Dear all,

We welcome you to the Greater Caribbean Monitor (GCaM).

Two of the Western Hemisphere’s largest democracies are approaching elections that could reshape the political future of the Americas. In Washington, Republicans face the prospect of losing their congressional majority, while in Brasília, the Bolsonaro family is approaching an extraordinary political comeback.

The contrast is striking. Donald Trump returned to the White House in 2025 with a mandate to fundamentally transform American politics, yet his party now faces the familiar difficulties of sustaining a presidential coalition through the midterms. Across the equator, Flávio Bolsonaro has demonstrated that the political movement built by his father remains a formidable electoral force, even after Jair Bolsonaro’s imprisonment and exclusion from electoral competition.

There is a broader lesson here about the political durability of conservative movements. Winning elections requires charismatic leadership, but preserving political power demands something considerably more difficult: building coalitions capable of surviving beyond individual leaders and electoral cycles.

For the United States, the challenge is ensuring that Trump’s political realignment translates into a durable congressional majority. For Brazil, it is determining whether the Bolsonaro movement can convert its renewed electoral strength into a governing coalition.

Both countries face their own institutional challenges, economic frustrations, and increasingly polarized electorates. Yet their political trajectories will have consequences far beyond their borders, particularly as Washington seeks to strengthen its influence throughout the Western Hemisphere.

The coming weeks will test whether the conservative resurgence that has transformed American politics can establish itself as a lasting political force across the hemisphere.

As always, please feel free to share GCaM with your friends and colleagues. We all, at the GCaM team, wish you a good weekend, and we thank you for your support.

With less than three weeks before Americans return to the polls, the Republican Party faces an increasingly difficult electoral landscape. On October 9, the Cook Political Report shifted 18 House races toward Democrats, adding to concerns that the party could lose its congressional majority. The Senate, initially considered considerably safer for Republicans, is also becoming more competitive.

For President Donald Trump, the November 3 midterms represent the first major electoral test of his second administration. Yet the Republican Party’s difficulties cannot be understood exclusively through the president’s approval ratings. They also expose a structural challenge that has confronted successive American presidents: translating a successful presidential coalition into lasting congressional power.

American political history offers little comfort to the party occupying the White House. Since World War II, the president’s party has lost House seats in nearly every midterm election, including under presidents who entered office with considerable popular support.

Barack Obama lost 63 House seats in 2010, while Trump himself lost 40 in 2018. Even Ronald Reagan, whose presidency would eventually become a defining chapter of modern American conservatism, saw Republicans lose 26 seats in 1982.

The explanation extends beyond individual presidents. Midterms frequently attract voters dissatisfied with the administration, while supporters of the governing party tend to participate less enthusiastically than during presidential elections.

Trump’s particular circumstances introduce another complication. His political success has depended heavily on his personal ability to mobilize voters who do not necessarily identify with the traditional Republican establishment.

Many of these voters supported him enthusiastically in 2016, 2020 and 2024, but their willingness to participate when Trump himself is absent from the ballot remains less certain.

Nevertheless, historical precedent cannot explain away the administration’s current political difficulties.

An AP-NORC survey released October 15 found that only 36% of registered voters approved of Trump’s job performance, while 64% disapproved. More troubling for Republicans,

These figures expose a particularly uncomfortable reality for an administration that returned to power promising economic improvement.

Although the White House has emphasized its achievements on border security, taxation and economic investment, voters continue to express considerable frustration over prices, while the conflict with Iran has introduced additional economic and foreign-policy concerns.

Trump retains stronger public approval on crime than on economic management, but congressional elections are increasingly being fought around issues on which the administration faces substantial criticism.

Democrats have capitalized on these frustrations, particularly in competitive suburban districts. Their popularity remains limited, however, suggesting that dissatisfaction with the governing party does not necessarily translate into broad enthusiasm for the opposition. These results should, by no means, be interpreted as support for democrats, especially in face of the next presidential election.

The Republican Party’s challenge also concerns its political identity beyond the president.

Trump transformed American conservatism by building a coalition that combined traditional Republicans with working-class voters, economic nationalists and Americans skeptical of political institutions.

