U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Elections
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Closed Thread Start New Thread
 
Old 06-05-2017, 06:31 PM
 
18,970 posts, read 7,380,409 times
Reputation: 8088

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bureaucat View Post
No, because unless something radically changes over the long term, they won't be.
Long-term = Left has no hope for decades to come.

For the next few cycles, census helps the GOP.

 
Old 06-05-2017, 09:47 PM
 
9,893 posts, read 10,146,941 times
Reputation: 5298
Nixon resigned on Aug 08, 1974 and the Republicans lost 48 House seats in the election that November. This scandal, along with high inflation, allowed the Democrats to make large gains in the midterm elections.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jas75 View Post
At this point, I think a small net gain for Democrats is realistic in 2018, but actually flipping the House will be very difficult.
So basically the Democrats in 2018 would have to make gains that they have not made since 1974 in order to wrest control of the House.

But the Republicans have done it twice since 1970s. Once in 1994 and again in 2010.

The most dramatic reversal in the last century was in 1932 when the Republicans lost over 100 seats.

I would say that flipping the House would be a titanic feat, but it would be even harder to flip the Senate in 2018.
 
Old 06-05-2017, 11:19 PM
 
Location: Pine Grove,AL
23,366 posts, read 11,569,810 times
Reputation: 4326
Quote:
Originally Posted by PacoMartin View Post
Nixon resigned on Aug 08, 1974 and the Republicans lost 48 House seats in the election that November. This scandal, along with high inflation, allowed the Democrats to make large gains in the midterm elections.



So basically the Democrats in 2018 would have to make gains that they have not made since 1974 in order to wrest control of the House.

But the Republicans have done it twice since 1970s. Once in 1994 and again in 2010.

The most dramatic reversal in the last century was in 1932 when the Republicans lost over 100 seats.

I would say that flipping the House would be a titanic feat, but it would be even harder to flip the Senate in 2018.
in the time period you laid out, Dems gained 20+ seats on 4 separate occasions. Im not saying it is going to happen, only that it is doable.
 
Old 06-06-2017, 06:58 AM
 
Location: Washington State
18,664 posts, read 9,639,706 times
Reputation: 15896
Quote:
Originally Posted by LoveToRow View Post
It isn't happening. There is no "anti-Trump backlash." It's the same old leftists in the media pushing fake news.
Yep, the people that didn't like Trump still don't and the people that like him still do. The tweeners will look at the economy and whether he has made moves to make us safer.

Normally the Republicans are stronger in mid terms (dems too busy getting high and protesting to vote) and normally the party opposite the President picks up seats so these 2 trends will clash. My prediction is that if Trump and the Republicans continue to have great success, they will pick up extra seats and if something calamitous happens, the Dims will pick up seats.
 
Old 06-06-2017, 07:29 AM
 
7,190 posts, read 2,540,726 times
Reputation: 3633
Quote:
Originally Posted by BobNJ1960 View Post
Long-term = Left has no hope for decades to come.

For the next few cycles, census helps the GOP.
Your party is on the road to the ash heap of history. The only variable is time. It's association with Donald Trump only accelerates the process.
 
Old 06-06-2017, 07:46 AM
 
7,190 posts, read 2,540,726 times
Reputation: 3633
Quote:
Originally Posted by BobNJ1960 View Post
Long-term = Left has no hope for decades to come.

For the next few cycles, census helps the GOP.
Your party is on the road to the ash heap of history. The only variable is time. It's association with Donald Trump only accelerates the process.

It's like a political version of Wagner's "Gotterdammerung."
 
Old 06-06-2017, 08:32 AM
 
Location: Washington State
18,664 posts, read 9,639,706 times
Reputation: 15896
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bureaucat View Post
Your party is on the road to the ash heap of history. The only variable is time. It's association with Donald Trump only accelerates the process.
Been hearing that for my entire life since the 70's and my party hs the most elected officials in over 100 years and now finally controls virtually all government in the USA
 
Old 06-06-2017, 12:09 PM
 
9,893 posts, read 10,146,941 times
Reputation: 5298
Quote:
Originally Posted by dsjj251 View Post
in the time period you laid out, Dems gained 20+ seats on 4 separate occasions. Im not saying it is going to happen, only that it is doable.
Yes it certainly has been done in the past. Usually it helps if there is a redistricting and your party had the primary say in many states. But Nixon's resignation, or massive changes in economy cause big changeovers.


Democrats gains or losses from previous election (ignoring changes between elections)
64th (1915-1917) -61
65th (1917-1919) -16
66th (1919-1921) -22
67th (1921-1923) -61
68th (1923-1925) +76
69th (1925-1927) -24
70th (1927-1929) +11
71st (1929-1931) -30
72nd (1931-1933)1 +52
73rd (1933-1935) +97
74th (1935–1937) +9
75th (1937–1939) +12
76th (1939–1941) -72
77th (1941–1943) +5
78th (1943–1945) -45
79th (1945–1947) +22
80th (1947–1949) -56
81st (1949–1951) +75
82nd (1951–1953) -28
83rd (1953–1955) -22
84th (1955–1957) +19
85th (1957–1959) 0
86th (1959–1961) +50
87th (1961–1963) -18
88th (1963–1965) -6
89th (1965–1967) +37
90th (1967–1969) -47
91st (1969–1971) -5
92nd (1971–1973) +12
93rd (1973–1975) -12
94th (1975–1977) +48
95th (1977–1979) +1
96th (1979–1981) -14
97th (1981–1983) -35
98th (1983–1985) +26
99th (1985–1987) -15
100th (1987–1989) +4
101st (1989–1991) +2
102nd (1991–1993) +7
103rd (1993–1995) -9
104th (1995–1997) -54
105th (1997–1999) +3
106th (1999–2001) +4
107th (2001–2003) +2
108th (2003–2005) -8
109th (2005–2007) -4
110th (2007–2009) +32
111th (2009–2011) +24
112th (2011–2013) -64
113th (2013–2015)* +8
114th (2015–2017) -13
115th (2017–2019) +6

Quote:
Originally Posted by dsjj251 View Post
So you think population density favors republicans ?????
Broad national demographic changes can be almost completely overshadowed by gerrymandering districts. Look at Nevada which went from one district to four.

