When the pied piper loses his audience, we must ask whether the people have rediscovered their conscience or simply found a new tune to follow.

On Tuesday night, Donald Trump and his MAGA movement saw what happens when political influence collides with the everyday realities of the people it seeks to lead.

The 2026 midterm elections brought a dramatic shift in political power. Democrats won control of both the House and the Senate, flipping Senate seats in states such as Texas and Kansas, which were long thought to be out of reach, and winning House districts Trump easily carried just two years ago. 

Voter polls placed the president’s approval at approximately 38%, with roughly six in 10 voters saying he was a factor in their vote. But beneath those numbers lies a more consequential story. Americans are confronting the cost of living, the economic consequences of tariffs, the uncertainty of war with Iran and diminishing confidence in American leadership abroad.

Trump promised his voters he would drain the swamp, end foreign wars and bring prices down. Yet many Americans went to the polls questioning whether those promises had been kept. Unlike the Pied Piper of Hamelin, who rid the town of its rats, Trump now faces an electorate concerned that the problems he promised to eliminate have instead multiplied. 

In the original story, the Piper fulfilled his bargain. He played his pipe, led the rats into the river and freed the town. But when the townspeople refused to pay him, he returned to exact revenge by leading away their children. 

Critics argue that Trump reversed that bargain. Rather than delivering the relief promised to ordinary Americans, the administration has left many struggling with economic uncertainty while continuing to demand political loyalty. Over and over again throughout the midterm campaign, Trump urged supporters to vote as though he were personally on the ballot. In this telling, the Piper did not eliminate the rats. He added to them, and still he expected to be paid.  

Trump’s supporters see a different story. They point to immigration raids and mass deportations, deregulation and challenges to established political institutions as evidence that the president delivered on important commitments. From their perspective, voters who rejected those policies after experiencing the consequences resemble townspeople who accepted the Piper’s services, but refused to honor their bargain. 

Both interpretations expose a fundamental ethical question: When does political loyalty cease to be an expression of shared principles and become an abdication of independent judgment? 

In a democracy, voters are not obligated to follow the music indefinitely. They retain the right to question the destination, reconsider promises and withdraw their support. Political loyalty is not a debt citizens owe their leaders. It is a trust that leaders must continually earn.

Albert Hirschman, an American economist and author of “Exit, Voice, and Loyalty: Responses to Decline in Firms, Organizations, and States,” distinguished between voice (working to change an organization from within) and exit (abandoning it). A vote against an incumbent is often itself an act of a voice. But where voters withdrew their allegiance from a party or movement altogether, Tuesday looked more like an exit. Hirschman saw loyalty as what keeps members inside, speaking up rather than leaving. His framework suggests that when loyalty silences voice instead, exit becomes the only remaining option. 

But elected officials carry a different and greater responsibility. 

Like the children of Hamelin, many Republican lawmakers followed the music toward an uncertain destination. Unlike those children, however, they had the authority — and the responsibility — to question where they were being led. Some embraced the president’s direction; others followed him despite reservations, knowing that dissent could invite a primary challenge. After all, they had seen others who challenged his leadership pay a considerable political cost. Kentucky Rep. Thomas Massie and Louisiana Sen. Bill Cassidy lost their Republican primaries to Trump-backed challengers. 

Political cooperation is essential to governing. But cooperation becomes ethically troubling when loyalty to an individual displaces the obligation to question, deliberate and act independently. The oath of office is not a pledge of allegiance to a president, a party or a political movement. It is a commitment to uphold the Constitution. A president can command attention, share public debate and place enormous pressure on members of his own party. But the ability to demand loyalty does not create a moral entitlement to receive it. 

The children of Hamelin’s Pied Piper tale had no part in the broken bargain, yet they paid its price. In our democracy, ordinary Americans and future generations often inherit the consequences of political decisions, and today they are paying a price. Economic instability, weakened public trust and the costs of war do not disappear when an election ends. A leader’s success cannot be measured solely by the number of people willing to follow along with them. It must also be measured by what happens to those who never chase the tune. 

---

Want more sharp takes on politics? Sign up for our free newsletter, Standing Room Only, written by Amanda Marcotte, now also a weekly show on YouTube or wherever you get your podcasts.

---

The election has shifted power in Washington. Democrats, after winning sizable, historic victories throughout the country, will soon have an opportunity to exercise congressional oversight and reinforce the institutional independence our constitutional system requires. 

But changing who holds the instrument does not necessarily change the music. 

Democrats now face their own ethical test. Will they exercise power with the transparency, accountability and respect for constitutional checks they demanded from their opponents? Will they welcome dissent within their own ranks? And will they resist the temptation to substitute partisan loyalty for independent judgment?  

An election can change the balance of power overnight. It cannot, by itself, restore public trust or guarantee ethical leadership. That requires leaders willing to place constitutional responsibility above political convenience, institutions prepared to exercise meaningful oversight, and citizens who refuse to surrender their judgment to the most compelling voice in the room. The first six months of the 120th Congress must be defined not merely by a change in political power, but by a demonstrable commitment to ethical reform, transparency, and accountability. The American people did not vote simply for a change in leadership. They voted for a government worthy of their trust.

The Pied Piper’s greatest power was not simply his ability to play a captivating tune. It was his ability to persuade others to follow without questioning where their journey would end. 

Political ethicist Dennis Thompson called this the problem of many hands: When many officials each contribute a small part to a collective outcome, responsibility seems to dissolve until no one bears it. So, when political loyalty becomes more important than independent judgment, who bears responsibility — the leader who plays the tune, or those who willingly follow? Thompson’s framework does not allow individual lawmakers to hide behind presidential leadership, party discipline or collective decisions. Nor does it assign blame equally. Responsibility depends on each official’s authority, knowledge, contribution and the alternatives available to them. By that measure, those who knew better and had the power to act cannot claim they were merely following the music from the leader in the red hat.

When the music finally stops, the question is not simply who will lead next. 

It is whether we have learned to listen differently.

The post Trump reversed the Pied Piper’s bargain, and voters stiffed him appeared first on Salon.com.

For all the horrible things Donald Trump has wrought upon the world — and there are so, so many — he’s also taught us some important lessons. Trump is proof of several truths: A red-meat-and-stress-addled heart can withstand otherwise unthinkable conditions with the federal government’s medical secrets; reality television ruined the world; and, if we’re not careful, we’re all liable to become parodies of ourselves one day, crying about it online.

That latter bit is certainly true for filmmaker Taika Waititi, whose otherwise tacky-yet-progressive veneer cracked last weekend when he took to Instagram to condemn the poor reviews of his latest film, “Klara and the Sun.” After a torrent of bad press and worse box-office performance, the film’s distributor, Sony, opted to scale back the movie’s wide release, reducing the sci-fi dramedy’s reach from 2,000 theaters nationwide to 800, most of which returned a meager profit. Never one to take his mediocrity on the chin, Waititi deflected the negativity outward, which, as we know, always paints someone in a good light!

Waititi reposted a graphic claiming that “Klara and the Sun” was “rebounding” with a 78% audience score on Rotten Tomatoes, a 53-point gap from the film’s 25% critics score. (For what it’s worth, neither number should ever be used to accurately measure a film’s quality.) “I haven’t read a review of anything aimed at me or my peers in 15 years,” Waititi captioned the post. “But I do listen to the people . . . Let’s spare a thought for those sad, lost souls who couldn’t achieve their dreams of becoming artists, and thus settled, and became critics. Irrelevant. Out of touch. Obsolete. In the bin.”

Reading Waititi’s emoji-peppered caption, I was surprised to find it so carelessly evoked the Trumpian crybaby approach to social media. Whether on X or his own Truth Social, Trump’s favorite way of addressing critics and opponents has long been to toss out adjectives at will. Tack a “SAD!” at the end of Waititi’s caption, and it could easily pass for one of Trump’s poetic musings. (If only Waititi had gone so far as to parrot my personal favorite Trump quip about Barney Frank by saying, “The critics looked disgusting, nipples protruding, in front of my movie. Very very disrespectful.”)

---

Want more from culture than just the latest trend? The Swell highlights art made to last.
Sign up here

---

Ironically, all those admonishments in Waititi’s caption are also fitting descriptors for the state of Donald Trump’s agenda, the one imitated by his legions of Republican cronies spread out across America, hoping to be elected in Tuesday’s midterms. But judging by the results, MAGA’s influence is waning fast. Seven Senate seats flipped, historically red states turned blue and a spate of monumental wins popped up nationwide. The MAGA bubble popped in real time. Americans have seen firsthand what little good fascist ideology does for the average, working-class person. And though the country may not become great again overnight, it appears the last 12 years of freefall have finally been suspended — at least for now.

Not to be all, “Oh, won’t someone think of the celebrities?” about it, but such overwhelmingly positive election results left me wondering what happens to someone like Waititi, whose childish outburst is straight from the MAGA playbook. For over a decade, Trump has used social media to peddle broadly disparaging, dangerous rhetoric that has legitimate impact outside the phone screen. The reckless hatred comprising MAGA ideology is so potent that it’s bled into the ways even otherwise progressive people wield their power, like crude oil painting an ocean black. And while refuting film critics isn’t akin to Trump’s most damning sins, Waititi’s mockery is a symptom of a problem that won’t be washed away by one blue wave, no matter how sizable.

One would think that Waititi would know better. For one, the guy is 51 years old, certainly experienced and well-established enough to let a flop roll off his back. How fitting that his biggest success is the anti-fascist yet aesthetically tasteless political satire, “Jojo Rabbit,” which won the Oscar for best adapted screenplay in 2020, just as the Trump era was revving up for its second leg. That film, about a 10-year-old Hitler Youth who begins to grapple with the realities of life in 1940s Germany, examines propaganda’s influence and the power of hegemony, even if it often lacks the nuance and perspective such a satire warrants. For better, or more often, for worse, Waititi’s writing displays a self-possessed vulgarity that gets in the way of his more salient observations. Case in point: It’s downright ludicrous to stake your name on a film renouncing hate, then take aim at critics — people not exactly matched in influence to someone like Waititi — just six years later.

But this is the rot that social media creates. Whether it’s Instagram, X, TikTok, or YouTube, these sites have incentivized and monetized incendiary opinions. Their algorithms push small people into major power. What was designed to ostensibly be a great equalizer has only divided the world more, making animosity easily accessible to anyone who gets their rocks off on sewing discourse through cruelty. 

For some time now, arts critics have been easy targets on these platforms. Gone are the days of the critic playing dilettante, having intellectual conversations over martinis and cigarettes at the month’s salon for like-minded individuals. To be a critic today — to pursue one’s passion for art and writing and learning, all rolled into one — is to subject oneself to a pretty bleak existence. In most cases, the pay is meager. The hours are long. The job is demanding. And virtually no one has the patience or attention span to read an entire article anymore, let alone engage with its ideas. A legitimate critic doesn’t stumble into the job just to point and laugh; they write because they have real passion for what they cover. Surely someone like Waititi would say the same when he begins a new project after a string of flops.

What Waititi fails to realize is that he’s not punching up or down, but laterally. This is artist versus artist. If the context is right, a good piece of criticism can be as life-altering as a good film. But that’s hard to see when the internet has built such a wide chasm between people, reducing the impact of writing in favor of scrolling. Along with social media’s effect on human behavior, it’s had a heavy hand in blunting the journalism industry. If everyone’s a critic, then no one is, and that’s precisely why monitoring Rotten Tomatoes scores like they’re poll numbers is futile and ridiculous.

But it’s not just Waititi who’s vulnerable to this unique form of MAGA-tinged, social media-brained psychosis; critics can fall prey to it, too. Whether it’s a filmmaker, a film critic, or just your average filmgoer, social media has confined us all to its machine. No one is exempt from consumer tech’s sway. And if a writer or filmmaker wants to make a splash, tossing out an inflammatory opinion aimed at a peer is a surefire shortcut. I’ve seen this affect critics’ prose over time, with certain writers (or their outlets) favoring button-pushing pull quotes and headlines for attention. But in most cases, no critic is happy to spend two hours watching something they find insufferable. No matter how gleeful Siskel and Ebert used to look sparring over movies, their industry was built on intellectual debate in pursuit of cinematic resonance, not schadenfreude.

