US Midterms 2026: Independent voters could decide who controls Congress | This Is America

This is America, and this is a country where the battle for political power is no longer just about Republicans versus Democrats. Inside both parties, competing factions challenging traditional leadership, while some of the country's most powerful interests are pushing their own priorities. So who is really driving America's political agenda? Is it party leaders, ideological movements, or powerful industries? But first, let's cross to our DC studio and Alex Marquardt. Thank you, Eva. This time next week, millions of Americans are going to be going to polling stations all across this country to cast their ballots in the midterm elections. Their votes will determine whether the Republicans can hold on to their slim majorities in both the House of Representatives and the U.S. Senate or whether Democrats can take back control. One group that will likely decide how that all plays out are the independents. They are now the largest political bloc in the country. They represent an estimated 45% of all registered American voters. Now, politicians on both sides of the aisle are scrambling to win their support, especially in key battleground states where they are going to be decisive. Now, around a third of voters in Ohio, for example, are independents. That's lower than the national average. For the Senate race there, 50% of those independent voters say that they would choose the Democratic candidate. Let's go way west to Alaska. 63 percent, so higher than the national average of voters there, are registered as independents. Polling taken at the same time as President Trump visited Alaska recently when he campaigned for Senator Dan Sullivan, that gives the incumbent, Sullivan, a narrow lead among those independents. And then there's Maine, another critical Senate race. Around a third of voters there don't register with the major parties. Republican Senator Susan Collins, she traditionally enjoyed more cross-party support than other senators. But now, independents are heavily backing her rival, Troy Jackson. Our Eva McKend reports on this independent streak across New England and the challenges that are facing candidates who want to turn it into political power. What's remarkable about Maine and New Hampshire, beyond its natural beauty, is that so many voters tell us they describe themselves as independent. neither want to identify with either major political party. I would just say that I can't tell you that I love every Democrat out there. I don't hate every Republican. I like to keep an open mind and hear what people have to say and then also see what their actions are. What are they actually doing? As the sun sets on Seal Harbor, Maine, Jessie Stone can sail away with the peace of mind she voted early. The women's health doctor supported Democrats this year, but that doesn't mean they can take her vote for granted. That independent spirit is characteristic of the region. In Maine, nearly 3 in 10 registered voters are unenrolled. And in New Hampshire, there are more than 300,000 undeclared voters. That's what Rick Bennett, former chair of Maine's Republican Party, is betting on as he runs for governor as an independent. What I do with my candidacy is give people an agency to think about things differently and also to a path of action where they can actually say, OK, yeah, I don't like that. I'm going to go a different way. There are a lot of independent voters here in Maine. Why is it still such a challenge for independent candidates? Well, the whole system is built to frustrate the independence of voters. I have no interest in serving as governor with a party label after my name. That's the point. The point is not about running, and it's about how we govern ourselves. And I can't imagine governing as a partisan governor. I couldn't get done what I want to get done. Maine has only elected two independent governors in state history. Eva McKend, Al Jazeera, Maine. So to get a closer look at these independent voters, we are joined now by Leslie Shedd. She is a Republican strategist and a founding partner of Rising Communications, as well as Roger Fisk. He is a Democratic strategist and a former Obama campaign advisor. Roger, Leslie, thank you both so much. This is a really interesting block, the independents. And for a long time, they have been kingmakers in a lot of different races in a lot of different states, to varying degrees, of course. But the number, the latest number that we have from a Gallup poll, 45 percent of Americans calling themselves independents, that's the highest that we have seen in polling. So Leslie, why do you think that figure is growing? I think that figure is very misleading. So Pew actually did a poll earlier this year as well and found about 44% identified as independent. But when you dig down into those numbers and ask if they lean towards one party or another, it went all the way down to about 10% of Americans that really identify themselves as independent. To me, when somebody says I'm independent, they really are a Republican or a Democrat, but they maybe don't agree with the party on absolutely every issue, or they don't want to feel as though, you know, they're part of the culture of the swamp of D.C. Instead, they want to be seen as somebody that's a free thinker that has their own opinions. And so they feel as though they're independent. But when they get in that voter booth, they're going to vote for their party of choice almost every time. But let's for the sake of argument, let's focus on what you say is a small number of true independents. That doesn't necessarily mean they're centrists, right, between Democrat and Republicans, because if you look at Bernie Sanders, for example, who's arguably the most famous independent in the Senate, he's at the far left wing of his party. 