The Stack: Redistricting Reckoning at the Supreme Court
The Supreme Court’s latest hearing in Louisiana v. Callais could dramatically reshape how Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act is applied — and by extension, how congressional maps are drawn. Todd breaks down the core argument: whether the law requires states to create “majority-Black” districts based on demographics or whether such mandates violate equal protection.
He also connects the case to the broader 2026 midterm landscape, where redistricting fights in Texas, California, and other states are shifting the political map. With CNN’s Harry Enten showing Democrats’ odds of retaking the House plunging from 83% to 63%, Todd explains why panic is setting in across the left-wing media and why the “gerrymandering truce” talk suddenly sounds convenient.
Stay connected with The Todd Huff Show:
Newsletter: Sign up for The Daily Truth
Email: todd@toddhuffshow.com
Text: 317-210-2830
🎧 Listen to Today’s Episode
📰 Stack Links
Supreme Court seems open to limiting key section of the Voting Rights Act
U.S. Supreme Court hears case that takes aim at the Voting Rights Act
Court appears ready to curtail major provision of the Voting Rights Act
Supreme Court conservatives signal skepticism of Voting Rights Act precedent
This Breakdown Shows Just How Catastrophic the Redistricting Battle Could Be for Democrats
Democrats’ Odds of Gaining Control of the House Are Sinking Fast
CNN Politics – Enten: Democrats’ odds drop sharply amid redistricting uncertainty
CNN’s Enten: Odds of Democrats Winning the House Have Gone Plummeting Down (RealClearPolitics)
📝 Transcript: Redistricting Reckoning at the Supreme Court
The Todd Huff Show – October 16, 2025
Host: Todd Huff
Todd Huff: My friends, the left, the Democrat party, the media, they are beginning to get into a bit of a panic mode. A panic mode because of the scenario we find ourselves in as we head into the midterms, which, believe it or not, are just a little over one year away. There's a lot of things that the left and the Democrat and the media are highly concerned about, and I want to get into those things today. There are Supreme Court cases that are being heard.
Todd Huff: There are all sorts of things along those lines pertaining to redistricting. We'll get into those, my friends, as the program comes together here. Before I do that, my friends, you know, one of the biggest challenges that you face, that we face as conservatives, is finding ways to ensure our values align with everything we do, including how we invest. That's why I love what the team at Four Eight Financial is doing. They specialize in biblically responsible investing.
Todd Huff: That means they screen out companies that don't align with your faith, your values, so you're not funding things that go completely against what you believe in. Plus, they do the heavy lifting for you, helping you align your investments with your purpose and your goals. The best part is that they're going to help you find out if your current investments reflect your values or to what degree they do or don’t reflect your values.
Todd Huff: All you have to do is visit four8financial.com/todd. You can take a short assessment there that'll give you an indication of where your current investments align with your values. Four8financial.com/todd — that's where that assessment is. I've taken it. It's quick, it's easy, it's painless. You can do the same thing there at four8financial.com/todd — 48 Financial, because your money, my friends, for your values.
Todd Huff: All right, the U.S. Supreme Court heard arguments yesterday in a case. We've talked about this case a little bit on this program in the past. It's Louisiana versus Callais, and that's C-A-L-L-A-I-S. And this is a case that could significantly reshape and redefine Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act.
Todd Huff: Again, we've talked about this in the past, but the case was heard by the justices yesterday. So let me give you a quick rundown, a quick right here as to what that is. The state of Louisiana has six congressional districts. They have six districts. Only one of those districts is currently what they label or call a majority Black district.
Todd Huff: So basically what that means is if you look at all six districts, there's only one of them that has 50% or more Black constituents. And so the population of the state of Louisiana is approximately 33% Black. And so a lower court determined—now, to the impact of liberal thinking on society, dare I even say leftist thinking—but a lower court ruled that this is basically, under Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, which I'll get to here in a minute, required the state to have two majority Black districts.