 

What’s most concerning in Waititi’s response is his foul self-importance, which is the real stain of MAGA politics. While an artist should avoid burdening themselves with hypothetical responses to their work before it’s even out in the world, considering the eventual reaction is worthwhile. Engaging with other people’s perceptions is a practice we could all stand to do with more grace and tact. Contemplating a differing opinion shows maturity and humility, not absolute agreement. Pointing a finger won’t do anything for a person’s growth, artistic or otherwise. America’s politicians are only just beginning to relearn that lesson, understanding the value in trying to address problems, rather than gesture toward them with a shrug.

If America’s blue wave is indeed going to usher in a new era where politicians actually act in favor of the people, and Trumpian artists like Waititi make themselves look foolish on Mark Zuckerberg’s Instagram, we owe some props to one of the century’s most prolific liberals. Aaron Sorkin’s “The Social Reckoning” actually got a few things right. In last month’s companion piece to “The Social Network,” Sorkin posited that the average American would soon be mobilized by their fatigue with MAGA politics and social media. But his director’s eye lacked style and discernment. Sorkin responded to criticisms with pleasant diplomacy, even questioning his own merits as a director versus a screenwriter. “I’m worried that the parts of directing that I’m not good at are those parts you can’t learn,” he admitted.

While there may be truth to his concern, Sorkin’s introspection is precisely the kind of pause this country could learn from. If living in MAGA-world for a decade has taught us anything, it’s that things aren’t just good because one person says so. Uniformity is the enemy of art, and blind trust is the scourge of politics. There is no future without recognizing the subtleties existing between the lines. The only thing that is, to quote Waititi, irrelevant, out of touch and obsolete is the arrogance in thinking anyone could know it all.

The post Taika Waititi’s Instagram crash out is a Trumpian sore loss appeared first on Salon.com.

Forty-five minutes before the first polls closed on Tuesday, Greg Gutfeld was still doing what Fox News does best, acknowledging reality just long enough to replace it with a culture-war hallucination. “Gas prices are so high, I’m going to vote for the party that wanted to trans my kids,” he joked on “The Five,” adding that he didn’t see Democratic wins on the horizon. “There is no blue wave materializing,” Clay Travis, the Outkick founder and Fox contributor, posted at 3 p.m. EST, adding that Republicans were surging in Florida and the polls were about to be proven wrong yet again. 

Then the polls closed, and MAGA’s delusions were pulverized. The country that right-wing media had spent two years describing as angry, ascendant and permanently realigned voted in an avalanche that crushed years of manufactured MAGA hype. American voters told the president to take his $5,000 “Trump Dividend” checks and shove them. Elon Musk, who moved to Texas to get away from Democrats and then spent a reported $150 million to deliver the Lone Star State for Republicans, saw his early Tuesday post urging people to vote red disappear from his profile by Wednesday. 

The country woke up to results that few expected — and a long list of historic firsts. Georgia elected Keisha Lance Bottoms, the first Black woman governor in American history. Michigan sent Dr. Abdul El-Sayed to Washington as the first Muslim senator. New Hampshire elected Chris Pappas as the first openly gay man in the Senate. New Mexico made Deb Haaland the first Native American woman governor, and Peggy Flanagan became Minnesota’s first Native American woman senator. Texas elected Gina Hinojosa over three-term Gov. Greg Abbott — the state’s first Latina governor and its first Democratic governor in more than three decades. Ohio got its first woman governor in Dr. Amy Acton. South Carolina tapped Dr. Annie Andrews as its first elected woman senator. Democrats won a Senate seat in Kansas for the first time in 94 years. While votes are still being counted in key races, solid majorities in both the Senate and House are assured, and Democrats are set to make Hakeem Jeffries the country’s first Black speaker. 

Even the New York Post, Rupert Murdoch’s tabloid and a loyal Trump house organ, refused to mince words on its front page: “Trump suffers historic rebuke as Dems romp in midterms,” with “BLUE TSUNAMI” blaring beneath it. On “Fox and Friends” Wednesday morning, Ainsley Earhart warned viewers that “your wallet and your way of life” are now in the crosshairs. 

It is no surprise that Trump 2.0, stripped of its previous establishment Republican guardrails like Mike Pence and Mitch McConnell, has culminated in such total structural collapse. The deeper truth the conservative media apparatus could never say out loud is that MAGA was always a Trump-specific phenomenon. It does not transfer to his imitators, and it only ever worked when the economy let voters treat Trump as entertainment. Right-wing media spent years confusing its ability to dominate a conversation with its ability to represent a country. When Tuesday’s returns exposed the difference, its leading voices reached for almost everything except accountability. They blamed immigration. They blamed insufficient restrictions on voting. They blamed each other. Alex Jones even decided Trump might secretly be a Democrat.

For the network’s election night coverage, Fox News seated former New York Mayor Bill de Blasio between two of Trump’s former press secretaries, Kayleigh McEnany and Karoline Leavitt, and he told them to their faces that they were “missing the plot.” He said, “The American people are looking at a war they do not believe in, and they did not authorize. They’re looking at prices that are making it impossible for middle-class people, let alone working-class people, to live.” 

Trump, watching at the White House, raged on Truth Social — “Why does FoxNews have deBlasio” — and seethed at the panel’s lone liberal: “I can’t stand Jessica Tarlov’s voice — DUMB AS A ROCK, but it’s the voice that gets me.” After Gutfeld read the president’s text on air — which is as good a diagram as exists of what Fox News is now: a suggestion box the president monitors live — Tarlov answered on X, not on Truth Social: “Reality is a tricky thing,” and the president “should get better at dealing with it.” 

On Newsmax, things were somehow worse. Political strategist Dick Morris argued that Trump’s problem was effectively excessive success: He had solved the major problems that would otherwise motivate Republican voters. The influencer ecosystem, meanwhile, went straight for the circular firing squad, and every faction picked a different target. 

---

Want more sharp takes on politics? Sign up for our free newsletter, Standing Room Only, written by Amanda Marcotte, now also a weekly show on YouTube or wherever you get your podcasts.

---

Jones, livestreaming as the returns buried his movement, said Trump himself is the plant: “I think he’s a Democrat. I’m 100% at war with Trump. He’s not that r*tarded. He did this on purpose. I think he’s the ultimate Democrat sleeper cell and he works for them.” Benny Johnson and Libs of TikTok reached for the great replacement theory, and Fox’s Lawrence Jones supplied the broadcast version, surveying Texas and concluding, “Texas, there is a lesson here. Don’t be so welcoming.” 

So much for celebrating people voting with their feet and the U-Hauls leaving California. 

Laura Loomer went straight doomer: “America is over and so is the American Dream.” Others blamed Sen. John Thune for failing to pass the SAVE Act and shrink the electorate further, as though the answer to such a broad repudiation were fewer voters. The Daily Wire’s Ben Shapiro posted the “everything is fine” fire GIF — “Just checking in to see how things are goi—” — and the Federalist’s Sean Davis answered with the hot-dog-suit meme, the one where the man in the costume insists everyone else is the problem.

The recriminations got personal fast. Rep. Nancy Mace told Fox’s Mark Levin to “STFU,” blamed his “beloved” war for the losses and called the night “devastating . . . for the hard-working American who can’t afford to buy a home, or fill their tank with gas or put food on the table.” Levin returned fire: Mace was a “washed up political loser” and “one of the most mentally unhinged POS to ever be in Congress.” She was angry, he said, “because you’ll actually have to now work for a living . . . Good riddance, crackpot.” Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis gloated that with governors’ races lost in Texas and Ohio and Georgia, the Sunshine State would stand alone among the ten most populous states with a Republican governor. And Katie Miller — podcaster, administration wife, professional MAGA explainer — told CBS’s Norah O’Donnell that she had not voted at all. “I did not vote in Virginia because in Virginia when you vote, you dox your own address, and so I prefer my own safety and security over giving that up.” 

In the end, the movement’s loudest voices spent the cycle performing for each other. Some of them couldn’t even be bothered to vote.

The post MAGA media scrambles to form a circular firing squad appeared first on Salon.com.

Democrat Abdul El-Sayed is projected to defeat Republican Mike Rogers for Michigan‘s open U.S. Senate seat, a closely watched race that capped off a massive night for progressives. 

The Associated Press called the race shortly after 2 a.m. Wednesday morning with El-Sayed leading by about seven points. 

The candidates were competing to replace retiring Democratic Sen. Gary Peters, whose departure created one of the most consequential open-seat contests of the midterm elections. El-Sayed, a former Detroit health director, campaigned on expanding access to health care and lowering costs, while Rogers, a former congressman and House Intelligence Committee chairman, emphasized manufacturing jobs, tax cuts and his alignment with President Donald Trump.

The race took an unexpected turn just two days before Election Day when Democratic Rep. Haley Stevens, who narrowly lost the party’s August primary to El-Sayed, endorsed Rogers during an appearance at a Detroit church.

The endorsement stunned Michigan Democrats, prompting condemnation from party leaders and resignations among Stevens’ staff. Stevens cited disagreements with El-Sayed over Israel and his campaign’s direction, while Democrats accused her of undermining their nominee in a critical Senate contest.

El-Sayed sought to move past the controversy, urging supporters to focus on voting. His campaign reported raising $2.4 million on Sunday, while Michigan Democratic officials said the endorsement had prompted an increase in volunteers. Rogers, meanwhile, highlighted Stevens’ support in the campaign’s final days.

More than 2.3 million Michigan voters had already cast ballots by Monday, according to The Associated Press, raising questions about how much the late-breaking controversy could influence the outcome.

The post Abdul El-Sayed defeats Mike Rogers despite Haley Stevens drama appeared first on Salon.com.

Sen. Susan Collins, the five-term Republican from Maine, called her opponent Troy Jackson, a former logger and state senate president, to concede Tuesday night. The Associated Press called the election just after midnight, with Jackson leading by about six percentage points.

Despite nearly 30 years in the Senate, Collins has been seen as one of the most vulnerable Republican incumbents, a smaller pebble in the blue avalanche that wiped out MAGA candidates in the midterm elections. She was the lone Senate Republican to represent a state that former Democratic Vice President Kamala Harris carried in the 2024 election. She lost despite her efforts to distance herself from President Donald Trump. Her campaign claims she has never voted for the president and reportedly refused his help with her run. 

That hasn’t stopped her from often playing a key role in Trump’s agenda, casting a critical vote in Brett Kavanaugh’s confirmation to the Supreme Court. Kavanaugh would later join the majority opinion in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, which overturned Roe v. Wade and ended the constitutional right to an abortion. Indeed, Collins’ position on reproductive rights seems to have played a key role in her defeat. Collins received support from Trump despite her efforts, according to reporting from ProPublica earlier this year, which revealed how an FBI anti-corruption squad was investigating Collins before Trump killed the case.

---

Start your day with essential news from Salon.
Sign up for our free morning newsletter, Crash Course.

---

As for Jackson, he first ran for office in 2000 as a Republican for the Maine House of Representatives, but lost. He ran again as an independent two years later and won, becoming the first non-Democrat to represent the area since the late ‘70s. 

Before delegates at a state convention chose Jackson in July, Collins was originally running against oyster farmer Graham Platner, who won the Democratic primary with support from progressive leaders. But controversies surrounding Platner continued to pile up, and he finally withdrew from the race on July 10 following sexual assault allegations.

The post Troy Jackson ends Susan Collins’ 30-year reign as Maine Senator appeared first on Salon.com.

Pretend I’m on the ballot, the president of the United States repeatedly told American voters over the last several weeks. Millions of voters did exactly that. Be careful what you wish for, my dude. 

