Every election matters, but the 2026 midterms may be among the most consequential in recent history.

Regardless of which party wins the House and Senate, the impact of next month’s elections will extend beyond November and into the 2028 presidential race. That is especially true in the Senate, where the parties’ closing arguments can make it sound as though senators serve only two-year terms, as Ramesh Ponnuru noted in the Washington Post.

Democratic candidates promise to check President Trump during his final two years and pursue investigations. Republicans warn that Democratic control would mean obstruction and efforts to “harass and impeach” Trump, Ponnuru noted. Either scenario could unfold, depending on who wins. But a narrow focus on the next two years misses the larger stakes.

Both parties enter 2028 at a crossroads. Republicans will no longer have Trump atop the ticket. Democrats still lack a clear identity or standard-bearer. The results will indicate where each party is headed.

For Republicans, the near-term direction is largely set. Trump remains in command, and whoever wins his endorsement will have the inside track to the nomination and an opportunity to reshape the party. Republicans still face a difficult post-Trump transition, but much of it may be decided for them.

For Democrats, the picture is far less settled. If they capture the Senate, four potential new senators who could provide the decisive votes — State Rep. James Talarico of Texas, Lieutenant Gov. Peggy Flanagan of Minnesota, Troy Jackson of Maine and Abdul El-Sayed of Michigan — would carry significant influence in 2028 and beyond.

The possibility of Democrats taking the Senate through those four candidates, along with former Gov. Roy Cooper (D) in North Carolina, is hardly far-fetched. Trump’s approval rating is historically low, Democrats maintain an 8-point advantage on the generic congressional ballot and frustration with the economy continues to grow.

Yet a majority built through this group could encourage Democrats to conclude that the party’s progressive wing — not its moderates — offers the clearest path forward. That interpretation could leave the party vulnerable in 2028, as two features of this year’s contests suggest.

First, despite a strongly Democratic national environment, all four races remain close — even in relatively blue states, reflecting at least some voter unease with the candidates’ more progressive positions.

In Maine, Jackson holds an average polling lead of roughly 1 point over Republican Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine), with some polls showing Collins ahead. Since winning the nomination after Graham Platner’s campaign imploded, Jackson has struggled to generate the same enthusiasm Platner inspired.

In Minnesota, Flanagan leads Republican Michele Tafoya by an average of just 2.6 points. That is striking, given Tafoya’s lack of political experience and Minnesota’s two-decade streak without a Republican senator.

In Texas, Talarico leads scandal-plagued Republican Attorney General Ken Paxton by just over 2 points, despite Paxton’s vulnerabilities. Talarico is a gifted communicator, but Republicans have attacked his past positions on policing and transgender issues.

In Michigan, El-Sayed matches Flanagan for the top average lead of the four — still under 3 points. He has faced sustained criticism over past statements and struggled with Black voters in a primary he won by only 1 point.

In other words, these Democrats may be benefiting as much from Republican weakness and the national environment as from an affirmative embrace of their politics.

The second concern is that a majority built this way could leave Democrats politically beholden to an emboldened left. Already, a plurality of Democrats (44 percent) say they are voting to oppose Trump, rather than to support individual candidates’ positions or qualities, according to Politico. A Senate majority powered by anti-Trump sentiment may therefore prove difficult to sustain once Trump is no longer on the ballot or in the White House.

If a Democrat wins the presidency in 2028 with control of the Senate, progressives could pressure the party to pursue measures such as eliminating the filibuster, expanding the Supreme Court or sharply curtailing Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

But the public is not necessarily there. Fox News polling found that 55 percent of voters view the Democratic Socialists of America unfavorably, and proposals associated with left-wing progressives remain potent Republican attack lines. Democrats therefore risk overreading a 2026 victory and moving ahead of the voters who delivered it.

It is also easy to imagine a replay of 2024, in which the party’s 2028 nominee is forced to answer for controversial positions taken by lawmakers whose victories helped create the majority. If Talarico, Flanagan, El-Sayed and Jackson hold the balance of power in the next Senate, Democrats may win the 2026 battle while complicating the 2028 war.

The lesson should not be that Democrats must reject these candidates. It is that an anti-Trump wave would not, by itself, amount to an endorsement of the party’s leftmost agenda, and the risks extend far beyond the end of Trump’s term.

For a Democratic Party still searching for an identity, confusing the two could push it decisively left just as the anti-Trump backlash begins to fade — and leave voters wondering what, exactly, they voted for.

Douglas E. Schoen and Carly Cooperman are pollsters and partners with the public opinion company Schoen Cooperman Research based in New York. They are co-authors of the book “America: Unite or Die.”