In an interview with the ECPS, Professor Frances E. Lee of Princeton University examines the implications of the November 2026 US midterm elections, which delivered Democratic majorities in both chambers of Congress. Challenging interpretations of Trump’s presidency as consolidated competitive authoritarianism, Professor Lee argues that authoritarian ambitions have encountered significant institutional constraints, particularly decentralized election administration, federalism, and judicial independence. While warning that Trump’s expansive use of emergency and tariff powers has exposed constitutional vulnerabilities, she emphasizes the importance of congressional oversight and bipartisan accountability. Looking toward 2028, Professor Lee questions whether Trump’s personalistic coalition can survive his departure, even as populist rhetoric remains influential. Despite Democratic electoral gains, she anticipates continued polarization and intense partisan confrontation: “I anticipate very hardball politics over the next two years.”
Interview by Selcuk Gultasli
The November 2026 US midterm elections delivered a significant political setback for President Donald Trump, with Democrats securing majorities in both chambers of Congress. Driven partly by public dissatisfaction with inflation, rising prices, and the cost of living, the results underscored the continuing relevance of electoral accountability while raising fundamental questions about democratic backsliding, institutional resilience, and the future of authoritarian populism. With divided government returning in January 2027, the next two years will test Congress’s capacity to constrain presidential power and restore institutional accountability.
In an in-depth interview with the European Center for Populism Studies (ECPS), Professor Frances E. Lee, Professor of Politics and Public Affairs, jointly appointed in Princeton University’s Department of Politics and School of Public and International Affairs, offers a nuanced assessment of Trump’s electoral defeat and its implications for American democracy. Drawing on her research into congressional politics, party competition, and institutional constraints, Professor Lee challenges interpretations that equate authoritarian ambitions with successful democratic capture.
Addressing the debate over competitive authoritarianism, Professor Lee distinguishes between the administration’s attempts to undermine democratic institutions and its actual capacity to manipulate electoral competition. Despite serious concerns about attacks on civil society, universities, due process, and the rule of law, she emphasizes that “what the administration attempted to do looked like something straight out of the authoritarian playbook. But what it actually achieved was far more limited.”
Central to this resilience, Professor Lee argues, is America’s decentralized electoral system. State and local control over election administration prevented Republicans from changing electoral rules nationwide, even amid unprecedented mid-cycle redistricting efforts. As she explains, “A key source of that resilience is the decentralization of the US electoral system.” Federalism, judicial independence, and presidential term limits provide additional barriers against authoritarian consolidation.
Yet institutional resilience does not eliminate constitutional vulnerabilities. Professor Lee warns that Trump’s expansive interpretation of emergency authorities and tariff powers has exposed previously unrecognized weaknesses. She urges Congress to “rein in presidential emergency powers” by imposing time limits and reconsidering executive authorities that have enabled presidential overreach. She also advocates restraint in congressional investigations, emphasizing the greater credibility of bipartisan oversight.
Looking toward 2028, Professor Lee questions whether Trump’s personalistic political coalition can survive without its founder. “It may be that the Trump movement has reached its limits,” she observes. Nevertheless, populist rhetoric, anti-establishment appeals, and impatience with liberal-democratic constraints remain deeply embedded in American politics.
Finally, Professor Lee cautions against interpreting Democratic electoral gains as the beginning of partisan reconciliation. Given the continuing intensity of party competition and Republicans’ expectations of recovering power, she predicts: “I anticipate very hardball politics over the next two years.” Her analysis thus presents American democracy as simultaneously resilient, institutionally vulnerable, and politically polarized.