Todd Huff: So the thinking is that because the Voting Rights Act says what it does, especially in Section 2, which, again, we'll get to here in a moment, the state, since it's a third Black, needs to have a third of its districts also voted for by a majority of Black constituents. Now, I know that a lot of people hear the word “race,” “Black,” and immediately, some people don't want to touch this with a ten-foot pole.
Todd Huff: They don't want to get close to it. They don't want to be called racist. Those are all facts. Those are all facts. You could insert whatever other race or ethnicity into that if it makes it easier to see this objectively. But the court ruled that since a third of the state's residents are Black, then a third of the districts need to be chosen by people who are Black.
Todd Huff: Now, let me pause. And I've said this before in a program. I don't know—maybe a couple of months ago we talked about this—but now it's after the oral arguments have been presented before the court, which ties in, I think, to an even bigger discussion of where we are politically heading into the midterms, which are, again, just a little over a year away.
Todd Huff: The first Tuesday in November. And here we are mid-October, so we got a year and a couple of weeks to get there. But it's obviously not good to try to silence the political voice of any person. Number one, right? I remember Rush used to say, the smallest minority is the minority of one.
Todd Huff: And so any attempt to silence someone's vote or their voice politically is unacceptable. That is a blanket statement that applies to people with whom I agree. That applies to people with whom I disagree. That applies to people with whom I disagree vehemently. You hear me on this program every day dismantling the viewpoints and the radical worldview — the godless, radical worldview — of the radical left.
Todd Huff: But they should have a political voice. I'm not here to take away the voice. I'm here to persuade. I'm here to properly frame these issues. I'm here to tear down the bad ideas, not the people. I'm here to promote the truth. Each and every day we try to help people hear and receive truth. Now, I've said on this program, while I understand why you might think that we have all that figured out, I certainly don't.
Todd Huff: I don't have everything figured out. We don't have all of the answers. But I will tell you this: we do have truth. We do have truth that we have had revealed to us, that we've discovered — however you want to frame that. But we've had this. We have truth. Not everything — you know, some things are opinion. Not everything's black and white.
Todd Huff: But there are things that are absolutely true. There are things that are absolutely good. Our founders built this nation on things that were absolutely good and true — not everything. We've been through this. We've been through this as well, obviously. Chattel slavery was an absolute, just terrible thing, reprehensible evil that this nation had in her founding.
Todd Huff: So I'm not talking about that, but I'm talking about the things that our founders learned and implemented into our society. Things like, you're no longer a subject to a king — you're a citizen. Things like, your rights don't come from the people in the nation's capital, those who are making the laws and the rules. Your rights come from Almighty God, your Creator.
Todd Huff: That's where your rights come from, not from some politician who can change them on a whim. The right to free speech, the right to peaceably assemble, the right to have a free press, the right to keep and bear arms, the right to be protected against warrantless searches and seizures from our government — all sorts of things like that.
Todd Huff: These founders, our Founding Fathers, built these into our system of government, and they were profoundly impactful. The free society that we had created, the capitalistic free markets that this nation embraced and was built upon, has unleashed a lot of good on this planet. The world would be a much darker place without the United States of America in existence. That is undeniable.
Todd Huff: I go back to the days of the Cold War. You had the United States of America and you had the Soviet evil empire. You had true darkness that was embraced. And listen, I'm not saying — I am under no illusion here that the United States of America is perfect. But again, I go back to something William F. Buckley said: the problem with socialism is socialism; the problem with capitalism are individual capitalists.
Todd Huff: Meaning the problem with socialism, the problem with communism, is that their ideas are faulty at their core. They can't be made to work, no matter what. The problem with capitalism isn't the idea or the system. The problem with capitalism is that you're always going to have individual people who do things that are not good, take advantage of people, defraud people. But that's not the system's fault — that's the fault of the individual and the choices that they have made.
