Midterm Math: House Edition

Between Trump’s War on Iran, Trump’s tariffs, and the murder of American citizens by agents of the federal government, things are not going well in Trump’s America.

The horrors committed by an aspiring autocrat are bad for the country, but they also create a favorable political environment for Democrats in this year’s upcoming midterm elections.

Today, we’re going to examine how well Democrats might perform in the US House in 2026.

In the process, we will discuss elections where Democrats have performed well in the US House, from 1990 to the present.

Baseline

 

Democrats won 215 US House seats in 2024.

This will be the baseline for comparisons that discuss how many additional seats Democrats need to win in 2026 to perform as well as they have in previous elections, when Democrats performed well in the House.

I will rely on a table of US House results for elections from 1990 to 2024, and its accompanying graphs, that I first published in Republicans retain House control in January 2025, about the results of the 2024 House elections.

I originally obtained the data in that table from Wikipedia, which I believe to be a reliable source for data about historical election results.

I will also use the forecasts for US House races compiled by the Cook Political Report.

Both the Cook Political Report and Sabato’s Crystal Ball publish forecasts for various races that describe how likely Democrats or Republicans are to win, using tossup, lean, and likely designations.

The expert forecasts from Cook Political Report and Sabato’s Crystal Ball are free and open to the public.

It’s a lot easier to use one of these resources for my political analysis, at a time, than to try to use both simultaneously.

I primarily used forecasts from Sabato’s Crystal Ball during my coverage of elections in 2024.

This article will instead use forecasts from the Cook Political Report.

Here are the forecasts for US House races from the Cook Political Report, as of March 12, 2026.

Some of the races in the screenshot above are described as open seats, which means the elected official currently representing the district is not running for reelection, at least not in the district they currently represent.

The results of the 2025 elections and the results of recent special elections indicate Democrats are positioned to perform well in the 2026 midterms.

Now, let’s explore just how well Democrats could do in 2026 in the US House, by examining several scenarios, in ascending levels of optimism for Democrats.

The Bare Minimum

There are 435 seats in the US House of Representatives.

That means 218 votes are required to obtain a majority in the US House, if all members are present and voting.

Democrats won 215 US House seats in 2024, which means they only need to flip three seats to win a majority in the chamber, securing House control.

But given the current political climate, fueled by a narcissistic, idiotic, tyrannical buffoon of a president, Democrats will likely do much better than that.

Cook’s Median Prediction

The Cook Political Report considers 212 House seats to be Solid Democratic, Likely Democratic, or Lean Democratic.

Cook considers 206 House seats to be Solid Republican, Likely Republican, or Lean Republican.

Cook classifies 17 House seats as tossups.

If we divide these tossup races evenly, Democrats and Republicans would each receive 8.5 additional seats.

This analysis is for Cook’s median prediction, which produces a fractional result.

In practice, a seat would not be split by partisan affiliation, as the following analysis might suggest.

Adding these tossups to the partisan totals, Cook’s median prediction is for Democrats to win 220.5 seats, and Republicans to win 214.5 seats.

This would give Democrats only two, and a half, more votes than the 218 they need to secure the House majority, if all members are present and voting.

Democrats won 215 seats in 2024, so they would only need to flip five, and a half, seats to reach Cook’s current median prediction.

Put another way, Cook is currently predicting that Democrats will only flip five, and a half, House seats in 2026.

Given the current political climate, I believe the Cook Political Report is likely underestimating Democratic chances in House races in 2026.

But it’s also worth bearing in mind that they are experts in election forecasting, and I am not.

2020 – Democrats’ Most Recent Majority

In 2020, Joe Biden was elected president, following Trump’s catastrophic mismanagement of the COVID pandemic.

That was the most recent election where Democrats won control of the US House.

In 2020, Democrats won 222 House seats, and Republicans won 213.

Coincidentally, those numbers exactly flipped in 2022, when Republicans won 222 seats and Democrats won 213.

Democrats would need to flip 7 seats in 2026 to win as many seats as they won in 2020, the last time they held majority control of the House.

2018 – Trump’s First Midterm

Democrats performed particularly well in the US House in 2018, during Trump’s first midterm.

In 2018, Democrats won 235 seats in the US House.

Democrats would need to flip 20 seats in 2026 to perform as well as they did in 2018.

I find this outcome to be the most likely of the historical comparisons we will discuss today.

I created the graphs in this article using Flourish, a website that allows users to create compelling visual aids.  

 

Let’s examine what this would look like in practice.

To win 235 seats in 2026, Democrats would need to win all of the Solid D, Likely D, Lean D, Tossup, and Lean R races, as well as two Likely R seats.

I find the chances that Democrats perform as well as they did in 2018, in Trump’s first midterm, to be a reasonable prediction.

Therefore, I believe Democrats are positioned to perform better in 2026 than Cook’s forecasts predict. 

But that being said, I have consistently been optimistic about Democrats’ political chances, even in elections where Democrats didn’t end up doing particularly well.

Comparing 2018 and 2006

In many ways, Trump’s reelection in 2024 feels reminiscent of George W. Bush’s reelection in 2004.

