.”…Roman cited data showing how Taylor Rehmet, a Democratic State Senate candidate in Texas, won decisively, carrying the district’s Hispanic electorate at 79 percent, compared with Kamala Harris’s 53 percent in 2024…Along similar line, Roman pointed to “Latino State of Play: 2025 Elections and New Equis Polling,” a report combining analysis with a late-October survey of Hispanic voters in heavily Latino congressional districts conducted by Equis…The report found: “The administration’s overreach on immigration has been a clear driver of discontent for many Latino voters. Both in July and October polls, immigration enforcement policies such as workplace raids and allowing ICE agents to use masks and civilian clothes during arrests were some of Trump’s least popular policies among Hispanic voters…In the most recent poll, the majority of Latinos disagreed with deploying troops to cities to assist with immigration enforcement (62 percent disagree) and increasing work visa fees to reduce the number of immigrant workers (60 percent).

Edsall notes further, “Compared with the Catalist estimate that Harris barely won among Latino voters, 51 to 49 percent, Equis found that Democrats in October 2025 held “a double-digit lead over Republicans (54-36) among Latino voters in competitive congressional districts.”…On a cautionary note for Democrats, the report also reported that “despite dissatisfaction with the Trump administration, Democrats have not managed to improve their favorability among Latinos (45 fav./45 unfav.) in the past three months.”…There are clear indications that Trump’s loss of support among Latino voters will have political consequences this November…In Texas, Politico reported, a Republican congressional redistricting plan designed to add five seats for the party is now in danger because of threats to Republican incumbents in heavily Hispanic districts along the southern border, Samuel Benson and Liz Crampton reported. “Backlash to President Donald Trump’s immigration crackdown is putting vulnerable Republicans in a tough spot, forcing them to shift their tone to appease frustrated Hispanic voters — or risk losing key battleground seats,” they wrote…“With the border secure and Latinos responding to ICE raids and government overreach,” Mike Madrid, a Republican strategist, told Politico, “the districts that Republicans thought were their future a year ago are likely to be their undoing.” He added that it’s “hard to find another situation in the past 50 years where a political party has squandered a generational opportunity like this.”

Edsall adds, “The next two sets of elections nationwide, this year and in 2028, will determine the scope of the damage Trump has inflicted on his party’s coalition. Polling shows substantial self-inflicted damage, but the data on the harm to the Republican Party and its candidates is more ambiguous…Comparing data from the Feb. 24 to 26, 2025, NPR/PBS/Marist survey to its Jan. 27 to 30, 2026, poll reveals Trump’s declining support among minority voters…The surveys showed Trump’s ratings among Black voters falling from 36 percent favorable and 55 percent unfavorable in February 2025 to 32 favorable and 64 unfavorable last month. Among Latino voters, Trump’s ratings fell from 44 percent favorable and 46 unfavorable to 38 favorable and 54 unfavorable…Put another way, Trump’s net favorability fell by 13 percentage points among Black voters and by 14 points among Latinos…But Trump will not be on the ballot in 2026 or 2028, so the crucial question becomes: Will his declines translate to Democratic gains?…This is where the numbers become somewhat murky. Just a month into his second term, a Feb. 23 to 25 Economist/YouGov survey found Black voters had a 56 percent positive to 26 negative view of the Democratic Party, while Latino voters were almost evenly split, 42 positive and 45 negative……In the 10 months between the two Economist/YouGov surveys, Black voters became decisively more negative, shifting from 23 percent favorable and 59 unfavorable toward the Republican Party to an overwhelming 8 favorable and 66 unfavorable……Hispanics, however, changed very little, from 31 favorable and 54 unfavorable toward the Republicans to 24 favorable and 51 unfavorable…Some of these shifts may seem so small as to be irrelevant. But the margin of victory in the national popular vote in 2024 was under 2 percentage points.”

