Between Two Majorities | The Cordray Administration (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
June 16, 2024, 07:54:25 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion
  Election What-ifs? (Moderator: Dereich)
  Between Two Majorities | The Cordray Administration (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: Between Two Majorities | The Cordray Administration  (Read 221405 times)
junior chįmp
Mondale_was_an_insidejob
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,430
Croatia
« on: December 26, 2017, 03:47:43 PM »

Worth noting that the Democratic wave of 1974 (which hasn’t been replicated in scope by either party since) came only two years before Ford nearly won re-election, and only six years before Reagan’s new realigning coalition came along.

In 1974, 43 House incumbents retired, which was one of the highest numbers in decades (1952 had 40 retirements) After 1974, the number of retirements kept increasing for both the House and the Senate:

House:
1974-43
1976-47
1978-49
1980-34

Senate:
1974-7
1976-8
1978-10
1980-5

Basically throngs of old school New Deal era politicians of both parties started retiring (plus the ones that were defeated). This slowly hollowed out both parties in preparation for the coming realignment.

When Boomers took over Congress in the Republican Revolution of 1994, you see the same pattern in the amount of retirements:

House:
1990-27
1992-68
1994-48
1996-49

Senate:
1990-4
1992-9
1994-9
1996-13

The amount of House retirements since 1996 has never gone above 40 (at least according to the data going up till 2012)
Logged
junior chįmp
Mondale_was_an_insidejob
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,430
Croatia
« Reply #1 on: December 26, 2017, 06:15:46 PM »

Worth noting that the Democratic wave of 1974 (which hasn’t been replicated in scope by either party since) came only two years before Ford nearly won re-election, and only six years before Reagan’s new realigning coalition came along.

In 1974, 43 House incumbents retired, which was one of the highest numbers in decades (1952 had 40 retirements) After 1974, the number of retirements kept increasing for both the House and the Senate:

House:
1974-43
1976-47
1978-49
1980-34

Senate:
1974-7
1976-8
1978-10
1980-5

Basically throngs of old school New Deal era politicians of both parties started retiring (plus the ones that were defeated). This slowly hollowed out both parties in preparation for the coming realignment.

When Boomers took over Congress in the Republican Revolution of 1994, you see the same pattern in the amount of retirements:

House:
1990-27
1992-68
1994-48
1996-49

Senate:
1990-4
1992-9
1994-9
1996-13

The amount of House retirements since 1996 has never gone above 40 (at least according to the data going up till 2012)

In unrelated news, the next retirement from the house of representatives this cycle will be its 40th.

Hence my saying: "Realignment imminent"
Logged
junior chįmp
Mondale_was_an_insidejob
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,430
Croatia
« Reply #2 on: December 26, 2017, 06:45:25 PM »

I'm skeptical of a wave in 2018 without a realigning election in 2020 because the foreshadowing and realigning down-ballot gains are usually similar. E.g., I don't expect a Democratic wave in 2018 with a Republican victory in 2020 because it's impossible for the Democratic Party to gain 6-8 seats in 2024 in the Senate to mirror past realignments.

The Democrats lost the House of Representatives in a Republican wave in the midterms of 1858 which of course precluded Lincoln's realigning election in 1860. The Democrats lost 35 seats out of 238, which would be similar to Democrats winning 60 to 70 seats in 2018 (of course this is no guarantee).
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.025 seconds with 13 queries.