It’s a cycle: either party will gleefully ride the other’s failures, but neither will address the voters’ real concerns
American voters brought Donald Trump to power, handing him the opportunity to radically transform the political landscape of America, building upon overwhelming discontent about the political status quo that had metastasized over the course of successive presidential administrations, both Republican and Democratic.
And on November 3 American voters, in a fit of buyer’s remorse, voted for the very party they had rejected two years prior.
In 2024, Donald Trump was elected to a second term as president after running on a platform centered on the concept of “Making America Great Again,” or MAGA.
Riding on Trump’s MAGA coattails, Republicans were able to win control of both the House of Representatives and the Senate, providing him with the opportunity to enact the kind of transformative changes in American politics his supporters were expecting – indeed, demanding. Two years later, the MAGA political machine lies in ruins.
Democrats, building on a wave of discontent and disappointment among an American electorate over the two-year track record of non-performance by Trump and his Congressional Republicans, have won decisive majorities in both houses of Congress, and are positioned to challenge Trump’s agenda for the remaining two years of his term.
Or more. Rep. Robert Garcia, a California Democrat and the presumptive chairman of the House Oversight Committee once the Democrats take control of the House of Representatives, issued a two-word warning to Republicans once the scope and scale of the Democratic victory became clear: “Lawyer up.”
In a subsequent statement, Garcia declared that under his leadership the Oversight Committee would focus on four major investigations. “The first is: We’re going to take on the Trump crime family,” Garcia said. “The amount of grift and corruption is unprecedented in American politics.”
In this regard, Garcia will seek to interview Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner along with other Trump family members about their alleged business dealings and any connection with the official duties of the president.
“Our second investigation is focused on DHS (the Department of Homeland Security) and the abuses of ICE (Immigration and Customs Enforcement),” Garcia declared. “When people are being kidnapped and detained, thrown to the ground, arms broken, people snatched up on their way to immigration appointments that we the government gave them – that’s inhumane, it’s wrong, and I think the American public – regardless of party – are sick of it.”
Garcia also plans to investigate corporate donors to the White House ballroom, no-bid contracts like the Reflecting Pool contractor and companies he has said are “ripping off” the American public. “While you’re struggling, CEOs and companies across this country are making record profits,” he said. “They’re putting in systems of surveillance pricing, so that when you go to the supermarket, you might be paying a different price than your neighbor.”
Garcia also intends to probe further into the scandal surrounding Jeffrey Epstein, saying he wants to hold public hearings, which would replace the interviews that occurred behind closed doors when Republicans were in control of Congress.
Other Democrats have indicated that Secretary of War Pete Hegseth will come under investigation for potential war crimes and other impeachable offenses.
The Secretary of Health and Human Services, Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., is likewise expected to be put under the oversight microscope.
A third impeachment of President Trump is very much on the table as well.
There can be no doubt that many Democratic voters, perhaps a very large majority, will support Garcia’s vindictive agenda.
There is some question whether the current projected Democratic leadership – Hakeem Jeffries as the House Majority Leader, and Chuck Schumer as the Senate Majority Leader – is considered the best choice for engaging in such a political direction. After all, it was this leadership, combined with the policies of Joe Biden and Kamala Harris, which led to Trump’s MAGA-driven electoral victory in 2024.
The buyer’s remorse of 2024 helped fuel the buyer’s remorse of the present times, and if left unchanged, the political cycle will continue to produce outcomes driven on similar remorse going forward.
Vice President J. D. Vance, obviously concerned about what the midterm results portend for his possible 2028 run for the presidency, has come out with his own post-game assessment as to why the Republicans under Donald Trump fared so poorly. In a social media post on X, Vance highlighted four actions that Republicans could have taken to mitigate their losses – ending the Iran war, focusing on the cost of living and inflation, putting America first and changing the US relationship with Israel.
None of these coincide with the agenda laid out by Representative Garcia.
This is a critical distinction.
Garcia, Jeffries and Schumer appear to believe that the midterm election results are a vote of confidence for a traditional Democratic platform.
Vance believes the midterm results reflect the disappointment among voters who had resoundingly rejected the Democratic platform in 2024. The voters, Vance believes, were punishing Trump and the Republicans, not endorsing the Democrats.
