Swing states and big names set the stage for explosive 2026 governor races
Wisconsin Gov. Tony Evers announced Thursday that he will not run for another term, throwing a new wrinkle into what is already shaping up to be a high-stakes — and hotly contested — set of governors' races in next year's midterm elections.
In a video announcing his decision, Evers, who has been governor of the Badger State since 2019, expressed confidence that he could earn another term if he pursued it but said it was time to step aside so he can spend more time with his family.
'Would I win if I ran … no question about it,' he said.
Governors have always been important, of course, but a state's leadership has taken on even more significance since President Trump returned to the White House. Democratic governors across the country have gone to great lengths to try to prevent Trump from carrying out his agenda, while Republicans have largely been happy to see his goals fulfilled in their states.
Only two governorships are on the line this year, in New Jersey and Virginia. Although there are plenty of reason to watch those contests closely, the real fireworks will come in 2026. That's when the top job in 36 states will be up for grabs.
Here's an early breakdown of next year's most pivotal governor races and what might be at stake depending on how they are ultimately decided.
Swing state showdowns
Just like in presidential election years, most of the attention in next year's midterms will be paid to closely contested swing states. Six of the seven swing states from the 2024 presidential race, all of which went for Trump, will vote for governor next year.
Four are currently controlled by Democrats. Arizona Gov. Katie Hobbs and Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro are both eligible to run again, though neither of them has officially announced that they're seeking another term.
The races in the two other Democratic-led swing states are wide open. With Evers not running and no obvious successor waiting in the wings, Wisconsin Democrats will now need to select a new candidate who will try to keep the state, which has flipped in each of the past three presidential elections, under their party's control.
Democrats will also need to find a replacement for one of their party's recent breakout stars, Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer, who can't run again because of term limits. Four candidates, including Michigan's current secretary of state and its lieutenant governor, have already announced that they're running in what will likely be a heated Democratic primary. Several Republicans have also thrown their hats into the ring at this early stage, including the state's former attorney general and former House speaker.
Republicans will also be defending the governorship in two of their own swing states. Georgia Gov. Brian Kemp, who became a foil for Trump after he refused to go along with the president's scheme to overturn the results of the 2020 election, is term-limited. Kemp comfortably defeated Democrat Stacy Abrams in both 2018 and 2022. But Georgia has been gradually becoming more purple, and the GOP could face some risk if it selects a more divisive MAGA Republican as its nominee. That's especially true if it ends up being controversial Trump ally Marjorie Taylor Greene, who has expressed interest in running. Abrams also hasn't ruled out a third bid for governor. Four other Democrats have already declared, including former Atlanta mayor and Biden administration official Keisha Lance Bottoms.
The Democratic Party's best opportunity to flip control of a governor's mansion will likely come in Nevada. Current Republican Gov. Joe Lombardo is running for a second term after narrowly defeating incumbent Democrat Steve Sisolak in 2022. Two high-profile Democrats in the state, current Attorney General Aaron Ford and Washoe County Commissioner Alexis Hill, have announced that they're running to unseat Lombardo. Sisolak has said he's considering joining the race as well.
What's in play if there's a blue wave
Things tend to go poorly for whichever party controls the White House during the first midterm elections of a new presidency. They typically take a beating up and down the ballot as the public turns against the party in charge. That includes governor's races.
The combination of that long-term trend and the particularly stark decline in public opinion of Trump since he returned to office could mean that what would normally be considered safe governorships could be at risk for the GOP. Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis can't seek another term. Trump may have already sealed the GOP primary for that state when he endorsed Rep. Byron Donalds in February. So far only one Democrat, former Republican House member David Jolly, has formally entered the race.
Ohio Gov. Mike DeWine and Iowa Gov. Kim Reynolds, both Republicans, also won't be on the ballot, which could help put those states in reach for Democrats if there's a major blue wave in the midterms. Ohio could be particularly interesting, with Trump ally and former presidential candidate Vivek Ramaswamy running on the Republican side and former Sen. Sherrod Brown reportedly considering a bid for the Democratic nomination.
Democrats have been eyeing Texas as a potential game changer for their party for over a decade and have made some noteworthy gains in what has historically been a deep-red state. Even in a blue wave scenario, ousting Gov. Greg Abbott — who is seeking a fourth term — is likely a long shot. Abbott has won each of his three previous races by double digits, and at the moment, none of the high-profile Democrats in Texas politics has stepped up to challenge him.