At The New Republic, Michael Tomasky explains”What the Democrats Need to Do Now: To win back working-class voters, they need to signal more clearly to working people that they are on their side. That means picking fights on their behalf with the bad actors who are making their lives harder—and the democracy-hating billionaires.” As Tomasky writes, “Democrats, by and large, are not insurgents. They don’t come to Washington to topple any establishment. They come to pass some legislation, help make people’s lives better. These are worthy motivations, but over the years they’ve left Democrats bringing a lot of knives to a lot of gunfights…There are signs that Democrats are finally understanding that they need to do more fighting, and that things are not mostly working well. Many—I still wouldn’t say most, but many—congressional Democrats now get just how angry people are. Their electoral losses among working-class voters in 2024 surely taught them a lesson about that. And, after a very confused first few months during Trump’s second term, many seem to grasp now that they need to fight harder. They did a good job during last fall’s government shutdown. True, eight of them eventually decided to end the shutdown. But the party basically won the argument about the importance of the Obamacare premium subsidies, and polls showed that the public blamed Trump and the Republicans more for the shutdown than the Democrats…They stood their ground by enough to win the PR battle in that episode. They’ve become better at defending their position against GOP attacks. They’re better at responding to Trump. But one thing they still don’t do well is play offense—create preemptive lines of attack against Trump and the Republicans that put them on the defensive. California Governor Gavin Newsom has done a pretty good job of this for a few months, using his social media account to mock Trump and goad him into responding. But most Democrats still don’t understand the attention economy—the fact that people’s time is a scarce commodity, and a politician is only going to get so much of it—and the hideous but unavoidable rules social media has imposed on political communication…Passing legislation and improving people’s lives are great things. But politics in this age is constant rhetorical war. And not only, or even chiefly, about issues. Today’s war is more over character and values, and it requires not just staking out positions but taking stands.” More here.

In the middle of Black History Month, we can celebrate a victory for historical truth, as reported by CBS News Philadelphia staff Laura Fay, Eva Andersen and Dan Snyder at cbsnews.com: “A judge ordered the Trump administration to reinstall an exhibit about slavery at the President’s House Site in Philadelphia… In a ruling issued Monday, Senior Judge Cynthia M. Rufe ordered the defendants in the case — Secretary of the Interior Doug Burgum, the Department of the Interior, National Park Service Acting Director Jessica Bowron and the National Park Service — to restore the site to the way it was on Jan. 21, the day before the signage was removed. They also must keep all of the items safe, secure and undamaged, and cannot install any “replacement materials” without mutual agreement with the city of Philadelphia while the litigation is ongoing or before another order from the judge…The order also says officials must continue to properly maintain the site, including the grounds, video monitors, recordings and exhibits. The order does not give NPS a deadline for restoring the site…Monday’s order grants the city’s latest motion for a preliminary injunction and will be in effect until the judge issues another ruling…The exhibits in question provide information about enslaved people who lived at the site with Presidents George Washington and John Adams. After Park Service workers removed the signs in January, the city of Philadelphia filed a lawsuit in federal court seeking to have the displays put back. The suit argues that the city has prior agreements with NPS that require any disputes to be resolved through communication and compromise between the two parties…Rufe begins her memo about the opinion with a quote from the George Orwell novel “1984” and says the court has been asked “to determine whether the federal government has the power it claims— to dissemble and disassemble historical truths when it has some domain over historical facts.”…She continues: “It does not.” Of course, the Administration will appeal the decision as part of its ongoing war against ‘D.E.I.’ and the pesky resurgence of historical truth. President Washington rotated his slaves from Mt. Vernon, VA to Philadelphia to get around a Pennsylvania law that freed slaves who lived in the state for six months. In fairness to President Adams, however, it should be noted that he never owned slaves, although he was a stalwart defender of the aristocracy.

Diversity, equity and inclusion are good values, although reasonable Democrats can disagree about how much to emphasize them in particular political campaigns. But there is a strong case for broadening understanding of the values to include low-income whites, who have also been denied opportunities.  As Richard D. Kahlenberg noted at The Liberal Patriot, “In 2023, after years of waffling, the U.S. Supreme Court acted decisively on the matter. In Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard, the justices upended 45 years of precedent and struck down racial preferences in college admissions. While Democrats expressed outrage at the time, the Court indirectly liberated them from their political confines. Democrats could tell interest groups privately that they supported racial preferences, but their hands were tied. The courts had ruled. A political albatross having been removed, Democrats could instead champion the broadly popular idea of affirmative action based on economic need, for which Clinton and Obama had articulated support but been unable to deliver…Today, there is a vibrant black elite, equipped with college educations and making six and seven figures. Research shows the economically privileged offspring of these families are the very ones who tend to benefit from preferences to elite colleges. At Harvard, for example, the litigation revealed that 71 percent of the black, Hispanic, and Native American students on campus were from the top socioeconomic 20 percent of the black, Hispanic, and Native American populations nationally…Dr. Martin Luther King called for reparations in the form of a “Bill of Rights for the Disadvantaged” of all races, a disproportionate share of whom would be black.” Kahlenberg notes further, “Under a system of racial preferences, Harvard’s student body was racially integrated but had 23 times as many students who were wealthy as low-income. At the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, the subject of a parallel lawsuit, the ratio of rich to poor was 16 to 1.” Kahlenberg closes his article by citing “King’s bracing vision of policies that advance low-income and working people of all races. That is the only path to King’s dream of a multiracial coalition that puts hard-working low-income and working-class Americans at the very center.”