100 percent. It doesn't mean they're moderates. Like I say, it often just means they disagree with their party on some of their platform issues, or maybe they don't like certain members of their party, or they have kind of different ideas. But Bernie Sanders caucuses with the Democrats. In fact, every single, you know, quote unquote, independent in the United States Congress caucuses with one specific party. So at the end of the day, that whole idea of independent, it truly to me just means, hey, I don't agree with absolutely everything. I want to be my own person. I feel like I'm going to have my own thoughts on things. Roger, how do you see it? First off, thank you so much for having me. Wonderful to be here with Leslie. In the biggest Just to talk about this culturally for a second before we get to the politics of it, we live in an age where institutions are increasingly less and less trusted, and that could be academia, government, et cetera. And I think that the two parties get lumped into that with some justification and without total justification. It's very interesting, faith leaders and the military are the two kind of cultural verticals, if you will, that still have the trust of the American people. So I think some of this is just the times that we live in and the speed with which people can reject traditional institutions that have long defined kind of the two sides of the American political spectrum. Before we launch to the Bernie thing because it's it's different to talk about independent elected officials rather than independent voters. That's a very good point. Yeah so let's just focus on the voters for a second which is largely what they're called is is swing voters and the reason that is is that because to Leslie's point about ideology the most powerful political force in American politics is a suburban college educated mom of two who owns her own home. That's largely who decides American political campaigns. Both sides, Democrat and Republican, walk into the equation with 42, 43 percent of the American electorate. And traditionally, it's been a competition over that remaining 8 or 10 percent. That remaining 8 or 10 has now gotten wider, so I think it's more a dynamic of where a Democrat and Republican walk in with 38 or 40 percent, and then they have to compete over that 20. But I think that makes for good general elections. It also makes it more difficult when an incumbent president puts their thumb on the scale and picks candidates to run in primaries, because as we've seen, President Trump is very good at picking candidates that will win primaries, but not that good at picking candidates that win in generals. So that's where you see the collision between his political influence and the ability to actually reach out and engage these independent voters or swing voters so essentially if i'm understanding you correctly you believe it's a sign of the times people are saying i don't want to be labeled you can't pin me down i don't belong to anybody um and therefore you know they want to say that they're independent but at the end of the day as leslie mentioned when they get into the booth they're probably going to stick with one party's beliefs or the other yeah and i would imagine actually if you and I've seen some evidence of this with younger people that Democrats and Republicans are kind of a 20th century construct. So there's a, I think a new generation of people that just don't feel that either side really matches their relationship with technology, their relationship with their family, their relationship with the government, their aspirations, all those things. So I think there's, there's a general generational element to this as well. Yeah. I just got back from Michigan and Texas. And I did hear a lot of disaffected voters who are disgruntled with with one party or the other and would insist to me that, you know, they are voting for the candidate and it will depend who is actually running. And as an example, we have a little bit of sound here from our colleague Richard Gaisford, who is in Michigan, who spoke with one voter at the Michigan football game over the weekend. Take a listen. I was a Republican forever, OK? And I but I became an independent the last two elections. I don't really vote for a party anymore. I vote for who I think will do the best job. So, Leslie, to Roger's point about it being generational, I can understand how younger voters coming up would say, I'm not going to check that box for one party, the other one you actually have to register. But what about from the other way, from the older generations? I mean, do you recognize that there are people like that gentleman in both parties who are just getting disaffected with the way that their parties are kind of splitting and going to the edges. Are those the true independents in your mind? I mean, I