GOP long shots
Given how things usually go in the midterms, the odds of Republicans gaining enough ground to put safe Democratic governorships in play could be slim. But the GOP is still likely to put forth serious challenges in a few states to give themselves a puncher's chance if the national mood shifts in their favor. Five Republicans have already joined the race to unseat former vice presidential candidate Gov. Tim Walz in Minnesota, assuming Walz doesn't decide to run for president instead.
Maine Gov. Janet Mills is term-limited, which could create vulnerabilities for Democrats in a state that hasn't elected consecutive governors from the same party since the 1950s.
The outliers
Two states with leaders who don't belong to the party that otherwise dominates state politics will vote for governors next year. In Kansas, where Trump defeated former Vice President Kamala Harris by 16 points in 2024, Democratic Gov. Laura Kelly is term-limited. Eight Republicans, including former Kansas Gov. Jeff Colyer, have joined the race. Two noteworthy candidates, both state senators, have announced their bids on the Democratic side.
New Hampshire isn't as blue as Kansas is red, but the state's current Republican governor, Kelly Ayotte, could face a tough reelection bid if a serious Democratic challenger joins the race — though no one has stepped up so far.
The primary battles
Most of the states electing governors next year aren't really at risk of changing party control, which makes the party primaries the real source of drama. The contest to replace California Gov. Gavin Newsom, who is term-limited, will have especially high stakes. Whoever leads the Golden State instantly becomes one of the stars in the Democratic Party and inevitably invites speculation about a future presidential run. Some of the biggest names in California politics have joined the Democratic primary race, including former Rep. Katie Porter, ex-Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, former Health Secretary Xavier Becerra and current state Senate leader Toni Atkins. A true bombshell could still be coming, though. Harris is reportedly giving 'a serious look' at jumping into the race.
Democrats will also need to select a replacement for Colorado Gov. Jared Polis. Michael Bennet, who has represented Colorado in the Senate since 2009, would appear to be the strong frontrunner for the Democratic nomination. He could face a tougher challenge than expected if Ken Salazar, another former senator who left the job to become interior secretary under Barack Obama, steps into the race.
Republicans face similar circumstances in Alabama, where Gov. Kay Ivey is term-limited. Former college football coach and current U.S. Senator Tommy Tuberville is currently the only significant candidate for the GOP primary there.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
4 minutes ago
- Yahoo
The EPA wants to ditch climate-change rules. That's bad for humans and automakers
Traffic near the intersection of Interstate 270 and Interstate 495 in Maryland with high-occupancy lane. | Maryland Matters I'm old enough to remember the days before the federal government regulated auto tailpipe emissions, a time when the air was stinky and Los Angeles was enveloped in perpetual smog. My first car was one of those pollution machines, a used 1968 Buick Gran Sport that gulped a gallon of poisonous, leaded gasoline every 14 miles or so. It was a different time, one that the Trump administration seemingly is trying to bring back. In what could be one of the most far-reaching deregulatory moves in U.S. history, the Environmental Protection Agency wants to stop regulating greenhouse gas emissions from cars and trucks long considered by most scientists to be significant contributors to climate change. 'With this proposal, the Trump EPA is proposing to end 16 years of uncertainty for automakers and American consumers,' EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin said at a Kenworth heavy truck dealership in Indianapolis on July 29. SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX Zeldin said the administration plans to overturn a landmark 2009 finding by the Obama administration that carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases are pollutants the agency can regulate under the Clean Air Act. That determination is known as the 'endangerment finding' and was the basis for strict tailpipe emission rules enacted by the Biden administration that would have required about half of new vehicles sold in the U.S. being electric or plug-in hybrids by 2030. Automakers also must meet certain fuel economy standards, which were stiffened by Biden. But Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy said in June the Trump administration is planning to roll back the Biden standards, calling them 'illegal.' And under the One Big Beautiful Bill, the tax and spending bill approved by Congress on July 3, automakers won't have to pay fines for not meeting fuel economy standards for the past three years. It's a big gift to automakers that pay hundreds of millions of dollars a year to the federal government for not meeting the fuel economy standards. But it will likely sting electric carmaker Tesla, which has made billions of dollars over the years selling regulatory credits to other carmakers. Environmental groups expressed outrage over the EPA's intent to deep-six climate rules. 