Friday, November 6, 2026. It's been a bad news week for Chump, Democrats prepare to take over Congress in January and are hiring investigative staff, US House Rep Robert Garcia speaks about what the results mean, Senator Elizabeth Warren writes about what the results mean, all eyes on Priss Pot Pete Hegseth and will he be in or out, and much more.
As Ben (MEIDASTOUCH) notes above, his arch has been blocked by a federal judge. It has not been a good week for him. He's still reeling from the midterms.
In an analysis on the races for seats in the House of Representatives, THE NEW YORK TIMES notes:
As of Thursday evening, Democrats have won 253 seats to Republicans’ 155. And that seat advantage could continue to grow for Democrats as more districts report results (27 races have not yet been called).
The president’s party often loses seats in a midterm election, but this is the largest victory by either party in half a century.
Democrats are set to have at least 71 more seats than Republicans and will now enter the next session of Congress with a sizable majority in both the House and Senate.
The largest victory by either party in half a century?
What a rebuke to Chump. The American people have spoken.
Democratic officials are celebrating. And on the other side?
A civil war is brewing inside the Trump administration after Republicans suffered crippling midterm losses, with insiders scrambling to assign blame and find someone to take the fall.
President Donald Trump has publicly said he has no plans to make Cabinet changes in the wake of Tuesday’s disastrous elections, which saw Democrats romp to victory in once-reliable red states, clawing back control of both the House and Senate. Instead, Trump faulted GOP candidates, congratulated Democrats and appeared eager to move on to other issues, like his White House ballroom.
But behind the scenes, the atmosphere is tense. Offensive and defensive maneuvers are being made: officials are searching for a suitable scalp, while seeking to insulate themselves from a potential purge.
Among the key players reportedly caught up in the turmoil are Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, Vice President JD Vance, Secretary of State Marco Rubio and White House Chief of Staff Susie Wiles. The White House, however, has said the administration remains focused on “what matters.”
Of the four noted, Hegseth is the most vulnerable.
Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth’s wife was paid by a consulting firm representing a weapons manufacturer that works with the Department of Defense, a new report has revealed.
Jennifer Hegseth, an unofficial Pentagon adviser to her husband, indicated on a disclosure form that Watchtower Strategy, an influential Trump-aligned public affairs firm that counts defense contractor Lockheed Martin among its clients, paid her for consulting, Politico reports.
Jennifer, a former Fox News producer, has already been exposed for embedding herself in daily DOD operations, raising questions about a potential conflict of interest within the Pentagon.
A Trump administration official reportedly believes Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth knows his days at the Pentagon are numbered following Republicans’ widespread midterm election losses.
“I think he probably knows he’s dead but would like an exit sufficiently dramatic that it gives him a launching pad to run for POTUS,” the unnamed official told CNN in a report published Wednesday.
The assessment comes as Republicans search for someone to hold responsible for the party’s loss of both the House and Senate, with Hegseth facing mounting criticism over his role in President Donald Trump’s war with Iran.
According to CNN, several Republicans believe Hegseth persuaded Trump to launch the military campaign without adequately preparing for its consequences. Some now view the defense secretary as a potential target of blame for the election results, even as Trump continues to stand by him.
“If the president is serious about anyone taking responsibility for it, it’s Pete Hegseth,” one Republican close to the White House told CNN. “Pete has been either dishonest or incorrect — neither of which are acceptable — about timelines, goals and objectives since the beginning.”
Before the midterms, US House Rep Thomas Massie introduced articles of impeachment on Hegseth. This prompted Speaker of the Closet Mike Johnson to immediately send the House home so that it would not be voted on. The midterms are over and the House will have to return. Massie says that when they do return, he will be focused on his articles of impeachment.
1. The impeachment threat. Democrats already have tried to impeach Hegseth, and with their new House majority in January, those efforts could intensify. The last thing Trump wants is a series of distracting impeachment hearings focused on Hegseth's rocky tenure — and, inevitably, Trump's decision to attack Iran.
"Tonight would have looked very different without the Iran war," one administration official told Axios late Tuesday. "I believe you'll ultimately see POTUS hold Pete Hegseth accountable, and that will play out in the lame duck," a reference to the period between the midterms and the new Congress' first day, Jan. 3.
