Democrats Win Multiple US Special Elections as Trump Consolidates GOP Primary Control

Two competing storylines are defining American politics six months before the 2026 midterms. In special elections across the country, Democrats are running far ahead of their 2024 baselines — flipping seats in districts Donald Trump won by double digits. At the same time, Trump is exerting unprecedented control over Republican primaries, purging dissenters and clearing fields for loyalists. The tension between these two dynamics — a party consolidating internally while losing ground externally — will shape the fight for Congress this November.

The Numbers: Democratic Overperformance Across the Board

Since January 2025, there have been 117 state legislative special elections nationwide, with Democrats winning 67 of those races [1]. Democrats flipped 21 percent of all GOP-held seats that were on the ballot throughout 2025, gaining 25 state Senate and House seats previously held by Republicans out of 119 resolved contests [2]. In 2026 alone, Democrats have flipped four additional state legislative seats [3].

At the congressional level, Democrats have improved on their 2024 presidential margins by an average of roughly 11 points in 2026 special elections and approximately 13 points since the start of 2025 [4]. The most dramatic swing came in Georgia's 14th Congressional District — formerly held by Marjorie Taylor Greene — where Republican Clay Fuller won by only 12 points in a district Trump carried by 37 [5]. That 25-point swing represented the largest shift against the GOP in any House special election during Trump's second term.

Source: Ballotpedia / NPR analysis

Data as of May 6, 2026CSV

The April 2026 elections in Wisconsin and Georgia underscored the trend. Democrat Chris Taylor won a Wisconsin Supreme Court seat by 20 points, while the Georgia special election showed a nearly 20-point shift from 2024 GOP margins [4]. In Ohio's 6th District special election in February, Democrats overperformed their 2024 baseline by 17 points [1].

What's Driving the Swing?

Precinct-level data from these special elections remains limited, but the available evidence points to several converging forces. Analysts at Brookings note that special elections primarily measure enthusiasm gaps — and the current gap strongly favors Democrats [6]. In the 2025 off-year elections, strong support in suburban counties came disproportionately from women and college-educated voters, a pattern consistent with the anti-Trump coalition that has formed in every election since 2017 [7].

Republican strategists have identified a distinct problem with base turnout. Axios reported in February 2026 that GOP "angst over voter turnout builds as losses pile up," with Trump supporters staying home in low-salience elections even in deep-red districts [8]. The Inquisitr documented multiple cases where Trump's base failed to materialize in special elections held in territory he dominated in 2024 [9].

The generic congressional ballot tells a similar story from a different angle. As of May 2026, Democrats lead Republicans 47.6% to 41.9% — a D+5.7 advantage [10]. Consumer sentiment has also declined significantly, with the University of Michigan index falling to 53.3 in March 2026, down from 79.4 in March 2024 [11].

Source: FRED / Federal Reserve

Data as of Mar 1, 2026CSV

Trump's Approval: The Backdrop

The electoral environment tracks closely with Trump's sliding approval numbers. His job approval stood above 50% when he took office for his second term in January 2025 but has fallen steadily to around 39% approving and 58% disapproving, a net approval of -18.4, according to the Silver Bulletin average [12]. A Washington Post/ABC/Ipsos poll in early May found disapproval reaching a new high [13]. On specific issues, approval for his handling of inflation stands at just 30%, the economy at 37%, and health care at 29% [14].

Source: Silver Bulletin / Pew Research

Data as of May 6, 2026CSV

Pew Research reported in May that Trump has "lost ground on several personal traits" as his approval has slipped, with Americans growing more skeptical of his competence and honesty compared to when he entered office [15].

Trump's Primary Machine: Purging Dissent in Indiana

While losing ground in general elections, Trump has demonstrated his ability to punish Republican dissenters in primaries. The most striking example came on May 5, 2026, in Indiana, where Trump-backed challengers defeated five of seven Republican state senators who had voted against his congressional redistricting plan in December 2025 [16].

The backstory: Indiana's Republican-led state Senate dealt Trump a rare rebuke when 21 Republicans joined all 10 Democrats in voting down a new congressional map designed to deliver two additional GOP seats [17]. Trump responded on Truth Social by calling the senators "SUCKERS" and declaring, "Every one of these people should be primaried" [16]. His allies followed through, spending roughly $12 million on advertising across the seven contested races [18].

The results sent a clear message. Five of the seven targeted incumbents lost to Trump-endorsed challengers [16]. As NBC News reported, Trump "exacted revenge" on legislators who had prioritized their constituents' opposition to the redistricting plan over the president's wishes [16].

The Massie Test: Limits of Trump's Power?

The most closely watched upcoming test of Trump's primary influence is Kentucky's May 19 contest, where seven-term Rep. Thomas Massie faces Trump-endorsed former Navy SEAL Ed Gallrein [19]. Trump endorsed Gallrein in October 2025, before Gallrein had even entered the race, and has since campaigned in the district, calling Massie "a disaster for our party" and "disloyal to America" [20].

Massie's offenses include supporting Democratic measures to limit presidential powers abroad, championing the Jeffrey Epstein probe that Trump sought to halt, and voting against the president's tax and immigration enforcement package alongside Sen. Rand Paul [19]. MAGA-aligned groups have poured millions into the race [19].

