Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Dems Favored To Win Midterms — Will They Run the Candidates Voters Want?

A rising electorate demands candidates who answer to citizens, not political insiders.

Opinion

Voters standing at voting booths.

As midterm elections approach, betting markets favor Democrats—but voter distrust, anti-establishment sentiment, and demand for reform could reshape the party’s future.

Getty Images, adamkaz

Donald Trump can dismiss his dismal approval ratings and the GOP’s sinking midterm odds as fake news – but he can’t ignore the betting markets. More accurate in predicting political elections than traditional opinion polls, Democrats are a heavy midterm favorite, with an 87% chance of taking the House, and winning the Senate, 52 seats to 48.

But for any Democratic victory to be more than a temporary restraining order on Trump and the GOP, the Democratic Party needs to start placing voters front and center, building a way forward focused on what millions of voters have made clear they need: a new type of candidate with character who will fight, not fold with a new agenda that puts them first – an agenda untethered to the political class(Democrat and Republican) who put the needs of special interests and billionaires over ordinary citizens. In short, they want candidates who are voter-centered, not donor-centered.


As a lifelong Democrat and political activist, I stand with them. Specializing in the rhetoric of social movements, I know that economic instability, social chaos, and efforts to deny some groups their fundamental rights are conditions currently in play that have historically triggered powerful social change.

More than eight million people took to the streets on March 28th for the Third No Kings March, the largest protest gathering in US history, calling for an end to Donald Trump’s assault on our democracy and economy, disastrous foreign policy, and most critically, his war on Iran. These public demonstrations are part of a larger political climate of disillusionment where, according to 2025 Pew Research Center data, just 17% of Americans express trust in their government.

During the past year, millions of American voters, through polling research, focus groups, and protests, have voiced their dissatisfaction and belief that the system is broken, our politicians are owned, and public policies favor billionaires over voters.

Regarding the Democrat Party in particular, just 27% of registered voters have a positive view of them; this includes the many Democrats who are angry and dissatisfied with their party’s leadership. Not only were the 2024 election results a dismal failure, but so too were their tepid efforts to oppose Trump’s policies. Elected Democrats left that job to ordinary citizens: Minnesotans, millions of No-Kingsprotestors, and community groups.

A recent poll of double haters – voters with unfavorable impressions of both major parties -- now favor Democrats by 6% in the midterms, “driven more by opposition to the GOP rather than enthusiasm for the Democrats.” Most importantly, 70% of Independents now disapprove of Trump. As the largest voter group, 45% compared to 27% Republican or Democrat, Independents have enormous clout and were a significant force behind Trump’s sweeping electoral victory.

Democrats have a rare opportunity to reinvent themselves, rather than gain the temporary upper hand in a broken system - to seize the moment by supporting new types of candidates pursuing a new agenda. For example, there is a preponderance of information on voters' beliefs that their representatives are “owned.” A voter-centered candidate would directly acknowledge this core problem and provide PLANS to fix it. What immediate steps can be taken to curb billionaires’ power in our elections? What long-term strategy do they propose for comprehensive campaign finance reform? Are they willing to fully disclose their own campaign contributions and financing? According to Pew Foundation research, there is strong support among voters for curbing career politicians by imposing term limits. How will a candidate work to make that happen?

Other issues, regardless of urgency, like the impact of AI on the workforce, are secondary to establishing a voter-centered agenda that drives solutions to specific problems. In the case of AI, how does the fix primarily benefit ordinary citizens rather than tech companies?

Occasionally, new types of candidates slip through the Democratic machine, but they are quickly sidelined if challenging the Old Guard, even though it’s under the Old Guard that the Democratic Party’s credibility has sunk to a new low.

Democrats have the odds going for them in November. Whether the party will seize this opportunity to get beyond the lesser of two evils and redefine itself with a voter-centered agenda is anybody’s guess.


Trudy Bayer is a specialist in the rhetoric of social movements. She was the founding director of the Oral Communication Lab at the University of Pittsburgh.


Read More

What the World Cup Teaches Us About Democracy

Charles De Ketelaere #17 of Belgium scores his team’s first goal past Unai Simon #23 of Spain during the FIFA World Cup 2026 Quarter Final match between Spain and Belgium at Los Angeles Stadium on July 10, 2026, in Inglewood, California.

(Photo by David Ramos/Getty Images)

What the World Cup Teaches Us About Democracy

As live sporting events go, nothing comes close to the World Cup. I was in the stands when South Africa, my birth country, hosted the event in 2010 after decades of exclusion from global athletics. In June of this year, I had a full-circle moment when South Africa played in the knockout rounds for the first time, and I stood with my two American sons, arms around them, singing South Africa's anthem — the only national anthem that weaves multiple languages into a single, unifying song. Later in the week, I was in the stands again, cheering Spain's win over Austria, a country to which my only connections are a brief holiday…and the fact that my mother's family fled from there during the Inquisition.

The magic of the World Cup is that everyone in the stands wears the flags and shirts of countries that are “theirs” in some way. For some, it’s where they were born; for others, where they live or where their ancestors hailed from. For some, it is simply a country they have adopted for the afternoon. It is impossible to know how deep a person’s connection runs simply by looking at them. And next to a person waving one team’s colors is a stranger, family member, or close friend supporting the opposing team—or wearing the jersey of a team that isn’t playing that day at all.

Keep ReadingShow less
​Former President Joe Biden, former President Barack Obama, former President George W. Bush, and former President Bill Clinton pose together.

Former President Joe Biden, former President Barack Obama, former President George W. Bush, and former President Bill Clinton pose ahead of the dedication ceremony for the opening of the Barack Obama Presidential Center, in John Lewis Plaza, on June 18, 2026, in Chicago, Illinois.

Pablo Martinez Monsivais - Pool / Getty Images

America Shouldn't Need a Political Savior to Hold It Together

America is waiting for a political savior, but the problem is structural.

This dynamic was illustrated during two recent broadcast appearances by journalist Katy Tur. Discussing modern secessionist movements on June 15, 2026, Tur found optimism in a poll showing 54 percent of Americans still believe we share core values, and she later expressed hope that future leaders could reunite the country.

Keep ReadingShow less
Constitution of the United State with the U.S. flag in the background.

The Framers designed a republic with the intention to manage factionalism through deliberate compromise and institutional guardrails, whereas 21st-century polarization often treats compromise as a moral failing.

Douglas Sacha, Getty Images

Our Framers on 21st Century Primaries and Polarization

The Framers would view 21st-century closed primaries and political polarization as the exact manifestation of "factionalism" they spent the 1787 Constitutional Convention trying to prevent. They would argue these systems force candidates to appeal to ideological extremes rather than the broad, moderate consensus required for stable governance.

The Danger of Factionalism: In Federalist No. 10, James Madison defined a "faction" as a group of citizens united by a passion or interest adverse to the rights of others. He argued that while factions are inevitable, their effects must be controlled. The Framers would recognize 21st-century hyper-polarization as the dominance of unyielding factions that prioritize absolute ideological purity over democratic compromise.

Keep ReadingShow less