Is a true anti-incumbent year possible?

[The Arizonan]

Let's say that Americans decided that not only do they hate Congress with a passion, but that they are going to vote out their OWN incumbents regardless of political affiliation. Is such a thing possible?

[Associate Justice PiT]

     Anything is possible, but that would be a major bucking of historical trends. There would probably need to be a massive scandal implicating almost all of Congress for this to happen.

[PAK Man]

I doubt it, because part of me suspects most people in this country don't even know who their incumbents are. When I was in college I went canvassing for a state legislator. When I approached one woman and asked if she was the incumbent, I told her yes, and she said she was voting all incumbents out. But if I didn't tell this woman, she wouldn't have even known who the incumbent was.

Granted, that's a local office holder, but I'm legitimately curious as to how many people even know who represents them in congress or the senate. I suspect it's much less than people tend to believe.

[Kingpoleon]

A massive economic recession, during which the incumbent President and Vice President dies and a Speaker of the opposite party replaces them, could be one cause. I think it would need to be alongside major bribery scandals in undercover FBI investigations finding most Senators guilty of being willing to accept bribes.

[Mr.Phips]

Look at 1992.

[Del Tachi]

In the Senate its almost impossible.  There are no remotely vulnerable incumbent Senate Democrats, so an "anti incumbent" wave in the Senate would be seen as an anti-GOP wave.

[Vosem]

I suspect that, in the event of the election of a third-party or independent President who then becomes unpopular, a true anti-incumbent year could very well be possible. Of course, depending on the composition of the Senate class that comes up for election it may be difficult to discern whether it is a true anti-incumbent year or just a reaction against a certain party.

[pbrower2a]

A true anti-incumbent year, when incumbents in both Parties go down in huge numbers? Not likely. Incumbents going down usually got elected, just barely, in a wave election for their Party. They could be marginal fits for their states or districts under perfect situations; they could be sub-mediocrities in performing their jobs; they could have scandals or have a rap for misuse of power. Such pols are the prime candidates for defeat in reverse-wave elections. If there is any time for a reverse-wave, then 2016 is an excellent opportunity for Democrats. Republicans typically fare badly in high-participation elections.

Yes, wave elections can demonstrate the vanishing support for a Party in a region (see 2010 and 2014, disasters for Democrats in the South from which there may be no recovery for decades). The Mountain South is now the most right-wing region in America, and the Deep South rifts along ethnic divides.

[🦀🎂🦀🎂]

Only if we take into account primaries. I'm very sceptical of the idea of everybody switching sides.

As for the reason, maybe a scandal like the British Commons expenses scandal or the Italian Mani pulite

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

If McCain loses to Kirkpatrick, it's probably an anti incumbent year.