We are now well into the primary election season, so it's time to take a look at the biggest burning question Democrats have at the moment: will they be able to ride a blue wave in November that is big enough to flip control of the U.S. Senate, or is this merely starry-eyed optimism run amok?

I should begin by saying that there is no clear answer to that question yet -- it's still far too early to make such predictions with any degree of accuracy. But the subject is back in the news after Donald Trump gave his endorsement to Ken Paxton in Texas, who is facing sitting Senator John Cornyn in a Republican primary runoff election next Tuesday. The winner of this contest will take on Democrat James Talarico in November.

But before we contemplate the repercussions of Trump's nod in Texas, let's take an overview of the national situation first. The current split in the Senate is effectively 47 Democrats (technically 45 Democrats and two Independents) to 53 Republicans. Because Republicans hold the White House, the vice president casts tie-breaking votes, meaning Democrats would have to pick up four seats to regain control (leaving the chamber 51-49 in their favor). Even for a midterm with a historically unpopular president, that's a steep hill to climb -- especially since the map of which seats are up for election isn't all that favorable to the Democrats.

Democrats have a few seats they will have to defend, before they even think about picking up Republican seats. There are open races in Michigan and New Hampshire, both of which hold primary elections incredibly late in the season (early August in Michigan, and early September in New Hampshire). There's a three-way Democratic primary race in Michigan which is still pretty up in the air, so it's impossible to even start thinking about what the November matchup will be. And Senator Jon Ossoff in Georgia will have to hold onto his seat as well (in a reddish-purple state), although he seems to be doing a good job on the campaign trail so far (while the Republicans running just aren't that impressive).

So we have to start from a rather big assumption, that Democrats will successfully defend the seats in Georgia, Michigan, and New Hampshire. If that doesn't hold true, then retaking control of the Senate will probably be out of their grasp.

If Democrats do manage to hang onto those three seats, then they have a range of pickup options, some of which are more plausible than others. Here's a list, in the rough order of how likely they are for a Democratic flip to actually happen.

North Carolina

Democrats secured a dream candidate for this race, while Republicans nominated someone who still struggles to achieve name recognition. Roy Cooper was previously governor of the state, which means he has already won statewide elections (six of them, in fact) and the voters know who he is. Michael Whatley is struggling -- in the fundraising race, in the ad wars, and in the polls. Cooper seems to have a solid lead that probably isn't going to change much over time (as noted, he's already a known quantity in the state).

North Carolina hasn't elected a Democrat to the Senate since 2008, but it is looking more and more likely that 2026 is the year they break their losing streak.

Maine

Democrats experienced some drama in this race already, as the candidate personally chosen by the Democratic establishment (in the person of Senator Chuck Schumer) had to drop out of the race when it became apparent that she had no real chance of winning the primary. This was somewhat surprising to some, because on paper, she certainly looked like the candidate with the most "electability." After all, Janet Mills is the current sitting governor of the state. But Maine voters just aren't in a "let's vote for someone safe" mood this year.

Maine is one of those states that fiercely prides itself on its own political independence. It's a small state (population-wise) and has large thinly-populated rural areas. It is notoriously hard to accurately poll. And it is known for electing Independent politicians both to statewide office and to send to Washington. Their Senate delegation currently consists of one Independent (Angus King) and one Republican (Susan Collins, the only Republican to still represent any state in New England).

Collins is a major political force in Maine, although she has gotten less and less popular over time. While she at times talks a good line about bucking her own party and showing some independence, when it comes down to actually voting, she usually winds up backing Donald Trump.

Challenging her will be oyster farmer and ex-Marine Graham Platner, a political unknown before this race. Platner is a full-blown populist and is running an outsider's campaign that so far has been incredibly impressive. He oozes authenticity, and Maine's voters have lined up to support him. He had built such a large lead in the polls that the sitting governor of the state withdrew from the race (which is a rarity).

There haven't been a whole lot of polls since Mills dropped out of the race, and as mentioned polling in Maine is not always accurate. Platner does appear to have a substantial lead over Collins, but she has beaten such odds before and disappointed Democrats who were looking to unseat her. So while it is a race that has garnered a lot of attention, it should still be seen as a toss-up race (no matter what the polls say) until all the votes are counted in November.

Alaska

Much like Maine, Alaska is a state where the voters pride themselves on being fiercely independent. Also much like Maine, Alaska is a notoriously hard state to poll. And it's got a sitting Republican senator, instead of an open race.

Democrats think they have a pretty good shot in Alaska, with a candidate who also oozes authenticity: Mary Peltola. She has won a statewide race before, for Alaska's lone House seat, although she lost her re-election bid in 2024. She has raised a boatload of money already and just began airing her first campaign ad (featuring voters approvingly noting that Peltola has had "her boots on the ground, on the riverbanks, in the mud"). Her campaign's theme is: "Fish, Family, Freedom." All of which seems like a pretty good fit for Alaska.

Still, Senator Dan Sullivan will be running as an incumbent Republican in a very red state. Trump won Alaska in 2024 by 13 points. Peltola has led in the few polls that have been conducted in the state so far, but (again, much like Maine) the polling can wind up being wildly off when the votes are actually counted. Peltola is the best shot Democrats have, but it remains to be seen whether that will prove to be enough.