So it would seem right that Democrats would be positioned to perform well in Trump’s second midterm, just as they did in Bush’s second midterm.

But Democrats actually won more seats in the US House in 2018, than they did in 2006.

Democrats won 235 House seats in 2018, whereas Democrats only won 233 House seats in 2006.

If Democrats perform as well in the House in 2026 as they did in 2006, they would have two fewer seats than they had after 2018.

Democrats would need to flip 18 seats to win a majority as large as they had after the 2006 election.

Democrats would need to win all of the Solid D, Likely D, Lean D, Tossup, and Lean R races to win 233 seats, and match their performance from 2006.

2008 – Obama’s First Presidential Election

Now, let’s consider what it would look like if Democrats performed really well in 2026.

In 2008, Barack Obama was elected president, following public backlash to Bush’s disastrous War in Iraq and the Great Recession.

Democrats also performed incredibly well in the US House, where they won 257 seats.

Democrats would need to flip 42 House seats to perform as well as they did in 2008.

Democrats would need to win all Solid D, Likely D, Lean D, Tossup, Lean R, and Likely R races, as well as seven Solid R races, to win 257 seats, and match their performance in 2008.

I believe the country is doing far worse in Trump’s second term than it did at this point in his first term.

So it’s possible Democrats could outperform their 2018 numbers in the House.

But I believe it would be quite a stretch for Democrats to win as many seats as they did in 2008.

1992 – Bill Clinton’s First Presidential Election

In 1992, Bill Clinton was elected President.

I was born in August 1991, so I was one-year-old at the time.

In 1992, Democrats won 258 House seats, one more than they won in 2008.

Democrats would need to flip 43 seats to match the size of their majority after 1992.

That means they would need to win eight Solid Republican seats.

1990 – George H.W. Bush’s Midterm

Democrats won 267 seats in the House in 1990, the midterm election during George H.W. Bush’s one-term presidency.

Democrats would need to flip 52 seats to match the majority they won in 1990.

That means they would need to win 17 Solid Republican seats in 2026.

That’s definitely not happening.

What you can do

No one paying attention can deny we are living through a time of profound importance in the United States.

The crisis presented by Trump’s erratic and authoritarian presidency creates both hardship, and opportunity.

We are truly living through history, and now is not the time to sit on the sidelines.

Get involved, and do what you can to nudge the great tides of history in the right direction.

The next big No Kings protest will be held on Saturday, March 28.

Make a sign, and attend a protest near you.

There will be no shortage of outrages to protest.

If you are interested in competitive elections in your state, let me know.

I can tell you if there are any competitive Senate, House, or Governor elections in your state, and when your state’s primary elections will be held.

We should all cast informed votes in every election we can. 

And campaigns are always looking for volunteers.

Finally, if you want Democrats to win as many races as possible in 2026, you can donate to the Democratic Victory Fund, which raises money for Democrats in important and competitive elections, nationwide.

If you find the actions of Trump and his administration to be truly unacceptable and unconscionable, now is the time to get involved. 

 

Vicente Gonzalez

 

South Texas has elected an idiosyncratic Democrat to the US House who supports El Salvador’s authoritarian leader and has voted against trans rights.

Vicente Gonzalez was first elected to the US House in 2016.

Gonzalez lives in the Rio Grande Valley, and he has represented the Texas 34^th Congressional District since 2023.

In 2024, Gonzalez was reelected to the US House by 2.6%.

According to Roll Call, Gonzalez was one of 13 House Democrats elected in 2024 in districts that voted for Trump.

The Cook Political Report considers the House Race in TX-34 to be a tossup in 2026.

In this article, we will discuss the concerning aspects of Gonzalez’s time in Congress, and the positive things he has done, before discussing his progressive primary opponent, Etienne Rosas.

Texas will hold its primary elections on Tuesday, March 3.

So next week, Texas Democrats will decide whether to choose Gonzalez to run as their party’s nominee in November’s general election.

I disagree with some of Gonzalez’s positions, but I intend to consider his record fairly.

I will also discuss how Gonzalez has voted on key issues in Congress, from 2021 to the present.

Frontline Democrats

Political pundits and news organizations on the center left often heap fawning praise on moderate Democrats in challenging frontline districts.

Often, this praise fails to include discussions about the votes in Congress these moderate Democrats have taken, which Democratic voters might disagree with.

This article is primarily about Vicente Gonzalez, but I will also discuss problematic votes made by Henry Cuellar, Don Davis, Marie Gluesenkamp Perez, and Jared Golden.

According to Roll Call, all five of these Democrats were elected in districts in 2024 that voted for Trump.

All of these Democratic incumbents are running for reelection to the US House, with the exception of Jared Golden, according to the Cook Political Report.

This article focuses on Gonzalez because:

1) His primary is only a week away.

2) He is a genuinely interesting politician.

3) It’s easier to focus on how one person voted on many important issues, than to focus on how several people voted on many important issues.

I believe it’s important to celebrate Democrats who can win elections in challenging districts.

But I also believe it’s important to carefully examine the records of members of Congress.

In this article, I hope to do both.

Now, let’s return to Vicente Gonzalez.

Supports Bukele

In an interview with Politico, Vicente Gonzalez praised Nayib Bukele, the authoritarian leader of El Salvador.