The outcome will test whether Trump's endorsement power extends to unseating an incumbent congressman, not just state legislators. As Al Jazeera noted, the Kentucky primary "may test Trump's hold on the Republican Party" in a way the Indiana races did not, given Massie's national profile and libertarian-conservative constituency [21].

The Republican Counterargument

Republican strategists offer several reasons to dismiss special election results as misleading predictors.

First, turnout: Special election raw vote totals are typically less than half of what the same party received in the same district in 2024 [6]. Mason Di Palma of the Republican State Leadership Committee said in February, "Let's not pretend a couple of low-turnout special elections suddenly signal a political earthquake" [8].

Second, organizational investment: Republicans argue that Trump's cash-flush political operation did not aggressively work to turn out the president's supporters in these contests, something it will do for House and Senate elections in November [8]. Trump plans to campaign aggressively, which allies believe will drive higher turnout when it counts.

Third, historical precedent: While special elections "more often than not break against the party that holds the presidency," as University of Virginia Professor Kyle Kondik has found in data going back to 1957, the relationship between special election margins and midterm outcomes is imperfect [6]. The opposition party's advantage in specials sometimes exceeds its eventual midterm performance, and sometimes falls short. The 2002 midterms, held after 9/11, saw the president's party actually gain seats despite some earlier special election losses — a reminder that external events can scramble the pattern.

Fourth, candidate quality and local factors: Individual special elections can produce extreme swings due to weak candidates, local controversies, or unusual matchups that have no analog in a November general election [22]. Georgia's 14th District, for example, was an open seat vacated by Greene — not a contested incumbent race — and the dynamics of replacing a polarizing figure differ from those of a typical competitive district.

The Money Picture

The financial landscape complicates any simple narrative. At the party committee level, Republican organizations held a substantial cash advantage heading into 2026. As of November 2025, the RNC, NRSC, and NRCC had raised $340 million and held nearly $320 million in cash, compared to $310 million raised and $167 million in cash for their Democratic counterparts [23]. The RNC alone held $95 million versus the DNC's $14 million, with the DNC carrying $17.5 million in debt [23].

However, at the candidate level the picture reverses. Democratic House candidates collectively raised $497 million in 2025 — about 20% more than their Republican counterparts [24]. Small-dollar fundraising has surged on the Democratic side, driven by grassroots energy that mirrors the special election overperformance. Trump-aligned super PAC MAGA Inc. had $304 million banked at year-end 2025 [24], giving Republicans a significant outside-spending advantage that has yet to be fully deployed.

In individual special elections, financial asymmetry has varied. Some Democratic wins came with significant national investment; others did not. The evidence does not support a claim that money alone explains the margins, given that Democrats overperformed even in races where Republican spending was competitive.

Structural Factors: Redistricting and the 2026 Map

The redistricting landscape adds another variable. Eight states have redrawn their congressional maps ahead of November 2026, including Texas, California, Missouri, North Carolina, Ohio, Utah, Virginia, and Florida [25]. The Cook Political Report estimates Republicans could net around four seats from redistricting alone following a Supreme Court ruling that weakened Voting Rights Act protections [25]. But California's new maps could flip up to five seats toward Democrats, partially offsetting Republican gains in Texas [25].

This mid-decade redistricting scramble — one of the largest coordinated efforts to redraw maps between censuses in modern American history [22] — means the districts that produced special election swings may not even exist in their current form by November. The structural conditions of an open seat in a safely red district, with a polarizing predecessor and an unusual candidate matchup, rarely replicate across dozens of competitive seats in a general election.

What History Says — and Doesn't

The historical record on special elections as midterm predictors is suggestive but not dispositive. Since 1957, special elections have more often than not broken against the president's party, and large swings in specials have frequently preceded wave midterms — 2006 and 2018 among them [6]. Brookings found that the current swing of 13 to 15 points toward Democrats in congressional specials, combined with a similar shift in the 2025 gubernatorial races in New Jersey and Virginia, is consistent with a political environment that produces significant midterm losses for the president's party [14].

But the generic ballot, currently at D+5.7, suggests a smaller pro-Democratic swing than the special elections alone imply [10]. Analysts note that generic ballot margins tend to widen as the election nears, which could mean the specials are leading indicators of a larger shift to come — or that they are overstating it.

The honest answer is that special elections are a thermometer, not a crystal ball. They measure the current temperature of the electorate with unusual precision because they strip away the noise of a national campaign. But the temperature in May is not the temperature in November, and the electorate that votes in a February special in Ohio is not the electorate that will vote in a November midterm across 435 House districts.

The Dual Bind

The Republican Party faces a structural tension that special elections and primary results together illuminate. Trump's ability to purge dissenters — demonstrated in Indiana and being tested in Kentucky — reinforces internal party discipline but does so by selecting for candidates who prioritize loyalty to the president over appeal to the broader electorate. The $12 million spent defeating Republican incumbents in Indiana [18] is $12 million not spent on competitive general election seats.

Meanwhile, the Democratic overperformance in specials suggests that the broader electorate is moving away from the GOP, driven by declining presidential approval, economic dissatisfaction, and an enthusiasm gap that consistently favors the opposition. Whether that gap closes when Trump's full political operation engages in November, as Republican strategists predict, or widens as it did in 2018 and 2006, is the central question of the 2026 cycle.

Six months out, the signals are clear even if the outcome is not. Democrats are winning where they should be losing, and Trump is winning primaries while the party loses everything else.