'As Americans reel from deadly floods and heat waves, the Trump administration is trying to argue that the emissions turbocharging these disasters are not a threat,' said Christy Goldfuss, executive director of the Natural Resources Defense Council. 'It boggles the mind and endangers the nation's safety and welfare.' Environmental groups have vowed to sue the EPA over the proposed climate rules rollback, possibly delaying any implementation for years. Even Detroit's automakers were muffled in their response to the EPA's move to ditch carbon dioxide rules. The Alliance for Automotive Innovation, an association representing dozens of automakers and suppliers including General Motors Co., Ford Motor Co. and Stellantis N.A., did not issue a statement about the EPA's groundbreaking announcement on its website. That might be because some top auto executives have acknowledged climate change is real and their products are contributing to it. GM CEO Mary Barra has said electric cars are a key element in the automaker's long-range plan to have 'zero crashes, zero emissions, zero congestion. It's the North Star that guides everything we do.' Ford Motor Executive Chairman Bill Ford has supported the Paris Climate Accord, which seeks to reduce carbon dioxide levels associated with climate change. Ford Motor also has pledged to be carbon neutral across its vehicles, facilities and suppliers by 2050. Trump and the Republican-controlled Congress are doing their best to torpedo those efforts by conducting an all-out war against electric vehicles. They're ending the $7,500 tax credit to purchase EVs on September 30. And they're eliminating tax credits for home EV charging stations, a move slated to take effect next June. Trump's chaotic implementation of tariffs also is being used as a weapon in his war against EVs. The Commerce Department last month slapped a 93.5% tariff on Chinese graphite, a critical ingredient in manufacturing EV batteries. China supplies nearly all the high-grade graphite Tesla and other automakers need to make batteries. But the Commerce Department says China is 'dumping' graphite into the U.S. at prices lower than in its home market. Some experts say the tariff could add $1,000 or more to the price of an EV battery, another huge disincentive for consumers to buy EVs. Trump's widespread tariffs on cars, trucks and parts are hammering Detroit automakers' bottom lines, potentially hurting their ability to adequately invest in new technologies to compete with Chinese automakers that are rapidly gobbling up the global EV market. Ford and Stellantis cited the impacts of tariffs in the companies' net losses for the second quarter of the year. Combined, the Detroit Three have paid more than $2 billion in tariffs so far this year. Trump longs to return to an America he remembers growing up before the federal government started regulating the auto industry. I'm nostalgic, as well, for my '68 Gran Sport. But that muscle car is an anachronism best suited for events like the Woodward Dream Cruise. And besides, today's quick-accelerating EVs could blow its doors off.
Yahoo
4 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Explainer-What happens next in the US court battle over Trump's tariffs?
By Jan Wolfe and Dietrich Knauth WASHINGTON (Reuters) -A federal appeals panel on Thursday appeared skeptical of U.S. President Donald Trump's argument that a 1977 law historically used for sanctioning enemies or freezing their assets gave him the power to impose tariffs. Regardless of how the court rules, the litigation is almost certainly headed to the U.S. Supreme Court. Here is what you need to know about the dispute, which Trump has called "America's big case," and how it is likely to play out in the months ahead. WHAT IS THE CASE ABOUT? The litigation challenges the tariffs Trump imposed on a broad range of U.S. trading partners in April, as well as tariffs imposed in February against China, Canada and Mexico. It centers around Trump's use of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), which gives the president the power to address "unusual and extraordinary" threats during national emergencies. Trump has said that trade imbalances, declining manufacturing power and the cross-border flow of drugs justified the tariffs under IEEPA. A dozen Democratic-led states and five small U.S. businesses challenging the tariffs argue that IEEPA does not cover tariffs and that the U.S. Constitution grants Congress, not the president, authority over tariffs and other taxes. A loss for Trump would also undermine the latest round of sweeping tariffs on dozens of countries that he unveiled late Thursday. Trump has made tariffs a cornerstone of his economic plan, arguing they will promote domestic manufacturing and substitute for income taxes. WHAT'S THE STATUS OF THE LITIGATION? The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit heard oral arguments on Thursday in the case. The panel of 11 judges sharply questioned the government about Trump's use of IEEPA, but did not rule from the bench. The Federal Circuit has not said when it will issue a decision, but its briefing schedule suggests it intends to move