Todd Huff: So I'm not talking about that, but I'm talking about the things that our founders learned and implemented into our society. Things like, you're no longer a subject to a king — you're a citizen. Things like, your rights don't come from the people in the nation's capital, those who are making the laws and the rules. Your rights come from Almighty God, your Creator.
Todd Huff: That's where your rights come from, not from some politician who can change them on a whim. The right to free speech, the right to peaceably assemble, the right to have a free press, the right to keep and bear arms, the right to be protected against warrantless searches and seizures from our government — all sorts of things like that.
Todd Huff: These founders, our Founding Fathers, built these into our system of government, and they were profoundly impactful. The free society that we had created, the capitalistic free markets that this nation embraced and was built upon, has unleashed a lot of good on this planet. The world would be a much darker place without the United States of America in existence. That is undeniable.
Todd Huff: I go back to the days of the Cold War. You had the United States of America and you had the Soviet evil empire. You had true darkness that was embraced. And listen, I'm not saying — I am under no illusion here that the United States of America is perfect. But again, I go back to something William F. Buckley said: the problem with socialism is socialism; the problem with capitalism are individual capitalists.
Todd Huff: Meaning the problem with socialism, the problem with communism, is that their ideas are faulty at their core. They can't be made to work, no matter what. The problem with capitalism isn't the idea or the system. The problem with capitalism is that you're always going to have individual people who do things that are not good, take advantage of people, defraud people. But that's not the system's fault — that's the fault of the individual and the choices that they have made.
Todd Huff: Our founders built our nation upon these things, embraced these things, and it was a good thing. And so when we did this, we had this wonderful nation that has made corrections over the course of time, including the evolution we've had — and I mean that in a good sense, not in some godless Darwinian sense — but the changes that have happened in this country since our founding that have given voices, political voices, to people that were not considered even fully human originally when we founded this nation.
Todd Huff: So we've come a long way, and no voice should be silenced. You shouldn't go out and try to silence, again, any group — Black, white, men, women. None of that should be happening. But at the same time, is this what our founders envisioned? Where you look at the makeup of a state based upon its race?
Todd Huff: Is this what makes sense? Forget, even to the point of what the founders would have necessarily envisioned — let's think about what is the good and right and best way to proceed here. The founders gave the state legislatures the power and authority to draw up their congressional districts. It's the job of the state legislatures to do that.
Todd Huff: And so if the voters in a state don't like the way a district has been drawn or their districts collectively have been drawn, then they can hold their elected representatives accountable, and they can vote them out of office. The problem is that I've been through this a lot as well — there's not a handbook that says, “This is the shape that you should draw your districts.” It just doesn't work that way.
Todd Huff: Now, we understand that while it's true on the one end of the continuum of the spectrum to say that there's not a uniform shape that all districts should be, that can be true, and that they might have to take an irregular shape because you have to fit into those districts roughly the same number of people, so that you're having each congressional district — each Congressperson that represents that district — representing approximately the same number of people.
Todd Huff: It can never be precise and perfect breakdown percentages, but you want it to be generally the same. And so sometimes the shapes have to be different. Some of the districts are going to be larger. Some of them are going to be smaller. Sometimes they might have to take an odd shape. So you can understand that on one side of the argument.
Todd Huff: But on the other side, you can also understand that some of these districts — especially many blue districts, which I'll get to in the program as this thing unfolds today — but many of these districts are clearly drawn with the intent to make sure that they have an outcome, a political outcome, or at least a statistical likelihood that they're going to vote for a particular party.
Todd Huff: This has been done. This is called gerrymandering, where it's extremely creative the way that these districts are drawn to connect areas of a state that are either Republican or Democrat to ensure that that district, if there's another member in the House of Representatives, that is whichever party is drawing the districts, that’s representing them. So that, of course, is at the other end of the spectrum, and we understand that that's not necessarily what we want either.
Todd Huff: But there’s no standard formula here. Some states have commissions that tell you that they're going through and trying to draw districts that are apolitical. This is a bipartisan commission and all that sort of stuff. There's no such thing. There has to be a level of just discretion that's implemented, that's used when drawing these districts. That's just part of it.
