On open letter to our political leaders

Good morning. It’s the day after midterm election day and everything looks different. This letter is about what we’d like you, our political leaders of both parties, to do now.

A political shockwave has jolted the US in voting in the midterm elections. Donald Trump asked voters to vote as if he were on the ballot, so he owns the seismic shift towards the opposing party.

Democrats flipped seven senate seats to take control of the Senate, with two other flips possible. They won in Republican strongholds including Texas, Kansas, Iowa, Ohio, North Carolina, and South Carolina. They flipped Maine, where the Republican Susan Collins had been in office nearly three decades. Texas and North Carolina were notable in that Trump rejected incumbent senators in Republican primaries and promoted more extreme candidates, who then went on to lose. As I write this, Democrats have won 228 seats, a majority, in the House, including in most of the districts that Republicans had just gerrymandered to their own advantage.

Every segment of the electorate shifted. Based on exit polls, according to the New York Times, men 18-29 shifted towards Democrats by 38 points, Hispanics by 28 points, Black men by 16 points, white voters without a college degree by 14 points, and white women by 11 points. Every segment of voters shifted significantly towards Democrats and away from Republicans.

When Republican and Democratic politicians return to Washington, they will be operating in a changed political environment. It’s clear that voters have, in aggregate, turned against Trump policies including tariffs on allies, the Iran War, support for data centers, undermining scientific research, opposition to many vaccines, support for Russia, and aggressive immigration enforcement. Donald Trump’s approval rating is 37%, while 60% disapprove. He told people, most of whom disapproved, to vote as if he were on the ballot, and they did.

What Republicans should do

Unlike many of my friends and readers, I believe America is healthier with two viable political parties. The way we got to this point is that one of those parties, the Republicans, was captured and dominated by one person, Donald Trump, who then operated in his own interests, ignoring and defying the desires of the electorate that supported him and members of his own party. In American elections, citizens punish this sort of behavior by voting for the other party.

Politicians are sensitive to polls, and especially to elections. The Republicans are now a minority party in both houses of Congress and have been turned out of governor’s seats in Texas, Iowa, Georgia, and Nevada. The party must reassess its choices.

The most consequential of those choices is the choice to align on all fronts with Donald Trump. Trump’s strategy of telling his voters to reject any Republican he doesn’t like has failed. Appealing solely to a dwindling faction of far-right Trump voters is a proven losing strategy — ask anybody in Texas, South Carolina, or Georgia. Blaming the nation’s economic problems on immigrants and Iran and ignoring the pain of inflation and high gas prices has proven to be foolish.

For the next two years, Republicans can choose one of two paths:

• Continue to align with Trump and block everything the Democrats pass by using their control of both houses of Congress.
• Work with Democrats on shared economic issues and ending the Iran War, while maintaining conservative positions on social issues.

I believe the block-and-resist strategy is a prescription for the effective end of the Republican Party. It will become a laughably small minority. The mass of voters who trashed much of the party yesterday are not going to have much sympathy for Republicans whose strategy is to do nothing.

One more thing. It will be tempting for Republicans to use the lame duck session — for the rest of 2026, when they still control the Senate — to ram through approval for several Supreme Court justices. Clarence Thomas, 78, has been on the court for 35 years, and Samuel Alito, 76, for nearly 20. If they retire, Republicans could rush to approve younger replacements, as they did with Amy Coney Barrett before Biden took office. As a short term tactic, this seems to make sense. But some Republicans, like Susan Collins of Maine, were turned out based on their support for Supreme Court Justices who ended the national right to abortion in the Dobbs decision in 2022. The same actions in 2026 are also likely to backfire on Republicans who vote for them.

What Democrats should do

Starting in 2027, Democrats will have firm control of both houses of Congress. In theory, they can pass any legislation they want, although the president can block it with a veto.

Democratic leaders have described two key priorities for the new Congress:

• Conduct hearings and investigate corrupt practices of government officials, including impeaching Trump.
• Quickly pass economic legislation, including restoring health care subsidies and ending Trump’s tariffs and the Iran war.

This will make for great theater, but will accomplish little for the country. A quick impeachment in the House will reveal more of Trump’s corruption, but let’s be honest, anyone who still supports him is not likely to be swayed by such hearings. The Democrats have at most 56 votes in the Senate, well shy of the 67 needed to convict and remove the president. And Trump will veto all of the Democrats’ legislation. Politicians love to “get the other party on record” against their priorities, which ostensibly accomplishes a political goal but has no other impact.

Let’s assume that the Democrats do all of what they’ve planned and then point to Trump as the impediment to progress. They’ll still be the party that did nothing but make noise for two years. There’s no need to prove that Trump is bad for the country. They just did that, and it worked.

Imagine instead a world in which they identify bipartisan priorities like lower taxes, reducing the deficit, support for Social Security, ending the Iran War, appropriately regulating AI and data centers, reining in global warming, restoring relationships with European allies, and sanctioning Putin.

Could such policies pass with a filibuster-proof 60 votes in the Senate?

Could they pass with 290 votes in the House (which would require attracting about 50 House Republicans) and 67 votes in the Senate (which would need about 11 Republican Senators)?

Such legislation would then be veto-proof. Both parties could point to wins.

It is tempting for Democrats to want to punish Republicans for their past behavior in lock step with Trump. Politically, compromising with your enemy when you have just triumphed seems emotionally unsatisfying. But I believe, perhaps naively, that Republicans and Democrats who acted together for the good of the country would be more likely to gain support in the future than those who demonized their opponents, scored political points, and got nothing done.

I’m sure you think I have a polyanna attitude here. But I patriotically believe in this nation and have in the past supported politicians of both parties, as well as independents. At the state level, members of opposing parties often work together because they have to: their constituents have needs they must fulfill. Why can’t Congress do the same?

I’d like my children to live in an America that once again gets useful things done, invests in its future, supports its citizens, and thinks beyond its political differences to emphasize shared priorities.

So Democrats, enjoy your victory lap and score your political points. But when you’ve gotten that out of your system, please prioritize action over demonization of your fellow legislators. We’ll all be better off if you do.