Motivated reasoning significantly influences political decision-making, with individuals relying on cues such as partisanship to interpret information through their political affiliations. The motivation to be accurate often reinforces prior beliefs and partisan identities. Wishful thinking is a subset and relatively simple form of motivated (directional) reasoning. Individuals tend to expect specific outcomes simply because they are deemed desirable for themselves or “in-group” members. This study examines the congruence between citizens’ and politicians’ perceptions of party governance likelihood and change in seats, focusing on the influence of partisan-motivated reasoning. We argue that accuracy in assessments is frequently overshadowed by wishful thinking and partisan cues, leading to asymmetrical congruence between these actors in their predictions. Findings from two cross-sectional surveys reveal that partisan and wishful biases shape perceptions of governance probability and change in seats, affecting both citizens and politicians. These results highlight the role of cognitive biases in political predictions and decision-making, offering insights into the alignment of perceptions among key stakeholders in democratic processes.