Trump dominates Republican midterm convention despite low approval ratings

The Republican Party is doing something it has never done before in a midterm election year: building an entire convention around a president who will not appear on the ballot. For two days in September, the party gathered roughly 20,000 delegates and activists at the American Airlines Center in Dallas to rally support for Senate and House candidates running on November 3rd. But the stage belonged to Donald Trump, who appeared both nights, overshadowing the actual candidates voters would be choosing.

This is uncharted territory for Republicans. Democrats experimented with large midterm conventions in the 1970s and early 1980s, but the format never took hold. The stated goal in Dallas was straightforward: mobilize Trump's base to turn out for Republican candidates down the ballot. The problem is that Trump arrives at this convention deeply unpopular. A Reuters/Ipsos poll showed his approval rating at just 33 percent. Meanwhile, Democratic voters are significantly more energized about the midterms than Republicans—nearly half of Democrats say they are especially enthusiastic, compared with only 31 percent of Republicans. The party is essentially betting that the one figure most likely to energize its base can also help candidates who may not want to be seen standing next to him.

That tension played out in real time. A Politico survey of more than 70 Republican candidates and lawmakers revealed considerable hesitation about the convention itself. Candidates in competitive districts—the races that will actually determine control of Congress—appeared reluctant to be too closely associated with Trump. Some avoided the convention altogether, a striking move for a party gathering. The calculation was clear: Trump's presence could mobilize the MAGA base, but it could also alienate moderate voters and energize Democrats. For candidates trying to win in purple districts, that risk was too high.

The convention's program attempted to thread this needle by leading with Trump's record rather than his personality. Organizers structured the event around economic achievements—tax cuts, lower drug prices, efforts to boost domestic production—alongside border security and public safety. Segments titled "Two Visions for America" and "The Opposition Contrast" were designed to paint Democrats as a threat to Trump's agenda, arguing that a Democratic Congress would block his policies and gain power to investigate his administration. It was a forward-looking argument, not a backward-looking one.

But the economic message faces a credibility problem. In a Financial Times/Focaldata poll, nearly two-thirds of Americans said the economy was heading in the wrong direction. More damaging still, 57 percent said their personal financial situation had worsened since Trump took office. Trump's speeches at such events, according to Sascha Lohmann, a political scientist at Germany's Institute for International and Security Affairs, tend to be poorly structured and light on specific policy details—more stream of consciousness than strategic argument. Whether he could offer anything substantially new in Dallas remained unclear.

One of the most telling absences from the convention program was the Iran war. Among 109 announced program items and speakers, the ongoing conflict barely registered. Organizers seemed intent on keeping this politically fraught issue out of the spotlight. Trump himself has taken a different approach, continuing to claim the war as a success—arguing that Iran has been weakened more than under any previous president, that its nuclear program has been destroyed, and that Iranian leaders are desperate for a ceasefire. Lohmann expected Trump to maintain that line in Dallas, even as the party tried to move past it.

Behind the midterm framing, succession planning was already underway. Vice President JD Vance received a prominent role at the convention, while Trump's potentially most significant rival within the party, Marco Rubio, was not on the speaker list. Trump was unlikely to formally anoint Vance as his successor in Dallas, but the vice president would have the opportunity to present himself to the MAGA base as a potential heir to the movement. Lohmann noted that Vance's prominence made sense partly because he had borne little political responsibility for the Iran war—a useful position as the party navigates a conflict that remains unpopular and unresolved.