“I think it’s undeniable what he’s done has been spectacular, in terms of bringing security to over 98% of the population that lived in turmoil for over a generation,” Gonzalez told Politico.

“He clean[ed] up the most dangerous country in the world and turn[ed] it into the safest in the hemisphere.”

Human Rights Watch has criticized the methods used by Bukele in his crackdown on gang violence.

“In March 2022, pro-Bukele lawmakers adopted a state of emergency, suspending a range of constitutional rights in response to a peak in gang violence,” HRW wrote on its profile on the state of human rights in El Salvador.

“Security forces arrested tens of thousands of people, including hundreds of children, and committed widespread human rights violations, including arbitrary arrests, enforced disappearances, and torture and other ill-treatment of detainees.”

The Guardian reported Vicente Gonzalez attended Bukele’s second inauguration in June 2024.

Gonzalez has co-chaired the El Salvador Caucus in the US House since July 2024, when it was created by Florida Congressman Matt Gaetz.

In his remarks announcing the creation of the El Salvador Caucus, Gaetz said its purpose will be, “to vindicate the choices that President Bukele has made.”

"El Salvador’s president, Nayib Bukele, has converted El Salvador from the murder capital of the world, into a reliable and stable partner for peace and security for the United States of America,” Gaetz said during his remarks on the House floor.

"The El Salvador Caucus will exist to nurture and advance the US-El Salvador relationship, to encourage strong borders, strong culture, and the strong reforms President Bukele has put into effect.”

I disapprove of Bukele’s human rights abuses and find it rather strange that Gonzalez, a Democratic Congressman, supports the authoritarian leader.

Votes against Trans Rights

Vicente Gonzalez was one of only three House Democrats who voted in favor of a bill that would ban gender-affirming surgeries, hormone replacement therapy, and puberty-blocking medications, for transgender youth, nationwide.

Late last year, Vicente Gonzalez (TX-34), Henry Cuellar (TX-28), and Don Davis (NC-1) joined 213 Republicans to vote in favor of the legislation, which was introduced by Republican Marjorie Taylor Greene.

The Advocate wrote a good article about Greene’s bill, which includes quotes from a pediatrics professor, officials from the Human Rights Campaign and Trevor Project, and the parent of a transgender teenager.

207 Democrats and four Republicans voted against the bill.

Three Democrats and three Republicans did not vote on the measure.

The House approved the bill, 216 to 211, on Dec. 17, 2025.

The Senate has not voted on the bill.

That wasn’t the only time Gonzalez has voted against trans rights.

Early last year, Gonzalez and Cuellar voted in favor of a bill that would ban transgender women and girls from participating in female school athletic programs, nationwide.

The bill would implement this policy by declaring it to be a violation of Title IX for a school that receives federal funding, which includes both K-12 and colleges and universities, to allow a transgender woman or girl to participate in athletic programs designated for women or girls.

Gonzalez and Cuellar, the only Democrats who voted for the bill, joined 216 Republicans to advance the legislation.

206 Democrats voted against the bill.

Six Democrats and three Republicans did not vote on the legislation.

One Democrat, Don Davis, voted Present.

The House passed the bill, 218 to 206, on Jan. 14, 2025.

The Senate has not voted on the bill.

This table compares how Vicente Gonzalez, Henry Cuellar, Don Davis, Marie Gluesenkamp Perez, and Jared Golden voted on proposed federal transgender sports bans in 2023 and 2025. 

About two years earlier, on April 20, 2023, the House considered a bill that would have done the same thing.

Gonzalez did not vote on that bill.

So Gonzalez went from not voting on a federal transgender sports ban, in April 2023, to voting in favor of one, in Jan. 2025.

Cuellar voted against a federal transgender sports ban in 2023, but voted in favor of one in 2025.

Don Davis did not vote on the sports ban in 2023, and he voted Present in 2025.

I discussed the Kansas Transgender Sports Ban in an editorial I wrote in 2024.

 

John Oliver discussed the Republican obsession with transgender athletes during a great segment on his program LastWeekTonight.

During an interview with the Texas Tribune in Nov. 2024, Gonzalez said his ability to understand the social conservatism of his district, and knowing when to break from the Democratic party, helped him keep his seat in Congress.

"I told the entire caucus, don’t ever try to whip me again, because I know my district better than anybody in this room,” Gonzalez said.

"Having me 97% of the time is better than having my opponent 100% of the time. We need to give that leeway, especially to frontline members. Nobody knows our districts better than us.”

I dislike that Gonzalez has voted against trans rights in Congress.

Now that we’ve discussed the troubling parts of Gonzalez’s record, let’s examine the times he has voted the right way on important issues, including the times he’s voted in favor of LGBT rights, which we will explore next.

Votes in favor of LGBT Rights

Gonzalez voted in favor of the Equality Act, which would prohibit discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity in employment, housing, and public accommodations.

221 Democrats, including Gonzalez, and three Republicans, voted in favor of the bill.

206 Republicans voted against the legislation.

2 Republicans did not vote on the bill.

The House passed the bill, 224 to 206, on February 25, 2021.

The bill did not receive a vote in the Senate.