2. Trump needs a scalp. Presidents have a long history of shaking up their administrations after disastrous midterms. George W. Bush notably ousted Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld after the 2006 elections.
It wouldn't be surprising to see Trump make a high-profile personnel change after a defeat of this magnitude. Hegseth, whose tenure has been marked by controversy, is one potential target.
"Somebody's gotta take the fall, and Pete is moving to the top of the list," a U.S. official said.
3. The lame-duck window. If Trump is going to replace Hegseth, there's a compelling reason to do it before January. Confirmations in a Democrat-controlled Senate will be impossible. That gives Trump a narrow window to push through a new defense secretary while Republicans still hold the majority.
"No one's getting confirmed" in the new Congress, a senior White House official said. "We're operating under that premise."
4. A potential soft landing. There also is a conceivable exit ramp for Hegseth: Tennessee Sen. Marsha Blackburn is about to become that state'e governor, and she will have the power to appoint a replacement to her Senate seat. Hegseth owns a home in Tennessee, giving him a connection there.
Trump expressed approval for the idea Wednesday: "I actually think he'd be very popular if he did that. But I haven't heard that at all."
Many Republican lawmakers and allies alarmed by Tuesday’s wipeout are moving swiftly to pin blame for the election results on Hegseth, arguing behind the scenes that he played a chief role in convincing Trump to attack Iran with no exit strategy -- and no plan for managing the inevitable political fallout.
The knives-out campaign comes despite private acknowledgement from House and Senate GOP strategists that the party’s problems extended far beyond the war, triggering 2008-level losses that will take years to reverse. But for now, party leaders -- and many in their ranks -- remain unwilling to directly blame Trump for their woes.
Even among House Republicans who survived Tuesday’s onslaught, there’s zero expectation they will suddenly break from the president with two years left in his term. Yet that fealty does not extend to Hegseth, the combative defense secretary who has made few friends on Capitol Hill since taking over command of the Pentagon.
The calls for Hegseth to be fired have grown so loud that even Chump admits the calls are happening. Ross Ibbetson (DAILY MAIL) reports:
'I have every intention to keep him,' the president told ABC News.
But he conceded the Pentagon chief has critics in his ear. 'I get these calls, you know, about him. I don't understand why,' Trump added.
The public show of support sits awkwardly with the picture insiders gave the Daily Mail, who said Trump spent Wednesday working the phones and asking a handful of close advisers whether Hegseth should keep his job.
Those sources now expect him to be gone before the new Congress is sworn in, a deadline driven less by the President's anger than by Senate arithmetic.
'Trump is making phone calls, contemplating it,' said a senior Republican.
Trump admitted it would be easier to confirm a new Defense Secretary before Democrats take control of the Senate in January.
THE ARKANSAS PUBLIC ADVOATE notes that, appearing on MS NOW, THE NEW YORK TIMES' "Maggie Haberman’s analysis focused on the political exposure of Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth after the GOP’s reported midterm defeat. She said Trump could remove Hegseth and blame him for the Iran war, describing that as a potentially easy move for the president." Holly Baxter (INDEPENDENT) plays out the possibilities:
The best-case scenario is that Peacocking Pete resigns quietly from the Cabinet and takes up Blackburn’s seat in Tennessee. But would he?
It would, in many respects, be an elegant escape route. Hegseth could leave the Pentagon with his dignity nominally intact, Trump could appoint a replacement while Republicans still control the Senate, and the defense secretary would no longer be in office when Democrats are seated at the beginning of 2027. As a senator, Hegseth would not be subject to impeachment as a cabinet official. He could also avoid becoming the central character in a highly publicized fight over the war.
There is another possibility: that Trump decides to let the impeachment process run. He has always enjoyed a political fight, particularly one in which he can portray himself and his allies as victims of Democratic persecution. Allowing Hegseth to become the subject of an impeachment campaign could give the White House a useful new grievance, while allowing the president to demonstrate that he is standing by a loyalist in the face of what he would inevitably describe as partisan attacks. It would also give Trump time to work out whether Hegseth is more useful to him as a sacrificial offering or as a continuing defender of the Iran war.
The danger is that a congressional investigation could expose even more about the decision-making behind the war. And I think most of us who saw the flag, fist and bomb emojis proliferating on that Signal chat can believe that the decision-making was more “grade-schoolers get handed the PlayStation controls” than “mature and restrained debate”.
