Shellshocked Republicans will spend months ferreting out explanations for the thumping they received in the 2026 midterm elections, just as triumphant Democrats will work on weaving their own narratives. At this early stage, many results are still being tallied, but the Senate results (as of this writing, Democrats have flipped seven seats and will comfortably control the chamber, with two races still undecided) are at least clear enough to ponder the question: what does the Senate swing mean?

In one sense, the loss of Senate seats was simply a reversion to the historical trend that the president’s party often loses seats in Congress during midterm elections. The past two midterms broke the trend, with Democrats gaining one seat in 2022 and Republicans gaining two seats in 2018. But, before that, the party who controlled the White House lost nine Senate seats in 2014, six in 2010, six in 2006, eight in 1994, and eight in 1986 (1990, 1998, and 2002 also broke the trend).

Both the trend and its exceptions are subject to a variety of factors, such as geography (how many seats the president’s party must defend, and in which states), current events (2002 broke the trend because of 9/11), and the quality of candidates who run.

South Carolina

Candidate quality tells at least part of the story for the 2026 midterm election, as demonstrated by Democrats winning a Senate race in South Carolina for the first time this century.

On Tuesday, Senator Darline Graham (R) received 951,165 (46.7%) to 1,042,362 votes (51.1%) for Annie Andrews (D). This was not because more Democrats than Republicans turned out to vote. In the secretary of state race, Republican Mark Hammond took 1,072,797 votes (52.9%) over Democrat Jason Belton’s 955,922 (47.1%). In the attorney general race, Republican David Stumbo (R) took 1,058,525 votes (52.3%) over Democrat Richard Hricik’s 963,645 (47.6%).

Notice not just the margins but also the total numbers of votes. Hammond won 121,632 more votes than Graham, and Stumbo won 107,360 more votes. By contrast, Andrews won 86,440 more votes than Belton and 78,717 more than Hricik. (A third-party Senate candidate took 23,560 votes, and the total votes cast in each race only varied by around 15,000.)

Clearly, a number of voters (somewhere from 80,000 to 110,000) in South Carolina split their tickets, choosing the Republican candidates for attorney general and secretary of state, but choosing the Democratic candidate for U.S. Senate, and those voters (approximately 5% of the total) made the difference. These voters likely at least leaned Republican, and probably would have voted for the late Lindsey Graham, but they evidently chose not to support his sister Darline.

Why would Republican-leaning voters not support the Republican candidate? For one thing, her answers to policy questions did not inspire confidence in her grasp of the issues. When asked in the August 18 special primary runoff debate about U.S. security interests regarding Taiwan, Graham responded, “National security is not my thing,” and “I’m not that informed on national security.” It was a refreshing bit of honesty, but not a compelling answer for voters seeking to choose a government official for a six-year term.

In fairness to Graham, it’s worth recalling how she ended up as a senator and senatorial candidate in the first place. Two days after Senator Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) died suddenly on July 11, Governor Henry McMaster (R) appointed his younger sister Darline to fill out the vacancy until January. That same day, July 13, President Donald Trump announced, “I recommended, to Governor Henry McMaster, Lindsey Graham’s wonderful sister, Darline, to serve as interim Senator from the Great State of South Carolina.”

Before the week was out, on July 17, President Trump urged Graham to run for Senate in her own right, granting her “my Complete and Total Endorsement in the Special Election for U.S. Senate in South Carolina — SHE WILL NEVER LET YOU DOWN. RUN, DARLINE, RUN!” These rapid announcements were enough to deter most serious candidates (besides Ralph Norman) from entering the race, and Graham took the Republican mantle largely unopposed, simply on the strength of Trump’s endorsement.

After Graham’s flubbed debate answer, Trump tied himself even more personally to the race, urging South Carolina voters on August 21, “What I really want you to do is pretend, please, that I’m on the ballot. Just come and vote. It’s so important. Just say that I’m on the ballot one more time.” The message (of non-confidence) was clear: if you won’t support Darline in her own right, support her because she is an ally of Trump.

The problem was that, by mid-October, President Trump’s approval rating in South Carolina had fallen to 41% (with disapproval at 52%), according to a Civiqs poll. Many South Carolinian voters may indeed have voted for Senate as if Trump were on the ballot — and voted against him.

Texas

The issue of candidate quality in Senate races is less clear in other states, simply because Democrats enjoyed much larger statewide margins. However, the trends are still visible.

In Texas, Ken Paxton (R) received 4,249,752 votes (43.0%) to James Talarico’s (D) 5,445,121 (55.1%). Other Republicans lost, but by smaller margins. Governor Greg Abbott (R) lost reelection with 4,524,948 votes (45.7%) to Gina Hinojosa’s (D) 5,230,908 (52.8%). Lieutenant Governor Dan Patrick (R) lost with 4,485,055 votes (45.6%) to Vikki Goodwin’s (D) 5,083,702 (51.7%). Mayes Middleton (R) lost the race for attorney general with 4,502,855 votes (45.9%) to Nathan Johnson’s (D) 5,133,740 (52.4%).

