Read Time:4 Minute, 30 Second

Contents

Two weeks after the U.S. midterm elections, we can look back to look forward. In my preelection column, I made several predictions, and I was largely right. I predicted that the Democrats would retake both the House of Representatives and the Senate with a tsunami victory, although I underestimated the size of the wave.

I predicted a large House majority for the Democrats, enabling them to be aggressive in the coming legislative term, but the size of the Democratic Senate majority is greater than I expected and will also allow Senate Democrats to pursue an ambitious agenda. I thought — correctly — that the Democrats would flip Ohio, North Carolina, Texas, Maine and Alaska, but was uncertain about Kansas and Iowa, which also went Democratic, as did South Carolina and Mississippi. The results in the latter states are stunning.

I was also correct with my prediction that Republicans would only half-heartedly challenge the election results because they would be too decisive: U.S. President Donald Trump has posted occasional social media messages questioning the election outcome, Mississippi Republican Party chairman Mike Hurst intimated ballot irregularities, while political influencers Laura Loomer and Katie Millerm, wife of new Trump chief of staff Stephen Miller, claimed election fraud. Overall, however, the U.S. electorate’s clear rebuke of Trump and his Make America Great Again (MAGA) movement neutralized accusations of election dishonesty.

I also argued that a major postelection theme would be both parties’ search for their future direction in the context of a weakened Trump. This dynamic has already started. MAGA is splintering as it tests new paths toward the 2028 presidential primary. Vice President JD Vance is seeking viability in the “New Right/Alt-Right” nationalist lane, while some — jack-of-all-trades Marco Rubio, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, Texas Sen. Ted Cruz, among others — are competing for what remains of the “traditional” Republican party position. Leadership shake-ups in the now diminished Republican House and Senate conferences are also pitting MAGA versus other emerging and rump factions of Republican identity.

The Democrats have a more advantageous dynamic, as their party’s numerous wings —especially moderates and progressives — attempt to win leadership races in both congressional chambers as a prerequisite for setting the coming agenda on legislation, budgeting, oversight and investigation in Congress beginning January 2027. The major development to watch in this regard is the race for Senate majority leader between centrist Chuck Schumer and progressive Chris Van Hollen.

If the Republican internal ideological battle is driven by the 2028 presidential race, Democratic wayfinding is about broader political strategy. As I indicated before the election, victorious Democrats face difficult decisions regarding how they will balance substantive issues (e.g., affordability) with holding MAGA accountable for its malfeasance. And indeed, there is no consensus on this within the Democratic party, especially as concerns impeachment.

Traditional mainstream Democrats seem to favor a modest approach to impeachment, arguing that the U.S. electorate wants to see measures to solve housing, energy and health care inflation more than partisan political and legal battles that might be perceived as vendettas. Progressive Democrats retort that MAGA corruption was high on the list of reasons motivating voters to choose Democrats, and that Republicans — led by Trump — have so blatantly and voluminously violated the Constitution that restoration of democracy requires broad impeachment.

Led by rogue Republican heretic Thomas Massie, impeachment articles against Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, a top Democrat target, failed last week on a party-line procedural vote, with 11 Democrats absent from the chamber — enough to have perhaps moved the articles forward. Were the Democrats disorganized or divided on the issue? Possibly, but another, charitable explanation is that Democrats are waiting for their House and Senate majorities in January 2027 to begin their own systematic impeachment campaigns against Hegseth, Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., Attorney General Todd Blanche and potentially others.

Indeed, each of the above has been told by senior Democrats soon leading oversight and investigation portfolios to “lawyer up” and instructed to preserve government records. It will be interesting to see if moderate Democrats rein in the potential impeachment parade or if, instead, the parade will take place as part of a larger strategic plan in which impeachment hearings are designed to run parallel to a legislative agenda timed to maximize effects during the 2027-2028 election season. A ranking Democratic member of the House, Jim Clyburn, has intimated this possibility, saying in response to journalists’ questions about whether Democrats would prioritize affordability or accountability: “We can walk and chew gum at the same time, and maybe do both.”

The most high-profile impeachment target is Trump himself, obviously, and Democrats have differing appetites regarding a third Trump impeachment. In my last column, I predicted that Trump would rage at the election results rather than moderate and compromise. After an initial moment of magnanimity, Trump reverted to form, promising to veto Democratic legislation, allowing Blanche to threaten Democratic legislators with lawfare prosecution and naming ultra-hardliner Miller his new chief of staff. This trajectory, coupled with unabated corruption and constitutional violations, will likely harden Democrats — even moderates — to impeach Trump again.

Strap in — U.S. politics in 2027 is going to be a rough ride.

Mason Richey is a professor of international politics at Hankuk University of Foreign Studies and president of the Korea International Studies Association.