The Senate has become an annoyance to Donald Trump Ahead of an August recess, Republican senators have not advanced the president’s agenda Aug 6th 2026 Was it a concession or a con? On August 2nd Todd Blanche, Donald Trump’s pick for attorney-general, produced written assurance that the Department of Justice was scrapping the president’s $1.8bn “anti- weaponisation” fund, a condition that Republican senators John Cornyn of Texas and Thom Tillis of North Carolina had set for backing him. The Senate’s judiciary committee duly advanced Mr Blanche’s nomination two days later. Democrats criticised the move as hollow, given that Mr Trump can still revive the slush fund in future. But to some Republicans, it was evidence that the Senate can still check the president’s worst instincts.
Congress remains largely pliant to Mr Trump. But a small band of Republican senators are increasingly defiant. Some, such as Mr Tillis and Mr Cornyn, are on their way out, so have little to lose and are picking more fights. Susan Collins of Maine, another senator resisting Mr Trump, faces a Democratic challenger in November. Presiding over this is John Thune (pictured), the Senate majority leader who has the blessing of not facing re- election until 2028 and the curse of trying to lead the chamber with Mr Trump in the White House. When senators break for a five-week recess on August 7th, they will have produced few wins for the president. The Democrats “can’t believe how lucky they got with this Senate leadership”, Mr Trump vented last month on Truth Social. “Remember, stupidity always brings LOSING & DEATH!” Mr Thune has framed his reluctance to advance Mr Trump’s agenda this summer less as a matter of policy than one of procedure. He has told the president that the SAVE America Act, a voter-identification bill, lacks the 60 votes needed to overcome a filibuster. Mr Trump’s fix—that Republicans do away with the filibuster—is a non-starter for the institutionalist Mr Thune. “The Republicans are not getting rid of the legislative filibuster,” he said in July. “It’s just a fact, and the facts don’t change.” Mr Thune is also loth to use the budgetary tool known as reconciliation as a workaround. The Senate would need only a simple majority to pass parts of the SAVE Act using reconciliation, but the process is meant primarily for spending measures. That procedural reason is matched by a political one: reconciliation would force vulnerable lawmakers to make contentious votes right before the midterms. Senate Republicans “have no intention of putting skin in the game on Trump’s behalf”, explains a Republican operative. In private, many senators say they appreciate Mr Thune acting as a shock absorber. Though the president has questioned his viability, he maintains the backing of much of his conference. Two Trump loyalists, Mike Lee of Utah and Rick Scott of Florida, tried and failed to buck Mr Thune by keeping the Senate in session to pass the SAVE Act. The composition of that conference is due to change, however. “The Senate will become more Trumpy, ideologically,” predicts Matthew Glassman of Georgetown University. The seats occupied by Mr Tillis and Mr Cornyn will
next year be held either by Democrats or MAGA newcomers. Two other Republicans leaving the Senate, Bill Cassidy of Louisiana and Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, will almost certainly be succeeded by acolytes of Mr Trump. In Louisiana Julia Letlow was personally recruited by the president, while Kentucky’s Andy Barr has vowed “to stand with President Trump 100%”. As the Senate’s MAGA wing gains greater influence, Mr Thune’s job will get even more difficult. Mr Lee, for example, looks set to be the top Republican on the judiciary committee next year. Trump-aligned senators may begin to press Mr Thune to push through controversial nominees or support Mr Blanche if he moves to re-establish the slush fund, as Republican strategists murmur that he will. New Republican senators may even move to abolish the filibuster. Should Democrats win control of the Senate, Mr Thune’s power will be diminished. He may find some solace in having strident anti-Trumpers on the left to give him cover.■ Stay on top of American politics with The US in brief, our daily newsletter with fast analysis of the most important political news, and Checks and Balance, a weekly note that examines the state of American democracy and the issues that matter to voters. This article was downloaded by zlibrary from https://www.economist.com/united-states/2026/08/06/the-senate-has-become-an- annoyance-to-donald-trump
Americans are sick of Republicans and Democrats. Can independents win? Senate campaigns in Montana and Nebraska offer a test Aug 6th 2026 BIAS BREWING in Kalispell, Montana, may seem an oddly named place for a self-described “radical pragmatist” to hold a campaign event. Yet on a recent evening in July, Seth Bodnar chose the brewery to make his campaign pitch. “Running as an independent, you upset people on both sides,” he told the crowd. Mr Bodnar (pictured) wants to be Montana’s next senator. He believes Democrats ignore the state and Republicans take it for granted. Mr Bodnar’s campaign is part of a trend. Voters are dissatisfied with America’s two main political parties. Net favourability for the Democrats, in particular, is near a 35-year low. That has created an opening for politicians on the far left (see next story), but it is also inspiring a new generation of
independents. More congressional candidates have filed to run as independents in 2026 than in any election cycle since at least 2000. The campaigns of Mr Bodnar and Dan Osborn, a candidate in Nebraska, are this year’s best test of whether independents can succeed. Running as an independent is sufficiently difficult that, at least historically, few politicians have deemed it wise to do so. Independents lack the campaign infrastructure of a party and, in many states, must collect more signatures to earn a place on a ballot. However, aspiring politicians now face a shifting set of odds. Last year 45% of Americans identified as independent, the highest share since at least 1988, according to Gallup. Those independents are, in turn, five percentage points more likely to lean Democratic than Republican. In Republican states, where Democratic policies are often more popular than the party itself, an independent may have a better chance of winning. It is no coincidence that two of this year’s strongest independent candidates are campaigning in Montana and Nebraska, where voters have thrice voted for Donald Trump but where farmers are also pinched by tariffs and fuel costs.