This table shows how Vicente Gonzalez, Henry Cuellar, and Jared Golden voted on key issues in 2021 and 2022.

During this time, Democrats held majorities in the US House and US Senate under President Joe Biden.

Gonzalez also voted in favor of a bill that protects same-sex marriage.

Congress passed, and President Biden signed, the Respect for Marriage Act in 2022.

Currently, the right to same sex marriage is protected nationwide under the Supreme Court’s ruling in Obergefell v. Hodges.

Liberals feared the US Supreme Court might overturn its decisions protecting gay marriage after the court overturned Roe v. Wade.

The Respect for Marriage Act was passed due to these concerns.

The Respect for Marriage Act requires states to recognize same-sex marriages conducted in other states, and requires the federal government to recognize the legitimacy of same-sex marriages conducted by states that allow them.

219 Democrats, including Gonzalez, and 39 Republicans, showed their support for same-sex marriage, by voting for the Respect for Marriage Act.

169 Republicans voted against the bill.

Four Republicans did not vote on the legislation, and one Republican voted Present.

The House passed the bill, 258 to 169, on Dec. 8, 2022.

After both the House and Senate approved the bill, President Biden signed the Respect for Marriage Act into law.

Votes in favor of Reproductive Rights

Gonzalez voted in favor of the Women’s Health Protection Act, which would have overturned state abortion bans by establishing a right to abortion under federal law.

219 Democrats, including Gonzalez, voted in favor of the legislation.

209 Republicans, and one Democrat, Henry Cuellar, voted against the bill.

Two Republicans did not vote on the legislation.

The House passed the bill, 219 to 210, on July 15, 2022.

The bill did not receive a vote in the Senate.

I read the text of an earlier version of the Women’s Health Protection Act on Primary Sources, a video series where I discussed the laws, legislation, and Supreme Court decisions behind important public policy stories.

The series featured four videos on abortion rights and one video on the federal eviction moratorium during the COVID pandemic.

Gonzalez also voted in favor of the Right to Contraception Act, a bill that would protect access to contraception. 

220 Democrats, including Gonzalez, and eight Republicans, voted in favor of the bill.

195 Republicans voted against the legislation.

Six Republicans did not vote on the bill, and two Republicans voted Present.

The House passed the bill, 228 to 195, on July 21, 2022.

The legislation did not receive a vote in the Senate.

To recap, in July 2022, Gonzalez voted in favor of reproductive rights by voting in favor of abortion rights and access to contraception.

Votes to Impeach Trump

Gonzalez voted to impeach President Trump for inciting the Jan. 6 insurrection to attack Congress to overturn the outcome of the 2020 presidential election.

222 Democrats, including Gonzalez, and 10 Republicans, voted to impeach Trump.

197 Republicans voted against impeaching Trump.

Four Republicans did not vote on the resolution.

The House impeached Trump, 232 to 197, on Jan. 13, 2021.

57 Senators voted to convict Trump on Feb. 13, 2021, after his Senate Trial, and 43 Senators voted against.

The Senate did not reach the 67 votes necessary, to achieve the 2/3 majority required, to convict Trump for inciting the Jan. 6 insurrection.

Gonzalez voted in favor of impeaching President Trump, for both Abuse of Power and Obstruction of Congress, on Dec. 18, 2019, during Trump’s first impeachment, for withholding military aid to Ukraine to pressure the country to investigate Joe and Hunter Biden, which would benefit Trump in the 2020 presidential campaign.

The Senate did not convict Trump, after his first impeachment trial, for either Abuse of Power or Obstruction of Congress.

This table shows how Vicente Gonzalez, Henry Cuellar, and Jared Golden voted on each Article of Impeachment during Trump’s First Impeachment in 2019.

Votes for Biden’s Economic Agenda

Gonzalez voted for the American Rescue Plan, the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, and the Inflation Reduction Act.

These laws were key elements of President Joe Biden’s Economic Agenda.

Each of these laws were passed by Congress and signed by President Biden.

Gonzalez voted for the American Rescue Plan.

The law extended unemployment benefits, provided emergency rental assistance, expanded food stamp benefits, expanded the child tax credit, and provided funding to cities and states to replace tax revenue lost due to the pandemic, according to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities.

The law also provided $1,400 checks to Americans making $75,000 or less per year.

220 Democrats, including Gonzalez, voted in favor of the legislation.

210 Republicans, and one Democrat, Jared Golden (Maine-2), voted against the bill.

One Republican, Thomas Tiffany (WI-7), did not vote on the legislation.

The House approved the bill, 220 to 211, on March 10, 2021.

Gonzalez voted in favor of the Invest in America Act, which is also known as the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law.

The Invest in America Act provided funding for roads, bridges, public transit, broadband internet, and other infrastructure projects.

215 Democrats, including Gonzalez, and 13 Republicans, voted in favor of the legislation.

200 Republicans, and six Democrats, voted against the bill.

The House approved the legislation, 228 to 206, on Nov. 5, 2021.

Gonzalez voted in favor of the Inflation Reduction Act, which allows Medicare to negotiate prices for some drugs and authorizes tax credits for renewable energy.

