Donald Trump is approaching the November midterm elections with a problem that extends beyond Republican candidates. Weak approval ratings, voter anxiety over living costs, and growing concern inside his own political operation have turned the final campaign stretch into a test of authority within the White House. Recent personnel departures have added to the sense that loyalty alone may not protect officials when the administration is under pressure. The more consequential question is who Trump will hold responsible if Republicans lose control of Congress.
The warning signs are already visible. The Associated Press confirmed that Katie Zacharia left the press secretary job less than a week after taking it, while Kimberly Guilfoyle resigned as ambassador to Greece after the White House called for her departure amid allegations of improper conduct that she denies. Neither case was caused by the midterms, but together they reinforced an image of instability just as Republicans need message discipline. That matters because a difficult election can quickly turn internal disagreements into contests over access, blame, and survival.
A White House blame contest takes shape
The most important uncertainty surrounds Chief of Staff Susie Wiles. The Washington Post reported that several senior figures, including Stephen Miller and Bill Pulte, have been discussed as possible successors if Wiles leaves after the election. Trump also bypassed Wiles when he approached Zacharia for the press secretary role, a move that reportedly raised questions among aides about how much control the chief of staff still exercises.
Trump has simultaneously begun faulting advisers for Republican difficulties. Reuters reported that he has questioned campaign spending, candidate choices, and political strategy as polls point toward serious risks for the party. Electoral setbacks often create pressure inside an administration to identify a person or faction responsible. For Trump, whose political organizations have long revolved around personal loyalty, that process could become especially intense.
Public opinion is making that pressure harder to contain. A Reuters Ipsos survey found Trump approval at 31 percent in mid October, its lowest level across his presidencies, while Democrats held a sizable advantage on the congressional ballot. Gallup also found Democrats ahead of Republicans in party favorability and on several measures of governing competence. Those numbers do not guarantee a Democratic victory, but they make concerns inside the White House harder to dismiss.
Who remains useful after November
Any postelection calculation will depend on more than who receives blame. Trump must also decide which advisers remain useful for the next phase of his presidency. Stephen Miller, for example, has become closely associated with the administration’s immigration agenda, an issue that helped Trump politically in 2024 but has become more divisive as enforcement expanded. Removing an official so central to implementing presidential priorities could look like a retreat even if Republicans conclude that parts of the policy hurt them electorally.
The same calculation applies to foreign policy. Reuters identifies affordability and immigration among the defining issues of the 2026 midterms, while the war with Iran has tied national security decisions more closely to fuel prices and economic anxiety. Personnel changes after November could therefore be presented as management decisions even when political repositioning is part of the calculation.
The deeper problem is that changing officials cannot easily solve a weakness rooted in presidential approval. Trump has made himself central to the midterm campaign through rallies and repeated efforts to mobilize voters who supported him in presidential elections. If Republicans suffer major losses, dismissing a chief of staff, strategist, or cabinet official may redirect attention, but it cannot separate Republican candidates from the president who dominates their party.
That leaves the White House facing a difficult postelection choice. A poor result would intensify demands for change, yet many officials most closely associated with Trump are also valuable precisely because they advance policies he personally favors. The struggle after Election Day may therefore be less about changing political direction than about deciding who successfully convinces the president that someone else deserves the blame.
Original analysis inspired by Harold Meyerson from The American Prospect. Additional research and verification conducted through multiple sources.