Todd Huff: And if it gets too extreme, you can hold your state legislature accountable — individual legislators — for the way that they drew the maps. But the courts intervened here because there is a law that was passed, the Voting Rights Act.
Todd Huff: And in this act, I'm going to read Section 2, Subsection B, because this is the one that's really in question and that’s before the courts. It says this: “A violation of subsection (a) is established if, based on the totality of circumstances, it is shown that the political processes leading to nomination or election in the state or political subdivision are not equally open”—this is the key part here—“to participation by members of a class of citizens protected by subsection (a), in that its members have less opportunity than other members of the electorate to participate in the political process and to elect representatives of their choice.”
Todd Huff: So that's really what's at question here. So the lower court said, “Well, in the way that we’re interpreting this, since there's 33% Black residents in the state of Louisiana, they should be able to choose 33% of the representatives of the state.” So there’s six districts; 33% of six is two. And so instead of having one majority Black district, the court says, “You now have to have two majority Black districts.”
Todd Huff: So now it's no longer a political process. Now it's become a legal process, where the court has interpreted and applied when it says that the district should be according to their interpretation of the law. Now, the state fires back and says, “Look, you’re basically telling us to draw districts based upon race, and that’s not the way that we should be doing this.”
Todd Huff: By the way, the state legislature gets to decide how we draw these districts anyway. So just as I said off the top, or earlier in this monologue, that it would be wrong to try to silence individuals or groups of people from exercising their political voices, there's also problems by doing this.
Todd Huff: This is how the left loves to think about these things. First of all, they think that the Black vote is just one thing, which to me is absolutely reprehensible. It's absolutely reprehensible to think that all Black voters, all white voters, vote the same way.
Todd Huff: Look, I understand demographics. I understand that there are things that appeal to different groups of voters. But to look at a class of people based upon solely the color of their skin and say that needs to be a group that is kept together for political purposes so that they can elect somebody who represents them is just a backwards way of thinking about it.
Todd Huff: Now, it works in today's society because the Democrats have called Republicans racist — and a whole lot worse — for so long that a lot of people think that that's absolutely the logical thing to do. Because if there are not enough representatives that are representing, quote-unquote, “the Black population” in this country, then there’s going to be all sorts of untold horrors upon the Black population.
Todd Huff: See, this is just not the way I like to think about people — not in classes of people. We are individuals. I understand, as someone with a background in marketing, I would say, someone who’s— I don’t know, I gotta say, a background in marketing — I understand that there are differences in the types of people and that there are things that appeal to certain groups. Again, some people want to just base these on the most superficial things possible — on race and so forth — but it’s really more about the mindset or maybe the subculture of a particular group of people.
Todd Huff: And certain things are more appealing to them; certain concerns are bigger to them; they fear certain things. But to think that there’s just kind of a monolithic thought process by an entire group of people based upon race, I reject that. That’s one of the things I love about conservatism, and it’s one of the reasons I find it to be rooted in a lot of truth — because it appeals to all people.
Todd Huff: It appeals to all people. More so, even than conservatism, the Gospel of Jesus Christ appeals to all people because we have a shared human condition. We have a shared human condition. We all have longings. We all have, again, the founders here of this nation understood that we all have a desire to live free, to make choices for ourselves, to set our own priorities, not to be looked at as an individual who’s just simply one cog in the wheel.
Todd Huff: But rather, we’re individuals who are living our own lives, who, by the invisible hand described by Adam Smith, can work together without force and interference by our government and so forth. The invisible hand causes us to work together, push generally in one direction by cooperation. We understand that our self-interest can be attained if we help other people achieve their self-interest.
Todd Huff: But, see, when government gets involved, all that stuff stops, and it says, “We’re going to tell you what to do by force.” This is not a good thing. So the lower court basically said, “Now you gotta have two districts that are majority Black,” which means 50 what, 50% plus one? Split that into two districts so that you’re not diluting the voice of “the Black vote,” which I don’t even like to say. I don’t even like to say that, but anyway.