The astonishing results of the 2026 midterm elections do not just represent a rebuke or a political setback for Donald Trump. Those neutral-sounding terms of art are not remotely adequate. This was a historic smackdown, a massive, crushing defeat on a scale suffered by no incumbent president in living memory. It represents this nation’s collective awakening — admittedly rather late in the game — to this individual’s uniquely poisonous effects on our public life and civil society.

Many larger political questions will emerge from this epic defeat, which will see any and all surviving elected Republicans (not that there are many) scurrying for cover and trying to establish as much distance as possible from Trump. They will lose his number. They will profess that they were never convinced MAGA believers, or that they secretly disagreed with the ICE reign of terror, with the war in Iran, with the disastrous tariffs, with the ideological assault on liberal democracy. 

Is JD Vance still a plausible 2028 presidential contender, having hitched his wagon to this tyrant, who has now been thoroughly pantsed in public and exposed as a pathetic loser? Will Pete Hegseth get even one more opportunity for podcaster-style flexing before the defanged Pentagon press corps? Let’s give Marco Rubio an infinitesimal amount of credit for creeping quietly through the corridors of power and staying out of the headlines. Whether his neocon mouse act is enough to survive the Trumpocalypse moment remains to be seen. 

In his inimitable style, Trump is already blaming others for this defeat. He has accused Texas Gov. Greg Abbott — who lost his seat to Democrat Gina Hinojosa in one of Tuesday night’s numerous shockers — of being a RINO sellout. As impossible as it is to talk about honor with these people, that is an act of dishonorable treachery, given how eagerly Abbott has crawled and begged and prostrated himself before the Trumpian throne. 

Then again, in an ass-backward way, Trump has a point. He didn’t do this all by himself; no one could have managed that. He loaded up the pipe with bigotry and xenophobia and fear and insane conspiracy theories, and adult Republican humans who used to believe in wrong-headed but somewhat sane political doctrines inhaled it all eagerly, persuading themselves that the resulting high would insulate them from the failure of their ideas. It only made the problem worse — all the problems, really — and they should have seen that coming.

The president corrupted and enslaved a historic American political party with a complicated but illustrious history, the party of Abraham Lincoln and Ulysses S. Grant and Dwight Eisenhower and Ronald Reagan. I’m not the biggest fan of that party either, but it has certainly had its moments, including the first woman to serve in both houses of Congress and the first Black man elected to the U.S. Senate. Trump insisted that it surrender everything to him — its principles, its history and its soul, if political parties have such a thing — and as in every fable about making a deal with the devil, now it has been destroyed.

We don’t know how this election would have turned out in the unimaginable alternate universe where Trump stayed out of it. But he didn’t. He forced Sen. John Cornyn out of the race in Texas, in favor of Ken Paxton. Look what happened. He picked Darline Graham to replace her late brother, Sen. Lindsey Graham, in South Carolina. Look what happened. He picked Mike Collins to run against Sen. Jon Ossoff in Georgia, and Michael Whatley to run against former Gov. Roy Cooper in North Carolina. Look what happened. He praised Ohio Sen. Jon Husted’s rear end and embraced gubernatorial candidate Vivek Ramaswamy’s noxious campaign ad. Look what happened there, too.

And that’s without considering the supposedly ingenious MAGA strategy of redistricting congressional seats in one state after another, with the objective of locking in a permanent Republican majority. How will that play out over the longer term? That’s impossible to say, but in 2026 it seems to have unleashed an extraordinary backlash. Forget all the hand-wringing about purple districts and swing districts; the congressional map is a nationwide wipeout. As I write this, the New York Times is predicting a Democratic majority in the House of Representatives of 256 seats. That may or may not hold up, but however this ends, it’s likely to be the biggest midterm swing in more than 30 years. 

Are there still die-hard MAGA Republicans in deep-red exurbs or rural districts who will continue to profess fealty to Trump in the wake of this catastrophe, and perhaps even maintain that it’s all some kind of grand misunderstanding? Yeah, sure. Any cult movement has its true believers and willing sacrifices. Years after his resignation, the postmistress in the rural town where I spent summers as a kid never took down the portrait of Richard Nixon. Then she retired and moved away, someone else took the job and Nixon’s picture wound up out back, in the dumpster. 

That’s about where we are. Trump has always been poisonous. Republicans are finally learning that the hard way.

The post Donald Trump is now radioactive appeared first on Salon.com.

The signs were there from the outset. About 30 minutes after the polls in Kentucky’s 6th Congressional District closed at 6 p.m., the first numbers from rural counties began trickling in. It was no surprise that they favored Republican Ralph Alvarado over Democrat Zach Dembo. The district was reliably Democratic until 2012, when Andy Barr, a Republican who is now running to replace Mitch McConnell in the Senate, eked out a win. Since then, the GOP has gerrymandered the district to all but ensure it stayed in the fold. 

The real story, though, could be found in the margins. Alvarado was underperforming Barr’s 2024 results by around 20 percentage points — a staggering drop, indicating that a significant number of Republicans had either stayed home or decided to take a chance on Dembo. Off the Democratic map for the last 14 years, by 9:15 p.m., when it was reported that Alvarado had conceded, the district had become a microcosm of what was unfolding nationwide.

The blue landslide, long predicted by pundits but mentioned with fingers crossed by Democrats, was becoming an avalanche.

Further south in Georgia, an earlier-than-expected call for Jon Ossoff buoyed Democratic hopes, followed by a pickup in the North Carolina Senate race, which saw Gov. Roy Cooper projected to defeat former Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Whatley. Democrats even put up a fight in ruby-red Florida’s statewide races, with David Jolly, the nominee for governor, and Angie Nixon, the democratic socialist Senate candidate, running ahead of their opponents until the conservative Panhandle’s votes were counted.

Then came South Carolina, where Darline Graham, who was foisted upon the state’s Republican Party by Donald Trump to succeed her brother, Sen. Lindsey Graham, after his death, went down to an historic defeat. The Palmetto State hasn’t seen a Democrat elected to the Senate since 1998. 

Amy Acton, Ohio’s Democratic nominee for governor, routed her opponent Vivek Ramaswamy after he released a widely condemned ad that weaponized a horrific part of her childhood. In Texas, James Talarico is projected for a stunning win over scandal-plagued Ken Paxton, and Gina Hinojosa ousted the incumbent Greg Abbott from the governor’s mansion. 

Other elections around the country — Senate races in Michigan, Kansas and Iowa; pivotal House contests and gubernatorial races — appear to be trending for Democrats.

For a decade, the party has wondered when, or if, a reckoning would arrive for Trump and MAGA. That moment has arrived.

Again and again, Republicans have followed the president over the cliff, no more so than during the past 22 months. In 2024, Trump expanded on the coalition that had carried him to success in 2016 by making inroads with Black men, Latinos and young voters. It was a success that, at least in part, led Republicans to launch a national gerrymandering scheme largely thwarted by Democrats, as well as an unfavorable economic climate of the president’s own making. 

---

Want more sharp takes on politics? Sign up for our free newsletter, Standing Room Only, written by Amanda Marcotte, now also a weekly show on YouTube or wherever you get your podcasts.

---

But Trump also made the grievous error of attacking the very communities that helped return him to the White House. The combination of his assaults on voting rights and Black history, as well as the Supreme Court’s gutting of the Voting Rights Act, ensured that Black voters turned out overwhelmingly for Democrats. After more than a year of ICE raids, mass deportations and threats against naturalized citizens, Latinos have swung to the Democrats en masse, playing a decisive role in Talarico’s win. Trump’s attacks on civil rights, immigrants’ rights and the social safety net have cut across demographic groups, and have had a strong negative impact on young voters. Drunk on his own power, the president has spent the better part of two years splintering his own coalition — and giving Democrats an opening they were happy to exploit.

The monumental defeat suffered by Republicans offers a sobering lesson for Democrats — to not forget what brought them to this night of victory. 

The message voters are sending is loud and clear: They want fighters, leaders who are willing to throw out conventional wisdom and do battle for working-class interests. That’s what Ossoff sensed last fall, when he was considered to be the nation’s most endangered Democrat. Instead of playing it safe, he staked his candidacy on affordability issues, particularly subsidies for the Affordable Care Act. In the midst of the longest government shutdown on record, Ossoff held firm: He would not vote to reopen the federal government unless the tax credits were restored.

Other Democratic candidates got the message. Dr. Abdul El-Sayed in Michigan proved steadfast in linking the billions in federal funding that continue to subsidize Israel’s ongoing assault on Gaza to skyrocketing consumer prices on the homefront. Another physician, Dr. Annie Andrews, who defeated Graham, unabashedly campaigned on creating a healthcare public option and gun control measures in South Carolina — and won. 

Right now, Democrats are feeling the wind at their backs. But after the excitement fades from tonight’s successes, they will realize they are now facing an even bigger challenge: To stay true to the mandate they have been given by voters, grudgingly in some cases, and to not, as they have done so often in the past, slip on the proverbial banana peel that is always waiting for them around the corner. 

Throughout his campaign for the Senate, Paxton was fond of saying, “If we lose Texas, we lose America.” Tonight, Democrats put Texas solidly in their column — and America is still standing.

The post MAGA wiped out in blue avalanche appeared first on Salon.com.

Democrat Keisha Lance Bottoms defeated Republican billionaire Rick Jackson in Georgia‘s gubernatorial election Tuesday, becoming the first Black woman elected governor in American history and ending more than two decades of Republican control of the state’s highest office.

The contest pitted two sharply different candidates to succeed term-limited Republican Gov. Brian Kemp, whose departure opened the governor’s office for the first time in eight years.

Bottoms, a former Atlanta mayor and adviser to President Joe Biden, campaigned on expanding access to health care, improving public education and addressing the rising cost of living. Jackson, a billionaire health care executive and political newcomer, emphasized cutting taxes, reducing government spending and bringing his private-sector experience to state government.

Jackson invested more than $200 million of his own money into the campaign, making his bid one of the most expensive self-funded gubernatorial campaigns in American history.

The election also ended Republicans’ decades-long control of Georgia’s governorship. The last Democrat elected governor was Roy Barnes in 1998. Barnes lost his reelection bid to Republican Sonny Perdue in 2002, and Republicans have held the office since Perdue took office in January 2003.

Georgia’s changing political landscape added another dimension to the contest. Once a reliably Republican state in presidential elections, Georgia narrowly backed Democrat Joe Biden in 2020 before returning to President Donald Trump in 2024. Democrats also captured both U.S. Senate seats in 2021, with Raphael Warnock subsequently winning a full term in 2022.

On Tuesday, Georgia voters also reelected Democratic Sen. Jon Ossoff, demonstrating the state’s continued willingness to support Democrats in statewide contests.

Bottoms is the first Black governor elected in Georgia, the first woman to hold the state’s highest office and the first Black woman elected governor anywhere in the United States. She is also the first Democrat to win Georgia’s governorship in 28 years, breaking a Republican winning streak dating back to 2002.

The post Keisha Lance Bottoms set to become first Black woman governor in US appeared first on Salon.com.

President Donald Trump fumed at Fox News on Election Day, accusing the conservative network of turning against him, giving Democrats too much airtime and driving away its own viewers.

“FoxNews Ratings are way down (27%!) because they’re spending too much time covering the Trump Deranged Dumocrats!” Trump wrote Tuesday on Truth Social. “All of those people who used to watch Fox, and no longer do, get it. It’s them, not me.”

Trump insisted his own popularity remained strong, claiming his numbers were “better than they have ever been” and citing a CNN poll that he said showed overwhelming Republican support for him.

The president also accused Fox News of deliberately undermining him through its polling.

“The FoxNews Poll, always the worst, is so insulting with the questions they ask,” Trump wrote. “Every question is a hit job, and every answer is ‘BULLS***!'”

His grievances extended beyond the network’s programming. Trump questioned why Fox Corp. was financially supporting Democratic politicians and organizations, naming House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, Reps. Jamie Raskin, Ted Lieu and Pete Aguilar, along with several Democratic campaign committees. He did not provide figures to substantiate his allegations.

