Hillary and 2018

[bobloblaw]

So if Hillary wins in 2016, how badly will the Dems do in 2018? Given that Obama has decimated the Dem party at every level of govt except the WH, there isnt much more to lose.

But I could see the Dems losing all the 15-20 House seats they might win 2016, 3-4 Senate seats (I assume the Dems will win 3-7 seats in 2016) and a few more Governor's mansions (MN, VT, NH, CO) . The GOP will likely win MO, WV, KY and possibly VA while the Dems will likely win NJ in the next cycle. 35 GOP govs isnt out of the question.

Far from being close to permanent majority status, the Dem party under Obama/Clinton is like the GOP under Ford. They have the WH and nothing else.

[bobloblaw]

Trying to predict the results of the next election before a single vote has been cast in the current one is a fool's game.

Not really. It is almost a certainty that the Dems would lose seats in 2018 if they win in 2016.

[bobloblaw]

Trying to predict the results of the next election before a single vote has been cast in the current one is a fool's game.

Not really. It is almost a certainty that the Dems would lose seats in 2018 if they win in 2016.

Even if the economy is good?

1966,1986, 1994, 2006, 2014. A good economy doesnt help the incumbent party much but does hurt if it is bad.

[bobloblaw]

Potential Democratic Governor losses would be offset by probable wins in states like MD and IL. Also, MN is not going to flip.

Ill bet N is more likely to flip than IL or MD. Unless Lisa Madigan runs, Rauner will probably win in 2018. She cant run as long as Daddy is the House Speaker. He might retire by 2018 and then she can run.

[bobloblaw]

Trying to predict the results of the next election before a single vote has been cast in the current one is a fool's game.

Not really. It is almost a certainty that the Dems would lose seats in 2018 if they win in 2016.

Even if the economy is good?

1966,1986, 1994, 2006, 2014. A good economy doesnt help the incumbent party much but does hurt if it is bad.

The economy wasn't good in 1966 or 2014.

Are you serious? 1966 was the middle of the 1961-69 boom. GNP growth was 4% or higher that year. 2014 was pretty decent, the best year since 2006 for GDP growth and for jobs the best year since 1999.

[bobloblaw]

Potential Democratic Governor losses would be offset by probable wins in states like MD and IL. Also, MN is not going to flip.

Ill bet N is more likely to flip than IL or MD. Unless Lisa Madigan runs, Rauner will probably win in 2018. She cant run as long as Daddy is the House Speaker. He might retire by 2018 and then she can run.

Considering how much his approvals have already taken a nosedive, I'd guess no under most circumstances.

Pols who make tough decisions after see their approvals nose dive at the beginning of their terms. But they often win re-election. Walker, Snyder, Kasich.

Erlich in MD was defeated in the best Dem mid term election since 1986. If 2018 is another 2014 or 2010, Hogan will likely win.

[bobloblaw]

Trying to predict the results of the next election before a single vote has been cast in the current one is a fool's game.

Not really. It is almost a certainty that the Dems would lose seats in 2018 if they win in 2016.

Even if the economy is good?

1966,1986, 1994, 2006, 2014. A good economy doesnt help the incumbent party much but does hurt if it is bad.

The economy wasn't good in 1966 or 2014.

Are you serious? 1966 was the middle of the 1961-69 boom. GNP growth was 4% or higher that year. 2014 was pretty decent, the best year since 2006 for GDP growth and for jobs the best year since 1999.

Yes, I'm serious. To me, and evidently to voters, cost and standard of living determine whether a economy is good as much as GDP. 1966 was the beginning of the 1970s inflation crisis, and 2014 has seen lower wages than before the recession.

No 1966, was not the beginning of 1970s inflation. 1968 was and that was not until the end of the year. In 1966 inflation was 3%. 1968 was 4.8%.