Patrick Ruffini
Subject: Predicting the Midterms
Bio: Pollster and Author of The Intersection
Transcript:
Larry Bernstein:
Welcome to What Happens Next. My name is Larry Bernstein. What Happens Next is a podcast that covers economics, politics, and history. Today’s episode is Predicting the Midterms.
Our speaker is Patrick Ruffini is a pollster and the author of his own Substack entitled The Intersection that includes frequent analysis on topics like gerrymandering, realignment, and polling errors. He is also the author of a book Party of the People.
I want to learn from Patrick about who will win the midterms in the House and Senate. My plan is to get into the weeds and find out what the issues will be, what the state of play looks like now, and who will win the close races.
Patrick, can you please begin with six minutes of opening remarks.
Patrick Ruffini:
In 2024, I wrote a book called Party of the People: Inside the Multiracial Populist Coalition Remaking the GOP. That election had a realignment of working-class and non-white voters towards Trump and the GOP. Now it’s been about a year and a half of Trump. We are about four months away from the midterm election. You have the normal midterm backlash, particularly against someone like Trump who has been extremely assertive about the use of executive powers.
This has intensified Democratic energy to put a check on him. In some respects, the groups we saw swinging towards Trump on the basis of inflation are swinging back. Some of the gains that Trump made in 2024 are reversed, but some are durable. There’s a flip side to this Democratic energy, that side of the aisle seems unruly. You’ve seen a string of progressive primary victories in Colorado and New York where progressive candidates swept congressional primaries. You will have a healthy Democratic Socialist of America contingent in the next House.
Republicans were quite successful in redistricting this cycle. That doesn’t mean that they have protected themselves from losing the House, but they’ve protected themselves from getting wiped out and built in a lot of safe seats for Republicans. It means that at best, you’re talking about a Democratic majority maybe 220 or 225 seats, maybe up to 230, which is pretty narrow. That means this DSA caucus will have outsized influence. They will provide the margin and decide whether Hakeem Jeffries can become Speaker, and if we’ll see the same chaos and drama that we saw on the Republican side a few years ago.
Larry Bernstein:
The House has 435 seats and so a majority would be 218 seats or more, so if the Democrats were to win 220 seats that would be a 5-member majority. That would give enormous influence to the 5 marginal players from the DSA (Democratic Socialists of America caucus.)
Patrick Ruffini:
After the Biden debacle, Democrats were told to trust this older, steady-hand candidate that failed them badly. Now, they are not inclined to listen to what the party establishment is telling them. The party establishment was Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton. You are seeing a Democratic Tea Party. There is energy behind the idea that Democrats need to regain the working-class voters that they lost in the Bernie and AOC faction.
It looks increasingly likely that the Michigan Senate race will go to Abdul El-Sayed in the primary. Democrats are nominating problematic candidates who could lose them seats in a reverse 2022 when it was Republican MAGA candidates who lost seats in very winnable races. It not only could have a significant impact on which way the Senate goes and what the House looks like after 2026, but we could see a Trump-like candidate of the left go far in the primary based on the mood of the Democratic primary electorate.
Larry Bernstein:
Historically in presidential primaries, the Democratic presidential candidates tack to the left and then in the general election, they tack back to the center to persuade independents to join their cause. What’s surprising here is that there are maybe two dozen congressional races in the House that are in play. And some of these candidates are very left-wing candidates. Do voters in these tight congressional races think of the national party? Do they consider that the candidate is particularly progressive? Will it affect the result of the election in such a tight toss-up race?
Patrick Ruffini:
It absolutely could have an impact. There’s been solid research that shows that the more far-left or far-right you are in your identification that those candidates tend to perform worse. There’s a penalty for perceived ideological extremism. Most of these Democratic candidates are in these deep blue districts where there’s no chance of the district going the other way. Voters there perceive why not get exactly who we want? And that is very telling about where the median Democratic primary voter is.
You haven’t seen as many progressive candidates in these swing districts win, but there have been examples of it. Notably in Maine 2 District, which is a Trump district held by a Democrat. The more progressive candidate won there. You had Colorado 8. A very tight seat. You had the candidate who was more progressive in that race win. This goes back to the Michigan Senate race where the more progressive candidate is likely to win in that primary, and that’s a swing seat where it’s pulling very tightly. Look at John Ossoff in Georgia. Look, he’s wondering who had him up by double digits. So that’s really kind of the model for Democrats of what a swing state race should be doing for them to cycle.