In “Taylor Rehmet Shows Working-Class Politics Can Win Everywhere,” Davis Griscom writes at Jacobin: “A union machinist just won a Texas State Senate seat Trump carried by 17 points. He was outspent four to one. How did he do it? By tossing out the Democrats’ playbook and running a grassroots economic populist campaign with a strong pro-labor message…“No one is coming to save labor, so we might as well do it ourselves,” said Taylor Rehmet in a video shared by the Texas AFL-CIO. This one sentence sums up Rehmet’s campaign for state senate in Texas’s Ninth District, which covers a large swath of Fort Worth and its northern suburbs. Rehmet, a union machinist and the president of his local, International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers (IAM) Local 776B, ditched the Democratic Party’s typical political playbook to laser-focus on material issues affecting all working-class people…Taylor Rehmet was not recruited by the Texas Democratic Party, which has suffered defeat after defeat and has been bleeding support from working-class and Hispanic voters. Nevertheless, his campaign achieved the unthinkable: it flipped a Trump +17 district…His victory is likely part of a larger swing away from the Republican Party, fueled by discomfort with Trumpism — but notably, Rehmet didn’t campaign against Trump. And while mainstream pundits are quick to chalk his victory up to a repudiation of MAGA, they are missing the real lesson: people are hungry for a politics that addresses their everyday needs. Rehmet’s victory vindicates a deeply held left-populist belief: that working-class politics can win anywhere.” More here.

“Fundraising is a critical part of winning reelection, but sometimes incumbents have political problems that money can’t fix, Nathan Gonzales writes in “House: Money Isn’t Enough to Save Incumbents in Wave Elections” at Inside Elections. “When voter sentiment is against you, outspending your opponent isn’t sufficient to survive an electoral wave. This is important context when analyzing campaign fundraising reports…While there can be confusion over what constitutes a wave election, 2010 certainly qualifies. Republicans gained a net of 63 House seats in President Barack Obama’s first midterm election, with health care at the top of people’s minds. And 2006 fits the description as well, considering Democrats gained 31 House seats during George W. Bush’s second midterm when the president had lost much of his credibility after the war in Iraq and the administration’s response to Hurricane Katrina…Under adverse political conditions, smart members gird themselves for the storm by raising money and leveraging that financial advantage most incumbents enjoy. But sometimes it doesn’t matter… Of the combined 74 House incumbents who didn’t win reelection in 2006 and 2010, 84 percent of them (62 members) outspent their challenger and still lost… Southeast Pennsylvania offers one of the best examples of this dynamic, which can plague both parties. In 2006, Democrat Patrick Murphy knocked off GOP Rep. Mike Fitzpatrick, even though he spent only three-quarters of what the incumbent did ($2.4 million to $3.2 million) in a suburban Philadelphia seat. Four years later, Fitzpatrick toppled Murphy while spending less than half of his opponent’s outlays ($2.1 million to $4.3 million)…This year’s financial dynamic in House races might look closer to 2006 or 2010 than to 2018… Yes, there’s mounting evidence that a Democratic House majority is within reach due to historical midterm trends. Trump’s job approval rating stands at 41 percent, according to Nate Silver’s latest average. And Democrats have been consistently overperforming in races across the country over the past 10 months… But there are signs of fatigue among Democratic donors. Losing yet another race to Trump isn’t great for morale… Still, as history tells us, underfunded challengers can defeat incumbents under the right political conditions. And, maybe most importantly, Democrats don’t need an electoral wave to win the House majority. They don’t need to gain 63 seats, 41 seats or 31 seats or topple dozens of incumbents as we saw in previous cycles… They need a net gain of three seats.”