On Thursday, new bombshell reporting revealed that one of President Donald Trump's top Cabinet officials may be preparing to resign. According to GOP insiders who spoke with the Independent, Secretary of State Marco Rubio appears to be leaving the administration in order to protect himself from midterm blowback as he ramps up a 2028 presidential run.
As the Independent explains, "Even before the disastrous midterm results -- when the Republicans lost both the House and the Senate -- senior party sources in the US and senior figures in the UK government told the Independent that Mr Rubio could quit his senior role in President Donald Trump’s administration. The sources doubled down on the expectation after the midterms gave a damning indictment of the Trump presidency, with the Democrats seizing Republican strongholds such as Kansas and Texas. Mr Rubio is one of up to five members of MrTrump’s current Cabinet who are thought to be preparing to 'run for the hills' in the aftermath of the midterms humiliation. One Washington insider told the Independent that Mr Rubio needs to 'distance himself from the Iran war and pin that one on Trump.'" Sources say that Trump may also lay the blame on Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth -- whose impeachment is being called for even by members of his own party — with Rubio and White House Chief of Staff Susie Wiles also targeted as potential scapegoats.
JD Vance is not going anywhere. Chump's going to have to be really irritated to try to force him out. But many are saying his 2028 hopes are over. Mike noted last night Republican Newt Gingrich had said that the midterms destroyed JD's chances. Bennito L. Kelty (RAW STORY) notes Democrats James Carvillel, Mark McKinnon and Aidan Kohn-Murphy on the podcast POLITICS WAR ROOM dismissed Vance's chances as well ("walking wounded"). Mataeo Smith (IRISH STAR) notes:
Former Republican Governor of New Jersey Chris Christie balked at the possibility of Vice President JD Vance running for president, saying he would "reek with the stink of Donald Trump."
Vance has not ruled out a potential run in 2028, but President Trump has refused to endorse him publicly and critics don't believe he has the charisma to secure the White House. Christie echoed this sentiment but suggested Republicans' crushing defeat in Tuesday's midterms only adds more hurdles. Vance said in June that he would determine whether to run after the midterm elections
During an interview with Times Radio, Christie said: "JD Vance has no other credential other than to be Donald Trump's vice president. He only spent a short two years in the U.S. Senate and has no other relevant experience to be president of the United States. Quite frankly, I think he will reek of Donald Trump and his further actions between now and Election Day 2028. I don't feel like JD Vance is the right leader for our party, and I certainly don't think he has any chance of being elected president of the United States."
Douglas Kriner, a professor of American institutions at Cornell University, said that Tuesday was hardest on the vice president.
“If I was a Republican hopeful not currently in the administration, I’d be breathing a sigh of relief and saying I had a good night,” Kriner told Newsweek.
Vance and Trump defended Ramaswamy’s decision to air the controversial ad calling her a liar. Ohio Governor Mike DeWine, a Republican, called the ad “deeply troubling,” and it came off the air days before the election.
“He got his act of contrition in first but no apology for his own conduct in Ohio,” Brendan O’Leary, a professor of political science at the University of Pennsylvania, told Newsweek about Vance’s post. “The decision to blame the war and Israel will be noted.”
Matthew Rozsa (ALTERNET) explores the case for ousting Wiles here. While people wait to see what will happen to Priss Pot, Rubio or Wiles, one official has resigned. Hafiz Rashid (THE NEW REPUBLIC) explains:
Assistant Attorney General Harmeet Dhillon is leaving the Trump administration.
Fox News reports that Dhillon resigned Thursday following Democrats’ landslide victory in the midterm elections. She reportedly told allies that she planned to leave after the elections, according to Bloomberg Law.
Dhillon is the first top official to leave the Trump administration following the election. She overhauled her division at the DOJ to actually weaken civil rights, and on diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives, said, “Either DEI will end on its own or we will kill it.” She also staffed the civil rights office with the worst lawyers, including people with criminal records, misconduct allegations, a love of conspiracy theories, and a history of hacking election sites. Dhillon also led a sweeping campaign to force states to turn over sensitive voter information, a crusade repeatedly shut down in court.