Larry Bernstein:
Primaries bring out a different voter than the regular election. That spells trouble for both the Republicans and the Democrats because they choose people who are much farther away from the median voter. Is there a real difference between the primary voter and the regular voter?
Patrick Ruffini:
The risk here that’s absolutely true. The primary voters tend to be more ideological. It’s been prevalent on the Republican side where you have more far right candidates win. There’s no real penalty for being more ideologically extreme. That’s going to mean more unruly House caucus on both sides. The other risk is that a progressive candidate in the Democratic primary starts at a disadvantage.
We did some polling, who’s the most electable Democrat? People are saying Gavin Newsom is the most electable Democrat, not somebody like Josh Shapiro with a track record of winning in a swing state.
They’re saying Gavin Newsom who publicly fights with Republicans and who’s adopting Trump’s social media strategy. There’s a hunger for somebody who acts like Trump, but isn’t Trump. I don’t think most people would say that the Governor of California is the right model for electability.
Larry Bernstein:
In the House, there are 15 to 20 seats in play. The redistricting ended up favoring the Republicans just by chance as Virginia lost in court. How many net seats do you think the Republicans were able to pick up because of redistricting?
Patrick Ruffini:
5 to 10. But if a normal midterm kind of wave happens, that’s a 15-seat difference between where Republicans would’ve been under the old maps and the new maps. It means at best you’re probably talking about a 225 to 210 House for Democrats. And that’s maybe being a little bullish for them. It’s a house where you have these more ideologically extreme members who hold a lot of sway because Jefferies needs to get 218 votes to be speaker. So how many concessions are they able to extract from him? We all remember what happened with Kevin McCarthy.
Even if Republicans lose the House this time, it makes it much easier for them to come back in 2028 because they don’t have as many seats they need to pick up. A lot of those seats are in friendlier terrain. This whole fight is going to largely decided by how the maps are drawn rather than the quality of the candidates.
Larry Bernstein:
You brought up this speaker issue. I’m not sure why we should care. They threw out the speaker on the Republican side. It seemed very dramatic. The Politicos were upset and how’s the House going to function? Everyone I know who’s not a politico was not paying any attention to this. And then one day Johnson was running the show. There’s technical stuff like the rules committee. But isn’t this inside baseball that away from Patrick, nobody else cares?
Patrick Ruffini:
That’s right. I don’t disagree with that analysis at all. You have an ungovernable House with these narrow majorities. If we have a third Trump impeachment, would that register politically? You would also have investigations of Trump, the Trump family, but also companies aligned with the administration.
Larry Bernstein:
A New York House Democrat, Goldman recently lost the primary. He ran the Trump impeachment trial and he’s thrown out for someone more progressive. It’s not like the more centrist Democrats were opposed to impeachment. The fact that it moves to the left won’t change that impeachment or investigation zeal. That’ll be going full throttle regardless.
Patrick Ruffini:
It probably intensifies the zeal. But you’re right that the median Democrat would be on board with that because they’re afraid to be primaried.
Larry Bernstein:
Political analysts evaluate each individual district to see if it leans more Democratic or Republican. One example is the Cook Political Report’s Partisan Voting Index or PVI. A District that is D+2 means that in a national election this district is expected to swing towards the Democrats by 2 more points than the rest of the country.
I want to look at two kinds of House races. Take a district that leans Republican by 2 percentage point like Zach Nunn’s seat in Iowa’s third congressional district. This is a district in previous presidential races, Trump tied Biden in 2020 and he beat Harris by 5 in 2024. This is a seat is one of 18 seats that the Cook Report calls a tossup.
The second seat is Colorado’s 5th District. It is in central Colorado and includes Colorado Springs. Trump beat Biden and Harris by 9 points in the past presidential elections. The incumbent Jeff Crank is viewed to likely win by Charlie Cook. This is rated to be a R+5 district. If the Democrats improve their performance on a national basis by four points, the math suggests that the Democrats would win by 2 points in Iowa’s 3rd district by 2 points and the Republicans would hold onto the Colorado 5th district by one point as R+5- 4 equals R+1.
That said, national shifts don’t apply evenly. Each district is special in its own way.
There will be enormous fundraising in the most competitive seats so turnout will be high on both sides. For less competitive seats, the Democrats will be more energized to vote, and this will impact the national voting patterns. So, Democrats will improve their performance in districts that will be easy wins for either party and thus incremental Democratic votes are wasted.
