The war didn’t sink Republicans. The economy did

Democrats won 40 House seats in the 2018 midterm elections, enough to give them control and end full Republican control in Washington, D.C. President Donald Trump was unpopular, Democrats were energized, and Republicans lost important races around the country. Despite the big losses in the House, Republicans gained two seats in the Senate, defeating Democratic incumbents in Indiana, Missouri, North Dakota, and Florida.One reason was the Senate map. Democrats were defending seats in states Trump had won comfortably two years earlier. But Republicans also had something going for them that they didn’t in 2026: Most voters held a positive view of the economy.According to exit polling, 68% of voters in 2018 rated the economy as excellent or good. Eight years later, 75% said it was not so good or poor. Worse for Republicans, 65% said Trump’s policies had made economic conditions worse. That difference has gotten lost in the argument over whether the war with Iran cost Republicans the midterm elections. Vice President JD Vance and other conservatives have pointed to the war as the reason Republicans suffered such a devastating defeat. The argument isn’t necessarily that Republicans would have won without it, but that the war turned what might have been an ordinary midterm loss into a rout.Republicans and Trump were already in trouble before the war started.A CBS News/YouGov poll conducted Jan. 14-16 found 59% of people rated the economy fairly or very bad. Trump’s approval on the economy was just 39%, with 61% disapproving. His numbers on inflation were worse, with only 35% approving of his handling of prices.Another CBS survey conducted Feb. 3-5 found that 60% rated the economy negatively and 55% said conditions were getting worse. Only 25% thought things were improving.Those numbers were recorded weeks before American forces attacked Iran. Gasoline prices hadn’t experienced the war-related spike, and the administration was still talking about tariffs, manufacturing, jobs, and the economic benefits Trump insisted his policies would deliver.Voters weren’t buying it.Michael Brendan Dougherty, writing in National Review, argues that the war made the difference between a normal Republican defeat and the disaster that unfolded on Election Day. He acknowledges the administration’s other problems, including tariffs, immigration enforcement controversies, and corruption. His position is that the war pushed Republicans over the edge.Dougherty cites election analysts David Shor and Sean Trende, who have suggested that Republicans might have held the Senate without the war. Both are respected analysts, and neither has any particular reason to protect Vance or Trump. But their arguments are counterfactual and only a theory about what might have happened.There is no way to know whether Republicans would have held the Senate without the war. It is possible the conflict cost them enough votes in close races to make the difference. But the argument becomes harder to sustain when applied to the broader Republican defeat. Voters were already giving Trump poor marks on the economy, and the party had to defend his record in congressional races across the country. A different outcome in a handful of Senate contests wouldn’t erase those problems.Trump’s tariffs impacted businesses in states Republicans needed to win. Michigan’s automobile industry depends on parts and materials coming from Canada and Mexico. Texas has a strong trading partnership with Mexico, while Georgia’s ports and manufacturing operations rely heavily on international shipping. Farmers in Iowa and Kansas faced uncertainty over relevant markets and the possibility of retaliatory tariffs.Trump defended those policies throughout the year, arguing the tariffs would bring manufacturing jobs back to the United States and strengthen American industries. People saw things much differently. The president would also change, impose, and increase tariffs on a whim, exacerbating the uncertainty.The Associated Press Voter Poll found about two-thirds of voters believed tariffs were hurting the national economy. Roughly the same share said Trump’s policies had contributed to inflation. Nearly 9 in 10 said the cost of living was a major or crucial factor in their vote.Democrats hammered the tariffs in campaign advertising. According to an analysis published on Election Day, Democratic House campaigns spent more than $58 million on ads attacking Trump’s tariffs. Republican-affiliated campaigns spent nothing defending them. Of 47 campaign YouTube videos mentioning tariffs, 46 came from Democrats.Republicans weren’t exactly short on campaign money. But when it came to defending one of Trump’s signature economic policies, they apparently decided their advertising dollars were better spent elsewhere.That left Trump defending the tariffs largely on his own. Republican candidates could campaign on tax cuts, immigration, and crime, but they couldn’t make the tariffs disappear from voters’ minds. Democrats kept reminding people of a policy the president championed and his own party seemed reluctant to discuss. For an administration that had made tariffs a centerpiece of its economic agenda, the silence from Republican campaigns was telling.The economy was the leading issue in the exit polls, with 39% of voters identifying it as the country’s most important concern. Ironically, it wasn’t that voters flocked to Democrats because the party suddenly became popular. Voters weren’t particularly enthusiastic about Democrats, either. Fifty-four percent viewed the party unfavorably, compared with 59% who viewed Republicans unfavorably.Democrats didn’t need to become popular for Republicans to lose. What they needed was an electorate angry with the party running the country.The war certainly didn’t help Republicans. Higher gasoline prices stretched household budgets, and the administration’s decision to attack Iran angered voters who had supported Trump because he promised to avoid new foreign conflicts. According to CBS News exit polling, most voters believed the United States had made the wrong decision to attack Iran, including some Republicans.For voters who had supported Trump in 2024 because they wanted a president focused on problems at home, the war presented another disappointment. The administration was asking the public to accept the costs of a military conflict while many were still waiting for relief from the high prices that had dominated the previous election. Even voters who weren’t following developments in Iran closely could see what was happening at the gas pump.That opposition gave conservatives who opposed the war from the beginning plenty of ammunition. But the argument that Republicans might have retained the Senate without Iran assumes voters would have overlooked their dissatisfaction with Trump’s economic record. The administration wasn’t enjoying a political honeymoon that ended when the bombs started falling.Trump also told voters to make the election about him. During a Nov. 2 tele-rally for South Carolina Republicans, he urged supporters to vote as though his name appeared on the ballot.“And really, I am on the ballot,” he said.Trump had spent months defending his tariffs and promising people his economic policies would deliver results. By Election Day, most voters believed those policies had made the economy worse.THE MIDTERMS SHOCKING EMBRACE OF ABORTION EXTREMISMThe Iran war added to the problems Republicans faced, particularly through higher gasoline prices. But blaming the scale of the losses on the conflict gives Trump an explanation that avoids the economic policies he pursued before the war began.He wanted the election to be about him. He got his wish.