The resounding defeat of Republicans by Democrats in the United States’ midterm elections does not only serve as a reminder to the ruling All Progressives Congress that electoral victories are not permanent endorsements of political parties and their leaders but a lesson to the Independent National Electoral Commission on how it should ensure that public confidence in an election is not in doubt, Wale Igbintade writes
Tsunami, a stunning rebuke, judgement, trouncing, complete repudiation, referendum, crushing, and landslide were some of the various words used to describe the Democrats’ defeat of the Republicans in the United States’ midterm elections held last Tuesday.
The outcome of the polls sent a clear message to President Donald Trump that his remaining two years in office would not be without political resistance.
For a long time to come, the midterm elections would be remembered by many Americans, particularly those who had hoped for a change in the balance of power in Congress.
In what many described as an end to the reign of terror, the Democratic Party broke several decades-long Republican winning streaks, recorded historic firsts and flipped both chambers of Congress. Voters in states and districts that had supported Trump’s re-election just two years earlier delivered a harsh verdict on his administration’s policies, including steep tariffs, rising fuel prices, corruption allegations, hardline immigration enforcement policies and the unresolved conflict with Iran.
By the time the results were announced, Democrats had secured 255 seats in the House of Representatives and 54 in the Senate, while Republicans won 134 seats in the House and 44 in the Senate. The results marked a significant shift in the balance of power in Washington.
The Democratic gains extended into territories Trump had carried comfortably in 2024, including Texas, South Carolina and Kansas.
Democrat James Talarico, who won the Senate election in Texas, attributed his victory to a different approach to politics.
“We didn’t win this race by alienating our neighbours or shaming our neighbours or ridiculing our neighbours. We embodied a new kind of politics. A politics rooted in a deep love for our state, for our country and, most importantly, for all of our neighbours,” he said.
Before the elections, Trump had urged supporters to vote as though he were on the ballot. After the results, however, he claimed on social media that he would have won “IN A LANDSLIDE!”
The results suggested otherwise, with voters appearing to judge his administration’s performance.
Reportedly, 62 per cent of voters disapproved of his performance, while 38 per cent approved. Nearly 90 per cent identified the cost of living as a major factor in their vote, while nearly two-thirds believed his policies had worsened the economy. More than half also expressed reservations about his leadership and priorities.
Trump’s interventions in the closing days of the campaign also appeared to backfire, with controversial remarks attracting attention away from his party’s agenda.
The question now is how Trump will respond to the setback. Known for his combative approach to criticism, he has said he would accept the election results and work with Democrats. Whether he will maintain that position remains to be seen.
Democratic control of Congress gives the party greater leverage to challenge Trump’s agenda, including his tariffs, healthcare policies and military actions in Iran. The House could also investigate allegations of profiteering involving his family and associates, while impeachment proceedings have been raised as a possibility.
Inside the Republican Party, initial shock at the stunning election results quickly gave way to anger with Trump. They argued that his focus on his legacy and indifference to voter concerns cost the party the elections. Some said the president dragged them down with unpopular policies, a low job approval rating and obsession over construction projects in Washington.
Unlike what he did in the presidential election in 2024 when Trump was on the ballot, not even the about $500million the billionaire businessman Elon Musk, put down to boost Republicans chances in the polls save the day.
As Nigeria approaches its 2027 general election, the American experience raises questions about whether voters will similarly use the ballot to express dissatisfaction with an incumbent government. Many Nigerians are grappling with economic hardship, inflation, insecurity, corruption, inadequate electricity and poor infrastructure, among other challenges.
The American experience raises questions about whether voters in Nigeria will similarly use the ballot to express dissatisfaction with President Bola Tinubu and other candidates of his All Progressives Congress (APC) as the country approaches its 2027 elections. This is because economic grievances that contributed to the Republican defeat are not alien to Nigeria where Nigerians face many of them in far more debilitating circumstances.
Economic hardship necessitated by cost of food, transportation, healthcare, electricity, corruption, nepotism, deplorable roads and insecurity has placed unbearable pressure on households. Inflation has diminished purchasing power, while government policies have imposed enormous adjustment costs on ordinary citizens. Millions are struggling to cope with economic hardship, even as those in positions of authority offer explanations, justifications and assurances.
