Trump Makes Midterms All About Himself
Left 33%
Center 33%
Right 33%
1 left · 1 center · 1 right
What happened
As the 2026 U.S. midterm elections neared and the first postal ballots went out, President Donald Trump, elected in November 2024, publicly centered the period on himself, his projects, and his foreign-policy fights rather than on Republican candidates. A shooting war with Iran that began on 28 February recently returned to armed exchanges after an economic standoff: the United States fired on Iranian targets, including a wedding party, killing four people, and Iran struck Iraq, Kuwait, Jordan, and Bahrain; U.S. petrol and grocery prices have risen, and the cost for the U.S. government to borrow has climbed since that date. Trump has also waged a tariff confrontation with Canada, which answered dollar-for-dollar in ways that hit exporters in Michigan, Ohio, Maine, Iowa, and Texas — Canada takes nearly a third of Iowa’s exports — and renamed Lake Ontario as Lake America, a label Apple and Google then used in their map apps. At home, he posted on Monday that communities that reject data centres do so only if they want to end up “backwards and poor,” has moved to demolish the White House East Wing for a ballroom and to put his signature on the dollar bill, and endorsed Texas attorney general Ken Paxton, previously impeached by fellow Republicans, as the Republican Senate nominee in Texas. Maggie Haberman and Jonathan Swan’s book Regime Change addresses how Trump might treat a Republican midterm defeat.
Omitted — what each side leaves out
Unpacked
Left-leaning coverage is simply more complete on what Trump's self-focus is costing Republicans. The Guardian says his Canada tariffs have given Democrats a genuine shot at an Iowa Senate seat the party has not won in nearly 20 years. Right-leaning coverage never names that race, and frames the moment only as the president making the contest about himself. Readers there never see the farm-state example left-leaning coverage uses to show harm to a reliable Republican constituency.
Left-leaning coverage leads by asking whether he secretly wants Republicans to lose. Right-leaning coverage leads on spectacle instead, treating the closing stretch as a show, and never poses that question.
Has any Republican candidate in Iowa asked the president to drop the Canada tariffs?
Bottom line
National Review's midterms piece never mentions Iowa, the farm state the Guardian says Trump's Canada tariffs have turned into a Democratic Senate opening after nearly 20 years.
The receipts — 6 facts one side's coverage lacks
- Democrats have not won an Iowa Senate seat in nearly 20 years, and the Guardian says Trump's tariffs now give them a genuine shot
- Canada takes nearly a third of Iowa's exports
- Seven in 10 Americans would not want a data centre anywhere near where they live
- Trump posted that communities should not want data centres only if they want to end up being backwards and poor
- Ken Paxton was impeached by fellow Texas Republicans on charges that included bribery, and Trump backed him as the Senate choice
- Regime Change by Haberman and Swan says that if Republicans were wiped out in 2026, Trump could boast they could not win without him
The Left View
Jonathan Freedland in the Guardian argues that this pattern is “hard to explain as anything other than calculated self-sabotage” and that Trump may be “unbothered by Republican defeat” or even “covertly desire it.” He says the Iran war creates “a worse environment for a governing party” given the 2024 inflation promise, higher expected interest rates on credit cards and mortgages, and “disenchantment of the Maga faithful” who wanted “an end to forever wars,” while the Canada tariffs threaten GOP Senate seats and give Democrats “a genuine shot” in Iowa; data-centre support, he writes, puts Trump against “seven in 10 Americans” who would not want one nearby and even “deep concern” among Republicans, and “insulted them too.” Freedland calls it “almost a talent” that Trump lands on “the wrong side of so-called 80/20 issues,” “persists” with “vanity projects” “strong majorities oppose,” and has “hobbled his party” by backing “radioactively unpopular candidates.” He argues Trump need not fear a Democratic Congress because it has “no means to enforce” subpoenas, he has “near-blanket immunity” from the Supreme Court, can promise “a comprehensive presidential pardon,” and knows impeachment “they will never use”; citing Haberman and Swan, he says that if Republicans were “wiped out,” Trump “could simply boast that they couldn’t win without him,” so “narcissism” would take defeat “not as a repudiation, but as a compliment.”
The Right View
National Review, under the headline “The Trumpapalooza You Never Knew You Wanted,” treats the same run-up as the president’s “final move” “to make the election about himself,” casting a Trump-centered midterm as a spectacle the audience “never knew they wanted” rather than as an effort to sink Republican chances.
Our Take (balanced)
The left’s strongest argument is the accumulation of choices Freedland labels self-sabotage — household costs and Maga war-fatigue from the Iran fighting, tariffs that freeze a major export market in GOP Senate states, data-centre advocacy against a seven-in-ten local-opposition finding, and the Paxton endorsement — plus Haberman and Swan’s line that Trump could “boast that they couldn’t win without him.” The right’s strongest argument, from the National Review framing available here, is that centering the midterms on Trump is a deliberate “final move,” billed as a “Trumpapalooza” voters did not know they wanted, i.e. that he remains the party’s essential electoral product. The central unresolved tension is whether that self-focus is indifference to, or a wish for, Republican losses — buffered by immunity, pardons, and a Congress he can ignore — or a strategic nationalization of the election around the president as the brand.
2 sources
More stories
The week's bottom lines, in your inbox
One email a week: the five stories that mattered and what they actually mean. Free.