Does Maine Matter?

July 14, 2026

Short answer: probably not

I know a lot of people will disagree with me on this conclusion, but I think too many do not really appreciate how bad this political environment is for Republicans and incumbents more generally. For the longest time, people have been assuming - at the behest of party leaders and pundits, as well as pollsters - that Maine was the key to flipping the Senate to Democrats. In a normal political environment, that was a fair argument. In today’s environment, I don’t think so.

I know at the moment people are interested in whether Republican Sen Lindsey Graham’s death over the weekend puts South Carolina into play. It’s hard to say since, while we know who the interim appointment is (his sister), we do not know who will be the nominee for the regular term in November. Democratic nominee Anne Andrews is a very good candidate who was polling about three-to five points under Graham. The polling data we have on that matchup finds Graham was very unpopular in South Carolina and among independents. That was true six years ago when the polling fooled people into thinking Jaime Harrison would beat Graham, but instead he lost by ten points. That was a function of the base “coming home” at election time. There were a lot of undecideds then and they did not like Graham, but they were largely Republican voters and held their nose and voted for him that November. A similar dynamic has occurred in the past couple of cycles for Sen Mitch McConnell (R-KY), who may or may not be dead right now.

So, what we know about the South Carolina race is that Andrews appeared to be in better shape this year than Harrison was in 2020, but that is probably not good enough to win. It seems like her best shot at winning was against Graham, since the electorate really does not like him and his role as a mouthpiece for Trump probably hurt him badly among independents (but, whatever the reason, the latest poll had him 70 [seventy] points underwater with indys). There are a number of candidates that could run for the seat now, and none of them will have Graham’s baggage – but they also won’t have his skill and experience. We will have to revisit this race in a few weeks after the special primary.

This special primary is not a special election, but the process by which South Carolina allows a party to pick a new nominee after the primary should something like the death of a candidate take place. The reporting on this is confusing because even outlets like the Washington Post are erroneously referring to this as a special election. There is no special election; the governor has already appointed an interim appointment. The November election will be for the seat’s full six-year term, which will include on the ballot Andrews as the Democratic nominee and the winner of the special primary as the Republican nominee. The special primary will take place on August 11 with a runoff on August 25 if no candidate wins outright.

So, putting South Carolina aside until we know more about the state of the race, I think Democrats are in a good position to win a majority in the Senate. In fact, I am a lot more bullish than the better known prognosticators in the media. Most, if not all, of them consider the Senate a Toss-Up at best for Democrats. But as for me, if current trends hold, I see Democrats winning 51-54 seats in the Senate.¹

The Seats to Defend: Georgia, Michigan, Minnesota, New Hampshire.

I don’t see Democrats losing any of these seats. Georgia right now looks like a blowout, but it will probably tighten - especially since Ossoff is polling in the low 50s. I don’t think anyone outside of the most partisan thinks his opponent has a chance against him. New Hampshire might actually be closer, but I still think Democrats hold that seat. In this environment, I don’t see Rep Mike Rogers (R) winning in Michigan. And if the Democratic nominee is Abdul El-Sayed I think, despite what you will hear pundits and centrists say, he might win quite convincingly.

The Pick-Up Opportunities (aside from Maine): Ohio, Iowa, North Carolina, Alaska, and Texas.

Yes, Democrats will pick up some or all of these states. You heard me say that without equivocation (see below for more explanation). Republicans are freaking out about the polling in Ohio and Iowa and plan to pour a lot of money into those states. When the trend is going against you, dumping a lot of money into a race can help prevent a blow-out but it often will not stop the momentum against you. However, Republicans have to try. They cannot concede those states.

North Carolina will likely be closer than polling has shown, but former Gov Roy Cooper (D) is often polling in the 50s - a good sign that he is going to win. If he ends up winning in a blow-out, I will not be surprised. But many of the undecideds right now are probably of the “coming home in the end” variety. Cooper is going to win.

Potential Surprises: Florida, Montana, Nebraska, and South Dakota.

Florida might be hopeless, but polling there suggests that both the Senate and governor races might be closer than people think. In recent years, we have seen Texas and Florida trend in different directions. However, it was not that long ago that Biden nearly won the state. That may have been simply related to that particular contest, but it could also show that the Sunshine State might still have some of its swinginess left.

The other three states are really interesting to watch. Polling shows that if the Democratic nominees drop out in Montana and South Dakota, the independent candidates there (both of whom are Democrats who are not running as such because the party brand is so toxic) are running about even with the Republican nominees. In Nebraska, the Democratic nominee plans to withdraw in favor of independent Dan Osborn, who very nearly won a Senate race few years ago. The most recent polling shows him beating Sen Pete Ricketts (R).

Does the Polling Really Support This?

Yes and No. I think a lot of polling out there is not capturing the electorate we will see show up in November. Yet, the races are close across the board. Even the Florida race is close in the polling. In recent weeks, Republicans have reportedly been increasingly concerned about states like Ohio and Iowa. We know they have been concerned about Texas for months. I am not convinced it is just the public polling that worries them; they must be seeing something on the ground as well. But for states that have been giving Republicans comfortable wins for many cycles now, facing even dead-heats in all three Senate races is cause for concern.