Nevada elections went Republican 24 times, and Democrat 36 from 1864 to 1982 (a single at large district)
Nevada 1st went Republican 2 times and Democrat 16 times since 1982
Nevada 2nd went Republican 18 times and Democrat zero times since 1982
Nevada 3rd went Republican 6 times and Democrat 2 times since 2002
Nevada 4th went Republican 1 times and Democrat 2 times since 2012


So as Nevada's population grows, the 1st district becomes smaller and more dense and more Democratic. But it creates other less dense districts that are reliably Republican.

Last edited by PacoMartin; 06-06-2017 at 12:27 PM..
 
Old 06-06-2017, 12:48 PM
 
Location: north central Ohio
8,422 posts, read 4,374,851 times
Reputation: 4976
Quote:
Originally Posted by LoveToRow View Post
It isn't happening. There is no "anti-Trump backlash." It's the same old leftists in the media pushing fake news.

Would that be the same "Fake-News" the Republicans were spewing that Obama didn't have a snowball's chance in hell of getting re-elected in 2012, ROTFLMBO???????
 
Old 06-06-2017, 03:02 PM
 
9,893 posts, read 10,146,941 times
Reputation: 5298
Democrats are targeting the well-educated suburbs (see New Jersey’s 11th District, for example), where Donald Trump either barely won or underperformed, Republicans are going after many rural districts where Hillary Clinton underperformed the congressional ticket.

Republicans are targeting all Democrats in districts where Clinton lost. Those include
  1. MN-07 Peterson, Collin 30.8%
  2. MN-08 Nolan, Rick 15.6%
  3. MN-01 Walz, Tim 14.9%
  4. PA-17 Cartwright, Matt 10.1%
  5. WI-03 Kind, Ron 4.5%
  6. IA-02 Loebsack, David 4.1%
  7. NY-18 Maloney, Sean 1.9%
  8. NH-01 Shea-Porter, Carol 1.6%
  9. NJ-05 Gottheimer, Josh 1.1%
  10. AZ-01 O'Halleran, Tom 1.1%
  11. NV-03 Rosen, Jacky 1.0%
  12. IL-17 Bustos, Cheri 0.7%

Seats that Clinton narrowly won, like New Hampshire Rep. Ann McLane Kuster’s 2nd District, are also on the list. Others include Connecticut Rep. Joe Courtney’s 2nd District, Connecticut Rep. Elizabeth Esty’s 5th District, Florida Rep. Charlie Crist’s 13th District, Michigan Rep. Dan Kildee’s 5th District, Nevada Rep. Ruben Kihuen’s 4th District, Oregon Rep. Peter DeFazio’s 4th District and Oregon Rep. Kurt Schrader’s 5th District.

Republicans are also targeting some districts that Clinton carried more comfortably. In Florida’s 7th District, the NRCC is on the offensive against freshman Democrat Stephanie Murphy, who knocked off longtime GOP Rep. John L. Mica last fall in a redistricted seat.

California Rep. Ami Bera was one of the NRCC’s three main Democratic targets last cycle, and he’s once again on its list this cycle. Clinton won his district by 11 points, but expect Republicans to double down on the congressman’s father’s guilty plea for making illegal contributions to his son’s campaigns.

The NRCC will again contest New York’s 3rd District, which Democrat Tom Suozzi won last fall after Rep. Steve Israel’s retirement. Clinton won the Long Island district by 6 points. The NRCC is also targeting Rep. Raul Ruiz in California’s 36th District, a seat with a slight GOP advantage but one that Clinton won by 9 points.

In two Midwestern districts, Republicans are targeting Michigan Rep. Sander M. Levin and Ohio Rep. Tim Ryan, whose districts Clinton carried by 8 and 7 points, respectively.

The NRCC is also going after a handful of Democrats in districts that Clinton won by double digits, some by as much as 22 points. Those include Rep. Kyrsten Sinema in Arizona’s 9th District, freshman Rep. Salud Carbajal in California’s 24th District, Rep. Scott Peters in California’s 52nd District, Rep. Ed Perlmutter in Colorado’s 7th District, Rep. William Keating in Massachusetts’ 9th District, Rep. John Delaney in Maryland’s 6th District, Rep. Derek Kilmer in Washington’s 6th District and Rep. Denny Heck in Washington’s 10th District.

In New Mexico, the NRCC is targeting the 1st District seat being vacated by Rep. Michelle Lujan Grisham at the end of the term and the 3rd District seat held by Democratic Congressional Campaign Chairman Ben Ray Luján.

- See more at: NRCC Goes After Blue-Collar Districts in 2018

Last edited by PacoMartin; 06-06-2017 at 03:12 PM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Closed Thread

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Elections
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 03:08 PM.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top