Trump also singled out Jessica Tarlov, the Democratic strategist and co-host of Fox News’ “The Five,” with a personal insult while watching the network’s election coverage, a complaint he brought up in previous posts.

“I can’t stand Jessica Tarlov’s voice — DUMB AS A ROCK, but it’s the voice that gets me,” Trump wrote, adding that he would change channels until she was off the air.

Fox News has experienced a ratings decline, although Trump’s explanation for the drop is unsubstantiated. Nielsen data showed the network’s total-day audience fell 27% in October compared with the previous year, according to TheWrap. Fox nevertheless remained the most-watched cable news network.

Fox Corp. CEO Lachlan Murdoch attributed the decline to viewer fatigue during an earnings call Monday.

Trump, however, insisted the network’s coverage of him was responsible.

“They’re way down, not because of me, but because they are AGAINST me!” he wrote. “This happened once before, and Fox almost collapsed. It’s happening again!”

The post “It’s them, not me”: Trump rages at Fox News over election coverage appeared first on Salon.com.

Among all the gruesome details of allegations both old and new of rape and sexual abuse, there’s one four-word phrase in the new congressional report on Jeffrey Epstein that says a lot about why Donald Trump seems especially unhinged these days: “No statute of limitations.” Led by Rep. Jamie Raskin of Maryland, Democrats on the House Judiciary Committee released their findings on the president’s long and close relationship with the deceased sex offender. The report, citing testimony from 11 women, “indicates that Trump abused, assaulted, and even raped numerous women alongside, and in coordination with, the most infamous sex trafficker in history.”

The media response to the allegations was muted, despite compelling new evidence about the extent of Epstein’s sex trafficking ring, suggesting more powerful men were involved than have faced legal repercussions. Perhaps the report was overshadowed by the midterm elections. Or maybe there’s a sense this is “old news” and won’t move the needle. But if Raskin has his way, we’ll all look back to this release as the opening chapter in a season of accountability not just for Trump, but also for various administration figures and MAGA cronies who have enjoyed the legal shield of a Republican congressional majority.

Democrats are expected to win control of the House, and perhaps even the Senate, in the midterm elections. If they do, Raskin and investigators will have a lot more power to investigate not just Trump and the White House, but also various Republican donors, right-wing business interests and other MAGA-aligned power players who have been taking full advantage of the atmosphere of corruption the president has created. The Epstein report is likely just the beginning. As the Washington Post noted on Monday, Democrats “are laying the groundwork for an array of inquiries into President Donald Trump, his family and his administration.” Various business and political leaders are meeting with their lawyers, worried about what Democrats could uncover with this new power. 

“I haven’t seen this much investigative activity in anticipation of a change in control of a house of Congress ever,” Michael Bopp, who runs a congressional investigations division for the law firm Gibson Dunn, told the Post. 

There are plenty of signs that it’s dawning on people around Trump that he will be out of office in two short years and that, as the latest Epstein report indicates, the statute of limitations has not run out on many possible crimes committed under the White House’s protection. A recent Zeteo profile of Stephen Miller showed that the White House deputy chief of staff is worried about going to prison if a Democrat wins the presidency in 2028. Congressional Democrats keep talking about impeaching Pete Hegseth, and the defense secretary is clearly anxious, reportedly making calls and begging Sen. Marsha Blackburn to appoint him to her Senate seat if, as expected, she wins the Tennessee governor’s race this week. Having a Senate seat would not only prevent impeachment; it could make prosecuting him for alleged war crimes much harder as well. 

In October Elissa Slotkin of Michigan set off a massive panic on the right when she suggested that there should be a focus on “signature cases” against “people who enabled” Trump. The Michigan senator wanted a “deterrence message” for anyone considering working for Trump, letting them know that committing crimes or otherwise assisting in illegal or corrupt activity might result in “a ton of problems” for them that aren’t worth the risk of legal liability. Fox News and other outlets tried to spin this as Slotkin threatening the mass arrest of young staffers, but the hysteria belies their real worry: Democrats might be able to compile enough evidence that prison is a real threat for many of the people working for Trump. 

Slotkin’s remarks clearly rattled the White House. Since then, Trump has repeatedly put out word that his underlings should not have to worry about obeying the law because mass pardons are on their way. A few days after Slotkin’s warning, sources inside the White House told the Washington Sun that administration lawyers are looking at “blanket pardons for all employees involved in particular policy areas, such as deportations, war or trade.” 

Still, the White House is facing serious staffing issues. A September report from the Partnership for Public Service found that people Trump hires quickly leave. Not only have there been a record number of resignations, nearly half of the quitters worked less than a year for Trump. 

---

Want more Amanda Marcotte on politics?  Sign up for her free newsletter, Standing Room Only, now also on YouTube or wherever you get your podcasts.

---

On Monday, Trump himself also told the New York Post that widespread pardons are on the table, not just for his staff, but for allies like Tesla CEO Elon Musk. Musk has good reason to be worried. His brief tenure running DOGE has raised a whole host of questions about what laws were broken by him or by staff carrying out his orders. He’s also under suspicion of messing with Ukraine’s Starlink access, crippling its defenses against the invading Russian military. This may explain why Musk spent nearly half a billion dollars — more than any single donor in history — trying to tilt the elections in the GOP’s favor. 

Trump and his family members should also be sweating. Trump has often interpreted the Supreme Court’s grant of presidential immunity as all-encompassing, but as Raskin told the New Yorker, he doesn’t see it that way at all. He outlined how the president has made billions in office, roughly $1 million a hour, and that there’s a great deal to learn about where that money is coming from. The Supreme Court’s decision technically only covers crimes committed during the commission of official presidential duties. By definition, Trump’s external money-making enterprises aren’t that. His children are deeply involved in the family business as well. And as the Epstein report made sure to note, some of the crimes Trump and his associates have been accused of committing with his old friend Epstein carry no statute of limitations.

It’s tempting to wave all this off as inconsequential, because Trump and his cronies were able to escape severe ramifications the last time around. But to dismiss this talk would be a mistake, in no small part because Democrats need their feet held to the fire. The corruption this time around is far worse than it was in Trump’s first term, more flagrant as the air of lawlessness led to a level of carelessness that creates more prosecutable evidence. The next Democrat in office may not be like Joe Biden, who shied away from aggressive prosecution of Trump and his allies. Some of the politicians whose names are being bandied around — like Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York or Sen. Jon Ossoff of Georgia — have been highly focused weeding out MAGA corruption. 

Then there’s the matter of political will. Before now, it was hard to drum up sufficient political support for accountability because voters simply didn’t care enough about corruption. But as the New York Times reported last week, the issue is a rising source concern for voters. Democrats, for one thing, are doing a better job of linking Trump’s self-dealing to the economic problems of ordinary people. For another, the Epstein scandal has broken into national consciousness, and even Republicans are struggling to sufficiently explain why Trump, despite signing a bill to release all Justice Department files related to the case, is refusing to do so.

With these winds at their back, Democrats have a much better chance of being able to conduct thorough investigations — and pursue criminal consequences for those found to have broken the law. 

The post MAGA panics as post-midterm investigation season looms appeared first on Salon.com.

Across the country, voters are making their way to the polls in the climax of a vitriolic midterm election cycle set against the backdrop of an electorate souring on Donald Trump and Republicans. Inflation is up, consumer confidence is down, gas and diesel prices are through the roof, largely due to the president’s war of choice in Iran. The cruelty of his MAGA agenda has roiled the country and left a bad taste even in the mouths of some of his erstwhile supporters. 

Each election is billed as being consequential; this one lives up to the hype. As we await the results, it’s worth taking note of several questions:

How big will the blue wave be?

A tsunami, a trickle — or something in the middle? All are possible, but signs are pointing to significant Democratic gains, likely up to 25 seats in the House, as well as a Senate majority. Dr. Abdul El-Sayed looks increasingly likely to win in Michigan, and James Talarico has Democratic hopes up in Texas. Senate races in Maine, Kansas, Iowa and Alaska are in play, and it’s worth keeping an eye on South Carolina, Mississippi and Louisiana as well.

One sign will come at 6 p.m. when polls close in Kentucky’s 6th Congressional District, where Democrat Zach Dembo is facing off against Republican Ralph Alvarado. Once a Democratic stronghold, the seat went Republican in 2012 and, despite a close call in 2018, has remained in GOP hands since. Although the district has been gerrymandered to favor Republicans, the energy on the ground is with Dembo. If he posts and maintains a healthy lead, look for significant Democratic gains to unfold throughout the night.

What effect did redistricting have on the GOP’s chances?

The midterms will be the first test of the GOP’s redistricting strategy, which saw the party redraw congressional districts in Florida, Texas and other states, partly in response to the gains Trump made with Black and Latino voters in 2024. But polls show those margins have been largely erased as the electorate has turned on the president after nearly two tumultuous years in office, while Democratic legislatures in California and Virginia have imposed their own gerrymanders. According to a Politico poll, the GOP increasingly sees the coalition that returned Trump to office as “crumbling,” and may have gained little or nothing from all this adventurous map-drawing.

Will progressives be bolstered or chastened?

The size of the blue wave could well come to be seen as a measure of progressives’ influence and power within the Democratic Party. Losses — or even narrow wins — by progressive candidates could be used as more evidence by the party’s establishment wing of the need to tack toward the middle ahead of the 2028 presidential election. Larger wins — and victories in unexpected places, such as Michigan’s 7th Congressional District where William Lawrence, co-founder of the Sunrise Movement, stands a real chance of unseating incumbent Republican Tom Barrett — would provide rocket fuel to the movement. 

Progressive groups are already on the offensive, getting a head start on spinning tonight’s election results, particularly in anticipation of a narrow El-Sayed win in Michigan. “Expect to hear narrow victories cited as evidence of weak electability,” a Progressive Change Campaign Committee memo obtained by Politico reads. “But a candidate’s first winning margin is not their electoral ceiling.”

Will the Haley Stevens drama matter in Michigan?

Haley Stevens, the Democratic congresswoman who narrowly lost to El-Sayed in Michigan’s Senate primary, has brought the drama in the race’s closing days. As late as Saturday night, she pledged to colleagues and friends that she was backing El-Sayed, only to turn up hours later at a church service with his Republican opponent Mike Rogers, and endorse the former congressman in a video. The cold-dish move has virtually drowned out El-Sayed’s closing message, with Stevens being formally kicked out of the Michigan Democratic Party.

---

Want more sharp takes on politics? Sign up for our free newsletter, Standing Room Only, written by Amanda Marcotte, now also a weekly show on YouTube or wherever you get your podcasts.

---

The question now is if any of it will matter, especially in light of a New York Times/Siena poll taken before Stevens’ move that showed El-Sayed leading Rogers by 11 points. Michigan Republicans seem to think it won’t, telling Politico they wish the congresswoman had crossed the aisle earlier. The nonpartisan Cook Political Report agrees, moving the race in their ratings to “Leans Democratic,” a shift that was already in the works before Stevens detonated her bomb. 

Still, the results in the state’s Democratic primary were far narrower than the polls showed, with El-Sayed besting Stevens by only 1%, or 14,893 votes. 

Will Elon Musk get his money’s worth?

The New York Times reported yesterday that the world’s first trillionaire has dropped a staggering $474 million this election cycle, an historic first. The amount has been spread out across a variety of groups, PACs and funds, but it doesn’t include the “dark-money donations” the Times reports he has also made. Most of the $168 million he contributed to the Senate Leadership Fund has served to shore up Ken Paxton, the GOP nominee for Senate in Texas, who is locked in a tight race with Talarico.

Musk has a lot riding on Tuesday’s results. Beyond the simple math of whether he got enough bang for his buck, there is also the issue of what will surely face him in the event of a Democratic congressional majority: investigations. If the blue wave materializes, Musk can expect congressional inquiries of his activities, including his reported interventions in Russia’s war against Ukraine and his leadership of DOGE during the early months of Trump’s second administration. 

