The 2026 mid-term election is over; a blue tsunami rolled over the nation.

In two earlier blog posts this year (7/05 and 11/01), I wrote about some of this year’s candidates. In this post, I will update you on how they fared. To add one more cliché to my last blog post – “You Can’t Win ‘Em All” (“may have originated among poker players – popular in the United States since about 1940”). 

Iowa Governor: Let’s start over in Iowa. The only race that I wrote about (11/01/26) was the gubernatorial race between Democrat Rob Sand and his Republican challenger Zack Lahn. Iowa voters will now have four years to determine whether Rob Sand is “Honest as the Day is Long.” 

Nebraska Senator: Life-long independent (as a Hog on Ice?) Dan Osborn was defeated by incumbent Senator Pete Ricketts. Ricketts had a better day than many other Republican senators trying to get elected or reelected. 

Nebraska Congressional District 02: In my July 5, 2026, post I wrote, “I fear that Brinker’s personality will be no match for Denise’s spunk. That, and a general “Trump-fatigue,” will bring out more Democrats than Republicans in November (or whenever the hell we start voting). But time will tell.”  

I think that post was pretty much right-on. Spunky Denise Powell (“a pissed off mom,” financed by “dark money” (per a Democratic primary opponent), who challenged her supporters to “Be Brave”) routed Brinker Harding, who was just too bland and nice to win in this year’s political environment.  

And as predicted, the Democrats came out in force, up over 20% in the northeast (Black) and southeast (Hispanic) parts of Omaha. Many west-Omaha (White) Republicans, happy with their capitalistic lives, failed to even vote. Several down-ballot Republican candidates that I supported (e.g., Douglas County Sheriff, Douglas County Attorney) also got swept away by the tsunami. I am not sure that the streets of Omaha will be as safe next year. 

Nebraska Legislative District 04: This is the one that hurt the most. In my July 5, 2026, post (after the primary), I wrote about some “speculative math” that suggested to me that Brad von Gillern would be reelected. He wasn’t. It was a tight race, decided by a few hundred votes, both candidates spending a lot of money. In a Facebook post, Brad stated that he had knocked on 10,000 doors during the campaign. The winner of the race, Cindy Maxwell Ostdiek is another “independent” (non-partisan in “unicameral-speak”). I suspect that she will quickly align herself with the “progressives” in the Nebraska legislature.  

As noted above, this one stung a bit, partly because Brad is something of a friend; but maybe more so because of his character, knowledge of the state’s finances (not good at this time), and the likelihood that he would have been the next “speaker” of the unicameral. I believe his defeat was a loss for the people of Nebraska. His campaign workers came by yesterday morning and removed his big 4’x6’ campaign sign from my yard. At least it will be easier to mow the grass now. 

Nebraska (in general): After the election, an interesting map showed up on my Twitter/X account. It indicated that “94% of counties [in the United States] shifted left.” Right in the middle of the map of the USA, surrounded by varying shades of blue, was the state of Nebraska (minus NE-02 as noted above) shining red – like a bullseye on an archery target. There were sizable chunks of red in South Dakota and Montana – but just smatterings of red here and there on the rest of the map.  

Nebraska Republicans managed to hang on to the other two congressional districts and the Republican governor survived. The state’s unicameral, however, is a bit more “progressive.” In addition to Brad, two other unicameral districts flipped, and the Republican’s “super-majority” (33 votes) is now gone. 

The USA (in general): Republicans got clobbered in both the Senate and the House – much more so than one might ordinarily expect during an off-year election. In a recent Tucker Carlson “Morning Note,” Tucker threw out another cliché.  

Tucker wrote, “The phrase ‘absolute power corrupts absolutely’ is a cliché, but it is totally true. Trump is nowhere close to the same guy he was when he burst onto the political scene. … We know some Republican voters are still clinging to that version of the president, but he is long gone. He has turned into the exact kind of special-interest-serving-swamp monster he once swore to destroy. The Washington bubble captured him. MAGA is done. 2028 will be the opportunity to replace it with something better.” 

MAGA: The Democrats love to denounce MAGA. They hardly ever utter the words “Make America Great Again.” They have turned that phrase into another obscene four-letter-word. I guess it was the word “again” at the end that riled them up so much. They preferred to think that the America of Obama and Biden was already great enough. What I don’t understand is, if America is so great already, why do we have to get rid of the electoral college, the senate, the Supreme Court, our immigration laws, and our capitalistic economic system?  

The “ins” and the “outs”: Elections often come down to “change.” If you are unhappy with how things are going, you replace the “ins” – whether they are called Federalist, Whig, Progressive, Libertarian, Democrat, or Republican – with the “outs” (the ones that want to get in). In a sense, this two-party choice is a circuit breaker for the country. Instead of periodically revolting and burning things, we just replace the “ins” – and then hope. 

The above reminds me of the University of Nebraska football team of late. Over the last thirty years or so, Nebraskans get fed-up with their under-performing team – and we fire the coach (who normally has an attractive buy-out in his contract – we never learn). And then we hire a “wonderful” new coach to right all the wrongs and lead us to a championship. We contently sit back and give the new coach time to recruit his players, install his system, and establish his culture. And then, after a year or two more, we rinse and repeat. But – and this is my main point – during those “rebuilding” years, we do not burn the stadium down. And always, in poker, football, and politics, we remind ourselves that “You Can’t Win ‘Em All.” 

Osborn for Congress: As noted above, “life-long independent” Dan Osborn lost his bid to the U.S. Senate. This was his second attempt; in 2024 he also ran as an independent against Republican senator Deb Fischer. I suggest that Dan is reaching a bit too high. I suggest that in 2028 Osborn run (as an Independent) for congress in NE-02, against Denise Powell. I would love to watch the Democrats squirm.