In September, Dhillon proudly announced that the DOJ had dropped more than 50 desegregation cases, most of which were in Southern states with Jim Crow histories. On her watch, the office focuses on everything but civil rights, looking at election rolls, immigration, and alleged antisemitism on college campuses.
Jeffrey Epstein may be dead, but his ghost continues to haunt American politics.
In the run-up to the midterms, candidates spent millions on campaign ads that attempted to tie candidates to sexual abuse, pedophilia or Epstein. Epstein’s survivors traveled the country with an exhibit containing Department of Justice files bound into thousands of physical volumes on the case. Several of them campaigned against members of Congress who failed, initially, to support the Epstein Files Transparency Act.
Polls, meanwhile, consistently show that roughly three quarters of Americans disapprove of the way the Epstein case is being handled by the Trump administration. Most Americans want all the government files released and believe that there should be accountability for others involved in Epstein’s crimes.
Now it’s the Democrats’ turn.
[. . .]
Ten days ago, Democrats on the House Judiciary Committee also formally called for an independent counsel to investigate Trump’s involvement with Epstein as well as the administration’s “cover up” of the Epstein files. The Committee released a 53-page report titled, “We Have Certain Things in Common, Jeffrey’: The Case Against Donald Trump Emerging in the Epstein Files and DOJ’s Desperate Efforts to Cover It Up.”
[. . .]
The Judiciary Committee report listed five women who have “directly accused Trump of rape or sexual assault in Epstein’s company or presence,” including a new sex allegation against Trump by a former Miss Switzerland contestant who told the Committee that Trump brutally raped her during one of his beauty pageants events in 1993.
Trump has repeatedly denied any involvement in Epstein’s crimes, and the White House slammed the report as politically motivated - as it was released almost a week before the midterms. A White House spokeswoman claimed the women’s accounts were false and that Trump had already been exonerated.
The American public is not so convinced that Epstein’s crimes, as Trump has long claimed, are a “hoax.”
Survivors deserve answers, and hopefully, Washington will be up to task, victim advocates say.
Republican Representative Thomas Massie says he has enough support to force a vote on his second Epstein Transparency Act.
“When we return next week, we’ll get 218 signatures for Epstein Files Transparency Act II, which guarantees a vote,” Massie wrote Thursday on X. “Survivors will be able to get their own records, State Attorneys General can prosecute crimes, and we can take the DOJ to court for keeping critical files hidden.”
Massie, who has made an enemy of Trump by opposing the Iran war and pushing for the full release of the Epstein files, first passed the Epstein Transparency Act in November of last year. And though President Trump signed it into law, Massie, Democrats, and a few Republicans argue that his administration didn’t fully abide with what the act required.
“The Department of Justice has flagrantly and consistently ignored EFTA’s disclosure requirements,” Massie wrote earlier this summer in his announcement of the Epstein Files Transparency Act II, co-sponsored by Democratic Senators Ben Ray Luján and Jeff Merkley, and Democratic Representatives Ro Khanna and Teresa Leger Fernández.
With Democrats set to take control of the House, they're making plans to use their majority not only to advance legislation, but also ramp up congressional oversight.
Our White House correspondent, Liz Landers, has more.
Liz Landers:
California Congressman Robert Garcia, who is expected to become the new chairman of the House Oversight Committee, says Democrats have plans to move quickly with a series of investigations when the new Congress takes office in January. These could include reviews into the Jeffrey Epstein files, the Trump family financial dealings, and immigration enforcement.
Congressman Garcia joins us now.
Congressman, welcome back to the program.
Rep. Robert Garcia (D-CA):
Sure. Happy to be here.
Liz Landers:
On election night, you posted this two-word statement on X: "Lawyer up."
Do you think the election results have given Democrats a mandate to investigate the Trump administration?
Rep. Robert Garcia:
I think they have, and especially because, right now, when you think about the key issue, which is affordability, in large part, the reason why people can't afford to pay the gas, the groceries, they're struggling with the rent or the mortgage is because the Trump family continues to enrich themselves, steal people's wealth, and enrich their billionaire friends and donors.
They continue to support companies and CEOs that are ripping off the American public. And so we have to, of course, focus on affordability, but there also has to be accountability and there has to be justice. There has to be justice for families that are being picked up by ICE agents and that are removing due process from the system.
