The story from Tennessee’s special election is Democrats’ attempt to recast defeat as momentum. Don’t buy it, because it’s not there. Tuesday’s special election in Tennessee’s 7th District told us very little that we didn’t already know. However, this doesn’t mean that Republicans should not run as hard as they can toward next November’s midterms; as Satchel Page advised: “Don’t look back, something might be gaining on you.”
There are plenty of headlines about how Tuesday’s special election results are a “warning sign” for Republicans (NBC News) and a “concerning sign” heading into 2026’s midterms (Newsweek). Similar headlines preceded the December 2 election day: “House Republicans sweat Tennessee election…” Politico wrote.
With 99 percent of the votes counted, Republican Matt Van Epps won with 53.9 percent (96,988 votes) of the votes, and Democrat Aftyn Behn received 45 percent (81,044 votes). That nine percentage point difference—less than half of Trump’s 22-point margin in that district or the previous Republican incumbent, Mark Green’s margin (also 22 percentage points)—is the primary point of focus. (That the nine-percentage-point margin is larger than Kamala Harris’s margin was in New Mexico, Minnesota, Virginia, New Jersey, New Hampshire, and Maine last year is conveniently overlooked.)
Before we follow the Chicken Littles into apoplexy, let’s remember that this was a special election and that it was an “open seat”—meaning no incumbent was running.
Non-presidential election turnouts are lower than general election turnouts. This is nothing new. Just look at how the former Republican Mark Green (R-07) performed in 2024 versus 2022.
In 2024, a presidential election year, Republican Mark Green won the 7th District seat with 191,992 votes to his Democrat challenger’s (Megan Barry’s) 122,764 votes. In 2022, Green won the seat with 108,421 votes to his Democrat challenger’s (Odessa Kelly’s) 68,973 votes.
Notice the huge drop-off in votes from 2024 to 2022 on both sides. And that’s just the fall from a general election to a midterm. Without the huge publicity and spending for this special election race, it is likely its vote total would have fallen below 2022’s level—instead, it roughly matched it.
So, comparing results from a presidential election year to a non-presidential election year is a comparison of apples to oranges.
Next, remember that this was an “open seat,” meaning there was no incumbent running. That’s also a huge difference compared to 2024 and 2022.
Incumbents have name recognition and usually a substantial following. This is why in 2024, incumbents won 95 percent of the time across the U.S.
Both Donald Trump (effectively) and former Representative Mark Green (running in his fourth race after winning the previous three in the 7th District in 2024) were incumbents. While Donald Trump was not the incumbent, in fact, he was effectively so in actuality, having won the presidency in 2016. No person is more known in American politics than Donald J. Trump—it’s been that way for roughly a decade. Naturally, he is going to draw a big turnout. Republican Mark Green was the incumbent, in fact, having won the previous three elections in the 7th District. Naturally, he was going to draw a big turnout, too.
And there was, of course, the money spent on the race. The Nashville Banner wrote in late November, “Behn’s campaign has spent more than twice as much as the Van Epps camp, a total of $546,000 on ads. Behn’s campaign spending is also the largest portion of total ad spending on her behalf, making up more than 35 percent of the spending on her side. The House Majority PAC and Your Community PAC have spent more than $950,000 on additional ads, bringing the total ad spending for Behn to around $1.5 million.”
So, you have a special election with low turnout (versus 2024), low name recognition for the Republican (non-incumbent Van Epps), and high spending (particularly by Democrats in a district where the party usually loses handily). Anyone looking at the special election objectively would think these three important points would have an impact.
None of this is to say that Republicans should be complacent. However, that is hardly the case.
Republicans have narrow majorities in the House and the Senate. Their party holds the White House, and that usually means they lose seats in the midterm elections. This is the reason both parties are looking for redistricting opportunities to bolster their chances between censuses. Everyone knows 2026’s midterms are likely to be close and that the field is historically slanted against the Republicans. None of this looks like complacency—by either party.
After getting drubbed in 2024’s presidential race—losing every swing state and the popular vote—Democrats need good news wherever they can find it. Or manufacture it. This is why the trumpeted recent gubernatorial wins in Virginia and New Jersey—both states that Harris won (even as she was losing the lion’s share of the rest) and where Democrats have done well in past presidential elections.
Democrats want and need to keep any semblance of momentum going. It’s understandable, especially as they insist on wrapping themselves around unpopular issues like defunding the police, opposing immigration enforcement, and allowing males to compete in women’s sports.
However, trying to make the Tennessee’s 7th District special election results more than they are—an almost double-digit loss—doesn’t pass for momentum.
Mr. Young is the author of “Unprecedented Assault: How Big Government Unleashed America’s Socialist Left.”