How decisive was the Republicans’ 2024 victory? Consider this: one commentator believes the GOP has achieved near-permanent control of the Senate.
In an article for The Hill, Ilani Nurick, a Yale Law student and opinion contributor, observed, “For the first time in a century, there is not one Democratic senator from a reliably red state.” This, Nurick argued, suggests the Republican Senate majority of 53-47 could endure for the foreseeable future, as Democrats lose their historical reliance on red-state senators to secure power.
“For decades, Democrats relied on popular Democratic senators in deep-red states — for example, Tom Daschle in South Dakota (lost in 2004), Blanche Lincoln in Arkansas (lost in 2010), Mary Landrieu in Louisiana (lost in 2014), Claire McCaskill in Missouri (lost in 2018), and Jon Tester in Montana (lost in 2024). In recent years, these red-state Democrats were critical to holding the Democratic majority,” Nurick wrote.
“The final nationalization of the Senate in 2024 with the ousting of Tester and Sherrod Brown in Ohio, and the retirement of Joe Manchin in West Virginia, shifts the path to a Democratic Senate majority entirely to blue and purple states. This makes the Democrats’ task nearly impossible,” she added.
The electoral math further supports Nurick’s argument. “Even if Democrats sweep every swing state contest (and oust Susan Collins in Maine), they can win at most 52 seats in the Senate,” she noted. “That includes both seats in North Carolina. If Republicans were to win all the Senate seats in those same swing states, they would control 62 seats.”
The next opportunity for Democrats to reclaim seats comes in 2026, but even then, challenges loom. While they might target Republican incumbents like Maine’s Susan Collins or North Carolina’s Thom Tillis, they must also defend seats in battleground states like Georgia, where GOP Governor Brian Kemp may challenge Democratic Sen. Jon Ossoff. Meanwhile, Michigan’s Gary Peters faces increasing Republican competition in a state that has trended red in recent cycles.
Further complicating matters, New Hampshire’s Democratic Sen. Jeanne Shaheen could face a threat if outgoing GOP Governor Chris Sununu reconsiders running. Meanwhile, Republican gains in states like New Mexico and Virginia underscore the broader trend of Democratic vulnerability.
Nurick draws a historical parallel to the “Permanent Democratic Congress,” when Democrats controlled the House for 40 consecutive years between 1954 and 1994. But this time, the realignment in the Senate—triggered by the ousting of Brown, Manchin, and Tester—has a far more significant impact.
“Any incoming Democratic president will enter the White House with a severe handicap, limiting the enactment of broad campaign promises,” Nurick argued. “Instead of enjoying a mandate reflected by majorities in Congress, the far likelier scenario is a Democratic president immediately vying against a confident and combative Republican Senate.”
Moreover, judicial confirmations under a Democratic president would face resistance: “Republicans no longer have any incentive to confirm Democratic judicial nominees, knowing a Republican-controlled Senate can outwait a Democratic president,” Nurick wrote.
She also suggested the Democrats’ opposition to the filibuster might fade in this new reality: “The filibuster’s threat and power hinge on the belief that each party will eventually rotate in and out of the majority. In the new age ushered in by the 2024 elections, Republicans have little reason to believe Democrats will take the Senate back anytime soon.”
As Nurick highlighted, the 2024 election not only secured GOP control for the next two years but could represent a seismic political realignment that keeps Republicans in charge of the Senate for the foreseeable future. If this holds true, Democrats may soon find themselves singing the praises of the filibuster they once sought to abolish.
