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.
1994 was the last time the Republicans cleaned house in the elections was the first time the South ditched fanatical support of Democrats in exchange for Republicans. If you look at sources of Congressional Republicans prior to that point, most of them came out of the Northeast, Plains, and Mountain West. In the 90s however the trend shifted as the South developed a stronger middle class throughout the 80s, resulting in a dramatic power shift towards the Republicans in that region. In case most of you have forgotten, the 90s was a period of intense culture war in elections, and by 2000 the political landscape had changed considerably, the South and Plains were the primary source for Republican support while the Northeast and West became more Democratic.
That was quite a dramatic transformation in the geopolitical landscape that is unlikely to be repeated this year, hence why Republican gains will be no where near as impressive as they were in 1994. In 2012 however, most of the South and West will be picking up several electoral votes (hence more House seats) after the Census as states in the Northeast and Midwest lose them, so we could see another power shift at that time..
Most of this years election depends on the economy, and so long as the unemployment rate is high it will cost Democrats dearly in November. Under Reagan, the Democrats cleaned house in 1982, picking up 27 seats in the House with the Senate remaining the same. In 1984 as the economy was soaring Republicans gained 16 seats in the House and actually lost one in the Senate. Even as the economy was still booming in 1986, Republicans lost 5 seats in the House and 8 in the Senate..
The point of course being that anything can happen.
Few things to keep in mind, especially as it relates to the economy. It appears that the peak of the economic problems have already passed, and things are slowly improving. How much it improves between now and November will obviously be key, but it does appear the worst has past. That was not the case in 1982, the economy was pretty much reaching its worst point leading into Election Day. Unemployment peaked at 10.8 in November and December 82.
As far as 1986, the economy really was not booming it was basically flat (unemployment leading into the 86 midterms was pretty much exactly where it was about 2 years earlier (right around 7%, down only a few tenths). It boomed from spring of 83-84, and then again from the summer of 87 onward. However in that period in between was basically flat with only a slight downturn in unemployment. Also keep in mind what major story broke the day prior to the 86 midterms. Iran-Contra. I don't remember how things were looking for the GOP heading into the 86 midterms, but something as huge as Iran-Contra breaking so close to Election Day clearly hurt them.
Have you seen what the GDP has done in the last year?
Let's see -
1Q/09 GDP: -6.9%
2Q/09 GDP: - .7%
3Q/09 GDP: + 2.2%
4Q/09 GDP: + 5.9%
That's a remarkable 12.3 points gain in 4 quarters. That kind of improvement doesn't come along very often - and every time it does, it's followed by a big boost in jobs. This time will be no different. Job cuts have gone from 900,000 in January of 09 down to under 40,000 last month. That's a reduction of 95% - and is poised to move into job creation either this month or next.
Finally, the US doesn't have to be at full employment for a President to be re-elected. What HAS to be the case is that if unemployment is high then it has be clearly falling (as was the case with Reagan - and as will be the case with Obama).
The fact is, by November the country will be well along the road of recovery. Unemployment WILL still be high, but it will be falling and there will be new job creation happening each and every month. Pent up demand by consumers - which is ALREADY starting to show up - will increase economic activity even more as that 80+% of workers who never did lose their jobs begin to realize that they are NOT going to lose their jobs after all, and "Frugility Fatigue" is replaced by "Relief Spending".
All of which bodes pretty well for Obama.
Ken
It's not just about the economy.
The economy was doing relatively well in 1994, yet the Republicans won control of Congress in the elections that year.
It's not just about the economy.
The economy was doing relatively well in 1994, yet the Republicans won control of Congress in the elections that year.
Well, as I said, I DO expect the GOP to make gains this year - as is typically the case in off-year elections (ie for the party out of power to make gains). They'll have to do a lot better than they did in 1994 to take either the House or the Senate - and I don't think that's going to happen.
You'll have to excuse me - in that post I was really talking about 2 different issues - the Congressional Elections this year, and the Presidential elections in 2012. Obama will likely do fine in 2012. The Democrats in Congress not quite so well in 2010.
Internet polls don't mean squat. They are way too easily pushed one way or the other by automated bot's that pump thousands of votes into them.
Ken
Ken, polls period don't mean much. Oh, if a poll shows an approval of say 80%, yes there is reason for excitement or negatives below 20%, but polls showing 45%, 60%, a candidate being ahead by 4 or 5%. These polls vary daily, the best they are good for is a slight picture of maybe what the public is thinking on any given day or week.
Well, aside from the fact that I agree with Jack Welch that the economy is on the mend, there's the question of whether the Tea Party folks will run as Republicans or on their own ticket.
I don't deny that the GOP will make gains - after all, as a general rule the party in power pretty much always loses seats in the midterms.
I doubt they'll get control of either house though.
Ken
Except for Bush in 2002 and I believe in 2004.
What do they need to take over the House - 40 seats?
Very doable, especially in those conservative districts that Blue Dogs currently occupy.
Quote:
Let's see -
1Q/09 GDP: -6.9%
2Q/09 GDP: - .7%
3Q/09 GDP: + 2.2%
4Q/09 GDP: + 5.9%
That's a remarkable 12.3 points gain in 4 quarters.
Not too good at math I see. I don't see a 12.3 point gain. And we all know the 5.9% in the 4th quarter was mainly from business inventory reduction. Hardly any investment, hardly any spending.
What do they need to take over the House - 40 seats?
Very doable, especially in those conservative districts that Blue Dogs currently occupy.
Not too good at math I see. I don't see a 12.3 point gain. And we all know the 5.9% in the 4th quarter was mainly from business inventory reduction. Hardly any investment, hardly any spending.
I serioulsly don't think anyone can say, "the fundamentals of the economy are strong" quite yet!lol
What do they need to take over the House - 40 seats?
Very doable, especially in those conservative districts that Blue Dogs currently occupy.
You are right on 02, but 04 is not a midterm. The Dems did pick up seats in 98 btw. The Democrats picked up 31 seats in 2006. The Democratic Party heading into the 06 midterms ranked MUCH better than the GOP currently ranks, and Bush's approvals were far worse than what Obama currently has.
I don't dispute the GOP picks up seats this year, but 40 seats is a pipe dream. While some districts the Dems represent are certainly conservative leaning districts its not as many as you might think. Many of the districts the GOP lost in 06 and 08, were liberal and Dem leaning districts, they aren't winning those back.
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.