Why winning in 2016 will be bad for both parties

[OSR stands with Israel]

Here's a problem which will affect the winner. No economic expansion in American history has lasted more then 10 years which means the current expansion which end between 2017-2020 which could cause the party in power to  all the blame.


For Democrats they most likely take back the Senate with a tie breaker with the Vice President but in 2018 they get slaughtered in the Senate and House like 2010 and 2014 and then with an economic recession, and likely high deficits, and foreign policy troubles in their term they will most certainly get all the blame as it is their third term and they don't have the ability to Blame Bush just like Bush Senior couldn't blame Carter for his woes and most likely be swept out of office in a realigning election just like 1992 was for the Democrats and lose the advantage they had in the Electoral College and the republicans would have filibuster proof majorities in Congress.


For Republicans it depends when the recession hits. If it hits early in his presidency they will be able to deflect some of the blame on Obama. But their advantage in 2018 congress will Disappear as despite a favorable map they wont gain any seats. If it hits late in their term  they will be swept out of Office in 2020 just like Carter was in 1980 and The democrats will go from having an advantage in the Electoral College to a lock just like what happened in 1980 to the republicans

[OSR stands with Israel]

Unless a Republican President has <40% approval, 2018 will result in an increased number of republican senators. The only plausible democratic pickup is NV (AZ isn't going atlas red in a midterm absent an absolute democratic tsunami), ND/IN will almost certainly flip, MO/MT will start with a definite republican advantage, if Manchin retires WV will almost certainly flip (if Manchin runs for reelection he should be okay), and OH/WI/VA/PA/MI/FL/MN (if Klobuchar retires)/NM could all flip in the right situation/climate. Remember, midterm turnout skews republican naturally, so even a republican president at 44/53 approval (or thereabouts) wouldn't be toxic, and republicans would still net at least 1 senate seat.

Only times a party has maid gains in congress in the last 100 years has been 1934 and 2002

[OSR stands with Israel]

For someone who's a computer, you certainly have a bad spell checker.

Fixed

[OSR stands with Israel]

Unless a Republican President has <40% approval, 2018 will result in an increased number of republican senators. The only plausible democratic pickup is NV (AZ isn't going atlas red in a midterm absent an absolute democratic tsunami), ND/IN will almost certainly flip, MO/MT will start with a definite republican advantage, if Manchin retires WV will almost certainly flip (if Manchin runs for reelection he should be okay), and OH/WI/VA/PA/MI/FL/MN (if Klobuchar retires)/NM could all flip in the right situation/climate. Remember, midterm turnout skews republican naturally, so even a republican president at 44/53 approval (or thereabouts) wouldn't be toxic, and republicans would still net at least 1 senate seat.

Only times a party has made gains in congress in the last 100 years has been 1934 and 2002

Lolol. Now if you had said 'party holding the presidency' instead of just 'party' you might be right (too lazy to go through wikipedia and check),but since you just said party you're hilariously wrong.

And please learn correct grammar and spelling.

[OSR stands with Israel]

Unless a Republican President has <40% approval, 2018 will result in an increased number of republican senators. The only plausible democratic pickup is NV (AZ isn't going atlas red in a midterm absent an absolute democratic tsunami), ND/IN will almost certainly flip, MO/MT will start with a definite republican advantage, if Manchin retires WV will almost certainly flip (if Manchin runs for reelection he should be okay), and OH/WI/VA/PA/MI/FL/MN (if Klobuchar retires)/NM could all flip in the right situation/climate. Remember, midterm turnout skews republican naturally, so even a republican president at 44/53 approval (or thereabouts) wouldn't be toxic, and republicans would still net at least 1 senate seat.

Only times a party has maid gains in congress in the last 100 years has been 1934 and 2002

Lolol. Now if you had said 'party holding the presidency' instead of just 'party' you might be right (too lazy to go through wikipedia and check),but since you just said party you're hilariously wrong.

And please learn correct grammar and spelling.

A Republican win in 2018 wont happen if a Republican is in the white house no matter how favorable the map is as the party controlling the white house will lose in midterm elections unless there is national security threat like Terrorism was in 2002 or the president inherited a catastrophic economy which caused the other party to be really unpopular like the Republicans were in 1934

[OSR stands with Israel]

Lol this take of mine turned out to be pretty accurate