Beyond the economy, questions of democratic accountability, institutional independence, governance and the exercise of executive power remain central to Nigeria’s political discourse. These are fundamental to the survival of any functioning democracy.
Despite the hardship and insecurity in the country, APC is confident that it would win the election in landslide.
Those who spoke to THISDAY urged Nigerians to use similar factors to rate and assess the ruling APC in 2027, citing the defeat of the Republicans as an example of how citizens can hold governments accountable through the ballot box.
Their views point to a central question ahead of the election: will Nigerians primarily judge the APC-led federal government by its record in office or will political loyalty, regional identity, ethnicity, religious bigotry, financial inducements and party machinery play a more decisive role?
A lawyer, Samson Afegbai, identified five issues that could influence the election: Insecurity, foreign exchange, the government’s subsidy policy, the cost of living and infrastructure. Femi Adeyinka similarly identified the economy as a decisive factor.
He feels that the removal of the petrol subsidy and the unification of the foreign exchange market under Tinubu have had significant implications for fuel prices, transportation and purchasing power. Although the government has defended the reforms as necessary to correct longstanding economic distortions, voters will be interested in whether they translate into tangible improvements in living conditions before 2027.
The candidates must therefore demonstrate how their economic policies can improve household incomes, employment, electricity supply and business conditions. While Tinubu will be judged on his administration’s record, Atiku and Obi must convince voters that their alternatives offer a credible route to recovery.
Another respondent and businessman, Emeka Odittah, identified six factors that could shape the election: The economy, coalition-building, voter turnout, security, religion and zoning, and the credibility of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC).
The businessman placed particular emphasis on electoral credibility, arguing that public confidence in the voting and result-transmission processes could influence participation and acceptance of the outcome. He said the credibility of INEC, particularly the use of the Bimodal Voter Accreditation System, the INEC Result Viewing Portal and the collation of results, would be crucial to public confidence in the election.
According to Odittah, the 2027 contest would be shaped by economic hardship and the ability of candidates to build cross-regional coalitions while securing public trust in the electoral process.
This is why the ADC urged Nigerians to draw lessons from the American elections and vote out the APC in 2027.
In a statement issued by its National Publicity Secretary, Bolaji Abdullahi, the party drew parallels between the American elections and Nigeria’s political situation under President Tinubu, arguing that voters should prioritise their welfare over political loyalty, sentiments and the personalities of political leaders.
“Americans have shown that when politicians become arrogant, when policies punish ordinary people, and when those in power mistake popularity for a permanent licence to govern, the ballot box remains the ultimate instrument of accountability,” the party said.
The ADC urged Nigerians to consider the country’s economic and security challenges before deciding whether to renew the APC’s mandate. It accused the Tinubu administration of presiding over worsening economic hardship, insecurity and declining opportunities, arguing that the ruling party should not be rewarded with another term.
“We cannot continue to complain about the cost of living while voting for a President who has made life unaffordable. We cannot demand security while rewarding failure,” the party said.
For the Human Rights Writers Association of Nigeria (HURIWA), the outcome of the US midterm elections should serve as an important lesson to Nigeria’s electoral authorities and political leaders on the need to guarantee credible, transparent and peaceful elections.
In a statement by its National Coordinator, Emmanuel Onwubiko, the group stressed that the victories by Democratic candidates and the transfer of control of both chambers of the Congress demonstrated the importance of allowing voters to determine political outcomes through credible electoral processes.
HURIWA argued that electoral credibility is strengthened when voters can independently verify results and political parties have confidence that the declared outcome reflects the ballots cast. It called on the Chairman of INEC, Professor Joash Amupitan, and other election managers to draw lessons from established democracies and ensure that Nigeria’s January 2027 national elections are free, fair, transparent and peaceful. It also warned that any attempt to manipulate the 2027 elections could trigger serious political instability and undermine public confidence in constitutional democracy.
The American experience offers a reminder that electoral victories are not permanent endorsements of political parties or their leaders. But whether Nigerians will apply that lesson in 2027 remains to be seen.