think, first of all, we don't know how he voted, right? He said, now I consider myself an independent, but I don't know. Does that mean he didn't vote for Republicans? Does that mean that he voted mainly for Republicans or mainly for Democrats, but maybe kind of flipped it up here? So I think that's important, too. When it comes to this idea of I'm an independent, I'm going to vote against the party, people change, right? And the parties themselves have also evolved, especially over the last 10 years. You're seeing the Republican Party lean more and more into populism. You're seeing Democrats lean more and more into kind of this like socialism. And so the question becomes, does that change the perspective of a certain person? Maybe I always was a Democrat, but now I am concerned about socialism and particularly in my state or the state. And so I don't feel that same connection with the Democrat Party. The question then becomes, what is that voter going to do when they're sitting there in a voting booth by themselves looking down at that ballot? Are they really going to vote for someone of a different party? And the vast majority of time, the answer is no. Yeah. I mean, I have met a lot of people anecdotally, and I'm not going to put words in that gentleman's mouth, but you can definitely meet people who say, oh, I was one party. Now I'm independent. And then you start talking to them about their views and their concerns. And it's like, well, clearly you're still part of whatever party. But just to push back on what you just said, that's if they get into the voting booth. You've got to get them off the couch and out the door. So if they're disaffected, that doesn't necessarily mean that they're going to go vote. It's incredibly important. You know, this is really what drives elections at the end of the day. We talk about money and we talk about this ad or that ad. At the end of the day, it is candidate quality and voter turnout. And GOTV is not sexy. It's not fun. It's not big, flashy ads. It's grinding it out, getting on the phone, calling people, getting them to turn out, knocking on doors. So the question I have is what do those GOTV operations look like in some of these swing states? It is all about enthusiasm, especially in an off year like this between cycles. Right, Roger? Absolutely. I think your question is spot on, which is and I understand Leslie's premise. But I think the biggest danger, frankly, on the Republican side is people that are still culturally aligned with the president, but have legitimate concerns about how this administration has governed. And I think that the biggest danger for the Republicans, to your point, is that some of those folks just won't get off the couch. And in a year where the headwinds are always going to be against the party in power, particularly when you have the same party running the White House and all of Congress, to what extent, Roger, do you think Democrats are doing enough to tailor their message to those independents who are going to be decisive in races all across the country? Well, I think the I think the affordability argument hits directly, you know, at the kitchen table. I think the Republicans have been caught a little bit asleep at the switch as it relates to data centers, which have kind of become symbolic of the technocrat kind of billionaire class. And so in that sense, data centers and affordability and also the very heavy hand a lot of states are using on the zoning and removing the control of local communities to decide their own zoning issues around the placement of some of these data centers. That kind of all congeals into a sense on the part of the American people and, I think, some of the Republicans that this administration is not delivering on some of the kitchen table issues that they got elected on in 2024. And that also translates into enthusiasm, which is, enthusiasm is a deceptive thing. And I'll give you one example of Democrats getting ahead of themselves over their skis for them to be too far for Democrat leaders right now to be talking about who and what they would investigate and what they will do with a majority, I think, is a gigantic mistake. They should be laser focused on their races, doing the shoe leather and the door to door, as Leslie mentioned, getting ahead of yourself and talking about how you're going to govern before you even have won the election, I think, is a gigantic mistake because I think the Democrats actually have the winning issues this time. They just can't get ahead of themselves and start talking about 2027. If we could talk about some of the officials who are both in government and trying to be in government to make the very important differentiation that you did, Roger, about voters versus officials. Let's look at some of the races. Montana and Nebraska are two of the Senate races that come to mind because there you have Republican incumbents getting challenged by pretty serious independent challengers. Do you think, Leslie, in those two specific cases, Montana, Nebraska, that those independent candidates are truly independent or are they seizing on the moment? No, I mean, they're Democrats. They're being generally propped up by the Democrat Party, propped up by Democrat donor money, and they will be voted for by Democrats. So this is the issue is that an independent means truly independent. I'm