In “Is Trump Losing Rural America? Jess Piper foretells the growing blue wave across the country,” The Contrarian’s Jennifer Rubin interviews Jess Piper, Executive Director for Blue Missouri, a grassroots fundraising organization that supports Democratic nominees for Missouri state legislature.  In the introiduction to the interview, The Contrarian writes that “Trump’s policies seem to have done nothing but negatively impact the people that voted him into power—especially in rural America. From farmers in Iowa to small business owners, people across the nation are feeling the effects of the Trump administration’s broken promises and inaction. In response, a growing number of Democratic candidates across traditionally Republican held areas are running for election…Jess Piper, Executive Director of Blue Missouri, joins Jen to give us an update on the growing blue wave forming in the South and the Midwest. The pair also discuss the National Rifle Association’s (NRA) pushback against Trump’s claim that Alex Pretti’s murder was justified because he was carrying a gun, and how Democrats need to run for office in uncontested districts. Video and transcript link  here.

U.S. Senator Chris Coons (D-DE) explains “What My Party needs to Do” at Democracy: A journal of Ideas: “Democrats need to stop telling Americans how to be and what to feel and believe. Instead, we need to listen. Then we need to solve the problems they’ve shared with us. In the last few years, it’s not just our message that was wrong—it was some of our policies, too. People didn’t recognize the impacts of the bills we wrote and the votes we took. That’s why Americans don’t believe us when we preach at them from auditorium stages, cable news desks, and social media posts…We have to get back to the values and ideas that draw people to be Democrats to begin with…Ever since the shattering loss of the White House and the Senate majority in 2024, Americans have been asking about the direction of the party. What do we stand for? Where will we take the country if voters give us the chance to lead again? We should have run better campaigns in 2024, but more than a year later, we also need better answers to those questions than what we offered on Election Day…Democrats did very well in the off-year 2025 elections, but success in larger elections in 2026 and especially 2028 will require a more affirmative vision. If we want to win again, we need to offer voters a concise, accessible framework that rests on the ideas that drew me and so many others to the party in the first place: opportunity, security, justice…The Democratic Party has to build things again, and we need to make sure that Americans are trained for the future that these technologies will bring. It’s a perspective that would reestablish us as a pro-growth party, not solely a pro-regulation party. We are a party that sees exciting and positive opportunities ahead for all of us—and will work to make them come true…We should fight for the right of all Americans to be secure in their homes, their communities, and their bodies—safe from violence, supported by effective policing that partners with communities, surrounded by secure borders and immigration policies that respect humanity, and assured of responsible gun ownership and safe schools…”

Coons continues, “Security also means financial security. Democrats should help Americans keep more of what they earn and save for the future. That means making our economy a fair playing field, so that a day’s work lets you provide for your family, put some money aside for a rainy day, and build wealth…We should ensure the government is fair and free of corruption. Americans should be confident that they’re playing by the same rules as everyone else, no matter how wealthy or well connected…Security also has global dimensions. It means we partner with allies, lead with our values, and defend liberty to secure our place in the world. We should build a foreign policy that keeps Americans safe—and understands that diplomacy, development, and aid, along with a strong military, are key parts of that equation…Democrats must speak to and act on legitimate concerns starting with opportunity and followed by security before they can be heard on justice. Focusing principally on security leads to a velvet prison—a nanny state where you can get by but never have the incentive or ability to thrive, where you will always be safe so long as you never step out of your proverbial front door. If we focus on justice when folks don’t feel they have security and opportunity, they will think we are out of touch and tone-deaf. But if we see justice as the means by which we work on opportunity and security, then we can pursue a pro-growth agenda and a pro-security agenda…Another source of opportunity are the immigrants who do work Americans can’t or won’t do in sectors like agriculture and construction. There simply aren’t enough Americans to do these jobs without making our homes and groceries so expensive that they would be out of reach. If immigrants don’t fill these roles, food rots in fields, prices go up, jobs disappear—and everyone suffers. So, if we apply the principle of opportunity, we end up with an immigration policy that brings in highly skilled immigrants and immigrants willing to work in sectors that desperately need them even as it ensures that our borders are secure, so we don’t let in more people than our economy can absorb…Americans feel our borders are endlessly porous, and that our broken system makes it easy for people to cut the line, skirt vetting, and dodge supervision. We need to ensure they know our goal is their safety, a secure border, and laws that apply equally to everyone…We keep Americans safe by deporting the violent criminals who are most likely to commit crimes again. When deporting everyone is your priority, you don’t actually have priorities. It is not possible to humanely deport the more than 14 million people in this country without legal status or documentation. So, we should focus on those who have committed serious crimes…A just immigration policy ensures due process, including the opportunity to plead your case before a judge, so that we don’t accidentally deport American citizens or those legally allowed to live in this country. A just policy doesn’t force undocumented immigrants who have been here almost their entire lives to remain in the shadows, nor does it ignore international law on issues such as asylum. None of these principles detract from Americans’ security and opportunity. Instead, they add to them, ensuring the systems we put in place protect Americans and immigrants alike, reflect our values, and drive us toward a future of growth and freedom.”