Where will the surprises be?

Each election brings surprises. Think not one but both of Georgia’s Senate seats going to Democrats in 2020, or Republicans making big gains in New York two years later. 

This is the year we could hear the echo of Georgia’s 2020 election results in another Southern state. Despite boasting large Black populations, Senate seats in South Carolina, Mississippi and Louisiana have long been out of reach for Democrats. But there is now a path to victory for the party’s candidates in each of those states.

In South Carolina, the GOP incumbent Darline Graham, who was appointed to the seat at Donald Trump’s command following the death of her brother, Sen. Lindsey Graham, has proven to be a lackluster candidate, alarming even some Republicans with her performance in debates and on the stump. Democrat Annie Andrews has run a more nimble campaign, and between Graham’s performance and the national state of affairs, she appears to have narrowed the gap.

Mississippi’s incumbent GOP Sen. Cindy Hyde-Smith has also run a lazy campaign, expecting to coast to victory. But the national political environment under Trump, coupled with campaign gaffes, large Black turnout in the aftermath of the Supreme Court’s decision to gut the Voting Rights Act and clever campaigning by Scott Colom, her Democratic opponent, have helped to put the race in play. 

Louisiana is also a wild card. The state, which is one-third African American, has also seen a surge in early voting among Black residents, and according to a recent poll, the race between Republican Julia Letlow and Democrat Jamie Davis, who is Black, is tied.

Polls are not predictive. The political history of these states continues to favor Republicans, but any of them could deliver one of 2026’s electoral surprises. If that happens, it will signal that the blue wave has become a blue tsunami.

The post Will the midterms live up to the hype? 6 key stories we’re watching appeared first on Salon.com.

Loss aversion is a phenomenon in psychology and behavioral economics. Defined simply, it means that the pain experienced from a loss is felt twice as much as winning. In politics, that intensity manifests itself in motivation. If you take something away from people, they are going to feel it more acutely than promising them something, and the theft produces a backlash. 

That’s what appears to be happening right now with Black voters. Across the country, they have been lining up to vote early, presumably against Donald Trump and the Republican Party’s MAGA agenda, in astonishing numbers, particularly in the South. That this comes only six months after the Supreme Court gutted the Voting Rights Act in Louisiana v. Callais should not come as a surprise.

In the Trump era, Republicans have become experienced at taking rights away from the American people. For women, it was the roll back of their constitutional rights when the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade in 2022, sparking a backlash in that year’s midterm elections. Since Trump returned to office in January 2025, immigrants have come under assault from a xenophobic administration intent on carrying out mass deportations via masked, secret police rampaging through neighborhoods. The LGBTQ+ community, and trans people in particular, have seen their rights stripped away. 

These policies have come as a shock to some Americans who never thought Trump would go there, and they have also opened the eyes of others to the cruelty at the heart of MAGA, overseen by the highest court of the land. But to many Black Americans, the GOP’s agenda and behavior will not have come as a surprise. After all, it’s been at the core of their history going back to before the country’s founding.

Black Americans know what it means to have their civil rights taken away from them. They understand fully the fear of being targeted by brutal, marauding gangs of armed men. In the decade following the Civil War and the passage of the 14th and 15th Amendments, Black people began to participate fully in civil society. Mississippi elected two Black U.S. senators and a lieutenant governor, and former slaves and their offspring enjoyed freedom of speech, movement and opportunity. But the white members of Southern society would not let that stand, and as soon as the federal government withdrew its troops, they stepped in with legal and social barriers to deny Black Americans their rights, this time backed by vigilante and state violence that became Jim and Jane Crow. 

Almost a century had passed by the time Lyndon Johnson signed the Civil Rights Act in 1964 and the Voting Rights Act in 1965, a period characterized by subjugation and violence by the white majority. But Black America kept fighting, against all odds, until they won. 

This year, we have seen yet another attempt by reactionary politicians and judges to turn back the clock. After the Callais decision, several Southern states reverted immediately to form and radically redrew their congressional districts to favor the white majority, making it much more difficult for voters to elect a Black federal and state representatives.

They may come to regret that decision. This isn’t 1955 (or 1855) anymore, as much as Donald Trump would like to make it so, and the Black community is once again mobilizing. According to experts, early voting data is showing something unexpected: The vote is being driven by young voters rather than just those who went through the earlier battles. It’s muscle memory for the Black community.

After 2024, when Trump won a surprising 15% of the Black vote — nearly doubling his share of 8% in the 2020 election — Republicans thought they were defying history to make great inroads within the community. Then, incredibly, the administration began attacking Black America. The result is what some politicos are calling a “Blacklash,” and it could very well be decisive in some places where nobody expected the Democrats to do well. And even if it doesn’t result in flipping seats, it’s a shot across the bow. 

---

Want more sharp takes on politics? Sign up for our free newsletter, Standing Room Only, written by Amanda Marcotte, now also a weekly show on YouTube or wherever you get your podcasts.

---

In Mississippi, prosecutor and former judge Scott Colom, who is Black, is running an excellent race against Sen. Cindy Hyde-Smith, the GOP incumbent. Colom has made some very clever advertisements which have garnered a lot of national attention, but Republicans and Democrats alike had largely ignored the race until just a couple of months ago. Polling has tightened, and the GOP has dispatched an influx of luminaries, including Trump himself. For the first time in years, Democrats from Bill Clinton to Kamala Harris, along with a long line of senators, have descended on the state to support Colom. Former President Barack Obama even cut an ad for him. Mississippi has the largest population of Black voters of any state in the country. If Colum gets a big Black turnout with just enough disaffected whites, he could win. 

Louisiana, after giving birth to the case that saw the Supreme Court’s conservative majority gut the Voting Rights Act, has been winnowed down to one majority Black district in a state that is one-third African-American. But there has been a surge in Black participation akin to what is seen in presidential years, which could prove decisive in a race for Louisiana’s open Senate seat that has been a sleeper until the last couple of weeks. According to a recent poll, Republican Julia Letlow and Democrat Jamie Davis are tied. Among voters who have already cast their ballot, Davis — who is Black — holds a six-point advantage, and 34% of early votes have been cast by Black Louisianans.

Then there’s South Carolina, which has seen Trump make three desperate appearances to shore up Darline Graham’s torpid campaign. The endangered incumbent, foisted upon South Carolina Republicans by the president himself following the sudden death of her brother, Sen. Lindsey Graham, is not getting the job done. As numbers cruncher Nate Silver pointed out, a recent New York Times poll showing the race essentially tied is not an outlier; she is in deep trouble. As of late October, the Times reports, “Black voters accounted for around 28 percent of early votes, while making up around 20 percent of the overall electorate in recent cycles. The trend is not unlike what we’re seeing in Georgia and North Carolina thus far.” If that holds true through Election Day, we could see the biggest upset of the whole campaign, largely due to Black South Carolinians saying “Enough is enough.”

In a few short hours, all the ads, mailers, signs and rallies will mercifully come to an end. I am cautiously optimistic, but like many, I’ll never celebrate prematurely again. There is good reason, though, to feel more positive than we have in a long time. Trump and his acolytes have overreached. Opting for the big tech credo of “move fast and break things,” they vastly overestimated their abilities — and the American people’s tolerance. 

They have also aroused a group of Americans who know what it is to lose their rights and privileges. With all that history and so many battles, Black Americans have shown what it takes to never give up.

The post Black voters could sway the midterms in surprising places appeared first on Salon.com.

Benjamin Netanyahu didn’t win last week’s election in Israel. But he didn’t exactly lose it either. The real loser may have been Israel’s fragile democracy, already corrupted from within, perhaps past the point of no return, by Netanyahu’s decades-long death-grip on power.

On the eve of a momentous election in the United States, the parallels are both inexact and unavoidable. Israelis must now decide what kind of country they will have, or at least what kind they aspire to have. They must decide whose votes actually count, and whether some citizens are more equal than others. 

Those same questions also confront Americans, both in this week’s midterm elections and, in a more general sense, on the larger political and historical stage. No doubt it is tempting for liberals and progressives to express outrage at the blatant flaws and contradictions of Israeli democracy. But to invoke the Christian tradition here, it might be better to remove the plank from your own eye before trying to remove the speck from your brother’s. 

On the surface, the electoral arithmetic in Israel appears straightforward. Parties opposed to Netanyahu’s far-right government won 67 of the 120 seats in the Knesset, Israel’s parliament. So a majority coalition of anti-Netanyahu forces is clearly achievable, right? You would think so, except that 19 of those 67 seats were won by Israel’s “Arab parties,” an all-time high, and that startling fact has thrown the entire political system into confusion.

Netanyahu and his allies have spent the last week airing groundless allegations that the election was fraudulent or rigged, a refrain that Americans are likely to hear a great deal in coming days. What the Zionist far right means is that too many Israeli Arabs — meaning the Palestinian population that remained in Israel after the state was created in 1948 — decided to vote this time, an outcome that no one expected, and that none of the parties representing the Jewish majority particularly wanted. 

Now, in a masterstroke of historical or perhaps biblical irony, Israel’s Arab minority — which is not a monolithic group in political or cultural terms, and until now has never been electorally significant — holds the balance of power, and perhaps the nation’s future, in its hands. 

Gadi Eisenkot, the former general who leads the centrist-Zionist opposition to Netanyahu, promised during the campaign not to form a government with Arab support. Over the last several nights, thousands of demonstrators in Tel Aviv and Jerusalem have urged him to do precisely that, since the only realistic alternative is the grim default setting of Israeli politics: another wobbly right-wing government headed by Netanyahu, which means more brutality and destruction in Gaza, more war with Iran and more settler violence in the West Bank. 

As Gideon Levy of the left-leaning Israeli newspaper Haaretz explains it, 

The future of Israel now depends on its Arab citizens and on the attitude of its Jewish citizens toward its Arab ones. Eighty years after the Nakba and the establishment of the Jewish state, Israeli Palestinians may determine its fate. Is there greater historical justice than that?

The election’s unexpected results are “a cause for rejoicing,” Levy writes, in that they have presented Israelis with a clear choice “between a government led by Benjamin Netanyahu and a government that includes the Arab parties.” If the “change bloc” within the Zionist majority cannot accept a coalition with Arab Israelis, he continues, “they will make it clear that they are actually the same as Netanyahu, that they prefer even the devil Netanyahu over repressing their racism. … [E]veryone will know that racism is the supreme value in this country, across the board, above any other value.”

That ferocious language certainly does not represent mainstream Israeli opinion, but it’s fair to say the strong emotion beneath Levy’s words is far more widely felt. I don’t think it’s possible for a non-Jewish observer (such as myself), however well educated or sympathetic, to understand the anguish felt by Jewish people — wherever they live, and whatever their political views — at the enormous distance between what Israel originally represented to the world, or claimed to represent, and what it represents now.

I’m old enough to remember when most American liberals and progressives viewed the state of Israel in overwhelmingly positive terms, as a locus of charismatic or heroic renewal for the people Hitler couldn’t kill, infused with the spirit of European socialism and, not far below the surface, the collective guilt of the Holocaust. I grew up in one of the most left-liberal corners of America, surrounded by educated adults who supported the civil rights movement, opposed the Vietnam War, hated Richard Nixon and loved Israel. Golda Meir and Moshe Dayan were beloved celebrities; the Six-Day War of 1967 and the Yom Kippur War of 1973, as narrated by U.S. media, were straight-up battles between the forces of light and darkness. 

That says more about the moral blindness or willful innocence of American liberalism, I must admit, than it says about Israel. In any event, when I saw Joe Biden’s fateful bear hug with Netanyahu on the tarmac of Ben Gurion Airport in the aftermath of the dreadful Oct. 7 attack, I understood it. I recognized the country Biden was coming from, because I came from there too: It was the Democratic majority of the not-so-distant past, when Israel was embraced as a light to the nations and left-wing radicals who brought up the Palestinian cause were being unreasonable hotheads, if not openly antisemitic and a little bit Nazi. 