Patrick Ruffini:
It’s a very astute point you’re making here, and that exact thing has happened a couple times before. First off, you mentioned a four-point shift. That’s not enough for Democrats. The median seat in a country that went Trump plus two is Trump plus four or five. Democrats need to, at a minimum, win Trump plus five districts. There are very few opportunities for them until you get to Trump plus nine based on redistricting. And that’s the foundation of why I’m saying it could be a very narrow majority for the Democrats. It’s very rare for a non-incumbent to pick up a seat that was won by Trump plus 10 or more. The math is very tough regardless of how good the candidates are.
Larry Bernstein:
The election is soon; you would think that the issues would be bombarding the airwaves already. Back to 2024, the key issues were immigration, tax policy; now we have Iran. What will be the important issues?
Patrick Ruffini:
It remains what it was in ‘24, which is inflation and the cost of living. Trump’s economic ratings decline significantly with the Iran war and the rise in gas prices. Remember 2018, everyone thought Trump was doing a great job on the economy; they still lost. Don’t think you can be going into a midterm with $4 gas and overperform.
Larry Bernstein:
Let’s go do some Senate races. Georgia Ossoff polled up by double digits, but Trump won that state. So how is it possible? Is Collins a terrible candidate? What is going on in Georgia?
Patrick Ruffini:
I don’t think Collins is a terrible candidate, but I think Georgia is a very Metro Atlanta state. Statewide success is somebody like Brian Kemp who is well-liked and can overperform in the Atlanta Metro.
Larry Bernstein:
Let’s move to Michigan. This is an Even state. Trump lost by 3 to Biden and beat Harris by 2. If there’s a national shift of four, this should be a D + 4 state right now. If El-Sayed wins the primary, he’s progressive, he’s anti-Israel, does that put Michigan in play for the Republicans?
Patrick Ruffini:
It could. And all the polling right now is tight within one or two points, but I think that’s very much the outlier. It’s tight against all the potential Democratic candidates. Now, that’s misleading because when you have a very contentious Democratic primary, you have Democrats who hold out in supporting the other candidates.
Mike Rogers, a strong candidate running against candidates who are in a divisive Democratic primary where the most left-wing candidate is likely to emerge from that primary. Ultimately that provides the opportunity. It’s still a lean D state in this environment. Historically Republicans have had a hard time in Michigan. It’s been a while since they’ve won statewide especially for the Senate. Even in good years, Democrats have tended to overperform there. This is turning into an exception to that historical pattern.
Larry Bernstein:
Let’s go to Maine. This is a Democratic state. Susan Collins is the moderate centrist candidate. Meanwhile, Graham Platner has so much negative press on his behavior and his Nazi tattoo. It’s incredible to me that this is a serious candidate. Yet in the polling, it’s even. If the Democrats put out their worst candidate, can they lose?
Patrick Ruffini:
They absolutely could lose. You have the worst possible Democratic candidate going against the best possible and most overperforming Republican candidate by far compared to virtually any other state. Will it be enough? In 2020, it turned out not to be a pro - Democratic year. She was able to get by a decent margin.
It’s looking like a strong national environment for Democrats that probably pulls Platner over the line. The candidate matchup couldn’t have been worse for Democrats.
Larry Bernstein:
My friend David Brail placed all thousand What Happens Next interviews into Claude AI. He asked who made the most accurate predictions of all my interviews? Answer was --- Patrick Ruffini. So here we go, will the Democrats take the House?
Patrick Ruffini:
I think so. They’re looking at about 225 seats, which would be a pickup of around 10 seats, which is more of a function of what Republicans did with redistricting this cycle than anything else.
Larry Bernstein:
In the Senate, will the Republicans hold Texas?
Patrick Ruffini:
Yes.
Larry Bernstein:
Will the Democrats hold Georgia?
Patrick Ruffini:
Yes.
Larry Bernstein:
The senate race in Maine is in flux after rape allegations came out against Platner. We have no idea what is going to happen about the replacement. That said if the election were held today would Collins win in Maine?
Patrick Ruffini:
I’m going to say yes.
Larry Bernstein:
Who will win in Michigan?
Patrick Ruffini:
I would tilt it ever so slightly towards the Democrat in Michigan.
Larry Bernstein:
Really? El-Sayed wins. It’s fifty-fifty down to the wire, but there hasn’t been polling suggesting that Rogers would win in this cycle. It’s as close of a toss-up as you can get.
Larry Bernstein:
Who wins in North Carolina?
Patrick Ruffini:
Democrat - Cooper.