His electoral victories demonstrated the possibilities of this realignment. But a presidential movement dependent on one exceptionally recognizable political figure faces a different challenge when competing across hundreds of congressional districts.

Republican candidates must appeal simultaneously to Trump’s most committed supporters and to independent voters who may share some of his policy priorities while expressing reservations about his administration.

The coming election will help reveal whether the Republican coalition can sustain itself under those circumstances.

The consequences will extend far beyond domestic politics.

A change in congressional control would reshape Washington’s legislative agenda, oversight priorities and budget negotiations during the remaining two years of Trump’s presidency.

For the Western Hemisphere, the stakes include congressional support for security cooperation, counter-narcotics operations, trade policy and the administration’s broader geopolitical objectives.

Whatever happens in November, the election will provide an important measure of the durability of Trump’s political transformation.

His return to the White House demonstrated that his movement remained capable of winning a national presidential election. The midterms will test how effectively that movement translates into sustained congressional support, particularly when economic dissatisfaction and the historical pressures facing incumbent administrations converge.

Less than two years after Jair Bolsonaro’s political future appeared to have collapsed, his family is once again at the center of Brazil’s presidential contest. His eldest son, Senator Flávio Bolsonaro, defeated President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva in the October 4 first round and now enters the final stretch of the presidential runoff with a narrow advantage in several polls.

The reversal is remarkable. Lula, who returned to power in 2023 after defeating Jair Bolsonaro, had been widely expected to secure reelection. Instead, his administration faces a competitive race against the political movement it helped remove from power four years earlier.

With the runoff scheduled for October 25, the election has become a test of both Lula’s political longevity and the durability of the Bolsonaro movement without its founder on the ballot.

The result overturned expectations of a comfortable victory for the incumbent and demonstrated the opposition’s ability to consolidate a substantial electoral coalition.

An October 15 Datafolha poll placed Bolsonaro at 51% of valid votes against Lula’s 49%. The following day, CNT/MDA reported an even narrower difference, with Bolsonaro receiving 50.5% and Lula 49.5%.

Both results fall within the surveys’ margins of error, making the contest a statistical tie. Nevertheless, the polling illustrates the dramatic change in Brazil’s electoral environment since September.  

Flávio’s performance reflects several political developments extending beyond his family legacy.

The first is the consolidation of conservative and anti-Lula voters. Brazil’s right has gradually recovered its electoral organization following Jair Bolsonaro’s defeat in 2022, while the younger Bolsonaro has benefited from support among voters dissatisfied with the incumbent administration.

Public security has become particularly important. Rising concerns about organized crime have strengthened demands for more aggressive law enforcement, an issue on which Flávio has emphasized continuity with his father’s political agenda.

Economic dissatisfaction has also complicated Lula’s campaign. Despite improvements in some macroeconomic indicators, household debt, borrowing costs and persistent concerns over living standards have remained politically consequential.

Lula has responded with measures designed to improve household purchasing power, including expanded social benefits and proposals to reduce working hours. On October 16, he also endorsed lowering the age of criminal responsibility for certain serious offenses, demonstrating the growing prominence of public security in the campaign.  

Brazil’s congressional elections strengthened the conservative bloc, while Flávio has secured endorsements from several influential center-right parties, including União Brasil, Progressistas, Republicanos and Podemos.

According to Reuters, these alliances could provide a Bolsonaro administration with support from more than 280 deputies and approximately 50 senators, although maintaining such a coalition would require negotiations among parties with competing interests.  

This congressional realignment carries particular significance for Brazil’s judiciary.

Jair Bolsonaro remains imprisoned following his conviction over efforts to overturn the 2022 election. His supporters have increasingly challenged the conduct of Supreme Court Justice Alexandre de Moraes, who oversaw proceedings against the former president.

A strengthened conservative Congress could intensify institutional confrontations over judicial oversight and appointments, regardless of the presidential result.  

Yet the political significance of October 2026 already extends beyond the final result. Four years after Jair Bolsonaro lost the presidency, his movement has secured a renewed congressional presence and returned to the center of the presidential contest.

The Bolsonaro family’s political influence has survived its founder’s removal from electoral competition. Whether that resurgence translates into control of the presidency will be decided on October 25.