What Israel has become during Netanyahu’s long and destructive reign is now clear to most of the world, and most of all to the many Jewish or Israeli critics who have been speaking difficult truths for many years, often at enormous personal cost. I am disinclined, however, to judge too harshly those who cling to the vision of Israel as an exceptional nation — one that has stumbled, perhaps, but may yet regain its true path. 

---

Want more sharp takes on politics?
Sign up for our free newsletter, Standing Room Only by Amanda Marcotte, also a weekly show on YouTube or wherever you get your podcasts.

---

Like I said earlier, we should mind the plank in our own eye first. Isn’t that the same vision that many Americans still cling to? That somehow, on the other side of this dreadful phase of our history — yes, a full decade of Donald Trump, but I’m afraid the damage goes back a lot further than that — the “indispensable nation” variously articulated by Abraham Lincoln, John F. Kennedy and Barack Obama is still there, still retrievable, still bending its moral arc toward justice.

Americans and Israelis are conjoined by history, for better or worse, and now see each other as distorted reflections, through a glass darkly, as the King James Bible puts it. We face versions of the same decisions this week, about whose votes count and whether the highfalutin words of our constitution apply to everyone. About whether to see terror and tyranny for what they are, and turn the page.

The post The dark paradox of Israel’s election — and ours appeared first on Salon.com.

With the midterm elections just three days away, “Saturday Night Live” returned from a two-week hiatus Saturday with Donald Trump interrupting a Halloween favorite to deliver an unusual campaign message.

Tom Hanks reprised his role as David S. Pumpkins in the Oct. 31 cold open, accompanied by skeleton dancers including former cast member Bobby Moynihan. But the haunted amusement park ride was interrupted by James Austin Johnson’s Trump, who commandeered the sketch to discuss the approaching elections.

“We both appeared in 2016,” Trump’s character said of Pumpkins. “We’re both very loud, very orange, and very, frankly, annoying.”

Johnson’s Trump mocked Republican polling numbers, compared Texas’ political landscape to his discolored hand and reluctantly urged viewers to support Republican Ken Paxton over Democrat James Talarico, or rather “Tala-FREAK-o” in Trump’s universe.

The sketch also revisited Trump’s recent remarks about men’s backsides, with Hanks becoming an unlikely recipient of the president’s fictional admiration.

After a quick Nicki Minaj impersonation of her recent hype of MAGA and love of Trump, a parody of former White House press secretary Katie Zacharia rightfully botched the show’s signature opening line.

Despite Tuesday’s approaching elections, the episode largely limited its political satire to the cold open and a handful of “Weekend Update” jokes. Colin Jost opened the segment with a montage of Trump’s remarks about Ohio Sen. Jon Husted‘s backside, extending the posterior joke.

---

Start your day with essential news from Salon.
Sign up for our free morning newsletter, Crash Course.

---

Elsewhere, the Halloween broadcast leaned heavily on nostalgia and celebrity appearances.

Moynihan returned as his recurring character “Drunk Uncle” during Weekend Update, joined by Milwaukee Brewers players Christian Yelich and Brice Turang and manager Pat Murphy, who brought the World Series trophy.

In one of the evening’s more pointed moments, host Inde Navarrette took aim at previous host Shane Gillis, whose remarks a few weeks ago describing women at the gym as dressing like “whores” drew widespread criticism. Discussing the fitness demands of her upcoming Marvel role, Navarrette turned his words back on him: “Every morning, I put on my ‘little whore outfit,’ and I hit the gym.” The audience responded with cheers and applause.

Gracie Abrams was the musical guest.

The post Trump hijacks SNL and David S. Pumpkins ahead of midterms appeared first on Salon.com.

Ahead of Tuesday’s midterms, Democrats are biting their nails and enduring sleepless nights, wondering whether they will be forced to endure yet another election that has so often characterized the Trump era: close races that seem inevitably to go to the Republicans. All the fundamentals and polls indicate a possible blowout and a big one, but after watching Americans shockingly elect Donald Trump the first time, live through his Big Lie and witness his historic comeback only two years ago, no one can feel confident that this era of chaos, corruption and cruelty might finally be beginning its descent into the dustbin of history. We thought we were here before, and it didn’t end well.

There are reasons to be hopeful, though, even if you assume that the polls are underestimating Republican enthusiasm for their leaders once again. While there have been misses in the polling over this past decade, it hasn’t manifested in midterms as it has in the races with Trump on the ballot. In those years, the polling was pretty much on the money. Democrats have done very well in all the off-year and special elections this cycle, and although that’s no guarantee, it has to be considered a good sign. 

The big difference this time is that Trump’s approval rating is hovering close to 30%, a lethal number, and he has presided over a high cost of living and a war of choice with Iran, both things he promised would never happen if he were president. The one election he lost in 2020 was the result of his mismanagement of the only crisis he faced, the Covid-19 pandemic, and this second term has solidified the impression among many voters who were inclined to give him the benefit of the doubt anyway, that he simply doesn’t know what he is doing. 

One sign that should give Democrats some real comfort in these last couple of days is Trump’s performance on the campaign trail. To say the 80-year-old has lost a step is an understatement. Sure, he barnstormed through all the battleground states and even attempted to shore up enthusiasm in places that should not need his presence to get out the vote. But his patented “weave” is unraveling at every stop. 

Trump has taken to doubling down on the weirdness, going on about men’s bodies to a truly bizarre degree, being under the impression that because his trained rally goers will ritualistically cheer anything he says, this is a winning message. His recent comments warning people to stay away from Mar-a-Lago, his private Florida club, because they would be unable to afford the hamburgers could not be more in keeping with his apparent pursuit of Marie Antoinette’s legacy. 

But most embarrassing for the president is that he is no longer the singular star of the Trump show. As POLITICO reported, after years of ragging on Democrats for bringing celebrities on the campaign trail and bragging that he didn’t need any to help him fill up stadiums, the president has invited some to join him at campaign rallies — although one could scarcely call them A-listers. The cast leans heavily on older athletes, from retired NFL players to race car drivers, although Trump did manage to talk at least one genuine country music star, Jason Aldean, to join him in a rally held just a few miles from his home. Rapper Nicki Minaj has become a staple on the trail, and the president’s old friend Mike Tyson is often with him. Trump simply can’t carry the show by himself anymore. 

This is the most expensive campaign in history, with Elon Musk alone spending more than $400 million in money he dug out of his couch cushions, but the total spending on both sides has reached upwards of $16 billion, the vast majority of it to benefit the Republicans. The fact is that it doesn’t appear to have done them much good. In fact, their spending is almost all coming from large donors like Musk, while their small donor base has shrunk considerably. That’s usually a sign of a lack of enthusiasm, and it doesn’t bode well for Tuesday’s results. 

---

Want more sharp takes on politics? Sign up for our free newsletter, Standing Room Only, written by Amanda Marcotte, now also a weekly show on YouTube or wherever you get your podcasts.

---

The election’s stakes are profound. America crossed the Rubicon in 2024 when it invited Trump back into power after he tried to overturn the election, was convicted of fraud, and was revealed to have possessed and leaked classified information after he was out of office. The media and the nation’s elites interpreted that victory as a sign that Trump was some sort of magical superhero, and that it was in all their interests to join with him and reap the rewards. The result has been nothing short of catastrophic, revealing gaping holes in our constitutional order, weaknesses in our democratic system and a void in our society where moral authority used to be. America has never been perfect, and it always falls short of its professed ideals, but this political era has stripped away the belief that we have any at all. 

The corruption on display, coupled with a lack of concern for the lives of ordinary people, is breathtaking. And while it remains shocking that tens of millions of Americans still support this administration, it seems that a majority may have finally had the veil lifted from their eyes, allowing them to see the incompetence, grift and megalomania for what it is.

It’s hard to see how a nation founded on the ideas espoused in the Declaration of Independence can survive without even the pretense of ethics or universal values. At the moment, the American creed is simply “to the victor go the spoils,” by which Trump is not just imperiously referring to the foreign countries he seeks to colonize. He’s talking about America itself.

There can be no more questions about what the Republican Party is capable of, and as weak as he appears on the campaign trail, Trump is clearly frustrated and angry. Reporting suggests that he plans to double down on all of it the minute the election is over. If the American people somehow fail to forcefully repudiate Trump and the oligarchs who use and manipulate him, it’s unlikely we’ll get another chance.

The post The Trump Show is on the verge of cancellation appeared first on Salon.com.

President Donald Trump called Norway a “shithouse country” after failing to win the Nobel Peace Prize. Norway’s tourism officials decided to take that as a compliment.

Visit Norway, the Scandinavian country’s tourism agency, responded to Trump’s insult with a cheeky campaign celebrating its spectacular public restrooms, declaring that Norway makes “shithouses great again.”

The campaign features some of the country’s most architecturally impressive toilets, many situated along scenic routes overlooking fjords, mountains and waterfalls. Some have even won international design awards.

Trump delivered the insult last Sunday during a campaign rally in Port Huron, Michigan, while complaining about the Nobel Peace Prize, which was awarded earlier this month to international jurist Navi Pillay.

“Norway has become a shithouse country, actually,” Trump told supporters. He also suggested he no longer wanted Norwegian immigrants coming to the United States because he had not received the prize.

The Nobel Peace Prize is awarded by an independent Norwegian committee, not the country’s government.

Rather than engage in a diplomatic spat, Visit Norway embraced the president’s characterization, promoting restrooms that include the award-winning Stegastein viewpoint toilet overlooking Aurlandsfjord and the triangular Golden Toilet on Senja Island.

The agency repurposed material originally developed for World Toilet Day, which falls on Nov. 19.

The response has been an unexpected tourism success.

According to travel industry publication Skift, Visit Norway’s toilet webpage attracted more than 80,000 views from over 170 countries in five days, with traffic surging to more than 540 times the previous week’s level. Roughly a quarter of visitors were American.

The tourism agency spent less than $10,000 promoting the campaign, with approximately 90% of its traffic arriving organically. A Times Square advertisement was also planned for this weekend.

---

Start your day with essential news from Salon.
Sign up for our free morning newsletter, Crash Course.

---

The campaign marks a reversal from Trump’s first presidency, when he disparaged Haiti and African nations as “shithole countries” while expressing a preference for immigrants from Norway.

Now, Norway is making the most of its presidential publicity, inviting visitors to discover some of the world’s most scenic places to answer nature’s call.

The post Norway makes toilets great again appeared first on Salon.com.

Republicans are shaking in their boots about the upcoming midterm elections, according to numerous reports. In a Wednesday episode of his podcast, Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, said his home state “is excruciatingly close,” adding that “we could lose Texas. Let me repeat that: We could lose Texas. And by the way, not just the Senate race. We could lose every single statewide race in Texas. That’s how close these numbers are.”

According to Politico, House Republicans aren’t quietly discussing whether or not they’ll lose their majority, but are counting how many seats. “It could be quite a brutal evening,” a senior Republican told the outlet. The mood at the White House is “grim,” the New York Times reported as advisers close to the White House anticipate at least losing the House, if not the Senate.

That’s seemingly why the world’s richest man, Elon Musk, has dumped nearly half $1 billion into the race, mostly into his own America PAC. The PAC’s spending has focused overwhelmingly in Texas with approximately $48 million, followed by Michigan and Ohio around $9 million and Iowa at $4 million. According to CNN, Musk’s spending streak “makes him the single, largest disclosed donor in modern American politics and one of the Republican Party’s largest-ever benefactors.”

But some people are already looking beyond next Tuesday to see how President Donald Trump may react, and not just by challenging the results, which is more than expected and arguably already being attempted. But the president’s legal options are limited, so even if he does try to seize voting machines, declares a national emergency, or otherwise wedges the federal government into the electoral process, there’s a chance it could fail. Jonathan Diaz, director of voting advocacy and partnerships at the Campaign Legal Center, told Forbes that the president can “certainly try” to intervene, but there “just isn’t a lot that he can actually do.”

