After a divisive and explosive process, President Donald Trump became the fourth president in a row to lose one or more houses of the United States Congress to the opposing party in the midterm elections. At this time, Democrats have gained 35 U.S. House of Representatives seats and almost 10 House seats remain undecided. Democrats needed 23 seats to gain control for the 2019 U.S. House of Representatives. 

In the week before the 2018  election, Trump visited states such as Missouri, Indiana and Florida to turn out his core voters and to emphasize to them that the U.S. Senate elections were a referendum on him and his leadership. In these states, voters in Trump leaning areas created the “red undertow” to contain the blue wave. These voters defeated two incumbent Democratic senators and sent the third to a recount. In the last few weeks of the election Trump amped up a heavy emphasis on a hard-line immigration stance. For Republican voters  immigration is a proxy for jobs and economic security. Immigration was the main issue driving Republican voters in 2016. Democratic candidates emphasized health care affordability, gun control and general ability to solve problems. 

Trump’s rafter-shattering campaign rallies or early morning tweets are created to let people know who his and their enemies are. These messages create images that obscure democratic ideas and their meanings, and encourage listeners to fall back on their predefined social identities. These created notions have the capacity to blur what individuals see and direct and filter their political decisions. In the United States, many white people have limited interactions with persons of color and immigrants. The president’s and politicians’ statements can have an outsized effect on their social reality on these issues.

In 2016 Trump campaigned as the candidate who would speak for and protect the typical middle-class white family.  He encouraged individuals to vote on the basis of cultural identities and being in the middle-class as a state of mind. Trump also promised to rectify any financial insecurities these families might have.  

Ideologically, racist, nativist and anti-democratic elements in our society have adopted Trump because parts of his rhetoric echo much of their beliefs about the world. This tribal fury has led to anger, animosity and attacks against Jews and Muslims, among others.

Trump’s 2018 election plan was to create national issues as the focus of the midterm elections. His dark populism includes an us vs. them framework and defines any individuals who disagree with his views as “the enemy.” His emotionally satisfying appeals emphasized that whether individuals agreed with him was the single most important part of their vote. Trump has been able to appeal to voters’ nostalgia, feelings of exclusion and fear both of change to their cultural identities and of the greater number of identities that are acceptable in American society. Trump’s ability to speak to core Republican voters allowed some Republican primary candidates to be more Trumpist than Trump. With no serious opposition to Trump’s statements, tweets and policies, the Republican Party is “all about Trump.” Divisive elements of the 2018 election led almost all Republican congressmen to capitulate to the Trump agenda.

 In contrast, the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC), which is concerned with U.S. House of Representatives elections, had many appealing candidates energized to run by the 2016 election. The DCCC focused on candidates who “fit” the congressional district and who had deep-roots there. This selection process did not emphasize ideology but  having candidates who could be competitive in specific districts. Democrats fielded a more racially and religiously diverse slate of candidates. Some of those candidates provided milestones such as the first Muslim woman and first women with Native American tribal membership being elected to Congress. 

Local issues matter in midterm elections, sometimes quite a lot. The main Democratic gains from Republicans happened in suburban districts where there are diverse and college-educated voters.  The DCCC’s matching process led to unexpected House victories in red areas: Oklahoma 5^th, Kansas 3^rd and South Carolina 1^st.  All of these districts also encompassed part of a metropolitan area of reasonable size, such as those of Oklahoma City, Kansas City and Charleston. Additionally, long-serving Republican incumbents in apparently safe seats lost to Democratic challengers, e.g., 16-term Republican Congressman Dana Rohrbacher lost his southern California seat.

The 2018 midterm elections were the outline for Trump’s 2020 campaign strategy. Will the drop off in urban and suburban areas with many diverse and well-educated voters, and individuals between 40 to 59 alters his 2020 campaign strategy? Also, can Democrats balance their appeals to these previous Trump voters while appealing to some portion of the rural electorate and non-college white voters?

Steven Puro is emeritus Professor of Political Science at St. Louis University. He studies and analyzes U.S. elections.