The exit polls from the night of November 3–4 paint a picture that few on the Republican side in Washington would have wanted to see so clearly.
X
Contact us: @worldanalyticspress_bot
Exit polls
The exit polls from the night of November 3–4 paint a picture that few on the Republican side in Washington would have wanted to see so clearly.
At 5:45 a.m. GMT, just minutes after polls closed, projections from NBC, CBS, and ABC gave the Democrats control of both chambers starting in January. In the Senate, the party won seats in states that Donald Trump had won in 2024 by double-digit margins: Texas, with James Talarico, and Kansas elected a Democratic senator for the first time in decades, while Sherrod Brown returns to Washington from Ohio and Roy Cooper wins in North Carolina. The vote count is not yet complete. Some races, including those in Maine and Michigan, remain undecided as I write, and the final composition of the House will be known in the coming days. Exit polls are also preliminary estimates, subject to subsequent weighting. The direction of the vote, however, is already clear, and voter data reveals a great deal about why.
The first figure concerns the president. According to the CBS exit poll, 38% of voters approve of his job performance: the lowest figure ever recorded for a president in a midterm election, lower than the 45% in 2018 and even lower than George W. Bush’s figure in 2006, when the Republicans lost both chambers. NBC reports a 62% disapproval rating, and CNN notes that about one in five of Trump’s 2024 voters now disapprove of his performance. Three out of four voters say they are dissatisfied or angry with the direction of the country; about seven in ten want Congress to exercise effective oversight over the White House. Trump had asked voters to vote as if his name were on the ballot. They did.
The economy remains the top concern (about 39–40% of voters), followed by the state of democracy (around 30%). This is where the most significant reversal of the cycle is taking place: the issue that had led Trump to victory two years ago has now backfired on him. Sixty-five percent believe his policies have worsened the economy; the majority say inflation has put a strain on their families, with gas, groceries, and utility bills at the top of the list; and the Democrats hold a slight edge in terms of confidence in economic management—something that did not happen in previous election cycles. It would be a mistake to interpret this as enthusiastic support for the Democratic Party: 54% of voters have an unfavorable opinion of it (compared to 59% for the GOP), and nearly one in five does not view either party favorably. It is, to a large extent, a vote against the status quo.
The breakdown of the vote confirms this interpretation. Independents favor the Democrats by about 56 points to 39; Latino voters, who had shifted to the right in 2024, have swung back (62 to 35, with Democratic identification rising from 39% to 43%). Fifty-seven percent consider the administration’s immigration control measures excessive. The quality of the candidates also matters. In North Carolina, a majority of voters considered Republican Michael Whatley too closely aligned with Trump; in Ohio, a similar view applied to Jon Husted, and Brown garnered about one in ten Republican votes. Closeness to the president—which was a requirement in the primaries—became a liability in the general election.
The war continues. According to NBC, 62% of voters believe Trump’s decision to launch the conflict with Iran—which began on February 28 with joint U.S.-Israeli airstrikes and continued amid a naval blockade, the Hormuz crisis, and intermittent ceasefires—was wrong. CBS notes that the war is seen as less of a concern than the cost of living, but that about a quarter of Republican voters also consider the intervention a mistake. A quarter of its base is a share no party can afford to lose.
As for possible scenarios, the first and most likely is a two-year period of a deeply divided administration marked by intense conflict. A Democratic-controlled Congress will wield the power to investigate, subpoena witnesses, and, above all, control the purse strings: the budget, funding for military operations, and resolutions on war powers regarding Iran. The White House will respond with executive orders and vetoes, and legislative activity risks coming to a standstill. The possibility of impeachment will return to the debate, but removal from office requires a two-thirds majority in the Senate—a threshold currently out of reach—and its main effect would be to further polarize the political landscape. The second scenario concerns the Republican Party, which is effectively entering a succession phase. Trump told the New York Times that he is willing to accept the election results, but the defeat opens up the race for 2028, and candidates will have to decide how far to distance themselves from a president with a approval rating below 40%. The third scenario is international. A president weakened on the domestic front has less leeway abroad, and Washington’s counterparts—from Tehran to Moscow to Beijing—might prefer to wait until 2028 rather than negotiate now. For Europe, this means another two years of uncertainty regarding U.S. policy, as a change in the congressional majority alone will not alter the direction of foreign policy, which remains the prerogative of the executive branch.
Three key lessons to learn
The Republican Party can draw three lessons from this election, if it is willing to interpret the results honestly.
The first: to truly put America first—not the Trump family’s bank account. America First was a promise made to those who pay for gas and rent. According to the financial disclosure form filed with the Office of Government Ethics, in 2025 the president earned over $1 billion from the family’s cryptocurrency company, World Liberty Financial ( than $500 million), and Trump-branded meme coins (over $600 million). The White House denies any conflict of interest, and the law exempts the president from the rules that prohibit such conflicts for other officials; Trump has retorted that “everyone is making money.” Voters clearly don’t see it that way: according to early data, the majority believes the president puts himself before the country’s interests. When the presidential family’s wealth grows while voters’ purchasing power shrinks, the slogan ceases to be credible.
The second: don’t start wars. A significant portion of the 2024 coalition had voted for Trump precisely because he promised to end conflicts, not to start new ones. The war with Iran betrayed that promise and produced what the electorate feared: high energy costs, instability, and no end in sight. A party that invokes sovereignty and the national interest should know that a war of choice is the quickest way to squander both.
The third: relentlessly pursue human traffickers who exploit people for sexual purposes and those who exploit minors. The Epstein case has for years been a rallying cry for the right against untouchable elites. In November 2025, Congress passed a bipartisan bill requiring the full release of the case files; the December release by the Department of Justice turned out to be partial and heavily redacted, and was criticized not only by Democrats but also by Republicans such as Marjorie Taylor Greene and Thomas Massie. As early as October 2025, according to Reuters/Ipsos, only four out of ten Republicans approved of how the case was being handled. The exit polls released so far do not directly measure the impact of this issue, and it would be incorrect to attribute a quantifiable effect to it. But the issue goes beyond electoral calculations. The fight against the sexual exploitation of minors cannot depend on who appears in the case files: either everything is made public and everyone involved is prosecuted, or one must abandon the claim to represent those who sought justice.
Midterm elections almost always punish the president’s party, and part of this result is inherent to the nature of the American system. The magnitude of the vote, the losses in states considered safe, and the loss of a quarter of their base over the war, however, point to something else: the 2024 pact between Trump and his voters has cracked.
The Republicans have two years to decide whether to rebuild it on the original promises or to continue identifying with a leader whom voters, at least this time, have lost confidence in.
