Democrats should win, but, as in 2016, what will happen perhaps not. | American news

America's midterm elections are primarily for the House of Representatives and the Senate, but are usually considered as a national referendum on the performance of the presiding president and an important indicator of how the next presidential election can take place. This is especially true of the polls made, as well as with Donald Trump on Tuesday, during the first term of office of the president.

Historically speaking, a former president's party has lost seats twice since 1789 – sometimes catastrophic, as was the case with the Democrats in 1994 during Bill Clinton's first term. In 1858, Democrats of President James Buchanan were crushed by the newly formed Republicans of Abraham Lincoln, a break that paved the way for the American civil war.

Although the views differ in the perspective of a civil war # 2 on Trump, there are other, objective reasons to believe that he and the Republicans are heading towards a drubbing. Trump's personal approval rating is about 41%, according to Gallup's latest survey, well below the 52% average for the current presidency. Only one in three voters feel that the country is heading in the right direction.

In conclusions mirrored by other polls, the performance of the Republican Congolese Congress also takes a resounding thumb, with only 21% satisfying. Greater public confidence in the growing US economy – usually the top issue for voters – has not translated into more approval for Trump.

Most estimates suggest that Democrats are on track to gain the 23 seats they need for overall control. Of the 33 seats considered to be "flown", 29 are democratic. The Senate, where Democrats demand a clean two-seat gain to gain control, is more balanced.

But if the political world has learned nothing from the Trump's win in 2016, it is that traditional indices have to be taken with a load of salt. Trump does not behave like a conventional politician, for the simple reason that he is not one. His interim campaign tactics have overcome, with harsh temper, the worst excesses of the most prolific ancestors of the White House. He has addressed unreservedly the most primitive voter instincts, mainly fear – and no one yet knows how these voters will respond.

Tuesday's elections are therefore an important moment in the life of modern America. The results will give a broad picture of whether Trump's narrow triumph of 2016 was a diversion, a hit or an accidental electoral accident. Or, alternatively, if a decidedly large number of Americans really meant when they were supporting the Trump then and they want more of them now.

The polls will give a look at the type of country that has become the US. Contrary to the overwhelming weight of historical precedent, political experience and poll forecasts, logic suggests that the Trump and the Republicans should lose on Tuesday, perhaps for a long time. But will they?

The choice seems bold. On the one hand, there is the highly subconscious racist, Terbu's white ethnic-nationalism, his genius of division and distrust, and his simple ones and their narratives. The worst of Trombism appeared after the Charlottesville white protest last year. It appeared after last month's bombings and Pittsburgh's assassinations of raids, media attacks and mistreatment on immigration, symbolized by the migrant caravan associated with the US.

Colonel Paul Krugman stated that Trump's gross behavior accurately represented an "ever-more … extreme-right [Republican] party "that avoided discussing real politics." Trump's hard effort to do [the election] for terrifying brown people and not for healthcare or tax cuts is tougher than we have seen for a long time but is not essentially out of character. "Trump's whole strategy was one of the" greatest immunities ".

On the other hand, the problem for the critics of Trump and the many voters who, according to opinion polls, are tempted to change the voters – suburban, women, young voters, voters educated on the campus and Latvian voters repelled by the President's disagreements – the democratic alternative is less convincing. The party, after Barack Obama, lacks a leader and runs in a rising economy.

The Democrats also tried to identify internal issues of global importance that have nothing to do with nationalism, race, nationality and beliefs ranging from flags – the agenda for truth. They may have been delayed by healthcare, and in particular defending insurance protections for Obama residents for people with pre-existing conditions. Such protections will almost certainly disappear if the next Congress is Republican.

Author EJ Dionne detects a craving among voters for the end of the poor polarization encouraged by the Trump. "On the ground, Democratic candidates … insist that the country is running out of clutter … and by avoiding everyday issues – health care, education, vocational training – that most Americans want their politicians to fight, "Dionne writes.

At national level, this is a tried and tested proposal. And the effects of the instruments could widen the parts of America. If the Republicans win, the question will be: how can Democrats prevent a second term "Terba"? If the Democrats win Congress, and the Robert Muller FBI Investigation Investigation is progressing unobtrusively, the question will be: what can a terrible, submerged Trump do to save it? The mind is mocking.