---

Start your day with essential news from Salon.
Sign up for our free morning newsletter, Crash Course.

---

Still, most analysts anticipate that the president will turn the dial up on his dual wars, the trade wars with America’s partners and the Iran war Trump started alongside Israel in late February 2026. The Pentagon is slowly building up its military presence in the Middle East, including drawing up plans to strike Iran’s nuclear facilities, energy infrastructure and missile and drone stockpile.

“It might be difficult for Democrats in Congress to restrain Trump from a course of action which he is strongly committed to, but they can still raise the political costs associated with plowing ahead,” Andrew Gawthorpe, a senior research fellow in the Foreign Police Centre, told The Independent. “Facing a hostile Congress, Trump might become even more willing to simply ignore domestic opposition and plow ahead with controversial and unpopular policies, as he did by attacking Iran or threatening to annex Greenland.”

The post As midterms loom, anxiety rises about what Trump does next appeared first on Salon.com.

Happy Halloween — and welcome back to the future.

My neighbor showed me his kids’ Halloween costumes today; a vampire, a zombie and a clown. “They’re going as Stephen Miller, Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and Pete Hegseth,” he told me.

Laugh or cry, we’ll be here all week. Try the veal.

I wonder what a Todd Blanche outfit looks like? The image of Frankenstein’s monster, for some reason, sticks in my mind.

It’s time to sit back, relax and enjoy the elections — a midterm extravaganza featuring two flailing political parties jockeying for supremacy in a nation full of educated young adults working as cabbies and delivery drivers who aspire to be “influencers” while their parents wonder how in the name of God they’ll be able to afford retirement. 

To be able to handle that good news, maybe you can channel your inner Hunter S. Thompson, without resorting to dropping a couple of hits of acid or snorting lines of cocaine in Studio 54 while Donald Trump ogles the dancers in tight pants, female and male alike.

Then again, you might need a tall glass of Wild Turkey 101 on ice (Thompson’s favorite) when you hear Trump say that Democratic U.S. Senate candidate Mary Peltola should be prosecuted because there are two Dan Sullivans running for office in Alaska, or declares that the country “would be gone” if he hadn’t won the presidency two years ago. 

Everything old is new again. At any rate, we’ve seen this carnival roadshow before, though it seems a bit different this time. Trump has less energy as he flails about dancing to the Village People. He plays before smaller crowds every week. He seems to be on stage only to get laughs. “Am I right?” he whispered hoarsely with a big grin last Saturday night in Georgia, after mocking Democrats one more time. He apologized for his raspy voice and kept going with the low-energy insult comedy. His small crowd chortled and ate it up.

In the last week on the campaign trail, Trump has appeared at a livestock arena, a school gymnasium, a hockey rink and, on Thursday in Rock Hill, South Carolina, at a venue that holds just 1,200 people. He doesn’t seem to care. He’s on autopilot. The war in Iran? He’s got nothing. The war in Ukraine? Nothing. Corruption, immigration, AI (sorry, never “SI”), the economy and any other real-world issue? He’s either got nothing, or it’s all nonsense we’ve heard before: The Democrats, Joe and Kamala, and marauding bands of violent dark-skinned immigrants and communists are to blame. As for the economy, he tells us he’s doing great and making billions. We should all be happy. 

Forget it. He’s done with campaigning, quite literally. The White House confirmed Thursday that two campaign stops planned for Kansas and Iowa this weekend have been canceled. What happens next is what we need to watch. It must be the season of the witch. Or as Thompson himself told us, “When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro.”

Thompson was covering Richard Nixon when he penned that epigram, but it is equally applicable to covering the surreal spectacle of vampires, zombies, ghouls and degenerates awkwardly shuffling across the MAGA landscape. It certainly should be a factor in understanding what Trump does on Nov. 4 and afterward. Ask anyone, Republican or Democrat, and they’ll all say the same thing: Whatever happens is likely to be simultaneously annoying and frightening. 

Trump has already filed suit against Alaska’s election results, even though the election has yet to occur. In Missouri, the GOP lost three times trying to gerrymander districts in a case that went to the Supreme Court, all in hopes of gaining one seat in the House. That move may have backfired big time. Not only did Republicans fail to gain a guaranteed seat, but in Missouri’s Second District Democrat Fred Wellman is poised to pull off a miracle against Republican incumbent Rep. Ann Wagner (albeit with little support from party leaders in D.C.). Trump appears ready to file suit there as well. Some insiders say he might try to sue in every state where an incumbent Republican loses. Check your favorite gambling app for the over/under on that.

At the same time, there’s a constant susurrus from Trump about “voter fraud” that surfaces wherever his candidates look to be failing. There are rumors of National Guard and ICE officers roaming the countryside on Election Day hunting and bagging anyone with a good tan who speaks something other than English. Long voting lines and randomly closed precincts are a given. A general feeling of chaos among the electorate, whipped into a frenzy by the president himself, is expected. There’s still stray talk about invoking the Insurrection Act and declaring martial law. What’s the over/under on that move? 

I’m actually tired of the talk. We all know Trump will not go gentle into that good night. If the GOP loses control of Congress, his administration will likely see more people convicted and jailed than Nixon’s during the Watergate weirdness that made Thompson “turn pro.”

On the other side of the aisle, the aging Democratic leadership looks as lost and confused as Trump. Some in the party want to remain silent, cross their fingers and hope for the best, fearful of Democratic infighting and hopeful that Trump is really on his last legs. Others want to defeat Trump then turn on the “establishment” Democrats.

I don’t want to listen to this from either side. After covering Trump for 10 years, he reminds me of my children during their pre-pubescence, always cocksure, arrogant and wrong. My children grew up to be adults. Trump never has. The same can be said for some of the more argumentative Democrats.

The Democrats, as is often the case, lack focus and leadership at the national level. The headless horsemen run amok, trying to scream “The Trumps are coming!” while fighting with each other, even before they hold any power. It does not exactly inspire confidence. Younger voters find each party equally repellent, and for good reason. If Democrats win a majority in the House, as nearly everyone expects, and the Senate, as a growing number of Democrats have the audacity to hope, how long will it be before they slice each other’s throats over their marginal political differences while what remains of the GOP looks on with glee? 

Still, the Republican Party at this point looks like a horde of zombies led by Art the Clown. To extend the horror-movie metaphors even further, Trump is such a crude cartoon character that if he isn’t the Terrifier then maybe he’s Pinhead from “Hellraiser.” 

But our president can still generate media attention, even as his crowds continue to diminish. He may soon be reduced to appearing before middle school PTA meetings across the South, but he’ll still be on TV. As one of the younger members of the White House Correspondents’ Association recently said, in all earnestness, “We’ll miss him when he’s gone.” Some reporters even find his insults of the press amusing. I don’t agree, but I admit that my experience is limited to the Ronald Reagan presidency — and every one since then. 

Some of us were here before Trump, and will still be here when he’s gone. For lazy reporters, or those who’ve never covered another president, Trump makes the job easy. He doesn’t hold real news conferences. He has no policies. We don’t have directives to read or position papers to study. There are no long meetings with press secretaries. Come to think of it, there’s no press secretary. Covering Trump is easier than covering a traffic accident, and twice as gory. That’s how he governs. 

It’s obvious to even the most casual political observer that Trump’s campaign tactics are the signs of a desperate man with dwindling influence. After he lost control of Congress in the 2018 midterms, he purged his staff and yanked press passes from reporters. Some senior officials quit. Expect a repeat of all that, beginning next week. Only now most of my colleagues in the press pool will wag their tails and bark a bit before waiting for a presidential treat.

Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, unless he gets appointed as a senator from Tennessee, is most assuredly a goner. Even the Republicans in Congress dislike him, and Trump, who never accepts responsibility for anything, still needs a scapegoat for the war in Iran — the one he has claimed is over on more than a dozen occasions. 

While Speaker of the House Mike Johnson says he’ll do his job and seat every Democrat who wins in the midterms, Trump is eagerly searching for ways to stop that from happening. Some believe he’ll try to stage another insurrection, while others believe he’ll let government funding run out and spend the rest of his presidency presiding over a government shutdown, in effect dissolving Congress.

Whatever he does won’t work. His recent public appearances add up to a tell on how badly he will fail. High school basketball teams in Kentucky are filling gymnasiums better than this president.

White House pool reports from Trump’s campaign stops no longer mention the venue capacity or attendance, but the empty seats in those modest arenas and his listless rhetoric, combined with ever-louder outbursts from protesters, are evidence enough that this guy isn’t what he once was.

Whether he’s complimenting another man’s (or woman’s) behind, berating reporters or making deals with Russia while screwing over former allies, his raging incompetence is still center stage at these increasingly feeble campaign events. We still can’t look away. 

I recently watched a documentary about the fall of the Bronze Age civilizations. It was an era of climate change, supply chain collapse, earthquakes, famine, disease, migration, drought and armed incursions and invasions. Stop me if you’ve heard any of that before.

What worries one of the archaeologists in the documentary and causes him to lose sleep is how similar our world is to that one.

We are ripe for catastrophe, and poor leadership exacerbates the problems we currently face. “How resilient will we be? How will we get back up?” the documentary asks. Those are excellent questions to ask now.

After the midterm elections are settled, we may learn some answers. If Hunter S. Thompson was right, maybe there’s some hope. After all, I’ve never seen politics any weirder than this. 

---

Want more sharp takes on politics?
Sign up for our free newsletter, Standing Room Only by Amanda Marcotte, also a weekly show on YouTube or wherever you get your podcasts.

---

Trump looks done, in ways I’ve never seen him look done before. I’ve seen him stumble, fall and constantly deflect reality. He’s always managed to survive those stumbles. Not now. The cancellations, his delusional ramblings, his anger and increasing desperation, the smaller crowds, the raspy voice combined with the collective shoulder-shrug I see from even his closest allies — countered by the quiet optimism of the Democrats and their muted sniping at each other — have created a stew of weirdness that Thompson might find eclipses the waning days of the Nixon administration.

All this leaves us pondering two questions: How far will Trump go to challenge the outcome of the midterms, and what will the Democrats do with power if they get it? 

Trump’s waning influence may ultimately be the deciding factor in both questions.

If I’m wrong, I’ll admit it. But if the Democrats win both houses of Congress, I don’t think Trump will do much of anything after the midterms. He will make lots of threats. But he has to deal with the zombies in his administration and all the fires they have started: wars, battles with immigrants, court cases, affordability issues, the economy, personal corruption, racism, misogyny, the destruction of healthcare and education and the existential problems brought about by ignoring climate change. That’s too much for almost any leader, and way above his level. For the next two years, we’re likely to see Trump in the White House on Tuesdays and Wednesdays and in Bedminster or Mar-a-Lago the rest of the week, somewhere on the back nine. 

Meanwhile, we teeter on the brink, and any one of those issues I just mentioned could push us over the edge. During the Bronze Age, a natural climate disaster led to the decline of the culture. Today we can do that ourselves. 

The week ahead will be challenging week, no matter what happens. I need to channel my inner Morgan Freeman, from the film “Se7en”: “Ernest Hemingway once wrote, ‘The world is a fine place and worth fighting for.’ I agree with the second part.”

The post After Trump’s looming midterm loss, how ugly will it get? appeared first on Salon.com.

Jon Husted has a problem: People can’t seem to remember who he is. The former lieutenant governor of Ohio was appointed to be the state’s junior U.S. senator in 2025, after JD Vance became vice president. But Husted hasn’t much of an impression on the Buckeye State’s residents. In an August poll conducted by Emerson College, nearly four in 10 Ohio voters answered “unsure/never heard of” when asked their opinion of the Republican incumbent. Only 14% answered the same regarding his Democratic opponent, former Sen. Sherrod Brown. In fact, one in four voters in a Bowling Green State University poll even mistakenly identified Brown, a popular veteran of Ohio politics, as the incumbent. (In fact, Brown lost his seat to Ohio’s other Republican senator, Bernie Moreno, in 2024.)

