We need an option such as “Democrats win the House (and/or Senate) but Johnson (and/or Grassley) refuses to seat them and chaos ensues”. Not quite the same as “Congress no longer exists”.
That’s what I think will happen. Dems will win and Pubs will refuse to concede it.
Or enough Republicans will figure they can separate Trump’s policy failures from their local candidates’ stands. The Republican running for state representative in my legislative district does not mention “Republican” on his website or in his ads which trumpet “Washington has failed us. I will fix it.”
This is despite being a sworn witness for Kari Lake’s legal team in her failed lawsuit to overturn her loss in the 2024 governor’s race and – admittedly loose – ties to the Proud Boys.
Okay I’ll play then! My surprise prediction:
After midterms there will be no major accusations of fraud by either side (barring Trump but no actions taken in response) and the next Congress will get seated without much drama.
Remember if this surprising result happens, you heard it here first! 
“President Trump said at a rally in Kansas Monday night that the Agriculture Department would provide $8 billion in economic aid to farmers hurt by high diesel prices.”
Seems to me this could have a “Streisand Effect” for some voters. Why put a fuckup front and center in people’ minds?
By what mechanism can they do that? Armed guards? Does that mean that there’s no quorum, since there’s also no mechanism to let someone who’s out of office just hang out forever? If so then wouldn’t the House be effectively dissolved, as the poll entry says?
Wonder how the truckers feel about that?
5 posts were merged into an existing topic: US House races 2026
I started a thread about how this could be attempted back in August. Here is a link to that thread - How might the GOP keep the House after the 2026 midterms?
NY Rep Joe Morelle (D) lays it out pretty clearly in the article linked in the OP. But continuing the discussion here would be a hijack.
WRT the hypothetical bet — assuming that all bets offer the same odds, which they certainly never would in real life — obviously you should bet on Dems taking both houses, because although it’s not certain, it’s inarguably the most likely outcome at this point. And any such bet in the real world would be paid off as soon as the results are known, regardless of any subsequent events preventing the new Congress from taking power.
That depends entirely on the terms of the bet.
In a semi-related point …
If we start seeing Kalshi , et al, action on post-vote shenanigans occurring, we’ll know there’s going to be an attempt to somehow not seat at least some of the new Congress.
Any attempt would be a half assed embarrassment that probably ends in Republicans tucking tail and surrendering almost immediately. These people are neither clever nor brave.
Yeah, they’ll probably try something at some point, maybe during or after these midterms or maybe not, and it will probably fail.
It doesn’t make a lot of sense IMO to try to predict exactly what they might do or when in the context of a thread such as this.
Or maybe people will place large bets on Kalshi against Congress being seated because they want to create the perception that it is a strong possibility. Prediction markets: bullshit all the way down.
Prediction markets are opinions and opinions are like assholes. Everyone has one and they all stink.
Neil Bush, brother of George W and Jeb, voted for James Talarico. He posted an explanation on Facebook about why he did so.
That was a great watch, thanks. I loved the head-hanging walk of shame out of the room that ‘Tommy’, the Repub plant, did after El-Sayed calmly dismantled his attempted ‘gotcha’ question.
I just saw an AES attack ad last night that featured a clip from that NBC Anchor Tom Llamas segment where Llamas confronted AES outside on the street with his sister’s texts to his mother asking about the mom’s involvement with a Muslim organization with terror ties. It came across in the clip as even worse than I remember when I first saw the clip on the evening news: Llamas is very confrontational, and AES is set back on his heels and defensive in a way he was not at all in the attempted gotcha in the video Gorsnak posted.
What the hell, Llamas? It doesn’t seem at all normal for a supposedly neutral journalist to aggressively question something a candidate’s parent did before that candidate was even born.
Sayed told Kristen Welker in an interview on October 12 that his family had no ties to the Muslim Brotherhood. Llamas is upset because Sayed told a huge lie to another NBC reporter specifically.
Again, a great way to avoid being in the situation of “OK, our candidate’s whole family is part of an Islamist terrorist organization, and our candidate specifically signed a letter saying that the Islamist terrorist organization should imprison its opponents, and then he brazenly lied about all of that” where the only thing you can do is try to work the refs and claim it’s somehow “unfair” for journalists to report on these things, is to not nominate candidates in that position.
The wording I’ve found is“purge the media and the police,” not “imprison opponents.” And the statement was directed to Morsi/the Egyptian government, rather than literally saying that the Muslim Brotherhood should imprison opponents
You seem to often make extreme claims such as these without offering any kind of cites to back up your claims. El-Sayed, in the face of Islamophobia-- the levels of which rival that of the immediate aftermath of 9/11, has repeatedly denied any ties to or support of the Muslim Brotherhood. Any ties his mother may have had to terrorist-supporting organizations, however tenuous those were, happened before he was born, and, in any case, he wasn’t raised by his mother and had little contact with her growing up.
A lot of losing Democratic campaigns love to treat “this didn’t happen and we’ve debunked it” and “this did happen but we’ve declared you’re not allowed to notice or care about it” as equivalent.