The economy is the top concern of the American voter before the midterm elections, and the repercussions of the Iran war cast a shadow

“It's the economy, stupid,” is a phrase used by James Carville, an advisor to former President Bill Clinton, to sum up his election campaign in 1992. More than three decades later, this phrase is returning to the forefront in Washington as if it were describing today's elections.

Weeks before the midterm elections, the economy is at the forefront of the American voter’s concerns, deciding the fate of candidates for legislative seats, while the Republicans are fighting a difficult battle to maintain their majority in the Senate and the House of Representatives. But the pressures this time do not come from within only, as the high cost of living crisis driven by the rise in gasoline prices intersects with the repercussions of the Iran war, intertwining internal and external accounts in the voter’s decision.

The Washington Report programme, which is the result of cooperation between Al-Sharq Al-Awsat newspaper and Al-Sharq TV, reviews whether the November votes will be decided by the economy and immigration, or whether the Iran war will also factor into voters’ calculations, and whether Trump can rally the Republican base at a time when his popularity is declining.

Economy first

Opinion polls agree that the economy and the cost of living are the top concerns of Americans, at a time when dissatisfaction with the administration’s performance on this issue is increasing. Alex Tracio, director of political strategies at Signal, an election campaigns firm, says that polls show Democrats leading Republicans nationally by a margin of between 8 and 9 points, but he warns against reading these numbers as an expression of Americans' satisfaction with the Democratic Party.

He adds: “It is true that Americans are dissatisfied with the Republican Party and Donald Trump. But this does not necessarily mean that they are satisfied with the Democratic Party.” He believes that what voters want from both parties is to offer solutions to inflation and the high cost of living. According to Tracio, Trump's popularity has declined among Americans in rural areas and those without university degrees, even though both groups formed an essential part of his electoral coalition in 2024, due to the economic pressures they face.

The dilemma for Republicans is that they currently control the White House and both chambers of Congress, which makes it difficult to evade responsibility for the economic situation. Democratic political consultant Nicole Brenner Schmitz believes that voters “direct the bulk of the blame to the party in charge” when food and fuel prices rise.

Iran is turning into a local issue

But the economy is no longer just an internal issue. The Iran war entered the electoral fray because of its connection to energy prices and the cost of living. Alejandro Ramos, executive director of the Ramos Research Institute, says that voters remember Trump's electoral promises, most notably his pledge not to fight new wars and to reform the economy. He adds: “With the midterm election season approaching, voters have begun to think seriously: Have these promises been fulfilled and have we made any progress in this regard? I think we see that voters are definitely linking the Iran war to their living situation. “The customs duties do not help in this regard either, especially those imposed on our allies.”

This connection between war and the economy began to appear clearly in the candidates' speech. In a number of swing states, such as Michigan and Iowa, Republican candidates sought to distance themselves from the White House's position on the war, while reservations extended to Congress, where a number of Republicans voted alongside Democrats in favor of resolutions aimed at restricting Trump's ability to continue military operations against Iran without authorization from Congress. But these positions put Republican candidates facing a delicate equation: responding to voters concerned about the repercussions of the war on the one hand, and avoiding a clash with Trump and his base on the other hand. Ramos believes that previous electoral experiences have shown the price that Republicans who enter into a direct confrontation with the president may pay, which prompts some candidates to try to balance the requirements of their local races and maintain their relationship with the White House.

Immigration “secondary file”

As for immigration, which was one of Trump's most prominent strengths in the 2024 elections, today it seems less important in the face of economic anxiety. Tracio believes that the reason is partly due to the belief of a segment of Americans that the situation at the border has become more disciplined, which some voters give credit to Trump for. But the administration's success in this issue allowed voters to focus on other issues, most notably the cost of living.

On the other hand, Ramos points out that the way immigration policies were implemented led to a decline in Trump's popularity among Latino voters who supported him in the 2024 elections, especially because of the methods of implementing deportation policies and their direct impact on local communities. This factor is considered to be of great importance in states such as Texas and Florida, where Hispanic voters constitute an influential electoral bloc.

For her part, Schmitz points out that some Americans from both parties voted for Trump in the last election cycle based on his promises to take strict measures against immigration. But the way the Trump administration went about doing this surprised them, adding: “I don’t think they wanted to see ICE turn into the hard-line military force that it is now.” They did not expect people to be thrown into detention centers with no legal way out. They did not expect that people would be sent to countries they had never visited before, with no possibility of working or living there. “I think it has reached a very extreme level that the American public is not comfortable with.”

The congressional battle expands

All of these factors were reflected in an electoral map that expanded before polling time, with red states likely to turn blue in Senate races. This is what was indicated by the “Cook” political report, which suggested that the Republicans would lose their majority in the House of Representatives, and that the competition for the Senate would turn into a closer battle than it was at the beginning of the election cycle.

The competition reached states that Democrats had not expected months ago to be at the heart of the battle, from Alaska to Texas and Iowa. This prompted Trump to intensify his field presence to support his party's candidates and mobilize the Republican base, but the question is the extent to which he can transfer the enthusiasm of his supporters to the Republican candidates and not harm their chances among independent voters amid a decline in popularity.

Tracio believes that Trump's presence can help Republican candidates, not only in mobilizing the base but also in raising money, but at the same time he stresses that every candidate will ultimately need to convince his voters of what he will offer them, and not just be satisfied with Trump's support for him. Regarding the possibility of Republicans losing the Senate seat in Texas, which is a Republican stronghold, Tracio says, “Texas is changing. There are many people who have moved from California, from Colorado, and from states with a low growth rate, and they are not Republicans. “So their population is becoming younger and more diverse and they are less interested in voting Republican.”

Schmitz considers that the mere talk about the possibility of a Senate coup in favor of the Democrats is evidence of the huge change in the electoral cycle. She expects that the Democrats will control the majority by seizing the states of Alaska, Maine, Ohio, and North Carolina, and retaining Michigan, which will give them 51 seats in the Senate, according to her estimates.