220 Democrats, including Gonzalez, voted in favor of the bill.

207 Republicans voted against the legislation.

Four Republicans did not vote on the bill.

The House approved the legislation, 220 to 207, on Aug. 12, 2022.

Supported Student Loan Debt Relief

In August 2022, the Biden administration announced a student loan debt relief plan to provide up to $20,000 of student loan debt relief for qualifying borrowers.

Republicans in Congress attempted to block the student loan debt relief plan.

Gonzalez voted against the Republican bill.

By voting against blocking student loan debt relief, Gonzalez essentially voted in favor of allowing Student Loan Debt Relief, which means he voted the right way.

216 Republicans and two Democrats, Jared Golden (Maine-2) and Marie Gluesenkamp Perez (WA-3), voted to block student loan debt relief.

203 Democrats, including Gonzalez, voted against blocking student loan debt relief.

Eight Democrats and six Republicans did not vote on the bill.

The House passed the bill, 218 to 203, on May 24, 2023.

The Senate approved the bill, which was subsequently vetoed by President Biden.

The bill failed to receive the required 2/3 majority in the House necessary to override the veto.

In the House, both Golden and Gluesenkamp Perez voted to override Biden’s veto.

The Senate did not vote on whether to override the president’s veto.

On June 30, 2023, the US Supreme Court struck down the student loan forgiveness program.

Approved Military Aid for Ukraine and Israel

Gonzalez voted in favor of military aid for both Ukraine and Israel.

On April 20, 2024, the House voted separately on components of a bill that provided military aid to Ukraine and Israel.

This allowed voters to see how members of Congress would vote on these topics, when considered separately.

I support Ukraine in its righteous fight against Russia’s aggressive military invasion of their country.

Therefore, I support the US providing military aid to Ukraine, in its fight against Russian aggression.

210 Democrats, including Gonzalez, voted in favor of military aid to Ukraine.

Three Democrats did not vote on the measure.

101 Republicans voted in favor of military aid to Ukraine, and 112 Republicans voted against.

Four Republicans did not vote on the measure, and one Republican voted Present.

The House approved the measure, 311 to 112, on April 20, 2024.

This table shows how Vicente Gonzalez, Henry Cuellar, Don Davis, Marie Gluesenkamp Perez, and Jared Golden voted on key issues in the House in 2023 and 2024.

During this time, Republicans controlled the House, Democrats controlled the Senate, and Joe Biden was president.

I do not support providing military aid to Israel.

I believe by April 2024, the horrors of the human rights abuses committed by Israel during its war in Gaza should have been apparent to anyone paying attention.

Therefore, I believe members of Congress should have voted against military aid to Israel at that time.

I wrote an editorial in July 2024 about the abuses committed by Israel during its war in Gaza.

173 Democrats, including Gonzalez, voted in favor of military aid to Israel, and 37 voted against.

Three Democrats did not vote on the measure.

193 Republicans voted in favor of military aid to Israel, and 21 voted against.

Four Republicans did not vote on the measure.

The House approved the measure, 366 to 58, on April 20, 2024.

The Senate subsequently approved military aid for Ukraine and Israel.

President Biden signed the bill into law.

Opposes the Big Ugly Bill

Republicans call it the Big Beautiful Bill.

I call it the Big Ugly Bill.

Gonzalez voted against the Big Ugly Bill, which cuts taxes for the rich, cuts Medicaid funding for the poor, and increases funding for ICE (Immigration and Customs Enforcement).

212 Democrats, including Gonzalez, and two Republicans voted against the Big Ugly Bill.

The two Republicans who voted against the bill were Brian Fitzpatrick (PA-1) and Thomas Massie (KY-4).

218 Republicans voted in favor of the Big Ugly Bill.

The House approved the bill, 218 to 214, on July 3, 2025.

The bill was approved by both houses of Congress and signed into law by President Donald Trump.

This table shows how Vicente Gonzalez, Henry Cuellar, Don Davis, Marie Gluesenkamp Perez, and Jared Golden voted on key issues in the House in 2025 and 2026.

During this time, Republicans held majorities in both the House and Senate, under President Donald Trump.

Supports NPR & PBS

Gonzalez voted against cutting funding for NPR and PBS.

President Trump submitted a bill to Congress to cancel funding previously approved by Congress.

The measure was called the Rescissions Act of 2025.

The Rescissions Act suspended all federal funding for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, which funds NPR, PBS, and their member stations, for the next two fiscal years.

211 Democrats, including Gonzalez, and two Republicans, voted against the Rescissions Act.

The two Republicans who voted against the measure were Brian Fitzpatrick (PA-1) and Michael Turner (OH-10).

216 Republicans voted in favor of the Act.

Two Republicans and one Democrat did not vote on the proposal.

The House approved the Rescissions Act, 216 to 213, on July 18, 2025.

Both chambers of Congress approved the Rescissions Act, and President Trump signed it into law.

The Rescissions Act ended all federal support for NPR, PBS, and their member stations.

So if you value your local public radio and television stations, consider making a donation, if you can afford it.

Supports releasing the Epstein Files

Gonzalez supports releasing files held by the Department of Justice related to Jeffrey Epstein.