Todd Huff: So the Supreme Court had this hearing yesterday, and they’ve basically — again, we don’t know what they think specifically — but you can get a glimpse if you’ve been to or watched or, well, you can’t watch, but you can listen to recordings of the Supreme Court. You can hear some of the questions, and you can begin to understand maybe what is going through the mind of a particular justice.
Todd Huff: There’s only nine justices; you have an inclination as to understand these three are probably going to vote this way, there’s a couple that you don’t know about. But you listen to their questions and maybe some of the things they say during the oral arguments, and you begin to get a picture. And it appears that the court is willing to take a look at changing this because this, based upon their questioning, probably not the best way, not the best interpretation of the Voting Rights Act.
Todd Huff: Which could have tremendous repercussions on limiting how states can draw their districts — which, again, as it’s currently standing, benefits Democrats. The way that they wield this authority and power through this interpretation of the Voting Rights Act, Section Number Two. More on that, my friends, as we get into the next segment of the program.
Todd Huff: I want to tell you, though, MyPillow is excited to announce that they are having their biggest three-in-one sale ever. They’ve got a limited edition product, a back-in-stock special, and a closeout deal, including the MyPillow bed sheets — only $29.98, any color, any size, even king! My Towels are back in stock; you can get a six-piece towel set for only $39.98.
Todd Huff: By the way, the quality of these products is really good. We use them here in the Huff household. And for the first and only time, you can get a limited edition premium MyPillow made with Giza cotton and a designer gusset — queens are $17.98, kings $19.98. Find out more by going to mypillow.com, mypillow.com, promo code Todd will get you these special prices. MyPillow.com, promo code Todd. Quick timeout, my friends, back here in just a minute.
Todd Huff: MedVet is 24/7 emergency and specialty veterinary care for the curveballs you don’t see coming, because life knew this morning the race to control the... New this morning, the race to control the House in... Welcome back, my friends. So, just to kind of tie up what we were talking about last segment with the hearing yesterday in Louisiana versus Callais, the issues that are under review currently by the courts after hearing the oral arguments yesterday...
Todd Huff: Are whether the Voting Rights Act, Section 2(b), whether those effects-based tests have gone too far — letting courts impose race-based maps without proving intent to discriminate, because there is a difference, right? So that’s what we were kind of wrapping up. It’s one thing to say, “We’re going to intentionally keep you from voting.” It’s another thing to say that state legislatures have the right to draw these districts where they want to draw the district, and if they’re not seeking out to silence a political group — which, it seems to me, you’d have to demonstrably prove in the affirmative — then why can’t they draw the district that way?
Todd Huff: It seems like, potentially, you could make the argument that this is done and being argued to protect seats that Democrats think that they can rely upon. So another issue here is whether or not race can remain a predominant factor in map-making without violating equal protection. Again, to me, this is a huge problem in this country — that race is basically everything. And I understand there have been tremendous racial problems in this country's history.
Todd Huff: I understand there are racists today, by the way. There are people that are racist on both sides, people that are racist against all types of people. I condemn all of that. But I also understand that, again, there are processes and there are laws that — well, there’s constitutional authority given to state legislatures to draw their districts.
Todd Huff: And when all the court cases and all the rulings seem to favor one group protecting its political interest, that’s a problem as well. And the last question here that they’re basically reviewing is whether the court should narrow the rule or limit its duration. So we’ll see. We’ll see what happens. But it looks like that could be the case.
Todd Huff: Progressives say that Section 2 remains necessary to counteract vote dilution and secure minority representation — again, they see the world constantly through their lens of race. And I’ll say this: if you believe in liberty, if you believe that the message of truth and freedom applies equally to all people, then you begin to see the world less and less in the view, the lens, of race.