The Husted campaign has tried to spin his forgettability as an asset, hoping to trick voters into thinking of Brown as a failed incumbent, but it doesn’t seem to be working. Brown is pulling ahead in the most recent polls, riding a larger national turn away from the GOP. So Republicans turned to the one person who knows how to get a headline: Donald Trump.

Bringing the president to campaign in Ohio has certainly helped to boost Husted’s name recognition, but at a painful cost. Now Husted has become the single most famous male victim of Trump’s relentless appetite for sexual harassment. 

The president’s public ogling of Husted started at a Youngstown rally on Oct. 12, when Trump delivered a monologue about how he’d “started examining [Husted’s] body” and had seen big hands and shoulders. Then he said the word “ass.” This caused a reaction of shock and laughter reaction in the crowd and also generated a lot of media attention. So Trump, like a narcissistic rat pushing the “applause” button, turned it into a running joke. At nearly every rally now, whether in Ohio or somewhere else, Trump raves about the 59-year-old Husted’s reputedly spectacular and muscular backside.

---

Want more Amanda Marcotte on politics?  Sign up for her free newsletter, Standing Room Only, now also on YouTube or wherever you get your podcasts.

---

Trump is famously a lifelong heterosexual, so many in the media and on the left are confused. They assume that latent homoerotic yearnings are burbling up, perhaps from the disinhibition that can occur among people who take regular tests for dementia, as does our president. But that’s unlikely, and not just because Husted actually possesses the softer derrière typical of a man his age. If genuine same-sex desire was behind Trump’s leering, the overtly homophobic crowds who populate MAGA rallies would be highly uncomfortable.

Instead, as videos show, they scream with the same laughter they produce when Trump goes on a racist tirade, encourages audience members to commit acts of violence or otherwise showcases his affinity for childish bullying, which remains his main and often sole selling point to his base. It’s a large-scale version of the infamous “Access Hollywood” tape, where Trump tried to impress the show’s host, Billy Bush, with braggadocious claims that he can grab women’s genitals and they have to put up with it. 

The MAGA crowd may not favor the term “sexual harassment,” but they get that’s what Trump is doing to Husted. He did the same bit with Nicki Minaj, making the rapper-turned-MAGA shill stand up and show off her backside to the crowd at a Michigan rally.  As feminists like to remind folks, sexual harassment is about demonstrating power, not lust. Husted is far from the only man Trump ever catcalls. As the New York Times notes, Trump loves making a spectacle out of men’s looks, for the approval of hooting MAGA audiences who get a vicarious thrill from watching Trump say inappropriate things to fellow Republicans, who have no choice but to grin and pretend they enjoy it. It’s a continuation of the other ways Trump displays his dominance over Republicans with fancy job titles, such as senators and Cabinet officials, by expecting them to flatter him grotesquely on camera or to wear ill-fitting shoes he has “gifted” them. 

None of this should make us feel any sympathy for Husted or other Republicans, who could at any point grow an actual spine and reject Trump’s abuse. These people grovel for their failing leader in the vain hope that some of his celebrity stardust will rub off on them and boost their political ambitions. Husted is a classic example of the problem now facing Republicans. Like most in his party, he has nothing to offer voters, unless they’re hyper-rich capitalists seeking deregulation or massive tax cuts. He has no discernible charisma of his own, either. So all that’s left is leeching onto Trump and hoping his ability to speak to the lizard-brain impulses of bigots will rally enough voters to drag Husted’s empty pair of pants (and his mediocre ass) across the finish line. 

What’s funny about all this is that Husted’s blandness is likely what landed him in the unfortunate spot of getting rhetorically goosed by Trump almost every night. By his own account, Trump knew very little about the Ohio Republican he was there to support at the Youngstown rally, but learned shortly beforehand that Husted played football in college. Trump, whose background is in reality TV, resorted to his tendency to reduce a person to a single defining trait that could fit on a chyron. So even though Husted’s gridiron career ended decades ago, Trump indulged in lame fantasies about how he thinks a football player should look like, complete with broad shoulders and well-defined glutes.

Likely, it would have ended with one iteration if he hadn’t praised Husted’s ass, which elevated a pedestrian effort to define a candidate into the realm of attention-getting weirdness. But of course that remark got everyone’s attention, and Trump will reliably return to any bit, no matter how bizarre, as long as it draws eyeballs. So it was that Husted, who was on the verge of being relegated to “Former College Football Player” in the sprawling reality show cast of Trump’s political orbit, instead became the butt of Trump’s favorite new joke.

It could be worse, of course. Trump has a similar bit he likes to trot out about Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, the Republican nominee for that state’s Senate seat. Except instead of being an imaginary muscleman like Husted, Trump has cast Paxton in the role of ugly loser. In nearly every speech where he mentions Paxton, Trump has to talk about how hideous the guy is and how poorly he supposedly dresses.

With both of these GOP candidates, Trump’s oversimplified, theatrical descriptors don’t have much to do with reality. Whatever he once looked like, Husted doesn’t really have the athletic build Trump fantasizes about. Paxton is nobody’s idea of a handsome man, but it’s simply not true that he dresses poorly. There are many terrible things we could say about Paxton, but his wardrobe appears perfectly fine — especially compared to Trump, who seems to believe that wearing enormously oversized suits will hide his ever-expanding bulk. But these two guys are now characters in Trump’s world, where, as in reality TV shows, individual humans are stripped of all their complexities to be turned into broad, easily consumed caricatures.

Whether he’s inviting the world to stare at these men’s allegedly spectacular rear end or daring them to smile while he calls them ugly, Trump is sending a message: He owns these people. He can define them in reductive, humiliating language, and they have been so hollowed out as human beings that they won’t even defend themselves. Normally, when a leader is both a lame duck and cratering in his approval polls, the way Donald Trump is now, that person’s party will start looking for ways to move on and forge a new identity. It’s a sign of how empty the Republican Party is that they seem incapable of doing that. They don’t just submit to Trump’s continued abuse, but even keep seeking it out. That must be a miserable experience, but clearly they feel that without him, they’re nothing at all. It’s tough to disagree. 

The post Ohio’s Jon Husted, object of Trump’s leering, is just an empty pair of pants appeared first on Salon.com.

In a 2025 investigation, The New York Times reported that officials in President Joe Biden’s administration, in the wake of Biden’s 2020 election win, had viewed rising immigration as “a distraction” best ignored so that the administration could concentrate political resources on more important economic matters.

Scott Shuchart, a Biden appointee who joined the Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency in 2022, told the newspaper that the White House was “wishing the problem would go away so that they could focus on the things they cared about.”

But two years after Donald Trump leveraged voter dissatisfaction with the Biden administration’s management of the U.S. southern border to win the 2024 election and enforce his immigration crackdown, the issue has suddenly become a secondary matter.

Amid the rising U.S. cost of living, a destabilizing war in Iran and a disrupted system of global commerce, the now-quiet border has relieved Democrats of their thorniest issue just in time for midterm elections.

From liability to advantage

For the past three decades, the Democratic Party and its candidates have struggled to develop and pass new immigration policies and communicate related political messages.

Bipartisan attempts at comprehensive immigration reform died on Capitol Hill in 2006, 2007 and 2013. Since then, a majority of Americans has trusted Republicans more with governing the issue. That has given the GOP an advantage when the salience of immigration policy has risen due to border crises and related high-profile events, even if that edge has recently narrowed.

In a February 2024 poll, 28% of U.S. respondents told Gallup that immigration was the country’s most important problem – matching the largest share since tracking began in 1981. By May 2026, that figure was 8%, a staggering drop in such a short period.

In a different poll by The Economist/YouGov, the share of U.S. registered voters who identified immigration as the country’s most important issue fell from 14% in October 2024 to 5% in September 2026.

Erik Iverson, a Republican Senate campaign pollster, recently told Axios that declining border crossings have reduced the urgency of immigration, depriving Republicans of an issue that previously energized voters and offered conservatives an advantage.

“You become a victim of your own success,” he said.

But this success is dubious. President Trump’s approval ratings on immigration are underwater.

In the RealClear Polling average from September to October 2026, his net approval was at negative 10.8%. In a recent Fox News poll, most Americans believe the Trump administration has “gone too far” in enforcing immigration laws, including 60% of independents.

Despite Republicans’ insistence that the mass removal of undocumented immigrants and a halt to new migrants would raise wages and make housing more accessible, Americans are experiencing high inflation rates, slow gross domestic product growth and sour consumer sentiment.

 

Ominously for the White House, Trump’s negative 10.8% net approval score on immigration is actually among his best. On inflation, the economy and foreign policy, his net approval rating is at negative 42.8%, negative 31.7% and negative 27.8%, respectively.

These dynamics bode well for Democrats’ midterm election prospects.

Republicans are now less concerned about immigration – what has been their greatest source of political energy and the left’s greatest political liability – as both parties’ voters are focused on other matters.

Despite the White House’s aggressive and frequently violent pursuit of undocumented immigrants, its proposal to end birthright citizenship, and its near closure of U.S. borders, even Democrats are no more likely to identify immigration as the country’s top issue today than they were previously.

According to The Economist/YouGov polling cited earlier, 1% of Democrats named immigration as their top issue in September 2026. In October 2024, 3% said the same.

Remarkably, without Democrats’ endorsement of a single new immigration policy idea, independents now express greater trust in Democrats than Republicans on immigration, 41% to 27%, according to a September 2026 Marist survey.

Democrats’ trial and error

Democrats’ sudden edge arises after a decade of trialing different approaches to counter the nativism and popular discomfort that Trump has harnessed.

Before Trump’s 2016 election victory and immediately thereafter, Democratic leaders sought to ameliorate the image of foreigners in the U.S., by highlighting that immigrants start more businesses, file more patents and commit fewer crimes than native-born U.S. citizens on average.

 

During this period, Democrats commonly cited immigrants’ acute vulnerability and their willingness and ability to fill critical low-skilled and high-skilled labor gaps. But the praise and pity produced resentment among many Americans who did not want an admissions system that elevated foreigners to a higher pedestal.

Toward the end of the first Trump administration, Democrats
began citing the immense macroeconomic and fiscal benefits driven by immigrants’ long-term settlement in the U.S.

Economists attribute to immigrants the bulk of U.S. population growth from 1990 to 2015. And economists have shown that continued immigration mitigates inflation and extends the solvency of Social Security and Medicare funds. Immigration also provides workers for industries like construction, agriculture, food production and healthcare.

However, the benefits of these relationships for average voters tend to be diffuse and realized in the medium-to-long run. That makes them hard to recognize.

After the global pandemic halted most human mobility in 2020, the Biden administration sought to avoid the immigration issue altogether. It’s a strategy that Democrats have now carried over while the dynamics of being out of power still permit doing so.

No mandate for inaction

Should Democrats win majorities in the Senate and House of Representatives in 2026, the issue of immigration is highly unlikely to be resolved. As a matter of constitutional oversight, Democrats plan to commence investigations into the Trump administration’s abusive immigration enforcement tactics, questionable case adjudication and alleged corruption.

It will be almost impossible to pass meaningful immigration legislation in such an environment.

The Biden-era approach was a pivotal electoral liability in 2024. And the Obama administration’s series of immigration executive actions instigated a tennis match of such orders between subsequent administrations ever since.

Democrats will soon feel some pressure to develop bipartisan approaches to immigration governance that ensure order at U.S. borders and a strategy for immigrant selection and integration that is designed with the national interest in mind.

Anything less, and the dysfunctional system – with its massive political risks – will return.

 

Justin Gest, Professor of Policy and Government, George Mason University; Institute for Humane Studies

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

The post Democrats are the unwitting beneficiaries of Trump’s immigration policies appeared first on Salon.com.