Bill Scher addresses a question of growing concern, “How Worried Should Democrats Be About Trump Stealing the Next Election?” at Washington Monthly: “President Donald Trump betrayed his panic about the 2026 midterm elections when he vented at Dan Bongino, formerly the number two official at the FBI and now a podcaster, about his baseless conspiratorial thoughts about immigrants and voting. After glazing his “landslide” 2024 victory (in which he defeated Kamala Harris by a 1.5 percent popular vote margin), he asserted: “You’re never going to have that again if you don’t get these people out. These people were brought to our country to vote, and they vote illegaly.”…He complained about his party’s handling of election laws: “Amazing that the Republicans aren’t tougher on it. The Republicans should say, ‘We want to take over.’ We should take over the voting in at least—many—15 places. The Republicans ought to nationalize the voting.” …Trump’s call for a partisan takeover of the electoral apparatus understandably triggered reciprocal panic in Democratic circles about voter suppression and outright vote stealing. Considering how far Trump was willing to go to steal the 2020 election—from disparaging mail ballots to pursuing dubious litigation to egging on an unruly mob hellbent on obstructing the Electoral College count—every American committed to free and fair elections must remain on the highest alert until Trump has fully left the political sphere….”

Scher continues, “Last March, the president issued an executive order imposing restrictive voting rules on states. The Justice Department has been trying to piece together a national voter database from unredacted state voter roll data, which the Brennan Center says is an “attempt to force states to remove voters from the rolls based on incomplete and likely inaccurate information.” Last week, FBI agents, with Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard creepily looking over their shoulders, seized 2020 voting records from Fulton County, Georgia. Trump, based on what he told Bongino (“you’re going to see something in Georgia”), is planning to use the records to further his gaslighting claims that Joe Biden stole the election in Georgia when we have plenty of evidence that Trump was plotting the theft. And considering how Trump has already abused his power with National Guard and ICE deployments designed to punish Democratic-run cities, we can’t discount the possibility that he will try to send armed agents to election sites with the intent of intimidating voters…  But, as with any bully, these real and potential acts of force and intimidation mask underlying weakness. A president simply doesn’t have the power to take over a Constitutionally designed, decentralized, 50-state managed election system. And as with any bully, the way to respond is to have your eyes wide open, but also have no fear…  That’s what we’ve been seeing. Most states aren’t turning over their unredacted voter data. Trump’s Justice Department has sued 24 of them, and last month, federal judges dismissed the cases involving California and Oregon. Also, last month, Attorney General Pam Bondi tried to pressure Minnesota Governor Tim Walz to turn over the data, suggesting that compliance would end ICE’s Operation Metro Surge, but Walz has not budged. In Georgia, the Fulton County government has sued to recover its voting records.” More here.

Greg Sargent and the New Republic report that “Trump’s New “Prison Camp” Threat Unleashes Fury Even in MAGA Country.” An excerpt: “Right now, more than 70,000 migrants are languishing in detention—a record—but the administration is running out of space. Add another 80,000 beds, and it would supercharge expulsion capacity…Yet these detention dreams are hitting stiff opposition. ICE wants to buy a warehouse in Virginia’s Hanover County, which went for Trump by 26 points in 2024 and combines rural territory with Richmond’s northern suburbs. Residents recently turned out in force and angrily condemned the proposed sale, with local reports suggestingonly a “handful” backed it. The GOP-heavy Board of Supervisors opposed the transaction. The warehouse owner canceled the sale…Meanwhile, in New Jersey, the Republican-dominated Roxbury Township Council, in slightly-Trump-leaning Morris County, recently voted unanimously to oppose ICE’s plans to buy a warehouse there, with some locals sharply protesting the scheme for humanitarian reasons. The Republican mayor of Oklahoma City came out against a proposed ICE warehouse, with the owner also nixing the sale. Officials in places like Kansas City, Missouri, and Salt Lake City, Utah, are also dead set against plans for ICE camps in their locales…Guess what: The opposition is only getting started. As MS NOW’s Rachel Maddow noted in a useful overview of the opposition Monday night, we’re already seeing mass protests outside existing facilities. Those are smaller than some of the gargantuan new camps ICE hopes to create, yet migrant deaths are already soaring in the current facilities, and the bigger ones will be even worse. “If they build them, they will fill them,” Maddow said, labeling them “prison camps.” She added: “How do you think those facilities are going to be run?”…The pushback has come together surprisingly quickly. What explains this? A bizarrely overlooked finding in a recent Pew Research poll sheds some light: It finds that a huge majority of Americans oppose mass immigrant detention. The wording is critical here:…Do you favor or oppose keeping large numbers of immigrants in detention centers while their cases are decided?…Favor: 35 percent…Oppose: 64 percent…Trump’s overall approval on the issue is in the toilet, and ICE has become a pariah agency. Majorities oppose deporting longtime residents with jobs and no criminal record and view immigration as a positive good for the country. In that Pew poll, 60 percent of Americans oppose pausing visa applications for the 75 countries Trump has singled out, apparently in keeping with his hatred for “shithole countries,” and two-thirds oppose ending asylum applications for people fleeing horrors abroad.” More here.

