America voted. "Mr. Veto" remains, and normality is still far away

DemocratsThey won both chambers of Congress, amid dissatisfaction with rising prices, the war with Iran, and the way Donald Trump exercises his power.

"I think I'm going to become 'Mr. Veto,'" Donald Trump said shortly before the November 3 election. The president saw himself rejecting Democrats' bills for a month or two before agreeing to negotiate with them.

By Wednesday morning, Democrats had won majorities in both houses of Congress, including in states where Republicans had dominated for decades. James Talarico became the first Democrat elected to the Senate in Texas since 1988, and Adam Hamilton defeated Republican Senator Roger Marshall in Kansas, where his party had not won a Senate seat since 1932. Democrats also picked up seats previously held by Republicans in Iowa, South Carolina, Ohio and North Carolina, according to Associated Press.

During the campaign, Trump had urged supporters to vote as if he were the candidate. After the Republicans' defeat, he claimed he would have won if his name had been on the ballot. However, he congratulated the Democrats and said he was willing to negotiate.

But the White House had been counting on losing Congress long before the election. As early as April, Stephen Miller, the deputy chief of staff, and Russell Vought, the director of the Office of the Budget, had been working with administration lawyers to identify measures Trump could take without congressional approval. According to a Reuters investigations published on November 1, preparations focused on immigration, tariffs, housing and federal spending. Officials were also looking at the use of already approved funds and how the administration might respond to congressional inquiries, subpoenas and lawsuits.

In January 2027, when the new Congress takes office, Democrats will take control of the House committees and control over the confirmation of presidential appointments in the Senate. They will also have more influence over federal spending. But Trump will retain his veto power and considerable decision-making power over foreign policy, including on issues related to aid to Ukraine, the war with Iran and the tariffs on which he has based much of his economic policy.

The price of foreign policy

Rising prices for gasoline, food, and other essentials have weighed heavily on American voters' choices. The war with Iran and Trump's tariffs have brought the costs of foreign policy into family budgets.

right AP Voter Poll, a poll of about 80.000 voters, found that four in ten say the economy is the most important issue facing the United States, and nearly three in ten say the state of democracy. The cost of living and government corruption were among the concerns that most influenced the vote for Congress.

The war with Iran has helped drive up energy prices, and tariffs have increased costs for American importers and consumers. Trump had promised a better standard of living and to avoid new wars in the Middle East. In his second term, he imposed new tariffs and went to war with Iran, decisions whose costs have weighed heavily on voters.

David Smith, American journalist, founder and editor of the publication Moldova Matters, has lived in the Republic of Moldova since 2012. He follows Washington politics from a country where American decisions have important consequences for the economy and security. Before the election, Smith believed that the domestic effects of Trump's foreign policy would decisively influence the vote.

"Tariffs and the war with Iran will likely weigh heavily in this election, because they both lead to the same thing: higher prices," Smith said.

Robin S. Brooks, a visiting scholar at Pomona College in the field of global politics and governance, worked for 21 years in the U.S. Foreign Service before serving on the National Security Council and advising Vice President Kamala Harris on European, Eurasian, and multilateral issues.

Before the election, Brooks noted that Democrats hadn't necessarily changed the way they addressed voters. But they had an opportunity to draw attention to Trump's broken promises on living standards and avoiding military intervention.

"In general, voters, especially young ones, are fed up with the current situation and feel that traditional parties no longer defend their interests and represent their values," Brooks said.

She sees the same discontent in Europe, where candidates outside the traditional political center are increasingly appealing to voters. She says the influence of big donors and corporations has reinforced the perception that established parties have become disconnected from the people they are supposed to represent.

The AP poll found that about seven in 10 Americans under 30 voted for Democratic candidates in the House of Representatives. In the 2024 presidential election, the young people's vote was more evenly split between the two parties. Although they made up about a tenth of the voter base, their shift toward Democrats coincided with a decline in Republican support among Hispanic voters.

Nearly four in ten voters said they voted to express opposition to Trump, while fewer than two in ten wanted to show their support for the president. But the dissatisfaction doesn't stop at the White House: about three-quarters of respondents also disapprove of Congress's performance.

Democrats have regained Congress with the votes of disaffected Americans from both parties. The new majority will have to respond to demands for lower prices and better governance, but also to the expectations of those who want tighter control over an administration whose foreign decisions are increasingly controversial at home.

What can Congress do?

With majorities in both chambers, Democrats will be able to investigate administration decisions, subpoena officials, and request government documents. In the Senate, they will be able to reject the president's nominees for key positions in the administration and the federal judiciary.

“Congress can refuse to fund programs it doesn’t agree with or allocate money for initiatives the administration isn’t very enthusiastic about,” Brooks explains.

Through the budget, the new majority can condition future appropriations, reject requests for additional funds, and scrutinize how previously approved money is spent. These decisions could affect military aid, diplomatic activity, and funding for federal agencies.

Funds already approved, however, remain subject to existing legislation, and new budget restrictions must usually be passed by both chambers. Trump can veto the bills. To override the president's opposition, Democrats would need the votes of two-thirds of members in each chamber.