quickly. Meanwhile, the tariffs remain in effect after the Federal Circuit paused a lower court's ruling declaring them illegal. WILL TRUMP'S TARIFFS BE BLOCKED IF HE LOSES IN COURT? A Federal Circuit ruling would almost certainly not end the litigation, as the losing party is expected to appeal to the Supreme Court. If the Federal Circuit rules against Trump, the court could put its own ruling on hold while the government appeals to the Supreme Court. This approach would maintain the status quo and allow the nine justices to consider the matter more thoroughly. The justices themselves could also issue an "administrative stay" that would temporarily pause the Federal Circuit's decision while it considers a request from the Justice Department for more permanent relief. IS THE SUPREME COURT LIKELY TO STEP IN? The Supreme Court is not obligated to review every case appealed to it, but it is widely expected to weigh in on Trump's tariffs because of the weighty constitutional questions at the heart of the case. If the Federal Circuit rules in the coming weeks, there is still time for the Supreme Court to add the case to its regular docket for the 2025-2026 term, which begins on October 6. The Supreme Court could rule before the end of the year, but that would require it to move quickly. HOW MIGHT THE SUPREME COURT RULE? There is no consensus among court-watchers about what the Supreme Court will do. Critics of Trump's tariffs are optimistic their side will win. They point to the Supreme Court's decision from 2023 that blocked President Joe Biden from forgiving student loan debt. In that ruling, the justices limited the authority of the executive branch to take action on issues of "vast economic and political significance" except where Congress has explicitly authorized the action. The justices in other cases, however, have endorsed a broad view of presidential power, especially when it comes to foreign affairs. CAN IMPORTERS SEEK REFUNDS FOR TARIFFS PAID? If Trump loses at the Supreme Court, importers are likely to seek refunds of tariffs already paid. This would be a lengthy process given the large number of anticipated claims. Federal regulations dictate that such requests would be first heard by U.S. Customs and Border Protection. If that agency denies a refund request, the importer can appeal to the Court of International Trade. There is precedent for tariff refund requests being granted. Since May, CBP has been processing refunds to importers who inadvertently overpaid duties because of tariff "stacking" — where multiple overlapping tariffs are applied to the same imports. And in the 1990s, after the Court of International Trade struck down a tax on exporters that was being used to finance improvements to U.S. harbors, the court set up a process for issuing refunds. That decision was upheld by both the Federal Circuit and the Supreme Court. WOULD A COURTROOM DEFEAT UNRAVEL TRUMP'S TRADE DEALS? Trump has used the threat of emergency tariffs as leverage to secure concessions from trading partners. A loss at the Supreme Court would hamstring Trump in future negotiations. The White House, however, has other ways of imposing tariffs, like a 1962 law that allows the president to investigate imports that threaten national security. Trump has already used that law to put tariffs on steel and aluminum imports, and those levies are not at issue in the case before the Federal Circuit. Some legal experts say a loss for Trump at the Supreme Court would not impact bilateral trade agreements the U.S. has already inked with other countries. Others say that the trade deals alone might not provide sufficient legal authority for taxes on imports and may need to be approved by Congress. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Yahoo
4 minutes ago
- Yahoo
As political petition passing begins, Illinois Democrats have flood of candidates; Republicans have a trickle
More than seven months before votes are cast, Illinois' 2026 political campaign season officially kicks off this week as candidates for federal, state and county offices fan out across the state to gather petition signatures to appear on the March 17 primary ballot. The Tuesday launch date to begin gathering voter signatures is a month earlier this year due to legislation approved last year that also advanced the date for candidates to file their petitions to Oct. 27, rather than the end of November. It's the latest chapter in an unusual midterm election cycle that has seen veteran federal lawmakers announce their retirements at the end of their terms in January 2027, creating open-seat races for U.S. Senate, four congressional seats and state comptroller, as well as several legislative seats, as politicians aspire to climb the political ladder. U.S. Sen. Dick Durbin's decision to retire after five terms has prompted U.S. Reps. Raja Krishnamoorthi, a five-termer from Schaumburg, and Robin Kelly, a six-term lawmaker from Matteson, to seek the Democratic nomination to succeed him. That primary race also includes Lt. Gov. Juliana Stratton. Adding to Kelly's open 2nd Congressional District seat and Krishnamoorthi's 8th Congressional District seat are the retirement announcements of 14-term, 81-year-old U.S. Rep. Jan Schakowsky of Evanston in the 9th Congressional District