Larry Bernstein:
The Dems pick up one seat in that scenario. Am I missing one?
Patrick Ruffini:
You could make a case for Alaska, Ohio and Iowa. There’s a chance they pick up one.
Larry Bernstein:
Alaska is funny because it’s a rank order state.
Patrick Ruffini:
The issue with Alaska is that you have this other Dan Sullivan on the ballot. The Democrats put this other candidate named Dan Sullivan to split the vote. I still think Sullivan wins.
Larry Bernstein:
Let’s go to Ohio.
Patrick Ruffini:
Ohio tilts Republican. It is Trump plus 13. The history in Ohio has been every cycle the polls are showing Democrats as they showed Brown ahead in ‘24. Ohio, Iowa are going to migrate in the same direction. It’s just going to be enough for Republicans to keep both those seats.
Larry Bernstein:
So based on that, it’s one seat pickup. 53-47 Senate. Any forecasts for any particular district in the House that you think is interesting?
Patrick Ruffini:
It’ll be interesting to see as a bellwether what happens with some of these districts that swung pretty heavily towards Trump in 2024, particularly these Hispanic districts. There was a poll out yesterday, Henry Cuellar, the very conservative Democrat under indictment, pardoned by Trump in the hope of him getting out of the race, and then he did not get out of the race showing the Republican is up 9 there, which would puncture this idea that Hispanics are moving back in a big way, at least in that part of the country. I was surprised to see a poll that saw him losing. I’m paying close attention to that as durability of this realignment.
Larry Bernstein:
In California 22, David Valadao is running to keep his House seat. This district had been a Trump plus 1 that during redistricting was gerrymandered to make this seat flip to the Democrats. Do you think Valadao can win because the Democrats chose a progressive in their primary?
Patrick Ruffini:
Normally Valadao always survived. The ultimate over-performer. That’s redrawn to be a Democratic pickup. But if anyone can survive, he can. The primary results have a Democratic progressive candidate in a general election.
Larry Bernstein:
Black male voters moved towards Trump.
Patrick Ruffini:
This is the group I’m a bullish on staying in the Republican Party because we’re moving to pure ideological sorting in the electorate. In the past, you had voting on racial identity lines that favored Democrats with Black male voters. Those ties are diminishing across the board.
Larry Bernstein:
You are a Republican pollster. How does that influence your judgment? We often see in these polls Democrats and, Republicans getting different answers. The people that pay you are Republicans does that influence your ability to forecast?
Patrick Ruffini:
When it comes to the polls we do for clients, our north star is accuracy. We are judged by Nate Silver on how close we were to the results of the election. We’ve had an A in the Nate Silver ratings over the years. In particular, the metric has almost no bias in our public polling projections. Oftentimes there is a trend towards Republican firms having a Republican bias or Democratic firms have a Democratic bias. We have no bias.
Larry Bernstein:
Is Israel an issue that will matter in the races?
Patrick Ruffini:
It’s the animating issue on the Democratic left deciding Democratic primaries. It’s provided the spark for these progressive candidates to prevail against the establishment. But in general elections absolutely not, it’s not anywhere near the top 20 issues.
Larry Bernstein:
I subscribe to your Substack, and it’s fabulous, and I encourage my listeners to check it out. One of the things that you mentioned in the New York races, specifically in the House primary races, is that the populists are winning, but the people voting for it in the Democratic Party are a college educated and not working-class voters. So normally we think of the populists garner working-class voters, but here it’s white college-educated. Comment on that.
Patrick Ruffini:
Working-class voters are moderate and not invested in day-to-day politics as your typical college educated voter. If they see somebody too far left or right, that’s a turnoff to them.
Labor has become fundamentally conservative rising into the middle class. They don’t want to overthrow the system. Maybe you have a bunch of downwardly mobile people in Brooklyn who are upset at the current economic system, but that’s not a reflection of the average voter. We need to distinguish between dissatisfied with how things are going in the performance of the system versus overthrowing the system itself.
Larry Bernstein:
Thanks to Patrick for joining us.
If you missed our previous podcast, it was The End of Meat.
Our speaker was Paul Rozin who is a Professor of Psychology at the University of Pennsylvania. Paul argued that in the future meat consumption will decline significantly because of increasing cost as well as health and moral reasons even though most of our audience enjoys meat including me.
You can find our previous episodes and transcripts on our website. Please follow us on Apple Podcasts or Spotify.
I am Larry Bernstein with the podcast What Happens Next.
Check out our previous episode, The End of Meat, here.