Carroll Doherty, former director of political research at Pew Research Center, writes in “Is the Time Finally Right for Real Immigration Reform?” at The Dispatch that “Americans are making a distinction between the stability at the border and the chaos and violence they have seen on the streets of Minneapolis, Chicago, and other cities where the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has surged its enforcement agents. Thus, a New York Times/Siena University poll last month found that Trump’s approval rating for handling the U.S.-Mexico border was 50 percent, 10 points higher than his rating for immigration overall… What do Americans want from immigration policy?…  Recent national polls have focused mostly on the two killings of American citizens in the past month at the hands of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and Border Patrol agents and their heavy-handed tactics more generally. The movement to rein in ICE—or even “abolish” the agency, in the dreams of some liberals—has spread from the halls of Congress to the citadels of American popular culture…Yet there has been less attention paid to the complex, unresolved question that has long been at the heart of America’s immigration predicament: what to do about the estimated 14 million people living in the United States illegally… Trump’s maximalist approach—the “largest deportation in the history of our country,” as he put it during the 2024 campaign—has retained a fair amount of popular support, despite the backlash over the tactics employed by ICE and Border Patrol agents…The same January New York Times/Siena poll that showed that Trump was underwater on immigration policy, and ICE even further underwater at 36 percent approval, found an almost even split on the administration’s mass deportation policy: Fifty percent of respondents supported it, and 47 percent opposed it…That’s consistent with other recent polls that ask respondents only about their views of the current deportation policy. Yet it’s often overlooked that, when given the opportunity, consistent majorities of Americans express a preference for finding a way to deal with illegal immigrants in the U.S. without resorting to mass deportations.” More here.

There is a pundit consensus that, absent any political earthquakes in the coming months, Democrats are favored to win a majority of the U.S. House of Representatives in the midterm elections, and with it, the speakership. The U.S. Senate, however, is a tougher call, with the smart money betting on Republicans holding their majority, according to Kyle Kondik at Sabato’s Crystal Ball. As Kondik, explains, “The 2026 midterm may once again be a “Blue Wave,” as we saw in 2018, Donald Trump’s first midterm as president…But that environment wasn’t enough for Democrats to win the Senate that year, and it may not be in 2026, either…While Democrats have made progress over the course of the last year in positioning themselves to compete in enough Republican-held seats to win the majority, the GOP nonetheless remains favored to hold that majority…The basic asset for Republicans, and problem for Democrats, is the structure of the Senate map. With Republicans having knocked out all of the remaining Democrats from states that voted for Donald Trump all three times he was on the ballot—a group of 25 states that accounts for half of all the Senate seats—Democrats either have to start winning in redder states again or, over time, essentially sweep all of the Senate seats in blue and purple states…Despite Republicans defending 22 of the 35 seats being contested this November, only a pair of those are in states where Democrats are currently very competitive: Maine, which consistently votes Democratic for president but also has the only Republican senator from a Kamala Harris-won state, Susan Collins; and North Carolina, which consistently votes Republican for president but often elects Democrats in other statewide races. Meanwhile, Democrats have to defend a couple of Trump-won states, namely an open seat in Michigan and the Georgia seat held by Sen. Jon Ossoff (D). We are upgrading Ossoff’s race to Leans Democratic—more on that below—but these other three races remain Toss-ups. Holding Georgia along with all of their other seats and flipping Maine and North Carolina would get Democrats to 49 seats—still two short of the 51 they need for a majority. Democrats have attracted credible recruits in additional, Republican-held seats, most notably Alaska and Ohio, but they may just run into a red wall even if the political conditions are very favorable in November.”

