Brent crude fell 2.5% to $101.02 per barrel on Wednesday, after President Donald Trump said the United States has no immediate plans to strike Iran and Democrats won control of Congress in Tuesday's midterm elections, according to Reuters.

U.S. West Texas Intermediate futures lost 2.6% and traded at $93.61. The moves came amid choppy trading, and the two benchmarks now sit well below the peaks of October's steep rally.

Why did prices fall on an election?

The mechanism is straightforward. Democratic control of Congress could restrain American defense funding for operations in the Middle East and make a peace agreement more likely in the near term, according to Dennis Kissler, an analyst at BOK Financial, who wrote in a note cited by The Wall Street Journal.

In other words, markets read the midterm result as a brake on escalation. If Congress holds the purse strings tighter, the argument runs, Washington has fewer resources for a wider regional fight. That lowers the odds of a supply shock from the Persian Gulf — and oil prices fall.

Kissler also pointed to supply itself. Larger Middle East crude exports and Trump's comments on Iran are, in his words, "keeping the pressure on crude oil prices for now."

How much oil is actually flowing?

The numbers back him up. Middle Eastern exports of crude oil, condensates (an ultralight oil) and refined fuels — excluding LPG (liquefied petroleum gas) — averaged 17.1 million barrels a day in October, according to Vortexa ship-tracking data cited by Reuters.

That's up sharply from 18.9 million barrels a day in September, and it puts regional flows close to three-quarters of pre-war levels. Supply is recovering. Traders have noticed.

What's still uncertain?

Plenty. Traders face mixed signals on the conflict, and the headline calm masks continued military activity.

• A U.S. official said the American military conducted defensive strikes on Iran's Qeshm Island on Tuesday, targeting anti-aircraft missiles that had been fired at U.S. assets, Reuters reported.
• A senior Iranian official said Tehran and Washington remain a long way from an agreement to end the war.
• Qatar has intensified its mediation efforts between the two sides.

That contradiction — strikes continuing while the White House downplays escalation — sits at the center of the market's hesitation. Priyanka Sachdeva, head of market insights at Phillip Nova, told Reuters: "President Trump's conflicting signals, with military strikes continuing alongside statements downplaying further escalation, have made it difficult for traders to build strong directional conviction."

She added that after October's steep rally, it was reasonable for traders to book gains and trim their speculative bets (positions that profit if prices keep rising) on higher prices. In plain terms: some of Wednesday's drop is profit-taking, not conviction that the war premium (the extra price markets charge for conflict risk) is gone.

What happened politically?

Democrats won majorities in both the House and the Senate, taking each chamber from Republicans. It's a clean sweep of Congress for the opposition, achieved against the backdrop of an ongoing foreign conflict.

Trump acknowledged that the conflict with Iran contributed in part to Republican losses. He said he had no regrets about it. On the road ahead, he said he was willing to cooperate with Democrats — but would use his veto if necessary.

What does this mean for the weeks ahead?

The near-term picture is one of competing forces. Bearish pressure comes from recovering Middle East exports, a Congress less inclined to fund escalation, and profit-taking after October's surge. Bullish risk comes from the talks stalling — Iran says an agreement is distant — and from further U.S. or Iranian military action.

For now, the market has sided with de-escalation. Brent at $101 reflects a conflict discount, not a conflict panic. But as Sachdeva's comment makes clear, traders are cutting bets rather than declaring a direction. One day of choppy trading settles nothing.