Todd Huff: But the left is focused on this. And I think there are some — I do think there are some — who genuinely believe that that’s the best way, that it’s necessary to continue to fix, to address the mistakes, the evils in our nation's history pertaining to race. I think there are some that use this as a political weapon, a political tool, to try to protect their political interests and to win seats.
Todd Huff: Conservatives say, look, this is not supposed to be Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, and not supposed to be a race-based quota system, because that’s inconsistent with equal protection. So we’ll see how the courts rule on this. But what I want to get to specifically is how the impact of this, combined with other things that I want to talk about as we get into the program deeper here today, is how these things affect the 2026 midterms, which are just a little bit over a year away.
Todd Huff: So this is CNN. I'm going to play a clip for you. CNN — there's a guy on there, his name is Harry Enten. He's kind of their data guy. He'll come on from time to time to go through the numbers, to talk about some of these things behind the scenes and so forth, and I want to play at least part of this clip. They’ve brought him on, I think this was yesterday.
Todd Huff: They bring him on to talk about the state of the 2026 midterm election. So what we just talked about is a factor in this — the Voting Rights Act, how districts can be drawn, what Louisiana specifically has to do. You also know that if you follow politics and listen to this program for any length of time, you will have known, you will know, I should say, that the people — Republicans — in some states have voted to redistrict.
Todd Huff: Well, in the state of Texas, they voted to redistrict, believing that that should yield more Republican districts in the upcoming election. Again, there are no guarantees here. There are no guarantees that that is going to happen. But based upon statistical probabilities and turnout and all that sort of stuff, it looks like they could have flipped several districts to make them red in the state of Texas.
Todd Huff: California, led by Gavin Newsom, now is trying to do the same — basically to redistrict themselves. They think that they might be able to squeeze five more blue districts out as well. Missouri has been a part of this. There’s been discussions for the state here that I live in, Indiana. A lot of states are talking about redistricting, and exactly what I told you on this program originally turns out to be true.
Todd Huff: Exactly what I told you on here because I told you the reason there is such opposition to this — and you're going to hear this in this sound bite when Harry Enten starts talking about this — the reason there is so much opposition today about redistricting is because Democrats have effectively gotten everything redistricted in their favor, and now they want to call for a gerrymandering truce.
Todd Huff: Now they want to call for a gerrymandering truce. It would be like saying — I go back to the day — I am a fan of the NBA, especially because of my daughter. There was probably ten or fifteen years I didn’t watch any of it, but we followed the Pacers. That was a wonderful run by the Pacers last season. We were able to do some cool things around the sport and got to do some interesting things with the team and stuff.
Todd Huff: But anyway, the point is that I'm a fan of basketball, and I remember reading and learning about the dominance of Wilt Chamberlain. And Wilt Chamberlain is one of those — there’s a couple of players that were so dominant that the rules were rewritten so that it would not give them an advantage. And that's basically what's happened here.
Todd Huff: In a manner of speaking, the Democrats had gotten — let’s say that they had Wilt Chamberlain on their team, and they didn’t want the rules rewritten for him because they wanted to get every bit of advantage. And let’s say he gets traded to another team — that’s when they say, “Okay, let’s now make sure he can’t do what he was doing.” That’s effectively what they’re doing with redistricting, because they’ve squeezed as much juice out of that lemon in their states as they can.
Todd Huff: And now Republican states are starting to do this and, or at least talk about it, and they’re acting like it’s the end of the world. Normally these things are all done behind closed doors and they’re quietly done. But Trump’s out there talking about it publicly, just calling up Governor Abbott and saying, “Hey, redistrict your state,” or probably having phone calls here in my state with Mike Braun: “You’ve got to get this done, Mike,” right? And people get appalled by that.
Todd Huff: But what’s interesting to me is those conversations have always happened — they just don’t happen in the limelight. And they say that Trump is the one that’s changing the whole system and turning it on its head. In reality, it’s the first time these things have been transparently discussed in real time before the voters.