Here’s the U.S. Senate race midterm map, according to Kondik:

Jennifer Rubin explains “Why Dems Should Force Kristi Noem Out: Keep the momentum going,” and writes at The Contrarian: “Creating a record, presenting the evidence through credible witnesses, and forcing Republicans to defend the indefensible (just as the original videos of the killings did) are part and parcel of rallying the people, throwing Republicans on defense, splitting the Republican cult, and, candidly, throwing Trump’s party and underlings into panic that others could also face Noem’s fate…From a purely political standpoint, the calls for her to quit are already sowing divisions among Republicans. “Sens. Thom Tillis and Lisa Murkowski called for Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem to resign Tuesday, making them the first Republicans in Congress to say she should step down,” NBC reported. And, to boot, Tillis called out Miller for the same treatment. (“GOP Sen. Thom Tillis on Stephen Miller: ‘Stephen Miller never fails to live up to my expectations of incompetence,’ he said, later adding, ‘I can tell you, if I were president, neither one of them would be in Washington right now,’ also referring to Noem.”) Squeeze Noem and watch her drop the dime on others, including other Cabinet members, Vice President JD Vance, and Trump…By making Noem’s ouster a necessary but not sufficient condition of dismantling Trump’s police state, Democrats should also force Republicans up for reelection (e.g., Sens. Dan Sullivan of Alaska, Susan Collins of Maine, John Husted of Ohio, and John Cornyn of Texas) to justify why they are covering for her (and Trump). That should make for some effective debate moments…Finally, without the White House or majorities in either chamber of Congress, Democrats do not have a surplus of “wins” to tout. To reassure the base that elected Democrats are fighting for them and to encourage protestors to achieve progress through nonviolent action, a win of this magnitude — knocking out a Cabinet secretary in charge of arguably the most important domestic initiative of Trump’s second term — would be an invaluable sign of momentum. And for a regime that survives on the aura of invincibility, each stumble, loss, and scandal should be treasured.” More here.

If Trump’s self-dealing and corruption is going to be a concern for midterm voters, then this article should be a must-read for Democratic campaigns. David D. Kirkpatrick reports that “Trump’s Profiteering Hits $4 Billion: In August, I reported that the President and his family had made $3.4 billion by leveraging his position. After his first year back in office, the number has ballooned” at The New Yorker. Here’s the lede: “At the start of Donald Trump’s first term, he promised that he and his family would never do anything that might even be “perceived to be exploitive of office of the Presidency.” By contrast, his second term looks rapacious. He and members of his family have signed a blitz of foreign mega-deals shadowed by conflicts of interest, and they’ve launched at least five different cryptocurrency enterprises, all of which leverage Trump’s status as President to lure buyers or investors. Ethics watchdogs say that no other President has ever so nakedly exploited his position, or on such a scale. Trump recently explained to the Times why he cast aside his former restraint: “I found out that nobody cared.” You can read the rest of the story by signing up for a free New Yorker newsletter right here.

From “A closer look at Americans’ views on ICE” by Aaron Blake at CNN Politics: “The White House and Congress have begun what appear to be earnest negotiations over reforms to Immigration and Customs Enforcement in the aftermath of Alex Pretti’s killing in Minneapolis…And a couple new surveys conducted both before and after Pretti’s death add some interesting data points to the debate…It’s well-established by now that Americans have largely turned against ICE, with about 6 in 10 disapproving of it and saying it’s gone “too far” or been “too tough.”…But a Fox News poll and a Pew Research Center poll dig a little deeper on a few key points…1. Independents don’t agree with Trump on local police helping ICE..For one, the Fox poll released this week suggests an argument made by Trump and others – that local officials are to blame for the chaos because of their lack of cooperation with ICE – is unlikely to fly with Americans…Trump warned Wednesday that Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey was “playing with fire” by not using local police to enforce federal immigration laws…White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt has said that Frey and Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz have “shamefully blocked local and state police from cooperating with ICE, actively inhibiting efforts to arrest violent criminals.”…Vice President JD Vance added last week: “If we have a little cooperation from local and state officials, I think the chaos would go way down in this community.” But Americans aren’t sure this is what’s called for…The Fox poll asked registered voters whether they favored or opposed “requiring local governments to cooperate with ICE.”…Voters were about evenly split, with 49% in favor and 50% opposed. But independents opposed this idea by a wide margin, 64%-34%…(And that’s to say nothing of the fact that Minneapolis police are actually legally barred from doing what Trump wants.)…”

