Healthy gif recipes: 💥 Midterm Blowout Blame

With the midterm elections ending in a blowout for the Democrats, lots of questions remain about how and why it happened, the president’s role, the media’s role, and where we’re going from here. One thing we know is that the consequences will be enormous over the next two years, and possibly many more to come. Let us know where you agree or disagree in the comments below.

Q: Is the media to blame for the blue wave? — Dan from Oregon

A: Partly, but that’s not the whole story. As we cover every day, the mainstream press typically treats Democrats with kid gloves while demonizing Republicans. GOP accomplishments get, at best, glossed over, so it’s fair to assume that many Americans receive half-truths or lies.

But voters didn’t need a news anchor to tell them gas hit $4.15 on Election Day, up from $2.98 just before the Iran war started. Exit polls showed economic issues were the main driver for voters (as they usually are), and prices are high right now.

There were really three big areas where the media reported unfairly. The first was immigration and deportations, where coverage fixated on the spectacle of protesters and agitators rather than the crime associated with illegal aliens and the many societal and economic problems associated with their mass influx under Biden.

The second was what voters call “democracy” issues. Media coverage left many believing Trump was unfairly using the Justice Department against his opponents, even though some investigations involved matters left unresolved since his first term.

The third was Iran. The administration says President Trump acted on intelligence indicating that the threat from Iran was a matter of national security, and the press largely didn’t take that case seriously.

The media also zeroed in on the ballroom, the Reflecting Pool renovation, and similar stories to make Trump look unfocused. That isn’t unfair, since he did spend attention and money on them, but the press clearly saw an opening and leaned into it.

Q: You mentioned corruption as a problem. This is a global problem on all sides of the fence. Can it be solved? — Brian from Australia

A: Corruption happens in every presidential administration at some level. It’s impossible to completely root out, given how much power the president and those around him have. But just as we covered the Biden corruption during his term, specifically with Anthony Fauci and Hunter Biden, the amount of corruption completely out in the open under Trump is a bit dizzying.

Part of it seems to be that Trump no longer cares much about the norms of the presidency. It’s also unusual to have a president this wealthy with global business interests, but the scale of these conflicts appears far greater than in his first administration.

We’ve covered the business deals the president’s sons are making with the Saudis, the Qatari jet, and Trump’s top advisers and their families running around Republika Srpska, raking in money while the administration lifts sanctions. The president has personally made over $1.4 billion from new cryptocurrency ventures, not to mention the many companies that donated millions to Trump's $330 million White House ballroom and expect favors in return.

Companies backed by Donald Trump Jr.’s investment firm, 1789 Capital, have also received more than $1.6 billion in federal contracts and grants during the first 500 days of his father’s second term (though his spokesman says he plays no role in the contracting process).

With Trump, let’s remember he campaigned in 2016 on fighting elites beholden to big-money interests. He used to say he didn’t need to take lobbyists’ money because he was already rich. Now he and his family are entrenched with Middle Eastern oil states and pro-Russian parties in Eastern European backwaters.

Democrats are going to subpoena Trump officials and family, business leaders, and anybody even potentially involved in “pay-to-play” schemes or in the president’s personal enrichment. That type of pressure should slow it down, though it will predictably spiral into a witch hunt.

Q: What does this blue wave mean for us going forward? And are there things Republicans could have done but didn’t (e.g., pass the SAVE America Act)? — Quinn from Minnesota

A: There’s no question Republicans should have passed the SAVE America Act, as showing ID should be a bare minimum to vote in our elections. But even if Republicans had passed this legislation, Democrats still likely would have swept the elections. No widespread fraud has been documented in this election; voters simply came out in droves to vote against Republicans.

This blue wave has seismic consequences going forward. With a blue House and Senate, the president’s agenda stalls, and now he’s either forced to compromise with Democrats to pass any legislation, or he simply vetoes every bill and the government grinds to a halt. Democrats are already planning to subpoena various officials over the Trump family’s business deals, the White House ballroom, and ICE operations.

Impeachment articles are drafted, and Secretary of War Pete Hegseth is the likeliest first target. The incoming House Majority Leader, Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY), says impeaching Trump isn’t a priority but hasn’t ruled it out.

The bigger changes may come from the states. Democrats won six new trifectas in Arizona, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin. That could let them join the National Popular Vote compact, which has 222 of the 270 electoral votes it needs to effectively kill the Electoral College and award presidential elections to whoever receives the most votes. They could also redraw congressional maps and rewrite election laws to favor Democrats.

Big changes are coming almost everywhere, and the Democratic surge could signal a strong performance in 2028.

Q: What is the Democrats' case for impeaching Pete Hegseth? — Claire from New York

A: Democrats already filed articles of impeachment against Hegseth in April, accusing him of launching the Iran war without congressional approval, civilian casualties in Iran, follow-up strikes on alleged drug boats, the Signalgate leak, and blocking oversight. Just this week, outgoing Rep. Thomas Massie (R-KY) filed eight articles of impeachment of his own, mostly about the Iran war, but the House killed the effort.

None of this is impeachable behavior, even if it were all true. The Constitution reserves impeachment for “high crimes and misdemeanors,” and carrying out a war on the president’s orders isn’t a crime, even if it was carried out incompetently, as Democrats allege.

Regarding the boat strikes in the Caribbean, these fall within the commander in chief’s authority. Legal scholar Jonathan Turley argues the boat-strike and Signalgate controversies don’t come close to the constitutional standard, since a follow-up strike can be tied to the mission in the fog of war.

If Hegseth has failed at his job, the remedy is for the president to fire him, not for the House to remove him. Plus, a conviction would take 67 Senate votes that don’t exist.

Q: What specific, court-admissible evidence or findings have been documented by bipartisan election authorities or law enforcement agencies to substantiate claims of widespread irregularities? — Steve from California

A: Right now, election officials, courts, and audits haven’t documented any widespread fraud in the midterms, and Trump initially said he would accept the results. But he later questioned whether the election was honest, without providing evidence for his claims.

Some claims circulating online point to registration totals exceeding the Census citizen voting-age population, but these estimates rely on outdated or incomplete figures that include inactive records (kept for multiple election cycles under federal law) and don’t show extra ballots being cast.

We know active voter counts and turnout consistently fall well below eligible populations, and database cross-checks turn up only rare, small-scale issues rather than big, systemic irregularities.

The 2020 presidential race was quite different in this respect. Biden’s combined margin in Arizona, Georgia, and Wisconsin was about 43,000 votes, making accusations of irregularities in those close states understandable.

Q: Lots of people moved from blue states between 2020 & now. Is there any evidence that these transplants flipped red states blue, like Texas? — Ashley from Kentucky

A: Let’s look at the numbers. From 2015 to 2024, about 2.07 million people moved to Texas from strongly Democratic states, while 1.37 million moved the other way — a net gain of about 700,000. That’s less than Talarico’s roughly 1.2 million-vote margin, and we don’t know how those people voted.

The transplants also aren’t as left-leaning as people assume. One analysis found Californians who moved to Texas between 2020 and 2024 had a 17-point Republican registration advantage.

The bigger factors really point elsewhere. Nationally, only about a third of Hispanic voters backed Republicans for the House this year, down from roughly four in ten who voted for Trump in 2024.

Young people swung over 30 points to the Democrats. Pretty much every recorded demographic ditched Republicans. Migration may have played a role, but these figures don’t show how much; broader shifts in voter preferences likely mattered more.

What do you think was the main cause of the Democrat sweep?

Let us know what you think →