Gonzalez signed a discharge petition to bring the Epstein Files Transparency Act to the House floor for a vote, and he voted in favor of the bill once the vote was held.

The Epstein Files Transparency Act requires the US Attorney General to publish all unclassified records, documents, communications, and investigative materials in DOJ’s possession that relate to the investigation and prosecution of Jeffrey Epstein.

The Act allows the Attorney General to redact personally identifiable information about victims contained in the files.

214 Democrats, including Gonzalez, signed a discharge petition to bring the bill to the House floor for a vote.

Four Republicans signed the discharge petition as well. They were Thomas Massie (KY-4), Nancy Mace (SC-1), Lauren Boebert (CO-4), and Marjorie Taylor Greene (GA-14). 

The effort was led by Ro Khanna (CA-17) and Thomas Massie.

After obtaining the required 218 signatures, the Epstein Files Transparency Act received a vote in the House.

Gonzalez voted in favor of the bill.

216 Republicans and 211 Democrats, including Gonzalez, voted in favor of the bill.

One Republican, Clay Higgins (LA-3), voted against the bill.

Three Democrats and two Republicans did not vote on the legislation.

The House approved the bill, 427 to 1, on Nov. 18, 2025.

The Senate approved the bill, without amendment by unanimous consent, and President Trump signed the bill into law. 

Progressive Primary Challenger

Vicente Gonzalez has a progressive primary challenger in his South Texas District.

On his campaign website, Etienne Rosas declares that Latino communities are being ignored, exploited, and criminalized.

“We’re up against a real fascist threat – one that scapegoats Latinos, militarizes our border and cities, and hands unchecked power to billionaires, while working families are left behind,” Rosas wrote.

“Our representatives have failed to meet this moment with the urgency it deserves.”

Rosas said these challenges create the conditions for people to build a better future.

“This is also a moment of possibility – a chance for us to come together and fight for a South Texas, and a nation, that finally lives up to its promises: freedom, justice, representation, and dignity for all,” Rosas continued (emphasis in original).

“This campaign isn’t about me. It’s about building a vibrant, grassroots movement from the RGV (Rio Grande Valley) to DC – rooted in the resilience, pride, and power of our people.”

Rosas supports Medicare for All, a $20 minimum wage and four-day workweek, rent control and affordable housing, universal childcare and tuition-free college, protecting immigrants and abolishing ICE, and taxing billionaires.

A screenshot of the priorities listed on Etienne Rosas’s campaign website.

On his campaign website, Gonzalez says he supports fully funding pre-k and local Head Start programs, helping college students graduate debt free, tuition-free higher learning for the first two years after high school, expanding social security to keep up with inflation, strengthening Medicare, expanding Medicaid, strengthening trade along the Texas-Mexico border, and investing in infrastructure.

On immigration, Gonzalez says he supports combating criminal elements crossing the border with smart and thoughtful border security, compassionate immigration reform with a pathway to earned citizenship, and passing the DREAM Act, a bill that would provide legal status and a pathway to citizenship for undocumented immigrants brought to the US as children, who meet certain requirements.

In the immigration section of his campaign website, Gonzalez does not take a position on whether to abolish ICE.

Etienne Rosas is one of the Democrats you can support through the Democratic Victory Fund, which raises money for Democrats in important races, nationwide.

You can also support Ricardo Villarreal, one of Henry Cuellar’s Democratic primary challengers, through the Democratic Victory Fund.

Texas will hold its 2026 primary elections on Tuesday, March 3.

Conclusion

While I am quite fond of Vicente Gonzalez’s progressive primary challenger, Etienne Rosas, I imagine Gonzalez will likely win his primary election next week.

If Gonzalez wins his primary, he will undoubtedly be better than whoever wins the Republican nomination for his district.

Before we bid adieu, let’s summarize what we’ve learned about Gonzalez from his time in Congress.

Gonzalez supports El Salvador’s Authoritarian Leader Nayib Bukele.

Gonzalez voted against trans rights, by voting for a nationwide gender-affirming healthcare ban for transgender youth, and for a nationwide transgender sports ban.

He voted in favor of LGBT rights, by voting for the Equality Act, and in favor of gay marriage, by voting for the Respect for Marriage Act.

Gonzalez voted in favor of reproductive rights by voting for bills that would protect access to abortion and contraception.

Gonzalez voted to impeach Trump three times, for blackmailing Ukraine, obstructing Congress, and inciting the Jan. 6 insurrection.

Gonzalez voted for the American Rescue Plan, the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, and the Inflation Reduction Act, all of which were key parts of President Biden’s Economic Agenda.

He supported student loan forgiveness, and voted for military aid for both Ukraine and Israel.

Gonzales opposed the Big Ugly Bill, which cut taxes for the rich, cut Medicaid funding for the poor, and increased funding for ICE.

Gonzalez voted against cuts to NPR and PBS, and he voted in favor of releasing the Epstein Files.

While I dislike Gonzalez’s support for Bukele, his votes against trans rights, and his support for military aid for Israel, there can be no denying that Gonzalez has been on the right side of a lot of important issues during his time in Congress.

Man and Woman, Boy and Girl

 

Today, we will examine the performance of Man, Woman, Boy, and Girl in the Gender Census.