Ohio

The Senate race in Ohio is an odd one, because it features an incumbent (Senator Jon Husted) who is not very well-known in the state. Husted is running against a very well-known former senator (Sherrod Brown). Usually incumbency boosts a candidate because they are well-known and have already won an election to their office, but that isn't the case for Husted, who was appointed to the seat by the governor after JD Vance decamped to become vice president.

Brown narrowly lost his Senate seat in 2024, after serving three terms in office. Voters at the time "were upset over inflation and the economy," which is rather ironic since that's what could decide the race this time around as well. Donald Trump's campaign promised to fix inflation and bring prices down on everything, but obviously that didn't work out as promised (and that's putting it mildly). Brown has been a populist since before it was cool to be one, and he will focus his campaign relentlessly on the cost of living for average American families.

This race is going to be a close one. Brown is a known quantity and could indeed win a Senate seat back, but Ohio as a whole has become redder and redder over time. Even though Husted is a seemingly weak candidate, he's still a Republican, and that might be enough to win him the race. It may depend on whether that nationwide blue wave does indeed develop or not.

Texas

So those are the top races. If Democrats ran the board in Alaska, North Carolina, Maine, and Ohio (and if they manage to hold on to all the seats they have), then they will emerge from November with control of the Senate. But there's one other race which could also be definitive (if the Democrats don't manage to sweep all four of the other battleground states). This is why the news of Trump's endorsement in Texas got so much attention.

If Ohio is going to be an uphill climb for Democrats, Texas is going to be a steep mountain. It's become almost a joke, the way national Democrats get their hopes up about "turning Texas blue" only to be massively disappointed when it fails to actually happen.

But there is the recurring "This time's the charm!" optimism, and who knows? Perhaps this will be the best chance Democrats have at flipping a Senate seat in the Lone Star State.

Plenty of Democrats were downright gleeful hearing Trump's endorsement of Ken Paxton, while plenty of Republicans are not happy about it at all. Sitting Senator John Cornyn was seen as a much safer bet for the GOP, but Paxton is about as rabid a MAGA supporter as can be imagined, which tilted the scales for Trump in the end.

There are still plenty of unknowns in this race. Will Trump's nod be enough to get Paxton across the finish line in the primary runoff next week, or will Cornyn surprise everybody with a come-from-behind victory? Democrats have gleefully watched the two candidates savage each other in the ad wars, and Paxton is an incredibly flawed candidate for all kinds of reasons -- all of which have featured prominently in attack ads against him. This has all eaten up an enormous amount of Republican money, which could have been better used in the general election campaign.

But conventional wisdom can turn out to be wrong. Just because Paxton's flaws have been fully aired doesn't mean it's going to be an easy victory for Democrat James Talarico in November. Attack ads have a way of becoming boring to the voters after a while, so when Talarico runs ads attacking Paxton for the same flaws that Cornyn did, the electorate might just collectively shrug and think: "Yeah, I've heard all of that before... you got anything new? No?"

The polling has been incredibly close all along, both in the Republican primary and in the general election matchups. Cornyn seemed to have a slight edge over Talarico while Talarico held a slight edge over Paxton, in head-to-head polling, but that will all likely change after the GOP nominee does emerge. How it will change is anyone's guess, though.

Will some of Cornyn's Republican supporters be so disgusted with Paxton that they decide to stay home in November? That's a possibility. But there's another possibility which might counteract that -- Paxton is a candidate very much in the mold of Donald Trump, which could mean he could inspire a whole lot of people who don't normally turn out to vote to do so this year (just like Trump). This could more than make up for any drop in support from Cornyn diehards.

Talarico is a very likeable candidate and he seems to be a pretty good fit for Texas politics. He has a solid chance of winning the Holy Grail of "turning Texas blue." But then the same was said of Beto O'Rourke, please remember.

Conclusion

There are other states with Senate races which some Democrats are hopeful about (Iowa and Nebraska, for instance), but if Democrats manage to win any of them they'll likely already have enough pickups to flip the Senate's control.

As I mentioned, it is impossible this far out to even begin to make predictions or assign probabilities for these races. We've still got the rest of the primary season to get through, so voters won't really start to lock in in their preferences until later in the summer or fall.

All that can be said at this point about Democrats' chances of regaining control of the Senate is that it is possible. A lot more possible than it was a few months ago, and the higher the price of gasoline goes the more possible it may become for them.

Flipping four seats would be a monumental achievement for the Democrats. It would be a serious rebuke to Trump and his party. Picking up even two or three seats would even be an enormous victory for the Democrats, but it would leave them short of a majority.

But the possibility of Democrats winning the Senate does exist. The races in North Carolina and Maine seem winnable for Democrats. Alaska and Ohio will be hard-fought and may be very close. Texas is even in the mix, especially if the voters there follow Trump's endorsement next Tuesday.

But to end on a cautionary note: even winning control of the Senate isn't going to mean Democrats will be able to relax. Because if their margin of control is only one seat (in a 51-49 chamber), what that will mean is that all it would take would be one Democrat to cross the aisle to torpedo any legislation. And while Joe Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema are gone, Democrats now have John Fetterman to deal with. They would have to win 52 seats in order to ignore Fetterman -- which seems a very high hurdle indeed.

-- Chris Weigant

Follow Chris on Twitter: @ChrisWeigant