Why are Republicans Winning so Much at a State Level? (Reagan, democratic)
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.
Democrats were victorious for the most part in my state of Pennsylvania. For example: all three seats for the Pennsylvania Supreme Court (formally with a Republican majority) that were up went to the Democrats. Here in Philadelphia we just elected another Dem mayor as usual.
So while it is true there are more Republican state legislatures, it appear the major of big city governments in the US are are in the hands of the Dems.
The Republican judicial candidates were outspent almost 10 to 1 by Democrats (much of which was contributed by labor unions). Big money bought the election. Democrats say big money only buys Republicans elections, but they're just as guilty.
Democrats were victorious for the most part in my state of Pennsylvania. For example: all three seats for the Pennsylvania Supreme Court (formally with a Republican majority) that were up went to the Democrats. Here in Philadelphia we just elected another Dem mayor as usual.
So while it is true there are more Republican state legislatures, it appear the major of big city governments in the US are are in the hands of the Dems.
1. 2010. 2010 was a HUGE year for the GOP and a terrible year for the Democrats. That happened to coincide with redisticting after the 2010 Census. The GOP's gains in 2010 help put them in control of redistricting in far more states, this has had a continued impact on Congressional and state legislative races since then.
2. Democrats poor turnout in not Presidential years. Turnout for 2010 was fairly poor and 2014 was considerably worse, and low turnout elections generally hurt Democrats more than Republicans. In 2012, the Democrats actually gained seats in the House even with redistricting being a boost to the GOP (though most of those seats were lost in 2014), they took the vast majority of the Governor's races that year and picked up several Senate seats as well, despite the inital thought they would have lost a couple due to the fact they were defending far more. A low turnout 2014 combined with the fact they defended far more seats than the GOP last year really hurt them in the Senate. It will be interesting to see what happens with the Senate next year as we will have the higher turnout Presidential year combined with the fact the GOP will have far more seats to defend.
Here in Philadelphia we just elected another Dem mayor as usual.
So while it is true there are more Republican state legislatures, it appear the major of big city governments in the US are are in the hands of the Dems.
For sure. That's where most of the murders are....
Wait a second: In this scenario, you use 2% as a high metric for increased voter turnout. When we were discussing Larry Hogan earlier, you said Hogan's win, in sheer number of votes, was insignificant. I know I'm comparing two metrics, but why exactly are do you discredit numbers that don't agree with the point that you are trying to make? Hogan won by an unexpected margin.
Here's another scenario that Democrats aren't thinking about: What happens if/when Republicans get a large enough majority in the House and Senate to override Presidential vetos? When it comes to Congressional races, Democrats seem to take one step forward (Presidential years) and two steps back (mid-terms). If that trajectory continues, Republicans will continue to amass majorities that diminish Presidential powers. That is the downside of holding onto the White House for so long.
I am thinking more along the lines of what happens when/if the Republicans get 38 governorships and legislature control and their respective state voters push them to a constitutional convention.
Here's another scenario that Democrats aren't thinking about: What happens if/when Republicans get a large enough majority in the House and Senate to override Presidential vetos? When it comes to Congressional races, Democrats seem to take one step forward (Presidential years) and two steps back (mid-terms). If that trajectory continues, Republicans will continue to amass majorities that diminish Presidential powers. That is the downside of holding onto the White House for so long.
Very nice.
But going back in history, who ever envisioned the President as simply a super-member of one of the parties of the legislature?
I do not know enough history to answer my own question, so it really IS a question.
Wouldn't it be WONDERFUL if we had a president who did not view the other half of the legislature as "the enemy"?
Hillary has already announced that that will be her view. So how effective can she ever be?
1. 2010. 2010 was a HUGE year for the GOP and a terrible year for the Democrats. That happened to coincide with redisticting after the 2010 Census. The GOP's gains in 2010 help put them in control of redistricting in far more states, this has had a continued impact on Congressional and state legislative races since then.
2. Democrats poor turnout in not Presidential years. Turnout for 2010 was fairly poor and 2014 was considerably worse, and low turnout elections generally hurt Democrats more than Republicans. In 2012, the Democrats actually gained seats in the House even with redistricting being a boost to the GOP (though most of those seats were lost in 2014), they took the vast majority of the Governor's races that year and picked up several Senate seats as well, despite the inital thought they would have lost a couple due to the fact they were defending far more. A low turnout 2014 combined with the fact they defended far more seats than the GOP last year really hurt them in the Senate. It will be interesting to see what happens with the Senate next year as we will have the higher turnout Presidential year combined with the fact the GOP will have far more seats to defend.
2010 census didn't affect redistributing besides a movement of house seats from one state to another. 2010 happened because of American not wanting Obamacare.
Democrats keep trying to blaiming gerrymandering for their woes but is has no bearing on governor or senate races where they are still losing.
The fact is hard to ignore: Republicans are winning big in individual states. They're winning governorships, majorities in state legislatures, U.S. Congressional seats, etc. We saw this demonstrated last night with the election of Matt Bevin in Kentucky, the retention of the VA State Senate by Republicans (which was at risk), and a few other smaller races. In 2014, we saw Republicans take back control of the U.S. Senate, hold the U.S. House, and pick up a few VERY unexpected governorships; including Illinois, Maryland, and Massachusetts. Overall, the last two years have skewed heavily Republican.
My question is why is this happening? Is it is a shift in public opinion, or are Republicans just providing better candidates?
I'm going with "We 'haters' are better looking."
But seriously, if I could take a wild a** guess, I'm going with in non-presidential election years you get the hardcore voters only, and we know the most reliable hardcore voting demographic is old people. Does anyone bother to do exit polling in non-presidential elections? Probably not. My guess is you would find that a large percentage of non-presidential election year voters are retired.
Everyone keeps forgetting how large (numbers-wise) the old people demographic is getting with all of the baby boomers hitting retirement age now and they tend to be more conservative/traditional. So, I think it's just a matter of even more old people voting now than in years past simply because there are more of them. They'll vote against taxes and things raising taxes will buy because they are on fixed incomes/limited incomes and of course they will vote against anything that threatens social security, medicare or healthcare in general. Because they are older, there will be more concern about crime and they will care less about any politician wanting to change a bunch of things.
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.
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.