not a part of any party. I'm kind of on my own. And instead, you know, these independents aren't. They're just trying to be slightly different or to differentiate themselves from the big major parties in D.C. They're not Republican. They're not Democrat. But ask those guys, if they win, who are they going to caucus with? The most important vote that any member of Congress takes is the very first vote that they take, which is who is going to be the leader, who is going to be the speaker, because that determines everything. It determines committee chairmanships. It determines what bills get on the floor, what hearings are held. And I guarantee you both of those guys will vote for a Democrat to be the leader in the Senate. So they're Democrats. But even if that's a ploy, not to put words in your mouth, but if that's a campaign tactic, what about longtime independents like Angus King and Bernie Sanders? Who caucus with Democrats and vote for Democrats. Correct. So why why do they insist on calling themselves independent still at this stage? I mean, you know, they started this way. It's kind of a part of their brand. Right. They want to keep it up. But at the end of the day, they're Democrats. They vote for Democrat leadership. They vote for Democrats. They are they serve as the ranking members and as leadership on as a Democrat on committees. They're Democrats. Do you agree with that, Roger, or is that spin to try to take down some of these independent candidates who would prefer not to be labeled with a Democratic label? I agree with much of what Leslie just said. The one differentiation I would make to pull ourselves out of the legislative machinery of this, I do think that if someone declares himself an independent, let's just take the two that we've discussed here. Bernie Sanders and I think we've implied Angus King but we might as well just say his name is that it's actually them wanting to have a hands off relationship with the political party. So even if they're going to caucus with Democrats in their day to day legislative work I think a component of them declaring themselves independent is to just say I do not want to be in bed with the DNC. I do not want to have fundraising raising requirements. I don't want my political destiny tied to a political party while still doing what they need to do in their chamber to get plum committee assignments and to deliver for their- Yeah, getting all the benefits. They're like the Notre Dame of Washington, D.C., right? Like, pick a conference. We all know what you are, and move forward with it. So I agree with your assessment about within the chambers themselves, but I do think, at least with the two independents on our side of the aisle that it's a conscious decision to have a have significant significant political distance from the actual um Democratic National do you think democrat democratic voters and the the party uh itself should be more supportive of those two independents running in Nebraska and Montana because as you've both said they will probably end up uh caucusing with the Democrats largely yes i mean because they're because i agree with Leslie's analysis of it, they're in any other state, they would probably be Democrats. So in that sense, I think the Democratic Party should should should support them. So, you know, it does seem, according to these numbers, that the the momentum is behind independence. But then when you look at who's actually being elected, you have two in the Senate and I believe just one in the House. And yet and this is according to NPR, there are 173 candidates running for the House this year who call themselves independents. Yet, Leslie, we don't expect to see a wave of independents getting into office. So does that tell us that voters actually are not going for those independents, or is it that the system is not structurally designed to support those independents when it comes to fundraising debates and that kind of thing? I mean, it's definitely the system is the biggest, you know, issue here, right? Like, you need money, you need infrastructure, you need a political organization and infrastructure, you need consultants that can work for you. And like we were talking about, people that can go out and knock on doors for you and get you to all of the like local meetings. And there are no independent county meetings or city meetings that can help you get those grass tops in your area in order to help turn out voters. So right now, the way the system is set up, there isn't really a place for independence. The other thing you have to think about is if we're ever considering some type of a third party, something more like libertarian or socialist parties are going to be much more likely to actually succeed because they stand for a specific ideal they can you know appeal to a certain group of voters and say this is what we stand for this is what we're going to vote for if we're elected and when you're independent it's kind of like well what does that even mean i mean look at you know Kevin Kiley's record or Lisa Murkowski was independent for a while right compared to like Bernie Sanders. They could not be more different. So the term independent doesn't carry any type of explanation about what you stand for. So it's never really going to be a real movement. Yeah, because, again, you don't know whether they're centrists who