Welcome to Monday’s edition of Washington Secrets, where we are trying to find a World Cup wallchart before Thursday. Today, we look at the latest midterm predictions and whether Republicans might be able to stave off the worst possible forecasts, and ask what’s up with the White House Correspondents’ Association?
Democrats have a 7-point lead over Republicans in the generic ballot ahead of November’s midterm elections, according to the latest data from J.L. Partners. That is enough to give the party an 80% chance of taking the House and a 40% chance of flipping the Senate.
Those numbers are not unusual in this sort of election year, as any analyst will tell you. When one party holds the White House, House, and Senate, they are set up for a shellacking.
“But all is not lost for Republicans,” according to James Johnson, co-founder of J.L. Partners. “If they can turn out what we are calling mid-propensity voters, then things might look different.”
Johnson delivered his election update to a small group of strategists and clients last week, setting out the political landscape, potential surprises, and an overall forecast for control of Congress.
And at its heart is the question that has long loomed over this round of elections, exercising strategists, pollsters, and pundits: What happens when President Donald Trump’s name is not on the ballot?
It all makes bleak reading for Republicans unless they can harness these MPVs. They are voters who may have turned out for the presidential election, but score themselves at 4 to 7 out of 10 on a voting likelihood scale for the midterms.
Johnson said they make up about 20% of the electorate, and skew towards Trump. Some 36% said they backed him in 2024.
They are also disproportionately young and black, representing key components of the coalition that powered Trump to victory. Persuading them to turn out in November could have a significant impact, said Johnson.
But that will not be easy. It is a group that does not respond to the usual messaging around how controlling Congress will help Trump deliver his agenda, for example.
He tested three messages and, to his surprise, the one that did best was: “Republicans winning the midterms will help a Republican Presidential candidate in 2028.”
Some 24% said it was an unconvincing message, compared with 43% who said it would convince them to vote for a Republican candidate. Those were better numbers than messages around Republican members doing a good job in Congress (a net positive of 7 points) or about the president’s agenda (a net positive of 5 points).
The lesson for campaigns, said Johnson, was that a lot of voters did not necessarily see things the same way as strategists did.
“In fact, a lot of them don’t actually know what the midterms are about,” he said.
His analysis also suggests that redistricting efforts across the country have had a minimal impact on the headline figures. Overall, the net impact has been to shift six districts from “competitive” to “non-competitive” status (from 45 to 39 in total).
And Republicans still face significant headwinds.
J.L. Partners’ tracking poll of economic sentiment shows negative feelings reached an all-time high for the year last month. Some 59% of respondents said things were getting worse, compared with just 38% in January.
As things stand, Johnson predicted — and he cautioned that the midterms are still five months away — that Democrats will have an easy time flipping the House, but that the Senate most likely remains in Republican hands. His forecast:
House
- 50%: DEM gain, 230+ seats
- 30%: DEM gain, 218-229 seats
- 15%: GOP hold, 218-229 seats
- 5%: GOP gain, 230+ seats
- DEM gain 230+ seats – 50%
Senate
- 60%: GOP holds majority
- 40%: DEM gains majority
White House Correspondents Association’s damp squib of an election
Voting for four posts on the board of the White House Correspondents Association is underway. Up for grabs is the top job (president) in 2028-29, as well as positions for print, radio, and photo reps.
There cannot be a more important time for the association. Trump has run rings around the White House press corps, blowing up the pool system that guaranteed independent coverage of the president — he replaced it with a White House system that allows staffers to pick and choose who is in and who is out — and banning outlets from Air Force One.
Trump’s radical approach has been met by the same old business-as-usual stance from the WHCA, long seen by ordinary members as a career-stepping stone for office holders.
Nothing is likely to change this time. Although there is some notable fresh blood in the running, only four candidates have signed up for the four seats. Each is standing unopposed, including Courtney Subramanian, of Bloomberg News, who is running for president.
If ever there was a need for robust debate and new ideas, then this is the moment. With so much change in the air, with so many questions about press freedom and the future of news, this all seems like a huge missed opportunity.
Quote of the day
“I call the shots. I call all the shots,” Trump told The Financial Times on Sunday.
He was talking about his relationship with Benjamin Netanyahu, Israel’s prime minister, who very much “doesn’t call the shots.”
It has become a critical question in recent weeks. At the start of the conflict, the two leaders were in agreement. It didn’t matter who called the shots when both men wanted swift strikes to end Iran’s nuclear threat.
It looks different now. Trump still needs a swift conclusion to the war, while Netanyahu remains focused on ending the existential threat to Israel.
No wonder Netanyahu initially ignored Trump and retaliated against Iran’s strikes on Sunday, before both sides called a halt.
Where does that leave things? Iran’s strikes yesterday show that Tehran is well aware of the gap between the U.S. and Israel. It may have spent much of the conflict on the back foot, but it still believes it has cards to play or, indeed, shots to call.
Lunchtime reading
Unease and hostility meets defiant support as Maine residents grapple with Graham Platner allegations: “I am voting for Janet Mills; people don’t remember she is still on the ballot,” said one voter. “This Graham guy, to me, he looks like a white supremacist with a Democratic sign on top of his head, and I like Janet; she’s proving herself, and I’m with her.”
‘Ike and Winston’ Review: Profiles in Greatness: Two great men faced existential threats and responded in different ways. The case for Churchill’s greatness was always clear, and this book sets out the case for Eisenhower, too.
You are reading Washington Secrets, a guide to power and politics in D.C. and beyond. It is written by Rob Crilly, who you can reach at [email protected] with your comments, story tips, and suggestions. If a friend sent you this and you’d like to sign up, click here.