Whereas three statewide Republican candidates trailed by 6.1% to 7.1% of the vote, Paxton trailed by 12.1%. Every other Republican received about 4.5 million votes, while Paxton’s total was reduced by about a quarter million. By the same token, Talarico surpassed the other statewide Democratic candidates by some 200,000 to 350,000 votes. Again, the results suggest significant ticket-splitting, with Republican-leaning Texans voting against Ken Paxton.

What made Paxton a flawed candidate was not the inexperience of Darline Graham but the stench of immorality. “Ken Paxton had a lot of baggage,” Family Research Council President Tony Perkins summarized charitably from FRC’s 2026 Decision Desk. “There were many, many conservatives that could not support him. … I know people said, ‘The Senate was hanging in the balance.’ Yeah, but — I mean, his personal lifestyle was unfolding in real time.”

To give the smallest flavor of Paxton’s personal life, The Wall Street Journal reported on October 12 that he spent New Year’s Eve 2024 at a luxury hotel in Dubai with a woman who is not his wife, at a party also attended by fugitives from U.S. justice. This was only the latest revelation to gild the politician’s already sleazy reputation.

Yet, as in South Carolina, President Trump staked his own political capital on Paxton’s success. In the March 3 primary, incumbent Senator John Cornyn (R) narrowly led Paxton 41.9% to 40.7%, setting up a run-off election on May 26. After previously staying out of the race between two supporters, on May 19 President Trump issued a surprise endorsement of Paxton as “a true MAGA Warrior who has ALWAYS delivered for Texas,” while Cornyn he characterized as “not supportive of me when times were tough” and “very late in backing me.”

As a result, the four-term senator lost in a lopsided result, taking only 36.2% of the vote to Paxton’s 63.8% in the runoff.

Polling from before the runoff primary already showed Talarico with a slight lead, but then Trump chose the scandal-ridden attorney general instead of the experienced Senate veteran, who had already weathered Democratic storms in 2008 and 2020.

Indeed, Paxton’s candidacy may help to explain the utter rout of Texas Republicans. Not only did he lose by double digits, but other Republican candidates also lost by sizable margins, and Democrats won control of the state House of Representatives, in a state that usually shows a reliable conservative lean. If conservatives stayed home in disgust over Paxton’s candidacy, that could explain the GOP’s poor showing across Texas.

Support for one popular candidate helps carry partisan allies on the same ballot over the finish line. Analysts call this phenomenon “coattails” (a term dating back to when people wore coats with long tails). Did Paxton have negative coattails, pulling other candidates down?

North Carolina

A third race worthy of mention is the flipped seat that wasn’t even on the list of battlegrounds. In North Carolina, former Governor Roy Cooper (D) sailed to victory against Republican Michael Whatley, winning 58.7% of the vote to 39.1%. The fact that Cooper didn’t even have to sweat enabled Democrats to focus their money elsewhere, driving their advantage deeper into Republican territory. Cooper’s coattails also led to Democrats flipping at least five Congressional seats in North Carolina.

This uncontested loss — at least, the fact that it was so weakly contested — is a consequence of President Trump’s vendetta against two-term Senator Thom Tillis (R). Tillis has distinguished himself as one of the least conservative Senate Republicans, but he did demonstrate the ability to win in increasingly purple North Carolina. On June 27, 2025, Trump said he would seek a primary challenger against Tillis after Tillis voted against the Big Beautiful Bill. The next day, Tillis announced he would not seek reelection in 2026.

Several weeks later, President Trump granted Whatley his “Complete and Total Endorsement,” leading to Whatley’s dominant performance in the Republican primary. But neither Whatley nor, perhaps, any other Republican besides Tillis could have presented a serious challenge to the popular Cooper.

Other losses

As for the other Senate seats Republicans lost, the explanations are less clear. In Maine, perhaps it was surprising that progressive Republican Susan Collins has held on in the deep-blue northeast for as long as she did. In Ohio, gubernatorial candidate Vivek Ramaswamy may have had his own negative coattails after a distasteful attack ad backfired. The losses in Iowa and Kansas may say more about the national mood than any particular candidate.

This is especially true in Kansas, where stellar Senator Roger Marshall (R) went down in defeat to heretical pastor Adam Hamilton (D).

As suggested above, it will take some time to sort out the real explanations behind the complex consequences of the 2026 midterm. But at least in a few notable Senate races, it seems that Republicans made their problems worse by choosing the wrong candidates because the president told them to.