When I was Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid’s speechwriter, there were very few nail-biter votes. Hanging around the cloakroom, 99 percent of the time we could predict the exact outcome of a vote before the roll call began. That’s how we’re all trained to think about Washington now. We’v e been through years of gridlock, and our pattern recognition-obsessed brains assume there will be more. The fundamentals of a divided federal government suggest the same: Democrats control both chambers, President Trump holds the veto pen, overcoming a filibuster still requires 60 votes, and overturning a veto requires 67. But the 2026 election scrambled the incentives that have kept Washington gridlocked for so long. That means things could get a little weird next year. To understand this shift, start with the next map. In 2028, 18 Republican senators are up for re-election, and seven of them represent states that either elected a Democrat to the Senate in 2026 or came within three points of doing so. Sen. Ashley Moody held her Florida seat by under three points, and she faces voters again in two years. Sen. John Kennedy just watched Louisiana nearly elect its first Democratic senator since 2008. Sens. Jerry Moran, Tim Scott and Ted Budd represent states where Democrats won Senate races this year. So will whoever runs for Sen. Chuck Grassley’s seat in Iowa. The years 2016 to 2026 will forever be remembered as the MAGA decade. During this period, the most existential fear keeping Republicans up at night was a primary challenge to their right with Trump support. This spring, Trump helped push out Bill Cassidy in Louisiana and John Cornyn in Texas. They were the latest in a long string of Republican casualties when their loyalty to the president was questioned. Look at what happened to the nominees who replaced Cassidy and Cornyn. Ken Paxton lost Texas by 12 points. Julia Letlow, Trump’s pick in Louisiana, held the seat by less than two. Republicans lost general elections in places like South Carolina and (probably) Mississippi that no one would have imagined would host a competitive general election. Even Montana, one of the most Republican states in the nation, might have elected a Democratic senator if the Democratic nominee and a stronger independent candidate hadn’t split votes. For the last decade, Republican senators had more reason to fear losing a primary than losing a general election. That math no longer holds. In almost any state, winning the primary in 2028 will be just half the battle. There will be very few obviously safe Republican Senate seats in America next cycle, especially if cost of living issues don’t dramatically improve in the next two years. There are plenty of explanations for the Democratic wave, but the Republican Party’s failure to deliver on its economic populist promises has to be near the top of the list. If you’re wondering which issues might see strange bedfellows during the 2027 legislative session, start there. We’re already seeing the shift. Four days after the election, Sen. Ron Johnson of Wisconsin, one of Trump’s most loyal allies in the Senate, went on Fox News and accused people inside the Trump administration of serving special interests. When Trump made clear he took it personally, Johnson widened his complaint to “deep state” actors in every administration. But he made the break first and softened it second, and his core complaint was that corporations have become too close to the agencies that regulate them. For a conservative like Johnson facing the prospect of an uphill re-election fight if he runs again, aligning himself with economic populism won’t be optional. Heading into 2028, Republicans facing re-election need to show voters at home that they can do something about the cost of living. In the NBC News exit poll, nearly 90 percent of voters said they were concerned about the cost of gas, groceries, utilities and health care. Those voters will remember who helped and who stood in the way. Don’t roll your eyes. I’m not suggesting that Republicans will sign on to signature Democratic priorities. But on legislation that addresses voters’ economic concerns – and isn’t indelibly aligned with the Democratic Party – we could see filibuster-proof and even veto-proof majorities emerge. We know where to find these types of coalitions. Just this past summer, the Senate passed a major housing bill by an 85-5 vote; it became law even though Trump refused to sign it. An issue like data centers defies obvious partisan labels, and legislation to prevent them from passing costs onto local communities came close to passing this fall (Democrats voted no because they thought the bill didn’t go far enough; a toothier version could well pass next year). Other issues with broad appeal could include permitting reform and health insurance premiums. Nothing will test these new coalitions more than tariffs. We could see legislation restoring Congress’s authority over tariffs. Will all but the safest Republicans really side with the White House on this one? Overriding a presidential veto would take two-thirds of both chambers. In the Senate, if Democrats end up with 56 seats, that means 11 Republicans. In the House, it would take about 30, and there are roughly 40 House Republicans who won this year by five points or less. A year ago those numbers would have sounded absurd. With seven clearly vulnerable Republican senators and several others who have already backed giving Congress the final word on trade, it is no longer out of the question. This is not just a game of political prognostication. CEOs and their companies who agree that there’s a reasonable chance of big legislation moving with bipartisan support next year need to plan for it. Some of the coalitions that form will move on issues companies have wanted for years, like permitting. Others will form against particular industries. Tech companies that assumed the data center buildout would go unchallenged should expect major headaches, and likely far higher costs than they’ve planned. Corporate public affairs executives who rely on the old assumptions about Washington may find themselves badly unprepared for 2027. CEOs, beware of anyone on your team who confidently breaks down expected voting patterns and legislative agendas based on how things always go. One of my favorite quotes, from Dwight Eisenhower, is “plans are useless, planning is everything.” Now’s the time to plan. The opinions expressed in Fortune.com commentary pieces are solely the views of their authors and do not necessarily reflect the opinions and beliefs of Fortune.This story was originally featured on Fortune.com ...read more read less