Heading into today’s elections, Democrats have virtually everything in their favor. There’s the sheer math in the Senate, where Republicans are defending 22 seats but Democrats only 13. The Republican president is unpopular. And the opposition party virtually always cleans up in the midterm races for the House of Representatives. (Obama called 2010 a “shellacking.”)
So it would be surprising if there isn’t a “blue wave” or even “blue tsunami.” Still, I’ve warned about predictions and the media’s inability to stick to what it knows for certain.
I can confidently predict what news giants will do: use the day’s results to make sweeping statements about where Americans stand in general. They do this every time. The hot takes virtually always fall apart under fact checking — either immediately or months later when better data comes in. Exit polls are notoriously unreliable when numbers are close.
Case in point: Following the 2024 elections, the New York Times gave notorious liar Peter Beinart prime real estate in its Sunday edition to present an argument that was demonstrably false.
For a powerful reminder of what elections really tell us, listen to my interview with Chad Peace of the Independent Voter Project. He called out media coverage of the 2025 elections.
“Why don’t they talk about the raw number of people that actually decided? What they’re suggesting to their audience is like this big wave of everybody woke up and wanted to be a socialist today. It wasn’t like there’s this massive change (from) how people felt four years ago… A rejection of the status quo is what you’re seeing in a lot of these returns. And yes, an engaged, funded, ideologically-based movement can capture a relatively small amount of the electorate and create significant political shifts.”
The big question, as always, is who will show up. Midterms have notoriously low turnout.
Anger is currently the biggest driver. Many people want to stick it to the other party more than they want the candidate they’re voting for. It may feel good in the moment, but it’s the rage cycle getting us into this mess.
A few more notes:
The New York Times blindly reported on a letter allegedly from Michigan “Jewish leaders” supporting El-Sayed. No one checked it. Lots of first names only, and “Jack Mehoff.”
Democratic leaders secretly acknowledge an El-Sayed victory will endanger Jews across the country, Dan Senor reports.
Democrats usually decry sexism, but now they’re insisting Haley Stevens must be unstable or under the control of her Jewish fiancé. I replied to her here.
LGBTQ+ activists are supporting the most anti-gay, transphobic voting bloc and destruction of the only safe haven in MENA:
Planning to vote today? Get facts about the government from sponsor USAFacts. Each sign-up this week helps support They Stand Corrected.
This week’s episode will come later in the week than usual, because I’m aiming to fact check the initial post-election coverage. Be sure to subscribe so it pops up in your feeds.