Last week was particularly sour for Donald Trump. To the election of the socialist Zohran Mamdani as the new mayor of New York, commented in detail in the international press, it was necessary to add three other defeats on the part of his party: the election for governor of New Jersey; the Virginia gubernatorial election; and a vote in California whose result will allow the local Democratic Party to redraw the state’s district map in its favor.
Many people, including Trump himself, blamed what happened on the ‘shutdown’ of the federal government. In other words: the lack of agreement in Congress when approving the federal budget for the fiscal year that has just begun. A paralysis that has already exceeded the 40-day barrier – a historical record – and that, by freezing all non-essential services, has led to the non-payment of payrolls for thousands and thousands of civil servants.
“We must reopen the government soon,” Trump declared at a White House breakfast last Wednesday with several Republican Party senators, only to immediately add that by “soon” he meant “immediately.”
Many in the Democratic Party celebrated Trump’s nervousness and, sharing his diagnosis, decided that the way forward was to maintain the budget blockade in the Senate – the chamber they control – until the Republican Party accepted most of their demands.
And they were there when seven of their senators (and an independent who usually aligns themselves with the progressive formation) broke ranks and chose to accept the latest Republican proposal, thus unlocking the ‘closure’ in the Upper House.
Now the agreement approved in the Senate will go to the House of Representatives, where no setbacks are expected because it is controlled by the Republican Party, and with its approval the federal government will raise the blinds again. To the anger, of course, of many people within the Democratic Party and many supporters who are referring to the eight wayward senators as “traitors to the nation.”
“I don’t think this result is good for anyone”
“I didn’t expect a victory,” Trump told the senators invited to the aforementioned breakfast last Wednesday, referring to Mamdani’s victory. Not that I thought the GOP candidate for mayor of New York –Curtis Sliwa– had some chance – he ended up getting 7% of the votes – but he did trust that the centrist Andrew Cuomowho presented himself as an independent despite being close to the Democratic Party, could prevent Mamdani’s victory.
“I don’t think this result is good for anyone,” Trump said after confirming that Mamdani had indeed obtained more than 50% of the ballots compared to Cuomo’s 41.6%. “The choice Americans now face could not be clearer: They must choose between communism and common sense.”
Although the president of the United States wanted to focus attention on New York, experts point out that the most worrying thing for the Republican Party did not happen in the Big Apple but on the other side of the Hudson River, in New Jersey, and south of Washington; in Virginia. Because? Well, because New York is still a microcosm that is difficult to extrapolate to the rest of the country. The states of New Jersey and Virginia, on the other hand, may be quite representative of how the average American breathes.
In the first of these two states, a fairly close race was expected between the Democratic Party candidate, Mikey Sherrilland the conservative Jack Ciattarelliwho also had the support of the president. It wasn’t like that.
Sherrill ended up taking more than ten percentage points ahead of his rival despite the fact that a year ago, in the presidential elections, Trump obtained a result that suggested that sooner rather than later New Jersey would fall into the hands of the Republican Party. Thanks, in part, to the Hispanic vote and the African-American vote. Two minorities who, given what has been seen, seem to have once again put distance with the tenant of the White House.
In Virginia, the Democratic Party candidate, Abigail Spanbergerobtained many more votes than Terry McAuliffethe fellow member who lost to the Republican Glenn Youngkin in the last gubernatorial elections, and surpassed what was achieved by Kamala Harris in last year’s presidential elections.
In other words: he consolidated Democratic Party fiefdoms within the southern state and made substantial gains in counties controlled by the Republican Party. Consequently, Spanberger won the victory by obtaining more than 57% of the ballots compared to the discreet 42.6% obtained by the Republican Party candidate: Winsome Earle-Sears.
Taking all of the above into account, and especially the great difference between the results of the presidential elections a year ago and last week’s elections, there are those who wonder if, in addition to the government ‘shutdown’, something else has happened in these last twelve months. And the answer to that question is usually yes.
Some experts point to ideology; Trump’s authoritarian impulses, they say, would have generated disenchantment among those who voted for him a year ago without much devotion. Others point to the economic problems that the country is facing. And then there are those who say that the absence of a certain name, “Donald Trump”, on the ballot is to blame.
Democrat Abigail Spanberger with her family on stage after her victory speech.
Reuters
In other words: there are those who maintain that a political battle without Trump at the helm is bad news for the Republican Party. And if this theory proves true, the Republican Party has two serious problems ahead.
The first is called midterm elections or midterms. They are the elections that occur in the middle of the presidential terms and that decide – among other issues – on which side the Senate and the House of Representatives will fall. The fact is that, if what just happened in Virginia and New Jersey is repeated, there is a possibility that the conservatives will take a major hit.
The second problem is none other than the 2028 presidential elections. In which, unless something extraordinary happens, Trump will not appear on the ballot because US law indicates that he cannot run again. In that case, will the millions of declared Trumpists come out to vote for whoever their replacement is? Some are quite popular –JD Vancefor example–…but no one reaches Trump’s status.
“It remains to be seen whether working-class voters with a low propensity to vote will go to the polls when Donald Trump retires from politics,” the senator pointed out a couple of days ago. Josh Hawleyof the Missouri Republican Party. “Until now when he has not appeared on the ballot they have not done so.”
Pool for 2028
The victories in New Jersey and Virginia have not only injected a good dose of optimism into the Democratic Party. They have also reopened the debate about who should appear on behalf of the party in the 2028 presidential elections.
He Washington Post is one of the newspapers that has decided to publish its own pool. For the capital newspaper, the three options most likely to excite party voters are Gavin Newsomcurrent governor of California; Josh Shapirocurrent governor of Pennsylvania; and Gretchen Whitmerthe governor of Michigan.
Newsom belongs to the progressive side of the Democratic Party, although without reaching the openly socialist postulates of Zohran Mamdani or Bernie Sanders. Shapiro and Whitmer belong to the ‘moderate’ – ergo centrist – wing of the party.
Also being considered – at some distance from the previous ones – are the names of Pete Buttigiegformer Secretary of Transportation during the presidency of Joe Biden and current mayor of a city called South Bend; Andy Beshearcurrent governor of Kentucky; JB Pritzkercurrent governor of Illinois; and that of the current governor of Maryland. a man called Wes Moore.
A second attempt by Kamala Harris is also not ruled out despite the number of voices that believe that this would be very good news for Trump and his Republican Party.