IN GOP MIDTERM CALCULATION, AVOIDING THE UNTHINKABLE. Republican politicos, and everyday voters, too, are inundated with predictions of disaster in the upcoming midterm elections. And indeed, the outlook for the party keeping the House is not good. The outlook for holding the Senate is better — iffy but possible. The big factors in determining midterm outcome — presidential job approval, generic ballot, history — are plainly discouraging for Republicans.
Now, especially where the Senate is concerned, GOP strategists have to choose some races for particular focus in the final weeks of the campaign. What standard should they use? Obviously, the first priority is to push hard in races that are close and where the Republican candidate has a good chance to win. One under-discussed example of that is Minnesota, where Republican Michelle Tafoya is running a strong campaign against deeply flawed Democratic candidate Peggy Flanagan. A Republican victory there would take away a current Democratic seat and make it much harder for Democrats to win control of the Senate. Victories to keep Republican seats in two other extremely close states, Iowa and Maine, would make it harder still.
But another factor to consider in the GOP’s choice of where to fight is whether a loss in a particular race would be unthinkable — not just embarrassing but nearly beyond imagining. Texas, which has not elected a Democratic senator since 1988, is one such race. Another candidate for unthinkable would be South Carolina, where it is hard to fathom a Democrat winning with today’s electorate. And a final candidate for unthinkable is Kansas, where the last Democratic senator was elected in 1932. Nineteen-thirty-two! It’s astonishing to contemplate.
A huge amount of time has been devoted to discussing the Texas situation. There’s not much more to say about it. Ken Paxton is a terrible candidate who would nevertheless be a better senator than James Talarico. Some veteran Republicans have a hard time believing that the Democrat can win the race — no way, no how, they say. Maybe they’re right. On the other hand, maybe that’s a bold claim that is true until it’s not.
The last time Texas decided a Senate seat in a midterm election was 2018, when the much-celebrated Democrat Beto O’Rourke challenged incumbent Republican Sen. Ted Cruz. If you remember that race, you recall big media organizations falling into an absolute swoon for O’Rourke. It undoubtedly gave him a boost; in the end, Cruz won, but it was pretty close, with 50.89% of the vote for Cruz to O’Rourke’s 48.33%.
This time, can Paxton pull it out? Unknown, but entirely possible. Can Talarico do a point or two better than O’Rourke? Also unknown, but also entirely possible. But from a Republican Party point of view, it is probably worth however many millions of dollars it takes to keep the seat in the GOP column, if in fact that can be done.Â
South Carolina is a state that should not be even a little bit doubtful. But this year, it has an asterisk by it because of the shock of Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham’s death as he was running for reelection. You know how it all happened, but Graham’s sister, now-Sen. Darline Graham, is running for the spot. And the race is close.
First, the usual warnings about state polls. Maybe they’re wrong. Back in 2020, when Lindsey Graham last won reelection, the race appeared to be close in the final weeks. Looking at the last six polls in the RealClearPolitics average of polls, three had Graham tied with Democratic challenger Jaime Harrison. Another had Graham leading by a single point, another had Graham up by three points, and one had him up by six. In the end, Graham won by 10 points, 54.5% to 44.2%. Maybe the race had been close at some point, but it wasn’t at the end.
Now, the polls show Darline Graham ahead of Democratic candidate Annie Andrews by 2.4 percentage points — within the margin of error. The last two polls in the RealClearPolitics average of polls have shown Graham ahead by a single point. Nobody quite knows what to make of them. It is tempting to dismiss the polls on the basis of the 2020 record. On the other hand, this race is Darline Graham, not Lindsey Graham. Unlike her brother, Darline Graham has no history of winning statewide elections — Lindsey was elected to the Senate in 2002, 2008, 2014, and 2020. There is no Darline Graham record to go on.
So there is reason for Republicans to be a little nervous. Yes, it seems hugely unlikely that any Democrat could win a Senate seat in today’s South Carolina, but in this particular case, there are a few unknowns. So it was not a surprise that the Senate Leadership Fund, the main GOP Senate funding machine, is sending $5 million to South Carolina; that an allied PAC is sending another $1 million; and that President Donald Trump is heading to the state to campaign for Graham. Just to make sure the unthinkable doesn’t happen.
As far as Kansas is concerned, the history of the state means a Republican Senate loss would be shocking. It’s no surprise that there is not a lot of public polling to go by there; of the five polls currently in the RealClearPolitics average, Republican Sen. Roger Marshall is ahead in two, tied in one, and behind Democratic challenger Adam Hamilton in two others.Â
That has happened before. In 2014, the aging Republican Sen. Pat Roberts fell behind in a reelection race. Poll after poll showed him trailing Democratic challenger Greg Orman. Washington Republicans got nervous and sent money and experts to shore up Roberts, and in the end, Roberts won by 11 points. So this time, maybe there’s nothing to worry about, but Republicans are sending Marshall help, too. After, breaking a winning streak going back to 1932 would be unthinkable.
Finally, Republicans might want to think of one other aspect of unthinkability. Every now and then, there is a candidate who is so unsuited for the Senate and the nation that it would be a disservice not to defeat him. In 2026, one could argue that that candidate is Abdul el Sayed, who is defending a Democratic seat in Michigan.
El Sayed is leading Republican opponent Mike Rogers by 3.2 percentage points in the RealClearPolitics average. Every one of the last six polls in the average has el Sayed up by anywhere from one to seven points. But el Sayed seriously underperformed his polls this year in the Democratic primary; the polls said he would win by 10 percentage points, and he ended up squeaking by with a single-point margin. In addition, El-Sayed’s Republican challenger, former Rep. Mike Rogers, very nearly won a Senate seat in 2024. That year, Democrat Elissa Slotkin was 2.3 points ahead in the final RealClearPolitics average, and ended up winning by three-tenths of one point.
Why would Republicans not throw everything into that race, too, given how close it is, given that victory would mean picking up a Democratic seat, and given that Abdul el Sayed is an unthinkable senator?
So those are some places where the GOP might concentrate in the final weeks of the campaign. Election Day is close, many people have already voted, and many more have already made up their minds. There is only so much opportunity to make sure the party avoids an unthinkable loss.