Republican fortunes go south as script flips

Donald Trump's Iran war, tariffs and economic policies have fuelled voter discontent, helping Democrats make sweeping gains in the 2026 US midterms, including in Republican strongholds Texas and Kansas. The results raise questions about Trump's political influence, the future of MAGA and the Republican Party's prospects as it looks towards 2028.

Deja vu, 2006? Then, an unpopular war in Iraq helped Democrats wrest both houses of Congress from George W Bush. Twenty years later, another Republican president has lost both houses amid another unpopular Middle Eastern war. But even Democrats who dreamed of a blue wave might have laughed if you had told them where it would crest. Texas? Yes, Texas. Kansas? The last time Kansas elected a Democrat to the Senate, Franklin Roosevelt was winning his first presidential election.

Democrats needed a net gain of four Senate seats. They flipped Texas, Kansas, Iowa, Ohio, North Carolina and South Carolina. In Maine, an early Democratic lead turned into a projected victory over Susan Collins, the Republican incumbent. That makes seven projected pickups, with Alaska still uncalled in the early tally. The rout ran from the Midwest to the South. Trump had carried South Carolina by nearly 18 points two years ago. His handpicked Senate candidate lost it.

The South also elected two Black governors, Democrat Keisha Lance Bottoms in Georgia and Republican Byron Donalds in Florida. Bottoms becomes the first Black woman elected governor of any American state. Donald's victory, in the middle of a Republican rout elsewhere, is a reminder that even a national wave leaves room for states to make different choices. Michigan made history by electing Democrat Abdul El-Sayed, the first Muslim ever elected to the US Senate.

Trump spent the campaign asking voters to pretend he was on the ballot. Once the returns came in, he insisted that had he actually been on it, he would have won in a landslide. Republicans who lost their seats can be forgiven for wondering what, exactly, they were supposed to pretend.

He gave voters a rationale for his tariffs, his immigration crackdown and his tax cuts.

He never gave them a convincing account of why America had to go to war with Iran, what victory would look like or why the resulting rise in prices was worth bearing. The war pushed up fuel costs. Tariffs made imports dearer. Huge budget deficits kept demand buoyant while households were already struggling with high prices. You can argue about the contribution of each. At the petrol pump, voters paid the combined bill.

Will Trump change course? He is more likely to seek an exit from the Iran war than to abandon tariffs, a conviction he has held for decades. A settlement that restores normal Gulf shipping would be excellent news for India. Cheaper oil would ease the import bill, relieve pressure on the rupee and give the Reserve Bank more room to manoeuvre. Indian exporters should still reckon with Trump's affection for tariffs.

On election day Trump said America would end roughly $4 billion a year in aid to Israel, arguing that Israel could afford to buy its own arms. He envisaged continued US arms sales, and Congress will have a say over the timing. The announcement may signal a willingness to change the terms of a longstanding commitment. A settlement with Iran is a separate test.

This could mark the end of MAGA as the dominant force in Republican politics. Republicans tolerated much from Trump because they thought he could win elections they otherwise would lose. After Texas and Kansas, expect some to ask aloud how many seats his endorsements cost them. JD Vance, the obvious heir, now has to explain why Republicans should run in 2028 on a record that just cost them Congress. Vivek Ramaswamy, beaten by Amy Acton in the Ohio governor's race, has an even more immediate problem. A movement built around one man's supposed electoral magic will find succession considerably harder once his own party stops believing in it.

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed in this column are that of the writer. The facts and opinions expressed here do not reflect the views of www.economictimes.com.)