In the Senate, most bills must gain the support of 60 senators to overcome parliamentary obstruction, known as filibuster. filibusterIn the case of initiatives that cannot be adopted through special procedures, Democrats will also need the votes of some Republicans.

Before the election, Brooks believed that a clear Democratic victory, accompanied by above-average voter turnout, would send a strong signal to the White House about the unpopularity of some measures. She predicted that the administration might abandon some of the policies that caused the greatest dissatisfaction.

About seven in 10 respondents to the AP poll believe the legislature has done too little to limit the president's power. The first signs of a possible policy shift could emerge before January, while Republicans still control the old Congress and the administration can use previously approved funds.

David Smith, however, does not expect the Republicans' defeat to change the president's position on foreign policy or tariffs.

Asked before the vote whether losing Congress might cause Trump to change his approach, he replied curtly: "I seriously doubt it."

Smith believes that Congress has, over time, ceded much of its influence over war and peace decisions. He cites the war with Iran, which was waged without express congressional authorization, and the appointment of interim officials who did not go through the usual Senate confirmation process. He also doubts that lawmakers can stop a president from using approved funds for other purposes.

The US War Powers Act, War Powers Resolution, establishes procedures for military operations conducted without congressional approval, including certain time limits. The legislature also decides on the funding of military operations, but the exercise of these powers can provoke disputes over the interpretation of the law and the limits of presidential power.

"The levers are there, and the courts have already imposed certain limits, including on tariffs. But the rules of the game are no longer the same and it is not clear how things will evolve," says Smith.

Brooks believes the election result will put Trump under more pressure to reconsider his unpopular decisions. Smith is not convinced the president will accept the constraints of a government in which the White House and Congress are controlled by different parties.

In January, Democrats will have the opportunity to investigate the administration's spending and block some presidential appointments.

The parties are preparing for the period after Trump

The Republican defeat reignited discussions about the party's direction ahead of the 2028 presidential election, when the Constitution will not allow Trump to run for another term.

Defeats suffered by candidates he supports, including in Texas and South Carolina, have shown how difficult it is for other Republicans to gain the same electoral support. Trump remains the dominant figure in the party, but within the movement built around him there are disagreements over economic nationalism, international commitments and the United States' relations with traditional allies.

Smith distinguishes between Trump’s personal beliefs and the ideology that is forming within the MAGA movement. The president has, he says, a few consistent preferences, particularly for tariffs and for leaders he sees as strong. The various camps around him have tried to translate these preferences into a more coherent political platform.

Smith expects the disagreements to intensify as Republicans begin to discuss the party's future leadership, which will also hinge on their positions on NATO, US military commitments abroad and strategic competition with China.

But he doesn't believe either camp will be able to return the Republican Party to the shape it had before Trump. For Smith, this stage in the party's history is over.

The Democrats haven't resolved their own disputes with electoral victory either. Smith points out that the United States doesn't have a formal opposition leader, as parliamentary democracies do. The 2028 presidential nominating contest will determine which personalities and ideas gain influence within the party.

Some Democrats support a more left-leaning economic agenda. Others believe that moderate politicians from close-run states can attract more voters by focusing on corruption and living standards.

Victories in Republican-leaning states have strengthened the position of those who support candidates who can attract votes from outside the traditional Democratic electorate. At the same time, the progressive wing of the party has achieved its own electoral successes.

Ten thousand miles to normality

The Democrats' takeover of parliamentary committees will give European governments more opportunities to demand a review of US defense spending and Washington's trade policy. For Kyiv and Chisinau, however, the most important decisions will remain on funding.

According to a report published in August by the Congressional Research Service, the US legislature had not approved significant new funds for Ukraine since April 2024. Meanwhile, European NATO member states financed American arms purchases for Kyiv.

The new Democratic majority could demand additional funding, investigate delays in weapons deliveries and support tougher sanctions against Russia. But Trump will retain control of negotiations with Moscow, and his veto power could make it difficult for the administration to change policy.

Washington's budget decisions also matter for the Republic of Moldova. At the beginning of the year, the United States allocated $36,5 million for the country's national security, including for energy security, cyber protection and the capacity of institutions to deal with threats, according to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in Chisinau.

Democrats could influence future allocations and scrutinize how this support is used. However, Moldova's security remains closely linked to the war in Ukraine and the Russian military presence in Transnistria.

David Smith warns that European leaders would be wrong to interpret the Democrats' victory as the beginning of a rapid return to the American politics they were used to.

“At best, this is just the first step on a 10.000-mile road to repairing a seriously damaged American political system,” says Smith.

Smith also sees a generational shift in Washington. Politicians trained during the Cold War are gradually giving way to younger leaders increasingly concerned with China and the Pacific region. He expects this orientation to continue regardless of the party in power, even if a future administration tries to improve relations with European allies.

He does not believe this orientation can be reversed. Washington's growing interest in the Pacific will continue to influence decisions about American military commitments and the resources available for European security.

"Whether the United States finds a new form of normality or sinks deeper into crisis, Europe will have to rely much more on its own strength," says Smith.