A MESSAGE FROM OUR SPONSOR

We’re working to prevent disease before it starts.

Too often, patients face barriers in getting the care they need. UnitedHealth Group is helping to remove these barriers while prioritizing new preventive care approaches that help keep patients healthy.

It’s hard to recall a midterm primary season as unsettled and unpredictable as the one ahead. In 2025, of course, President Donald Trump triggered a House redistricting arms race in Texas, which was quickly answered by California’s Gavin Newsom—redrawing old district lines and potentially ending long congressional careers on both sides of the aisle. Democratic leaders are balancing their anticipation of a blue wave against early signals of an emerging Tea Party–style movement on the left, as activists agitate for primary challengers to knock off members of the establishment. Meanwhile, Republican leadership is bracing for a reckoning of its own, as Trump’s deteriorating approval ratings push once-solidly-red districts into tossup territory.

The primary calendar itself will be relentless. First up is Texas on March 3, which will give Washington its first look at how Trump’s redistricting is playing out—and whether incumbent Senator John Cornyn can survive a far-right challenge from Ken Paxton. From there and through the summer, most Tuesdays will feature a primary in some state. Then it’s an all-out scramble to the general.

A MESSAGE FROM OUR SPONSOR

At UnitedHealth Group, we’re reshaping care with a new approach: Helping physicians focus on patients and prevention, instead of paperwork.

See how we’re helping patients live healthier lives with a new model for health care.

To make sense of this, I called up Jacob Rubashkin, the deputy editor of Inside Elections and one of the country’s premier nonpartisan analysts of Senate, House, gubernatorial, and presidential campaigns. Along with his partner, Nathan Gonzales, Rubashkin has rare insight into what’s happening with major campaigns in real time—interviewing candidates, talking to sources in Washington and the states, and fielding internal polling that the rest of us never get to see. We discussed whether a Democratic wave is coming, why Michigan is complicating Chuck Schumer’s legacy, and the churn on Capitol Hill as incumbents head for the exits. As always, this transcript has been lightly edited for length and clarity.

Abby Livingston: This is shaping up to be a historic year for retirements, but also for new and returning candidates beating down the doors of the House. What do you make of all the churn we’re seeing this cycle?

Jacob Rubashkin: I continue to be amazed by the number of former members who are trying very hard to get back into D.C. I don’t understand it, especially when current members seem very happy to leave and do other things. For the first time, we’ve got members in their 60s saying they want to go and spend more time with their families rather than wait around ’til their 80s or 90s. And yet you’ve got all of these former members who can’t help themselves.

In my backyard in Maryland, former Congressman David Trone, fresh off of spending $60 million of his own money to lose his Senate primary last year, is running again against his successor, April McClain Delaney, who’s also the wife of his predecessor, John Delaney. [There’s] The Real Housewives of Potomac, but this is The Real House Members of Potomac. It’s already a very tricky primary there.

You’ve got former Congressman [Illinois Democrat] Jesse Jackson Jr. trying to make a comeback bid after his fraud conviction a decade ago. You’ve got [Texas Republican] Quico Canseco waking up one morning and deciding he wants to try and get back to Congress. You’ve got [Democrat] Melissa Bean, also in Illinois. It’s this bizarre thing where current members are desperate to get out and former members are desperate to get back in.

Do you think a Democratic wave is coming?

I try to maintain a good deal of humility about projecting things a year in advance. I truly believe it’s too early to answer that question, so I’ll give you an unsatisfying answer: There could be, but there’s still time for things to develop in different ways. Both parties often fall into the trap of thinking they have time to turn things around when, historically speaking, that’s very difficult. When things are going poorly, it’s rare that they get better.

What’s your explanation for the Democratic vibe shift over the fall?

Trump continued to grow more unpopular. And when people are upset with the president, they take it out on his party. It’s especially dangerous for Republicans at the moment because they’ve subsumed themselves pretty much entirely to Trump’s will. There’s no meaningful distinction between congressional Republicans and Trump at this point. The worse Trump does, the more uncomfortable it’s going to be for congressional Republicans.

The one thing they thought could help is this massive nationwide redistricting push, which wouldn’t change the political environment but would change the underlying math. And it’s looking more and more like a wash.

You think the Republican redistricting project will backfire?

I didn’t think it was going to happen, initially, because it seemed so outlandish—the notion that they would do a rerun of 2004, which got Tom DeLay indicted. Not to put too fine a point on it, but the last time this happened, in this kind of manner, it was a huge deal and blew up in the Republicans’ faces by the time 2006 and 2008 rolled around. So I was surprised it got off the ground at all.

Looking back at the whole scope of it, it is full of sound and fury and signifying nothing: the back-and-forth between Texas and California, the decision in Utah and North Carolina, ongoing litigation in Missouri, this latest blowup in Indiana, and the elephants in the room in Virginia and Florida looming over 2026. For every action there’s an equal and opposite reaction, and the end result is going to be very little change in the majority math.

What are you seeing in House Democratic primaries so far?

This year feels different. It feels much more about two related factors: age and willingness to fight. There are older members whom people believe are still up for the challenge of fighting against Trump, and there are younger members facing questions from voters about how willing they are to burn it all down in D.C. That creates an opening for primary challengers.

That’s why we see members like John Larson in Connecticut facing several well-funded primary challengers—not because he’s a particularly offensive member or he’s done something people don’t like, or because they think he’s too squishy on any particular issue, but because he’s getting up there in age, he had a health episode on camera, and there’s a desire from parts of the party to have people in D.C. who don’t face those challenges.

Brad Sherman, out of California, is facing that. Doris Matsui in California is facing that. Grace Meng—she’s not the oldest member, but she’s facing a challenge from a younger Democrat. That really seems to be the dominant axis this cycle, rather than the strictly progressive-versus-moderate clashes we’ve seen in years past.

Any chance the Senate could flip?

The Democrats still have a ways to go before they’re positioned to flip the Senate. It’s a really tough map for them. 2018 was a great example of a year that went incredibly well in the House and still fell short in the Senate because of the races at play. Obviously there are differences. We’re now talking about a tranche of states that’s slightly more competitive: Iowa, Ohio, and Texas. But those are not easy states for Democrats. They still need small lucky bounces in each of them to put themselves in serious contention. And they need Mary Peltola to run in Alaska. The Senate has largely decent news for Democrats, incrementally. But they’re starting from a very deep hole that they’re very much not out of yet.

Last question: What is your favorite race on the map?

It’s hard to pick favorites. The Michigan Democratic Senate primary race has quietly gotten very interesting—nobody knows what’s going to happen. Democrats have been very good about avoiding Senate primaries over the last decade or so, really since Chuck Schumer became the head honcho. He has been incredibly adept at getting the candidates he wants through the primaries with room to spare.

It’s been a long time since we had a truly competitive Democratic Senate primary in a battleground state. Now that could all come undone in Michigan in a three-way race, where any of those candidates could realistically win in a primary that’s not going to happen for another eight months, in a state that’s both crucial to the Senate battleground and has a really topsy-turvy three-way gubernatorial race, and at least two, if not three or four, highly competitive House races.

Need help? Review our FAQ page or contact us for assistance. For brand partnerships, email ads@puck.news.

You received this email because you signed up to receive emails from Puck, or as part of your Puck account associated with {{customer.email}}. To stop receiving this newsletter and/or manage all your email preferences, click here.

Puck is published by Heat Media LLC. 107 Greenwich St., New York, NY 10006