But wait!

The Gender Census is a global annual online survey of people with a gender that isn’t exclusively male or female.

Doesn’t that mean Man, Woman, Boy, and Girl are wrong answers?

We will begin by discussing these terms in the context of nonbinary identity, before exploring how these terms have performed in the Gender Census.

We will also use a pairing analysis to determine the other words most commonly chosen by respondents who selected these terms.

Discussion

Most people have a gender that is either exclusively male or female.

But some people have a gender that isn’t exclusively male or female, and they’re known as nonbinary.

So what are Man, Woman, Boy, and Girl doing in a survey of nonbinary genders?

While these terms aren’t inherently nonbinary genders, they can be part of someone’s larger nonbinary identity.

You may have encountered the compound terms Nonbinary Man, Nonbinary Woman, Nonbinary Trans Man, or Nonbinary Trans Woman.

One of the ways you could interpret these compound terms is that someone has a gender that’s between male and female, but closer to one side or the other.

What about demiboy and demigirl?

We will discuss those terms in the next article. We already have more than enough on our plate for today.

For reasons I will explore in this article and the next, I consider Man, Woman, Boy, and Girl to be valid choices in the Gender Census.

Examining the other words most commonly chosen by respondents who selected these terms will help determine whether or not this is true.

Whether you consider these options to be right or wrong answers, within the context of the Gender Census, could affect how you interpret the results we will discuss in this article, and the ones that follow.

While I believe they are correct answers, it might be worth keeping both possibilities in mind for now.

First, we’ll examine the performance of Woman and Girl in the Gender Census.

Next, we’ll examine the performance of Man and Boy in the survey.

Then, we’ll explore the other identities most commonly chosen by respondents who selected Woman, Girl, Man, and Boy.

Woman

The wording of the checkbox for woman has changed several times in the Gender Census.

Woman appeared as a checkbox in the Gender Census from 2015 to 2023.

In 2015, “Woman” appeared as a checkbox, and “Girl” did not.

From 2016 to 2019, the checkbox was “Woman (or girl if younger)”.

From 2020 to 2022, Woman and Girl appeared as separate checkboxes.

In 2023, “Woman” appeared as a checkbox, and “Girl” did not.

Woman has appeared in the Gender Census, in one form or another, nine times.

Its minimum was 10.6% in 2021, and its maximum was 15.6% in 2015.

Woman’s average is 12.7%, and woman’s range is 5%.

Girl

 

Girl appeared, on its own, in the Gender Census, three times, from 2020 to 2022.

In 2020, Girl received 9.1%.

In 2021, Girl received 9.7%.

In 2022, Girl received 11.1%. 

Girl’s average is 10%.

Woman and Girl

Woman performed better than girl in two of the three years when they appeared as separate checkbox options in the Gender Census.

Girl performed better than woman in one of the three years when they appeared as separate checkboxes.

In the three years girl appeared as a separate checkbox, woman was chosen by a smaller percentage of respondents than in other years.

Man

The wording of the checkbox for man has changed several times in the Gender Census.

Man appeared as a checkbox in the Gender Census from 2015 to 2023.

In 2015, “Man” appeared as a checkbox, and “Boy” did not.

From 2016 to 2019, the checkbox was “Man (or boy if younger)”.

From 2020 to 2022, Man and Boy appeared as separate checkboxes.

In 2023, “Man” appeared as a checkbox, and “Boy” did not.

Man has appeared in the Gender Census, in one form or another, nine times.

Man’s minimum was 7.6% in 2016.

Man’s maximum was 16.1% in 2023.

Man’s average is 10.5%, and Man’s range is 8.5%.

Boy

Boy appeared as a checkbox, on its own, in the Gender Census, three times, from 2020 to 2022.

In 2020, Boy received 9.5%.

In 2021, Boy received 11%.

In 2022, Boy received 14.7%.

Boy’s average is 11.7%.

Boy and Man

Boy was chosen by a larger percentage of respondents than Man in the three years the terms appeared separately in the Gender Census.

All Together Now

Now, let’s compare the performance for Man, Woman, Boy, and Girl, all on a single graph.

All four terms have consistently received between 7% and 17% in the Gender Census.

Man has both the lowest minimum and the largest maximum, among the four terms.

Boy performed better than Girl in each of the three years they appeared in the survey.

Woman outperformed Man seven times, from 2015 to 2021.

Man outperformed Woman twice, in 2022 and 2023.

Woman Pairing Analysis

Next, let’s examine the terms that were most commonly chosen by respondents who selected Woman in the 2023 Gender Census, the last time it appeared as a checkbox.

56.1% of Woman respondents identified as queer.

54.1% of Woman respondents identified as nonbinary.

Therefore, majorities of Woman respondents identified as queer and nonbinary.

44% of Woman respondents identified as, “a person / human / [my name] / ‘I’m just me.’”

43.2% of Woman respondents identified as gender non-conforming.

40.6% of Woman respondents identified as trans.

Therefore, large minorities of Woman respondents identified as “a person…”, gender non-conforming, and trans.

Woman respondents were less likely than Gender Census respondents as a whole to identify as nonbinary and trans.