In Iowa, we can go beyond the polling and look at the election results over the past two years. Democrats have flipped previously-reliable Republican state legislative districts and generally over-performed the average Democratic over-performance. Polling and special election results - in combination with really good candidate recruitment - suggest that Democrats could win all four Congressional districts plus Senate plus the governor’s race. At the moment, the Senate race looks more challenging for Democrats than the governor’s race, but not by much.

In Ohio, Republicans nominated a terrible candidate for governor who additionally has to deal with how racist his party’s base is. That contest may be dragging down Republicans generally in Ohio, but in the Senate race Democrats are fortunate enough to have former Sen Sherrod Brown running. His loss in 2024 was surprising, but he is better liked than his opponent, has nearly universal name recognition, and is significantly outpolling incumbent Republican Sen Jon Husted in some polls.

Texas is much more vulnerable for Republicans than people generally realize. Sure, Democrats have a good candidate in Talarico and Republicans nominated one of the worst people in politics (which tells you how bad he really is). But Texas Republicans have placed a huge bet this year that the rightward shift of nonwhite voters - particularly Latinos - in 2024 is a permanent phenomenon. Polling and special election results are showing them that they might have made a really bad bet. This could show in House races where some of the redistricting might prove to backfire on them. But in the Senate, it might be enough to ensure victory for Talarico.

Over the past few election cycles, the vote gap has gotten narrower, which gave Texas Democrats hope for the future. Most folks have assumed that demographic change was at the heart of this narrowing gap, but that change was coming from nonwhite and young voters. But what the data shows is, while those things are also true, the share of white voters supporting Republicans has been gradually shrinking. This phenomenon was masked in the 2024 election as the Democratic share of nonwhite voters shrank. However, if just Latino voters had voted at historic levels in 2024, Harris would have lost the state by less than one point.

The Texas Senate race has been generally even. But if the electorate looks like 2020 (nevermind 2018) instead of 2022 or 2024 (which pollsters are generally using as weighting floor), the polling is almost certainly underestimating Talarico’s support right now. This is continually a challenge in polling: guessing what electorate will actually show up to vote. And in an anti-establishment year it becomes trickier. Democratic voters are very angry this year and Republican voters are much less enthusiastic. In addition, Trump and Republicans are very unpopular with independents. One of the problems of catering to your base and ignoring everyone else, as Republicans have been doing under Trump, is that you cannot win elections in most places if independents vote against you in large numbers.

What About Maine?

What about it? Democrats are more likely to win or lose the Senate regardless of the outcome in Maine than because of it. Democrats have been underestimating Republican Sen Susan Collins’ electoral strength for decades. Six years ago, everyone - including me - thought she would lose to Democrat Sara Gideon. But she won by nine points. Nine! I think she was probably better off running against withdrawn Democratic nominee Graham Platner in the general election. Even absent last week’s allegations that forced him from the race, there are a lot of Maine voters that probably would have come home to Collins in the end because she is the devil they know. I now think Democrats’ chances of beating Collins are better, as long as they do not pick Gov Janet Mills.

The mistake people have made for many election cycles is that Collins is not that she is vulnerable, but that the race is winnable. The race is only literally winnable; she can be beat, but she always exceeds expectations (or perhaps wishful thinking) when it comes to actual votes. This race was always going to be tougher than people imagined it would be. Ask her last opponent. If I were a Maine Democrat I would subtract 3 or more points from whatever polling you get and assume that is what you are dealing with. The past is not predictive of the future, but it is instructive.

If Democrats’ hopes of winning the Senate are contingent on winning Maine, then there is almost no reason for being excited. I think Democrats can beat her, but I don’t think it will be easy. And overall - concerning the majority - it doesn’t matter. This is one race that I do not think will be swept up in a Democratic wave. What this means is if you told me Collins was going to win, I can see that happening in an environment where Democrats win Iowa, Ohio, and Texas. However, if you told me that the Democratic nominee was going to lose in Minnesota I would believe Democrats were getting wiped out.

Maine is a weird place and Collins is a weird exception even there. Democrats can crush Republicans everywhere and still lose to Collins. Don’t ask me to explain it; I have no idea what her appeal is. She is one of the most cynical politicians I know of. I still don’t understand why so many Maine voters are not insulted to the point of refusing to support her by her constant voting against their interests and then clutching her pearls about the completely foreseeable consequences of those votes. But just because I don’t get it doesn’t meant mean it isn’t a real thing.

I do think that winning Maine suggests a better night for Democrats than losing Maine would suggest a bad night. But I just do not think the state is as important to winning the majority than Michigan is. In the end, I doubt Maine will be the make or break state for the Senate majority. It could turn out that way, but I think the data we have right now suggests that if Democrats are going to win the Senate it will be due to a big wave that will likely take Maine with it, but won’t need the state to make it happen.

1. I am assuming a free and fair election, but there are increasing reasons to be concerned about whether that will happen. That is a topic for another day.