Blake continues, “2. Americans seem to misunderstand the scope of ICE’s actions…There is one aspect of Trump’s messaging that does appear to be breaking through, though…The Fox poll shows a majority of registered voters think that ICE’s actions reflect Trump’s promises to target people with criminal records either “almost always” (29%) or “most of the time” (25%)…That suggests that most Americans think this is indeed mostly about criminals…But it’s not – or at least, not anymore…The most recent data from the Deportation Data Project at the University of California Berkeley shows that the vast majority of non-citizens arrested by ICE had no criminal convictions, as of data through mid-October. (The percentage of non-criminals targeted has generally increased over Trump’s second term.)…Many others had pending charges. But a New York Times analysis last month found that major enforcement operations focused on specific areas tended to key on people who hadn’t even faced charges. In Washington, DC, 84% had never been charged with a crime. That percentage was 57% in Los Angeles; 63% in Massachusetts; and 66% in Illinois…We don’t have data on Minneapolis yet, but it stands to reason that the numbers look somewhat similar there…The difference between Americans’ perception of the immigration crackdown and what the statistics bear out suggests their already- negative opinions of ICE could worsen further…After all, Americans’ support for deportations drops significantly when the person in question hasn’t committed a crime.”

Blake adds, “3. Americans are good with recording ICE; they don’t like ICE wearing masks…Pew, meanwhile, tested how people feel about some of the things they’re seeing from both federal agents and the protesters in Minneapolis…Americans, by and large, seem to be okay with many of the protesters’ tactics. About three-quarters (74%) said it’s acceptable to record video of agents making arrests. And 59% said it’s even okay to share information on where arrests are happening, which protesters often signal through whistles…As for ICE’s tactics, Americans don’t like them as much…Nearly three-quarters (72%) said it’s unacceptable to use a person’s looks or the language they speak as a reason to check their immigration status. (Some videos from Minneapolis show agents mentioning the accent of the person they’re stopping.) And Americans say 61%-38% that it’s unacceptable for immigration agents to wear face covering to hide their identities on the job…The latter issue is one area where Democrats are demanding reform in the current negotiations. Trump and administration officials have said it’s necessary to avoid the agents being doxxed…Expect that to be one of the major flashpoints in this debate.” More here.

Alex Nguyễn reports that “Texas Democrat Flips State Senate District That Trump Won by 17 Points” at Mother Jones: “A Democrat and union leader won a special election on Saturday to represent a Texas state Senate district that Donald Trump carried by 17 points in 2024… GOP Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick called the result, a 57-43 victory for Taylor Rehmet, “a wake-up call for Republicans across Texas” in an early Sunday post on X. Republicans currently hold every statewide elected office in Texas…“Our voters cannot take anything for granted,” Patrick continued, calling out low voter turnout in special elections…Rehmet, an Air Force veteran and the leader of his local machinist’s union, spent $242,174—nearly 10 times less than Wambsganss—according to campaign finance reports reviewed by Fort Worth Report…“It’s clear as day that this disastrous Republican agenda is hurting working families in Texas and across the country, which is why voters in red, blue, and purple districts are putting their faith in candidates like Taylor Rehmet,” Ken Martin, chair of the Democratic National Committee, said in a statement. “This overperformance is a warning sign to Republicans across the country.”…According to the Texas Tribune, Patrick gave $300,000 to the campaign of Rehmet’s opponent, Leigh Wambsganss, through his PAC, Texas Senate Leadership Fund. Trump also posted multiple get-out-the-vote messages on behalf of Wambsganss on Truth Social in the days leading up to the election… Rehmet, an Air Force veteran and the leader of his local machinist’s union, spent $242,174—nearly 10 times less than Wambsganss—according to campaign finance reports reviewed by Fort Worth Report… “It’s clear as day that this disastrous Republican agenda is hurting working families in Texas and across the country, which is why voters in red, blue, and purple districts are putting their faith in candidates like Taylor Rehmet,” Ken Martin, chair of the Democratic National Committee, said in a statement. “This overperformance is a warning sign to Republicans across the country.” More here.