Girl Pairing Analysis

Next, let’s examine the terms most commonly chosen by respondents who selected Girl in the 2022 Gender Census, the most recent survey where it appeared as a checkbox.

62% of Girl respondents identified as queer.

60.3% of Girl respondents identified as nonbinary.

Therefore, majorities of Girl respondents identified as queer and nonbinary.

47% of Girl respondents identified as women.

44.6% of Girl respondents identified as trans.

40.9% of Girl respondents identified as transgender.

40.4% of Girl respondents identified as gender non-conforming.

Therefore, large minorities of Girl respondents identified as women, trans, transgender, and gender non-conforming.

Girl respondents were significantly more likely to identify as women than Gender Census respondents as a whole.

Girl respondents were less likely to identify as nonbinary than Gender Census respondents as a whole.

Man Pairing Analysis

Now, let’s examine the terms most likely to be chosen by respondents who selected Man in the 2023 Gender Census, the most recent survey where it appeared as a checkbox.

72.6% of Man respondents identified as trans.

68.1% of Man respondents identified as transgender.

65.7% of Man respondents identified as transmasculine.

60.1% of Man respondents identified as queer.

54% of Man respondents identified as nonbinary.

Therefore, majorities of Man respondents identified as trans, transgender, transmasculine, queer, and nonbinary.

49.6% of man respondents identified as gender non-conforming.

41.5% of man respondents identified as fags.

40.4% of man respondents selected “a person / human / [my name] / ‘I’m just me.’ ”

Therefore, large minorities of man respondents identified as gender non-conforming, fags, and “a person…”

Man respondents were significantly more likely to identify as transmasculine, transgender, trans, and fags, than Gender Census respondents as a whole.

Man respondents were less likely to identify as nonbinary and “a person…” than Gender Census respondents as a whole.

Boy Pairing Analysis

Now, let’s examine the terms most commonly selected by respondents who selected Boy in the 2022 Gender Census, the last survey where it appeared as a checkbox.

68.8% of Boy respondents identified as trans.

66.5% of Boy respondents identified as transmasculine.

65.8% of Boy respondents identified as queer.

65.3% of Boy respondents identified as nonbinary.

64.5% of Boy respondents identified as transgender.

51.8% of Boy respondents identified as gender non-conforming.

Therefore, majorities of Boy respondents identified as trans, transmasculine, queer, nonbinary, transgender, and gender non-conforming.

44.8% of Boy respondents identified as men.

40.8% of Boy respondents identified as genderqueer.

Therefore, large minorities of Boy respondents identified as men and genderqueer.

Boy respondents were significantly more likely to identify as transmasculine, men, trans, and transgender, than Gender Census respondents as a whole.

What have we learned?

Now, let’s revisit the question we asked at the beginning of this article.

Are Man, Woman, Boy, and Girl wrong answers, for the purposes of the Gender Census?

While these terms are not, in and of themselves, nonbinary identities, I maintain that they can be part of someone’s larger nonbinary identity, when included alongside other identity terms.

In 2023, majorities of Man and Woman respondents, in the Gender Census, identified as nonbinary.

In 2022, more than 60% of Boy and Girl respondents, in the Gender Census, identified as nonbinary.

Moreover, the percent of respondents, who chose each of these four terms, who identified as nonbinary, wasn’t substantially different from the percent of Gender Census respondents, as a whole, who identified as nonbinary.

To me, this shows the people selecting these terms in the survey are not, by and large, binary men and women who are incorrectly completing a survey that is meant to answer questions about people with non-binary genders.

Nevertheless, we will revisit this question, in the next article, with additional data.

Because once again, whether you consider these to be “wrong” answers, in the context of the survey, will affect how you interpret the survey’s results.

Woman and Man, have appeared in the Gender Census, in one form or another, nine times.

Girl and Boy have appeared in the Gender Census, on their own, three times.

Woman’s average is 12.7%.

Boy’s average is 11.7%.

Man’s average is 10.5%.

Girl’s average is 10%.

This means that all four of these terms have, on average, outperformed many other terms in the Gender Census, including all of the terms shown in the graph below.

The surprising fact that Man, Woman, Boy, and Girl outperform many nonbinary identities, even among nonbinary people, is an interesting result, and not one that everyone would necessarily predict.

If you believe these results are the consequence of many people completing the survey, who were not the intended target population of the survey, then this result might not be meaningful.

But if you believe, based on the other terms selected by Man, Woman, Boy, and Girl respondents, that these are legitimate choices chosen by nonbinary people, this result is a meaningful one.

Respondents who selected Man or Boy were more likely to identify as trans, and more likely to identify as transgender, than respondents who selected Woman or Girl.

These comparisons will be the focus of a future article, which will contain similar results for demiboy and demigirl, as well.

Another future article will discuss the terms, including Man and Boy, that have a majority of respondents who selected transmasculine.

These terms are part of the Transmasculine Family Tree.

In the next article, we will examine the performance of demiboy and demigirl in the Gender Census, explore the other terms those respondents were most likely to select in the survey, and compare their performance to the terms we discussed today.

So make sure to join me next time, as we continue to explore LGBT identity, by the numbers.