Vance is most likely correct in the fundamentals of his assessment: punishment versus endorsement. But his breakdown of causal factors is fundamentally flawed, something his fellow republicans have noted.
Senator Thom Tillis, a retiring North Carolina Republican, called Vance’s explanation oversimplified. “That is one of several factors,” Tillis said. “Do you honestly believe, for example, respectfully, Mr. Vice President, that we saw the departure of Hispanics over the war? Give me a break. It’s more complicated than that, and we owe a thoughtful analysis so that we get it right.”
Tillis was alluding to the fact that Vance had completely ignored the role the unconstitutional actions of ICE played in shaping the mindset of much of the electoral mindset, especially those among the MAGA base who held constitutional rights as being sacrosanct.
Garcia has made the DHS/ICE abuses a centerpiece of his agenda. But he is perhaps forgetting that under both Obama and Biden the Democrats deported more illegal aliens than Donald Trump. No one has clean hands when it comes to the issue of illegal immigration.
The same can be said about Israel and the ongoing genocide being perpetrated on the Palestinian population of Gaza. The current phase of the genocide started under Joe Biden. Trump simply continued the support.
Israel is one area where the American voter may get a choice – Vance wants to review America’s blind commitment to Israel and focus on putting America first.
Jeffries and Schumer each took more than $1.7 million in AIPAC donations.
But there is no unity among the MAGA crowd about Israel. Many support politicians like Ted Cruz, who claims to have become a senator to serve the cause of Israel, and Tom Cotton, who openly advocates in favor of the Israeli genocide in Gaza.
But it is the issue of war and peace where the fickle nature of the American voter and the feckless behavior of American politicians truly comes into play.
Vance states that the Iran war was a major factor in influencing the American voter. But not because we carried out an illegal war of aggression facilitated by an act of perfidy that resulted in the murder of 170 Iranian school kids.
No, the issue was gas prices. President Trump promised an end to the endless wars in the Middle East. He lied, getting America embroiled in a failed war of choice.
But he could have gotten away with the lie if he had ‘won’, with victory measured by the price Americans pay at the pump for gas and diesel. We lost not because we did the wrong thing, because we violated international law, because we committed war crimes. We lost because the price of gas became uncomfortable for the American voter.
Simply put, the American voter has no moral compass. Just a bank account. If it goes up, all is good. If it goes down, there will be hell to pay.
This bodes poorly for the conflict between Russia and Ukraine. Trump has made ending this war a priority, but the fact is he has failed to take advantage of opportunities, such as Russian President Putin’s offer of a compromise made in August 2025 in Alaska.
Instead, Trump continues to fund the Ukrainian war machine and provide political cover for European financial and material commitments to Ukraine. Trump continues to authorize the CIA to carry out operations against Russia designed to trigger conditions conducive to the collapse of the Russian government.
Any hope that Trump might navigate toward a path of conflict termination has been dashed by the election outcome – Congressional democrats, empowered by their electoral victory, will continue to advocate for supporting Ukraine’s war of attrition against Russia.
For Russia, this is perhaps the best outcome. Former Russian Ambassador to the US Anatoly Antonov has said that one of the things Russia looks for most in foreign relations is predictability. Trump’s Russian policy was the most unpredictable policy imaginable, making the formulation of coherent, sustainable policy on the part of Russia almost impossible.
Trump will not be able to move forward toward ending the Russian-Ukraine conflict through negotiations – the Democrats in Congress will not permit this. Trump will be compelled to support Ukraine, which makes US policy objectives inherently predictable.
It is time for Russia to recognize the reality that Ukraine is a cancer on its aspirations for regional security. Excise this cancer. Ukraine is a rabid dog. Shoot the dog.
The extinction of Ukraine is the most predictable outcome that emerges from the US midterm election.
Faced with the fact that the US will not only fail to reign in the Ukrainian nationalists who have seized the helm of power in Kiev, or moderate the Russophobic aspirations of Europe, Russia will have no choice but to finish the job of bringing peace to Ukraine by itself.
And because this conflict does not impact the price of gas in the US, the American voter will remain oblivious to the human tragedy that will result.
Buyer’s remorse only extends to that which the buyer has attached value to. And for America, Ukraine holds no value.
