478
‘We lose the midterms’: Republicans worry Iran might have already cost them Congress
(www.politico.com)
this post was submitted on 09 Apr 2026
478 points (99.6% liked)
politics
29328 readers
2421 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
But if people keep thinking and what you are saying, then it never happens. Trust me, if everyone would suddenly vote for a third party, shit would. The duopoly wants you to keep being afraid to vote for at third party. Which is why I'll keep voting third party.
I mean yeah of course. But look at how many people in the country actually are 3rd party. Like I said if the country wasn't very clearly and decisively divided into 2 parties it would be different. But the fact is people in the US now are typically either pretty far left or pretty far right. The amount of people in the middle (like truly in the middle) is absolutely miniscule - less than 3% last I checked. If 100% of the 3rd party people voted 3rd party, it wouldn't amount to much sadly. I would absolutely love for that to change but we are wedged so far into these two parties that it will be a loooong time before that happens.
Your opposition party would be absolutely thrilled if you voted 3rd party. There is no conspiracy to stop you from doing so. I'd argue the bigger conspiracy is against changing how we vote and how a winner gets chosen as that would make it much easier for a 3rd party candidate to make headway. As it stands, the more people they can get to throw their votes away instead of voting for someone that actually has a chance of winning (unless it's their party of course) the happier they'll be.
I would be so happy to be wrong here but over the years this has only gotten worse and worse, exacerbating the problem and pushing us farther into this hellhole of diametrically opposed political theatre. But at least we are HOT HOT HOT as a country now right?! 🔥🚒 🔥
This is interesting. From the outside it looks like you have a lot of far right groups - the Republicans being the biggest example of an organised political presence. The Democrats are centre-right at best, but presumably you're talking about the people, not the political parties? In which case, surely it's on the Democrats to move left to meet the people? And if as many people are as far left as you say, that should be simple...
I'm not going to pretend I'm a political expert but from everything I can tell you are spot on. The right here is moving farther right at a much faster rate than the left is moving left. The other interesting (and depressing) caveat is that people that lean right, at least recently, tend to be much more staunchly right in their beliefs. People that lean left are often times more splintered. Which is why you get people like Bernie Sanders that are outspokenly independent but run as a left Democrat because they have a much better chance of winning if they join up with one of the two parties and they find a good amount of support on the left but virtually none on the right.
And yes! From the rooftops yes! I agree with you that it's on the Democrats (or either party really but since the Democrats have ground to make up we'll go with them) to move the party and meet the voters but so far they absolutely refuse to do so. This is why you are seeing such a high degree of dissatisfaction within the democratic voter base. The party is forcing candidates out that the people in their own party don't really want, much less people that are undecided. It is truly surprising how out of touch they are with their own voter base. Which stinks because the right is (at least until very recently) very strongly united behind their movement.
Because people like you keep repeating it and people get scared and don't wanna take the chance.
Even if every single person who voted for 3rd party in 2024 voted for Harris, she still would have lost. That's how big her margin of loss was. Look it up.
It wasn't 3rd party voters that destroyed her chances, it was non-voters.
Again, because people like you keep saying that and scaring people. Let me piggback on your conspiracy theory: Both major parties actively work to keep third-party candidates from having a real shot.
And one of the clearest examples is how they teamed up in 1987 to create the Commission on Presidential Debates. They set strict rules that have excluded virtually every third-party candidate from the national stage ever since.
It’s one of the rare things they publicly agree on: maintaining the two-party lock on the biggest platform in politics.
Add every time you vote for them, you support them doing that. I refuse.
Okay, I did. Harris lost the popular vote by roughly 2.285 million votes.
Green Party (Stein/Aware): 862,000 votes. Independent (Kennedy/Shanahan): 756,000 votes.
Libertarian (Oliver/Maat): 650,000 votes.
Other: 650,000 votes. Combined: 2.919 million.