Todd Huff: Anyway, all that being said, this is having a negative potential impact on Democrats in a massive, massive way. And Harry Enten kind of paints the picture here, and I want you to listen to his description of just how bad things could be for Democrats heading into the 2026 midterm.
Todd Huff: (Clip plays) “This morning, the race to control the House in the 2026 midterms has taken a turn and possibly brings with it a new warning sign for Democrats. Harry Enten running the numbers on this one…”
Todd Huff: And sneaking in at the last, “I’ve learned that way around. Good maneuver, thank you. I wish people could see it. I have fantastic shoes,” he says. “It’s the new shoes, as we spoke about yesterday. Okay, moving on. You’re tracking the odds — what is the change that you’re seeing?” “Yeah, okay, so if you go back six months ago, you go back to April…”
Todd Huff: “We were looking at the Democrats with a very clear shot of taking control of the U.S. House of Representatives according to the Kalshi prediction market. We saw them at an 83% chance, but those odds have gone plummeting down. Now we’re talking about just a 63% chance, while the GOP’s chances up like a rocket — up from 17% to now a 37% chance.”
Todd Huff: So, what looked like a pretty clear likely Democratic win in the House come next year has become much closer to a toss-up at this point, although still slightly leaning Democratic. And that’s when she asks, “What’s changed?”
Todd Huff: Okay, I want to pause there because I’m at the end of this segment. I want to play a little bit more of this in the next segment. She’s asking him, “What’s changed?”
Todd Huff: My friends, before we wrap up for this segment, my friends, you ever notice how some families seem to have a plan that lasts for generations? It’s not by accident, my friends — Full Suite Wealth works with people who want their wealth to make a difference for years to come. Their team brings together high-level investment strategies like private equity, private credit, and options strategies combined with expert legal guidance as well.
Todd Huff: If you’re looking, my friends, to do more than just manage your money — if it’s more to you than just making sure you’re well — just managing the money. If it’s more about making sure your vision becomes a reality, a reality for the people you love, both today and in the future; if you want to leave your mark, if you want to build something lasting, take a look at Full Suite Wealth.
Todd Huff: Jason and his team there are a great resource. They’ll take good care of you. FullSuiteWealth.com is where you can go — build your legacy, secure your future. Quick timeout for me, my friends. Back in just a minute.
Todd Huff: What do you think? Okay, what has changed? Well, likely Democratic win in the House come next year has become much closer to a toss-up at this point, although still slightly leaning Democratic. What’s changed?
Todd Huff: Welcome back, my friends. I want to get you to the rest of this sound bite with Harry Enten talking about what’s changed regarding the odds. In fact, in April, the Democrats had an 83% chance, according to the Kalshi prediction market — an 83% chance of winning the House in the midterm elections in 2026. Now, those odds — so that was in April. So we got May, June, July, August, September, October — six months later — those odds have cut from an 83% chance for the Democrats winning to a 63% chance.
Todd Huff: So it was 83–17 in April, 17% for the Republicans. Now it’s 63–37. So it basically went from a five-in-six chance of Democrats winning to a two-in-three chance for Democrats winning — a big flip. And we’re getting close, we’re inching toward 50–50. And if some of these other redistricting efforts happen, if this case with the Voting Rights Act could affect the way that districts are drawn, there’s a lot of potential seats here that could be impacted, my friends.
Todd Huff: Really quickly here, I want to take a moment to tell you about one of our newest advertising partners. You might be curious, my friends — you might be curious about Kratom, or you just want honest answers before you try something new. So you’re invited to the weekly Tea Talk from Christopher’s Organic Botanicals. It happens every Thursday night, 7:00 p.m. Eastern time.
Todd Huff: You can join the weekly Tea Talk — no pressure, no sales pitch — just real conversations with real people who want to help you understand Kratom: what it is, how it’s used, how to stay safe, and what to avoid. Christopher’s Organic Botanicals believes education should come first. That’s what sets them apart. If you’ve got questions about relief, about dosage, safety, sourcing — this is the place to ask those questions in this forum.
