Analysts see Trump's rejection and anticipate political confrontation

A democratic historical victory in the US mid-term elections represents a rejection of Donald Trump's policies, but analysts differ as to whether the President will respond by moderating his performance or radicalizing positions.

Nuno Gouveia, an American political expert, believes that voters have turned Tuesday's elections into a referendum on Trump's presidency, while US investigator Susan Goodwill believes that the results mark the end of a political era.

Paul Star, a French expert in international politics linked to the University of Lille, considers that Republican defeat can free Trump to adopt even more radical decisions, anticipating a period of confrontation between the White House and Congress.

“ The Americans have rejected Donald Trump and his policies for the past two years. The victory of the Democratic Party is staggering,” says Nuno Gouveia, who finds historical parallels only in the 1974 elections, after the resignation of Richard Nixon, in 1994, when the Republicans recovered the House of Representatives, and in 2010, during the presidency of Barack Obama.

The expert points out that the dimension of democratic victory is particularly significant because electoral conditions favored Republicans, both due to changes in electoral circles in the House of Representatives and to the distribution of states in dispute in the Senate.

Democratic conquests in traditionally conservative states such as Texas, Kansas, Iowa and South Carolina demonstrate, in their perspective, the depth of Republican defeat.

“The President himself asked the Americans to vote as if his name were on the ballot. And that’s what they did,” Gouveia said, countering this interpretation to Trump’s attempt to distance himself from the results by not having participated directly in the elections.

The US President acknowledged in an interview with Fox News that the war in Iran was “partially” responsible for the Republican defeat, although he also congratulated the Democrats, admitting that they “did a good job.”.

For Nuno Gouveia, the conflict with Iran and the consequent increase in fuel prices were only part of a set of factors that penalised Republicans, including commercial tariffs, immigrant deportations, proximity to Russia, and accusations of corruption and abuse of power directed at the administration.

The expert particularly highlights the evolution of the Hispanic vote, which he considers decisive for the Democratic victories in Texas, where the party achieved historical results.

Also Susan Goodwill, an American researcher at the University of Sussex in Brighton, attributes Republican defeat to voters' discontent with the economic situation, especially fuel prices, unemployment and social inequalities.

In his analysis, the same material factors, namely inflation, which contributed to Trump's return to the White House in 2024 ended up penalizing Republicans two years later.

Goodwill considers that the electorate conveyed an unequivocal message of dissatisfaction with the second presidential term and voted decisively to limit Trump's power.

The researcher goes further in interpreting the political significance of the elections, supporting that, almost ten years after the surprising 2016 presidential victory over Hillary Clinton, “the Trump era has effectively come to an end.”.

The conclusion contrasts with Paul Star's perspective, for whom Republican defeat does not necessarily mean weakening the President's political strategy.

“Republican defeat is essentially a defeat of Trump. However, do not believe those who look at these results as the failure of the US President’s strategy,” says the French expert.

Star admits that Trump can take advantage of the new political situation to renew the team, surround himself with collaborators closer to their positions and ignore the message transmitted by voters.

“Trump will now be freer to make even more radical, even more extremist decisions,” the French analyst warns.

Despite the differences in the presidential reaction, the three analysts converge on the assessment that the Democratic victory will profoundly transform the functioning of the American institutions.

With the control of the two chambers of Congress, Democrats may block presidential nominations, including for the federal courts and the Supreme Court, as well as trigger parliamentary investigations into the President's administration and personal circle.

Nuno Gouveia considers that a Democratic majority in the Senate, which admits to being able to reach 56 places when the counts are completed, will strongly limit Trump's margin of manoeuvre in the next two years.

Susan Goodwill also highlights the possibility for Democrats to regain constitutional powers of Congressional oversight, promote investigations of government members and give greater visibility to their own legislative priorities.

Paul Star anticipates, however, that Trump will seek to counter the opposition through presidential veto and executive decisions, paving the way for an institutional confrontation.

“ We can see a chaotic confrontation between the White House and Congress”, says Star.

Another point of convergence among analysts is the possibility of defeat causing internal divisions in the Republican Party, although the perspectives on Trump's ability to retain political leadership are different.

Nuno Gouveia believes that the President has lost influence with the electorate, but continues to control the basis of the MAGA movement, so it is not certain that the main Republican figures are available to confront him.

“ The question is whether there will be a civil war in the party or whether, as so far, the great Republican figures continue to be afraid to confront Trump ", says the Portuguese analyst.

In his view, the results undermine Vice President JD Vance's presidential ambitions in 2028, while Marco Rubio may present himself as an alternative with greater ability to approach the centrist electorate.

Susan Goodwill also anticipates a growing challenge to presidential leadership, considering that younger and ambitious Republicans may seek to distance themselves from Trump to protect their own political perspectives.

Paul Star also admits divisions between the leaders willing to move away from the President and those who will continue to defend him in the hope of obtaining their support in the forthcoming presidential elections.

The differences may also arise in the Democratic Party, where the dimension of victory has strengthened different ideological currents.

Nuno Gouveia highlights the results of centrist candidates such as Jon Ossoff, Georgia, and Josh Shapiro, Pennsylvania, but acknowledges that the progressive wing is also strengthened, notably with the Michigan victory of Abdul El-Sayed, who became the first Muslim elected to the Senate.

For the expert, the absence of a favorite Democrat for the President of 2028 could be an advantage, allowing new figures to assert themselves in competitive primaries.

Paul Star also considers that the result opens an opportunity for Democrats to build a political agenda capable of sustaining the next presidential candidacy, but warns that the reaction of the conservative electorate remains unpredictable.

The French analyst admits that Republicans may seek a more moderate figure or, on the contrary, a successor of Trump who promises to implement the policies that the current President could not execute.

Tuesday's elections gave the Democrats control of the Senate and the House of Representatives, with surprising victories in Republican states and the defeat of historical figures like Susan Collins in Maine.

The final dimension of the Democratic Majorities remains to be determined.

For analysts, however, the main unknown is no longer the one who will control Congress and become the way Trump and the two parties will respond to the new political balance until the President of 2028.