Disproving your point technically, but your point is still taken.
But the popular vote doesn't decide the election, you say.
In Trump's three largest swing states, that if lost would've meant he lost the election, 31k greater votes went to a third party (260k) than his eventual margin (230k).
I'm not here to say there's no place for voting 3rd party, but rather to refute your point that Trump would've won without the third party voters. Demonstratively not necessary true.
Popular vote doesn't decide the election and NEVER has decided the presidential election. U.S. Constitution (Article II, Section 1) has always required the president to be chosen by the Electoral College or by the House of Representatives in rare cases where no one gets a majority of electoral votes.
The popular vote is only used by states to help choose their electors. It has never overridden or replaced the Electoral College.
Your popular-vote math is correct about shifting all ~2.92 million actual third-party votes to Harris flips the popular vote. But the presidency is decided by the Electoral College.
In the three big swing states you mentioned:
Pennsylvania: Trump’s margin (120,266) > third-party votes (~68k–92k) → PA does not flip.
Michigan + Wisconsin: yes, they flip (+25 EV).
Result: Harris ends at 251 EV, Trump at 287 EV. Trump still wins the presidency.
So the numbers actually confirm my point: even if every person who voted third-party had voted for Harris instead, Trump still becomes president.
All of this is straight from the official FEC certified results.
The popular vote does not matter, and has not mattered for a while. The Electoral vote decides the election. Which by the way, BOTH parties refuse to change.
It's essentially unknowable, because the moment we remove third party votes, we can't say for certain that margins the major parties would've ended up with. There's too many variables to say with certainty. I'll concede that all else being equal third party votes wouldn't have shifted any EC votes, but my point is that all else isn't equal in this hypothetical. What is true third party voting could've shifted the popular vote, and if it did and Trump still won we'd be looking at the third time the popular vote didn't match the popular vote in the last seven elections, all benefiting republicans. I'm not saying those wins weren't valid (except maybe 2000), but it does highlight something worth reevaluating.
The [National Popular Vote Interstate Compact](National Popular Vote Interstate Compact) would like a word. Just because there isn't support in Congress for an amendment abolishing the EC, doesn't mean there isn't bipartisan support for overriding it.
But you didnd't say that in your reply to me. You specifically said, "Disproving your point technically" and "but rather to refute your point that Trump would’ve won without the third party voters."
Also, I think it is knowable by numbers. I specifically said that if all the people who voted third party in 2024 prez election had voted for Harris instead, she still would have lost the election. The numbers show it.
We don't base it on popular vote and NEVER have. It's Electoral votes. Now I wish we went by popular vote. And I'm all for going by popular vote. But that hasn't happened yet, and wasn't a reality in 2024, which is the time frame for my example.
I'm behind ya on wanting popular vote. But you were incorrect in you orginal reply by implying that my statement was wrong. The numbers prove it.
The popular vote/electoral vote argument has been happening during every election in my lifetime. I ready for that to change, but that doesn't make my statement or facts incorrect.
Harris lost to Trump by such a large margin, that even if 3rd party voters had voted for her instead, Trump still would have won.
If you wanna point fingers, point them at non-voters. That's what would have changed the election.
Ah damn. I thought there was a decent chance at a constructive political discourse. But I see I we're just skipping straight to finger pointing (which is quite entertaining as all signs point to us being at least ostensibly politically aligned). But you are right. I concede. This is all because of me and evil people like me. You're 100% right. Surely it has nothing to do with the system that has all of us boxed into nicely manicured corners.
Just remember the 1st and only rule of political finger pointing in the US. Keep it eye level or lower. Don't look up.
That's totally the reason for most of the problems. I just refuse to stay in those corners.
And like I said, even if every single person who voted for 3rd party in 2024 voted for Harris, she still would have lost. That’s how big her margin of loss was.
It wasn’t 3rd party voters that destroyed her chances, it was non-voters.
Be mad at them, not me.