are trying to wedge themselves between the two parties or actually on the flanks of the parties, like you mentioned, libertarians, socialists. Roger, rank choice voting is something that we have seen growing increasingly. I'm thinking of Alaska. They've got it up there. Is that system of voting going to allow for independents to have a greater shot? It could. One of the things that I was just thinking of, it's not unusual around the world to have coalition-style governments, right? We're watching it in Israel today. Brazil. So the idea that someone would run with a particular label but then caucus with a larger, you know, philosophically aligned group is not necessarily all that unusual around the world. Ranked choice voting, my experience of it has been much more on kind of like the city level around city council and things like that. And I see and I do see some logic to how it will lift up two things, how it will lift up some independence, but also how it will play into that coalition dynamic, because most of the ranked ranked choice voting happens twice. There's a primary and then there's a general. And sometimes it goes from five to three or ten to five or whatever, in terms of numbers of names but between that primary and that general there's a lot of you need to reach out to the people that didn't make the cut in the in the primary right so that's that's essentially coalition building so in a sense if we were to include rank choice voting and we have more independents running it starts to actually look more like a lot of the coalition governments we see across the industrialized world so if this trend continues and people are disaffected and don't want to label themselves. What does that mean, Leslie, for the two-party system? I mean, right now, I don't see it truly as a challenge to the two-party system at all. You know, the way, if you are disillusioned with your political party, you need to form another political party. And that starts with building political infrastructure, finding donors, getting out your message, honing that, and then finding voters. I agree. I would start on like the city level, the county level, and work to build it out from there. Kind of like what DSA has been doing. Now they have figured out a nifty new trick, which is to infiltrate the Democrat party as well with their candidates, pretend that they're Democrats, not socialists, and then run. And they are essentially a parasite on the Democrat apparatus. That's another, I mean, bluntly successful way if you want to try to push your party's agenda. But you know, you still got a D next to your name. I mean, when you look at both parties, especially in the last few years, you've got obviously the growth of MAGA within Republicans and you still have, you know, establishment Republicans. I would argue that your boss, your former boss, rather, Congressman McCaul, is in that camp. And then on the Democratic side, a bit of an identity crisis with the rise of, you know, DSA-aligned candidates and those who are much more progressive. Roger, do you think that there's space for an argument that you just tell those disaffected voters, hey, we are big tent parties. Come join us. Or will they just not believe it? I think every party has to be focused on growth, right? Like politics is the science of addition rather than subtraction. And I think both parties are dealing with kind of calcified, anachronistic brands that, to bring us all the way back to where you started this conversation in my original point, that aren't necessarily suited to capture where the American people are right now, culturally, politically, economically, and any number of things. So both parties can reconstitute themselves. I would submit that the Republicans have a lot more work to do in that regard because I grew up with a Republican party that was about patriotism and family values and fiscal discipline. And I think we can largely say that the family values and the fiscal discipline and the patriotism is not necessarily pillars of the current crew. We do have, you know, this DSA insurgency, which I frankly think is a healthy thing. There's always been the far left. There's always been the far right. They've called themselves different things at different times. We've been dealing with it for as long as the Democratic Party has been around, and we will continue to. And I think that's healthy. I think those internal debates about what we stand for, what our aspirations are, how we're going to deliver for constituents, those are healthy. And I think when things get too calm and when there's too much groupthink in parties, that's when they start to die. And so in that sense, I think having some insurgencies and some new blood are good things. I mean, it certainly makes for very interesting races, very competitive races, and very heated races. We have to leave it there. Leslie Shedd, Republican strategist. Roger Fiske, Democratic strategist. Really appreciate your time and your thoughts. Thanks for having us. And that's all from the team here in Washington. I I want to hand it back to Eva McKendon, Maine, and Al Jazeera's global headquarters in Doha. That's it for this edition of This Is America. You can catch us every weekday as we continue to cover the midterms. That's at 1830 GMT or 2.30 p.m. Eastern if you're here in the United States. Goodbye for now.