and 15-term, 83-year-old U.S. Rep. Danny Davis of Chicago in the 7th Congressional District. Those open seats in reliably Democratic districts have triggered a rush of candidates competing in the primaries, where winning will almost certainly lead to victories in the general election on Nov. 3, 2026. At least 62 candidates have already announced their intentions to run for the five federal offices, 47 of them Democrats, portending a raucous primary season as they seek to gain attention and differentiate themselves before prospective voters. Add to that at least three Democrats vying for the open statewide office of comptroller created by incumbent Susana Mendoza's decision not to seek reelection as she pursues a likely 2027 mayoral run. Robin Johnson, a political strategist and political science professor at Monmouth College in far western Illinois, said the allure of an open seat is an obvious factor for the deluge of candidacy announcements. But he said other factors are in play. 'I think it's pent-up demand due to open seats, but I also think it's due to the generational battle within the Democratic Party and the ideological battle within the Democratic Party that's bringing out a lot of people who might not ordinarily consider running,' Johnson said. 'They're looking at the success of Zohran Mamdani, the New York City mayoral Democratic candidate,' he said of the 33-year-old democratic socialist. 'Some of these candidates are drawing their beginnings back to (Vermont Sen.) Bernie Sanders, were motivated by his first (Democratic presidential) race in 2016,' he said of the generational change movement. In addition, Johnson cited as a motivating factor an ideological battle spawned by President Donald Trump and his Republican allies in Congress that pits 'those Democrats who are the resistance part of the party and the others who are still trying to get things done and compromise where they can to get things done.' Not all of the announced candidates will file petitions or make the ballot amid petition challenges filed by rivals. But Johnson also warned that large fields of candidates seeking a specific office can lead to a nominee achieving far below a majority of votes, forcing them to try to unify a disparate base. 'The question is going to be, is this (large number of candidates) just a one-timer as a result of incumbents retiring and the raging debates going on within the Democratic Party, or is this ideological and generational divide going to continue?' he asked. While Democrats have seen a flood of candidate announcements, for Illinois' moribund Republican Party, it's more of a trickle. So far, no major GOP candidates have emerged for U.S. Senate or most of the statewide offices. Democrats Gov. JB Pritzker, Attorney General Kwame Raoul, Secretary of State Alexi Giannoulias and Treasurer Mike Frerichs are all seeking reelection. DuPage County Sheriff James Mendrick is the only announced candidate for governor of any political stature, and he reported July 1 having only $100,000 in cash on hand in his political fund to take on the billionaire Pritzker. Others are said to be weighing a bid, including former state GOP Chair Don Tracy, Palatine Township Highway Commissioner Aaron Del Mar and Ted Dabrowski, president of the conservative advocacy group Wirepoints. On Sunday, Richard Porter, an attorney and former Republican national committeeman from Illinois, used social media to announce he would not seek the GOP nomination for Durbin's U.S. Senate seat. 'After close consultations with my family and friends, I have decided not to pursue this opportunity,' Porter wrote in a Facebook post. 'I intend to stay involved in the effort to turn around Illinois.' Republican Day at the Illinois State Fair on Aug. 14 may prove to be an important event for the party, depending upon whether potential candidates use the day to announce a decision to run. Pat Brady, a former state GOP chair and a Republican not aligned with Trump and his takeover of the party, said the dearth of candidate news is 'unfortunate, because I think there are things that Republicans can talk about that the voters would like. But you can't beat somebody with nobody.' As the party's influence in Illinois has continued to dwindle, more internal factional infighting has developed. 'I've never, ever seen it where it's going to be questionable whether or not the Republicans have a full (statewide) slate,' he said. 'I haven't heard anybody for comptroller, haven't heard anybody for secretary of state, haven't heard anybody for treasurer. Nobody's even leaking their name to get attention.' Brady said the results of the 2022 Republican primary, which saw a slate of candidates backed by billionaire Ken Griffin and headed by former Aurora Mayor Richard Irvin go down in defeat, also meant the loss of several up-and-coming Republicans who could be running this time. 'It's a sad, sad thing, but the party's got to come to grips with the fact that the approach that we need to get more conservative to win — that doesn't work. Or we need to be more Trumpy to win — that hasn't worked either,' Brady said. 'I do believe there are things Republicans used to stand for or should stand for that would be of interest to Illinois voters, taxes, economic growth, things like that.'