There has to be justice for the survivors of Jeffrey Epstein. So there's a lot of work to do, but I think there's definitely a mandate to ensure we have accountability and affordability.
Liz Landers:
You have said that you have been preparing for these investigations for months and you're not starting from scratch here. What is the first thing you expect to investigate and how quickly will those subpoenas go out?
Rep. Robert Garcia:
Look, the first issue for us is going to be around the Trump family and the clear corruption. This is the most corrupt administration in the history of the United States.
When you have the president making billions from these crypto schemes, you have Jared Kushner getting $2 billion from the Saudis for his investment firm just after leaving the White House. Don Jr., his entire wedding being paid for by a Russian oligarch, him sitting on boards of companies that get contracts from the Pentagon, I mean, this is really serious stuff.
And the American public are looking at their own bills and seeing costs go up when they go to the supermarket, yet they're seeing the Trumps get richer. And so that's a real contrast, and that's a real issue for us to take on. People want solutions. They want accountability.
Liz Landers:
When it comes to the Epstein files, what more is there to learn and what documents have not been released?
Rep. Robert Garcia:
Look, I think, first, we want to center our work on justice for the survivors. Half of the Epstein documents, of the files have not been released to the public, even though Trump -- even though we know that Trump has tried to create confusion, calling this a hoax, and Todd Blanche saying they're going to release documents, and then they don't.
So we still have half of the files have not been released. We need more information from the Epstein estate. We need -- the co-conspirators that were involved with Jeffrey Epstein, there needs to be real accountability for them. If you abused, trafficked, raped women and children, and you're walking around with no sort of justice, that has to end.
There has not been a single, not one public hearing on the Epstein investigation in the Congress. And that's going to end when we take over the Oversight Committee.
Top congressional Democrats have been reading a 181-page dossier that urges them to go after hundreds of executives and companies once they hold power next year, The Washington Sun reported on Thursday.
The document, written by the think tank Groundwork Collaborative and reviewed by the Sun, argues the party should aggressively investigate big corporations, among them tech giants, AI labs, natural gas companies, private prisons and nursing home operators.
The Sun said it was spearheaded by former staffers for Sens. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) and Bernie Sanders (I-VT). Multiple sources say House Democrats on the Judiciary and Oversight committees have been reviewing it, along with Warren, caucus leaders, and chiefs of staff for incoming senators.
The plan pictures a run of hearings where executives are pressed to resign or repay consumers, on topics such as landlord junk fees, AI and online sports gambling, credit card pricing and grocery chains’ use of shopper data. Groundwork’s Alex Jacquez said Trump controversies like the Qatari jet and Reflecting Pool renovation are “not interesting or motivating to anybody but hard-core Democrats,” and urged focusing on corporations voters blame for high prices.
The committee’s Democratic staff is seeking counsels and professional staff members for “policy, oversight, investigative, and legislative work” in the next Congress, which begins in January, according to its website. The posting says experience conducting investigations is valued for oversight jobs.
“Didn’t take long,” Scott MacFarlane, MeidasTouch’s chief Washington correspondent, wrote on X Wednesday, adding that committee Democrats were hiring investigators “as they gear up to launch probes of Trump 2.0.”
Committee Democrats have no subpoena power in the minority, and Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-MD), the panel’s top Democrat, said his earlier inquiries into Middle East envoy Jared Kushner went unanswered, MS NOW reported last week.
Raskin is expected to chair the committee in January, and chairs control subpoenas in most cases, according to a client alert from the law firm Jenner & Block. The investigators hired now could then pursue those unanswered questions with subpoenas to back them up.
From the House Judiciary Committee to the judiciary itself, Chump's administration continues to lie to the courts and the courts continue to tire of this nonsense and obstruction. Joe Patrice (ABOVE THE LAW) reports:
Federal judges traditionally don’t have to ask the DOJ’s number 3 if they’re kidding. But Associate Attorney General Stanley Woodward is nothing if not a trailblazer.
And the trail he’s blazing involves clear cutting a whole forest of ethical norms and presumptions of DOJ integrity.