Todd Huff: They’ve built a community that’s focused on truth, not hype. Join the conversation — Thursdays, by the way, that would be today, Thursday, 7:00 p.m. Eastern. For more information, visit ChristophersOrganicBotanicals.com — that’s ChristophersOrganicBotanicals.com — truth, tradition, transparency.
Todd Huff: Okay, friends, I’m going to pick up here in the time we have remaining and play a little bit more, give you a little bit more context about what’s going on as we head into the midterms here. And as I said, this is not good news, not good news for the Democrat Party, for the left, for the media. Let’s pick up where we left off last segment.
Todd Huff: (Clip) “Welcome back, my friends. So, just to kind of tie up what we were talking about last segment… What’s changed? Well, why don’t we just take a look at the national picture first, take a look at voters and how they’re feeling about things, and we can take a look at the generic congressional ballot. I want to take a look and compare it to 2017–2018.”
Todd Huff: Right, because that’s sort of the baseline. That was, of course, the first Trump term; that was where Democrats were sort of keeping pace. You go back to April — look at the generic congressional ballot. What do you see? You see plus three Democrats in 2025 in April. You see plus three Democrats back in April of 2017. Now jump over to this side of the screen — what happens?
Todd Huff: Well, the Democrats are no longer keeping pace with the pace that they were setting back in 2017–2018. You look back in 2017, you saw that the Democrats had leaped up to an eight-point advantage. I remember covering this; I remember a lot of folks, including myself, saying, you know what, Republicans look pretty decent right now in terms of the fact that they had the House, they had the presidency, but things were likely going to flip.
Todd Huff: And I was looking for the same signs this year. The bottom line is, it hasn’t happened, Cape. Well, when it hasn’t happened, Democrats have stayed basically steady. They have fallen off the pace. Democrats were way out ahead back in 2017 on the generic congressional ballot, and now we’re basically looking at Democrats ahead.
Todd Huff: But again, they are so far behind the pace that they set back there. And so I think what a lot of folks are seeing, folks like myself, are saying, “Wait a minute, given what we might be seeing in redistricting, is this plus-three going to be enough, Cape?” So that’s the question. Right now, you couldn’t see the video — basically what he was doing was showing a chart that said in April of 2025, earlier this year, on a generic ballot, meaning when people were surveyed and said, “Are you going to vote for congressional Democrats or congressional Republicans in the midterm elections?”
Todd Huff: They’re saying Democrat with a plus-three advantage right now. In 2017, when we got to the month of October, Democrats had a plus-eight advantage in the general ballot, which means that they had momentum as they headed into that final year leading up to the midterms, the first time Trump was elected. That’s not the case this time. They still hold a plus-three advantage according to polls in October, but they didn’t make up any more ground.
Todd Huff: That’s why you gotta look at the lens — well, look at the shutdown, I should say, through this lens. Democrats are looking to move those numbers any way that they can, and they think or they hope that they can get some of that traction by blaming Republicans for the shutdown, which of course is silly and ridiculous, but this is the way that the politics are headed as we move into the midterms.
Todd Huff: And I’m telling you, they’re terrified. And if you factor in, there are other things I have in the stack here that you can go to and see on the website — I don’t have time to get into them today — but just go to the stack and just go to today’s episode, and you will find other articles that say that Democrats, at least in one particular study, stand to lose as many as 19 seats, my friends.
Todd Huff: Nineteen seats from some of these impacts, which again I can’t get into. They are terrified. They are desperate. They are grasping for straws. And this midterm election is very, very important. It’s going to determine whether or not Trump’s agenda is going to continue to move forward or whether or not we’re going to have nothing but investigations throwing a wrench in his gears. But I’ve got to go. SDG.
Please note that transcript are generated automatically with transcribing tools and AI. While fairly accurate, it is not perfect. 