In Montana, Mr Bodnar has an institutionalist’s pedigree: he graduated from West Point, was twice deployed to Iraq and worked at General Electric before serving as president of the University of Montana in Missoula. “I feel like both parties left me in what I call the sensible centre,” he explains over coffee in Missoula. He faces Kurt Alme, a former US attorney backed by Mr Trump and Steve Daines, the retiring senator who now holds the seat. Mr Daines waited until the last moment to announce his retirement, in effect ensuring that only his preferred candidate was prepared to run. Mr Osborn, in contrast, is a populist firebrand. A 51-year-old veteran, mechanic and former union leader, he got his political start in 2024, when Democrats failed to field a Senate candidate. Mr Osborn ran as an independent and lost to Republican Deb Fischer, but won an impressive 47% of the vote. His opponent this time is the Republican incumbent Pete Ricketts, a wealthy former governor whose father founded TD Ameritrade, a financial firm. Critics argue that neither Mr Bodnar nor Mr Osborn are true independents, but Democrats seeking to escape the party’s noxious brand. Indeed both men rely on Act Blue, a Democratic fundraising platform, and enjoy the support of prominent Democrats. Mr Osborn, in particular, echoes the anti- billionaire sentiment of today’s left. “Elon Musk can give a campaign
$300m and he’s got keys to the White House,” he recently told a crowd in Sidney, Nebraska. “Man, that’s not right.” Mr Bodnar insists that his independence is a product of his military career, which fostered non-partisanship, and claims he has identified as an independent for more than a decade. “We believe strongly that the government has no place in our doctor’s office, no place in our bedrooms, no place in our gun cabinets.” Mr Osborn critiques the Democrats’ past standard-bearers. “I’m not afraid to say that Joe Biden failed us on the border. I’m not afraid to say Obama shouldn’t have bailed the banks out,” he says. Victory for independents depends on their ability to convince enough Republican voters to give them a chance. As important, it depends on Democrats’ decision to drop out or remain in the race and risk splitting the vote. The winner of Nebraska’s Democratic primary has filed paperwork to withdraw, but a loser of that primary is suing to force the party to compete. In Montana the Democratic nominee is Alani Bankhead, whose campaign is nearly broke. “When I was a senator,” says Max Baucus, a former Democratic senator in the state, “I raised millions of dollars for Democrats in Montana.” He is now supporting Mr Bodnar. The deadline for Ms Bankhead to withdraw is August 10th. Mr Baucus is still hoping she drops out. “For Seth to win”, he says, “she has to.” ■ Stay on top of American politics with The US in brief, our daily newsletter with fast analysis of the most important political news, and Checks and Balance, a weekly note that examines the state of American democracy and the issues that matter to voters. This article was downloaded by zlibrary from https://www.economist.com/united-states/2026/08/04/americans-are-sick-of- republicans-and-democrats-can-independents-win
America’s Democratic Socialists are having the summer of their lives Could a populist-left candidate win the Democrats’ presidential nomination in 2028? Aug 6th 2026 Four years ago the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) were in a funk. Jacobin, a left-wing magazine, depicted on its cover three DSA-friendly lawmakers in a waiting room and declared the group in purgatory. Joe Biden’s victory over Donald Trump in 2020 had made Democrats complacent—they had gone “back to brunch”, in the pejorative of the left. Then came the war in Gaza; progressives found their animating cause in Palestine. Mr Trump’s defeat of Kamala Harris strengthened their case for change: what were establishment Democrats good for if they couldn’t stop his second coming?