Last Friday, in the ongoing court battle over the administration’s capricious destruction of the East Potomac Golf Course, Woodward told Judge Ana Reyes that he didn’t “recall the court asking a question as to whether we were wanting to come up with a plan,” per the Independent. Given that the only reason Judge Reyes called Woodward to court in the first place was to get to the bottom of the administration’s plan — and why it seems to be at odds with what government lawyers told the court — the judge asked whether he was kidding. As Bloomberg Law News reported, the judge added: “Seriously, Mr. Woodward, come on.”
He did not, ultimately, get serious. By the end of Friday’s hearing in DC Preservation League v. Department of Interior, Reyes had opened a formal inquiry into whether Justice Department and Interior officials and lawyers made material misrepresentations to the court. She proposed assigning the matter to a special master… unless DOJ would rather Reyes do it herself.
Perhaps she just wanted to check if the DOJ is as obtuse as it pretended to be.
Republican Sen. Chuck Grassley says he has no plans to resign, despite there being concerns in his party that a Democratic governor will choose his replacement if he dies in office.
Questions about the future of the oldest member of Congress have been raised after Democrat Rob Sand won Iowa’s gubernatorial race to replace Republican Kim Reynolds. But the 93-year-old Grassley, first elected to the Senate in 1980, says he will not step down.
“Senator Grassley is not resigning,” a spokesperson told the Daily Beast. “He remains committed to delivering for the people of Iowa, who overwhelmingly elected him to a six-year term in 2022.”
93 years old. Yes, we need a mandatory retirement age for the US Senate. (The House? House members aren't elected to six year terms, they're elected to two year terms. Not saying I'd oppose a mandatory retirement age for the House but I am saying the Senate issue needs to be addressed.) US House Rep Mike Johnson will not attempt to become the Minority Leader. He will end his (mis)leadership with Speaker of the Closet. US House Horror Jim Jordan has announced his intent to seek the Minority Leader. John Casey (RAW STORY) notes:
Longtime readers of Raw Story know I have written about Jordan many times over the years, and those columns have been forceful. I wrote about his years as an assistant wrestling coach at Ohio State, from the late 1980s into the mid-1990s, when team doctor Richard Strauss was sexually abusing student-athletes.
Ohio State's own independent investigation found that Strauss abused at least 177 students, and the university's count of abuse instances has since climbed to nearly 1,500. Many of those victims were wrestlers.
Jordan says he never knew. But a long line of former wrestlers say otherwise. They say the abuse was an open secret and that they raised it with coaches, including Jordan. In the HBO documentary Surviving Ohio State, survivors again spoke with raw courage about what happened to them and who they say looked away.
I wrote then that Jordan abandoned those men when they needed him most. I've called him a liar. I've said he doesn't belong in Congress. I haven't changed my mind. Jordan has never been held accountable, and that is another outrage in itself.
Let's wind down with this from Senator Elizabeth Warren's office:
“Now, Democrats must deliver. Yes, even with Donald Trump in the White House.”
Washington, D.C. — U.S. Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) published an op-ed in TIME Magazine laying out lessons from the 2026 midterm elections and the next steps for Democrats to deliver for the American people.
TIME Magazine – Sen. Elizabeth Warren: Why Democrats Won the Midterms
November 5, 2026
Democrats won their largest congressional victory since the 1976 Watergate election—overwhelmingly flipping both the House and Senate. And while the dance music is still playing, a debate has already burst forward over whether those election results were merely a rebuke of President Donald Trump’s failures, and whether it was progressives or moderates who produced the secret recipe for Democrats’ success.
These are the wrong questions. Anyone seeking to understand the midterm’s lessons should start here: Democrats won by being populist economic fighters who were unafraid to call out the corrupt politicians and corporate interests who have rigged the system at the expense of everyone else.
Now, Democrats must deliver. Yes, even with Donald Trump in the White House.
In 2024, Trump swept back into power, declaring he would cut costs on “Day 1” and bragging he would “end inflation and make America affordable again.” Instead, Trump and Republicans took a wrecking ball to the economy, cutting health care to finance tax breaks for rich people and giant corporations, imposing chaotic tariffs, and launching a war with Iran. With astonishing brazenness, Trump has attempted to reengineer the federal government into a corruption machine designed to rake in profits for himself, his family, and his cronies.
In the most competitive 2026 races, in blue, purple, and red states, including places like Texas and South Carolina that have not elected Democrats statewide for decades, Democrats won by recognizing Americans’ economic pain, denouncing Washington corruption that has made a rigged economy worse by favoring giant corporations over working people, and by pledging to upend this system.
