UAlbany Political Science Professor Predicts the Midterm Elections
By Thomas Fink | November 3, 2026
Dr. Timothy Weaver, an associate professor of political science from the University at Albany, was interviewed to give his predictions on the outcome of the U.S. 2026 midterm elections. The interview was driven by five questions.
Q: “It is expected that the Republicans will lose seats in the House, but how many seats do you see the Democratic Party gaining? Why would that be?”
Professor Weaver said that he believes that the seat-flip in the House of Representatives will be less than the 41-seat-gain the Democrats succeeded with in the 2018 midterms under President Donald Trump’s first term.
“It’s gonna be a bit more modest, but I would expect to see the Democrats…picking up, let’s say, at least 20,” he said.
He said that would amount to a majority of 235 Democrats in the House.
He said that “gerrymandering…which has reduced the number of seats” is the main factor into why the Democrats will flip approximately half the number of seats compared to 2018.
“And I think it’s because of higher degrees of partisanship which means that the number of people that switch is lower than it has been traditionally and so, when you combine those two things together, it means that there are fewer competitive districts than there were even eight years ago,” he said.
Q: “Do you have a prediction for what political party will win control of the Senate? What specific swing Senate races would determine what party would come to control the Senate? What predictions do you have for any of these swing Senate races?”
“I’ve got a lot less confidence with respect to the Senate,” he said. “Although, I do expect that the Democrats will pick up seats there and will probably win a majority, which means they need to get to at least 51.”
He predicts that Roy Cooper will win in North Carolina, a Senate gain for the Democrats and that the party will hold seats in Minnesota, Michigan, and Georgia with Peggy Flanagan, Abdul El-Sayed, and Jon Ossoff, respectively.
He said if El-Sayed loses in Michigan, it would intensify pessimism from the Democratic Party about electability with the progressive left in swing states. Nevertheless, he predicts that although El-Sayed will win, he expects “that he will probably underperform.”
“So, then the Democrats would need at least another three pick-ups, so where are they gonna get them?” he said. “I think Ohio is looking pretty strong for the Democrats with Sherrod Brown who’s obviously a well-known character there, having been the senator before this current election.”
Regarding Maine, he believes that Democrat Troy Jackson will win “narrowly,” because he is “not a great candidate.” The fact that Maine would be feasibly helpful to the Democrats with flipping the Senate as well as the widespread lack of enthusiasm for centrist Republicans such as incumbent Susan Collins he sees as the main factors behind his predicted electoral outcome.
“[This could] be a time when Susan Collins’s time finally be up—the chickens may come home to roost, but again, I think that’s gonna be close,” he said.
“[Texas Democrat] James Talarico has had several polls that put him in front a lot of the modeling is suggesting—in addition to the polling evidence…you know, I hesitate to say it, but I think he might be able to pull it out,” he said.
The factors into Talarico’s potential victory he said would be “fundamentals in terms of economic data, polling, and candidate quality.” He also said that Talarico has “run a pretty smart campaign” and the fact that Trump has been campaigning with Republican Ken Paxton “would suggest that the Republicans are worried about Texas.”
“If I had to bet, I would bet on Talarico, at this stage,” he said.
He said that the key reason for Paxton’s expected loss would be that he is viewed as a “weak candidate.” If Paxton is defeated, there would be “a major Republican freak-out” as Texas would come to be perceived as a “game-changer” of a swing state for the 2028 presidential election with its 40 electoral votes all of which “would be very interesting.”
With Alaska, he also said that “it looks like [Democrat] Mary Peltola will win.”
“And so, in that case, it would be five Democratic pick-ups and therefore, the Democrats would have 52 seats,” he said. “I think it’s important they get to 52, because I don’t think John Fetterman is going to be a reliable vote for the Democrats. He may even consider defecting and so, therefore, I think if they want to be confident of being able to have a governing majority in the Senate, they’re gonna need 52.”
“I’m pretty confident that the Democrats are gonna get to 48, 49, 50,” he said. “But getting to 52, I think, is going to be a struggle, but I do think it’s possible.”
Q: “If the Democrats succeed in flipping the Senate (thus winning complete control of Congress), what message would that send to the Trump administration, the Republican Party, the Democratic Party, the right-wing conservative movement, and the progressive left?”
“Well, it will definitely send a message to the Republicans that…the Trump coalition has broken,” he said.
He said that the concept of what specific Democrats Senate candidates would win their respective races in specific states would send important messages to both parties; it would spark conversation on which campaigns were successful and why.
“I think one of the things the Democrats have done quite well is to actually not have a national message, but rather to leave it to individual candidates to develop whatever messages work for them,” he said.
He said that because the Democratic Party itself is not popular, these individualistic campaign strategies are helpful in overcoming that obstacle.
He said that the most significant reason behind a potential blue wave would be a reaction driven by “economic anxiety” against inflation (e.g. rising fuel prices) and “concerns about corruption.”
Q: “If the Democrats fail to flip the Senate, what message would that send to the Trump administration, the Republican Party, the Democratic Party, the right-wing conservative movement, and the progressive left?”
“I mean, failing to win because you lose Texas, it wouldn’t be a massive shock and it wouldn’t necessarily be a huge problem for the Democratic Party,” he said. “To be in a position where you’re disappointed, because you lost Texas means that you’re in a pretty good place.”
“I think failure to win the Senate—there will be a lot of questions about why and who failed to win,” he said.
If the Democrats lost in states “where they’re confident” like Maine, Michigan, North Carolina, and Georgia, he said then it “would be a real disaster” and “would raise really major alarm bells.”
“If they can’t be winning those seats in this environment, then…one would have to wonder what circumstances they could ever win those kinds of seats,” he said.
“They should be picking up lots of seats,” he said. “Now, if they end up with, let’s say, 50 where they wouldn’t have control, it would be a not-great-night for the Democrats, but I think it wouldn’t be a disaster. I think it would still be a partial repudiation of Trump, because this was gonna be a tricky year anyway for the Democrats, because there were lots of states that Trump won that the Democrats would have to win this time to get them a majority.”
Q: “Any predictions on swing gubernatorial races?”
“It looks like [Democrat] Rob Sand may well win in Iowa,” he said. “He seems to be up in several polls.”
He predicts that the Republican incumbent governors of Vermont and New Hampshire will win re-election.
He said “it would be major news indeed if” Democrat Gina Hinojosa wins in Texas.
“I’ll be really interested to see how close that is,” he said. “I’m not predicting [Hinojosa] will win though, but I think it will be close—and uncomfortably so for [incumbent Republican] Greg Abbott.”
Comments