Democrats relentlessly and rightfully criticized Trump’s economy, but we also made a much deeper point—and it struck home. The first Democratic Governor of Texas in 30 years, Gina Hinojosa, said, “The one fight in this country is about economic power.” Red-state winners like Sherrod Brown, James Talarico, and Jon Ossoff called out a “rigged” system. In South Carolina, Annie Andrews pledged to take on “big insurance, big tech, big pharma, and the utility monopolies.” Josh Turek promised to fight for Iowans, “not for billionaires and large corporations.” Chris Pappas declared to New Hampshire voters in his victory speech: “Tonight’s results are a wake-up call for the corporate special interests and billionaires who have been rigging the economy.”
Just campaign rhetoric? Nope. Across the country, Democrats stood up for big policy changes like increasing the federal minimum wage, expanding child care, reining in Big Tech, data centers, and AI, and reforming health care. We came with plans—specific policies to dismantle a rigged system and beat back concentrated corporate power.
From Mary Peltola in Alaska to Roy Cooper in North Carolina, Democrats called for blocking grocery store mergers that drive up prices. Both Iowa’s Josh Turek and Texas’ James Talarico promised to break up vertical integration between insurance companies, pharmacy benefit managers, and pharmacies. Maine’s Troy Jackson and Michigan’s Abdul El-Sayed beat Republicans by proudly campaigning for Medicare for All. And plenty more Democrats like Lindsay James (IA), Zach Dembo (KY), Denise Powell (NE), and Jamie Ager (NC) flipped Republican seats after demanding a public insurance option that is available to all Americans. Not long ago, trying to flip a seat from red to blue by promising to raise taxes on the rich was considered unthinkable. But Democrats did just that—and won.
None of this happened without Democrats putting in the work to earn the trust of voters. Our new housing affordability law—that Donald Trump refused to sign—was a critical proof point. And in races from Kentucky to Indiana to South Carolina, candidates loudly proclaimed their support for blocking private equity from gobbling up housing. Annie Andrews and Kansas’s Adam Hamilton specifically campaigned on cracking down further on Wall Street ownership of single-family homes than the historic provisions that passed Congress this summer.
Now it’s time to act. Donald Trump says he wants to work with Democrats. We should force him to do that on the affordability and corruption issues that drove this election—or call his bluff. I’m ready to team up with any Republican who is listening to the American people. But if Congressional Republicans won’t join us to deliver relief for working families, Democrats will do it without them.
Some Democrats have already argued that it’s wasted energy to send bold policy changes to the Trump White House. I think that’s just plain wrong. It would be a breach of faith with the people from South Carolina to Texas, who voted for us to address costs and corruption, to spend the next two years waiting for some future Democratic trifecta to hopefully deliver meaningful change. Trump says he welcomes the nickname “Mr. Veto.” Well, let’s test that out by passing legislation the American people support to make life more affordable and our government less corrupt.
First, stop Trump’s war. Second, cut costs. Democrats have power on spending bills that require our votes, and we should use it. No more funding for a forever war with Iran. Cancel the looming cuts to health insurance and nutrition benefits put in place by Republicans last summer. The reconciliation budget process also allows us to pass big chunks of legislation without a single Republican vote, so we should reverse Republican health care cuts, expand health care coverage, and fund universal child care. Third, pay for it by putting a little fairness back in the system. We can start with canceling the tax breaks Trump and the Republicans handed out to corporations, ultra-millionaires, and billionaires.
Next, where Democrats agree reconciliation is not an option, like with bills to ban stock trading by federal officials or crack down on Trump’s corruption in plain sight, Democrats should put the bills up for a vote. Let the Republicans decide if they want to stay tied to such corruption and, if they do, then let’s clear away Senate filibuster rules and pass the laws anyway.
Finally, accountability. Congress has the power to hold Donald Trump and his cronies accountable for ripping off the American people to make themselves richer. Big Tech CEOs, Wall Street executives, and giant corporations should prepare to answer tough questions and face meaningful consequences if they have broken the law.
Democrats won this election by claiming we are on the side of working people, and working people are counting on us to deliver.
Americans need Democrats to deliver now, not in two years.
