Democrats Face a Grim Future -National Journal

[Frodo]

Goes to show just how badly we were mauled in 2010 and 2014:

Democrats' Vanishing Future

BY JOSH KRAUSHAAR
May 21, 2015

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Vosem]

but muh demographics

[Skill and Chance]

This will all be resolved by 2022.  With Obama being reelected, that means Democrats will miss at most one chance to get the House back (2018 with a Republican president) before there are new lines and they have held up about as well as anyone thought possible in the Senate.  What would have been really bad is if Romney won and narrowly flipped the Senate in 2012.  Republicans could have easily held full control for 8+ years.  Also, there's plenty of executive branch officials and mayors/county executives who report to at least CD-sized populations to run statewide.  Don't worry about this until 2020.

[smoltchanov]

but muh demographics

Demographics, most likely, will really help Democrats. But it's an extremely slow process - it will take 2-3 dozens of years for it's effects to be fully politically felt. Even for those. who are 18 today, it's a very long time. For those (like myself), who are somewhat over 50, that may be whole remaining life... At the same time Democratic collapse among whites (and not only in South, but in many ethnic AND/OR workingclass AND/ON small town/rural areas like Western Pennsylvania, SE Ohio, most of Indiana, Southern Illinois, parts of Missouri and so on) gives very big tactical advantages to Repblicans. Strategically these people may be "dying off" and Democrats (i repeat) may be in better position, but tactically, IMHO - not so.

[henster]

Strickland wasn't Dems only hope in Ohio there's Tim Ryan and Richard Cordray who would've been great candidates and in WI Ron Kind, Mary Burke, and Chris Abele. Kathy Castor and Patrick Murphy as well in Florida, I think Dems have some great candidates for 2016.

[smoltchanov]

Strickland wasn't Dems only hope in Ohio there's Tim Ryan and Richard Cordray who would've been great candidates and in WI Ron Kind, Mary Burke, and Chris Abele. Kathy Castor and Patrick Murphy as well in Florida, I think Dems have some great candidates for 2016.

Some - yes. But, most likely, for 50/50 Senate only. And then comes 2018, which will be VERY bad for Democrats in Senate under almost all scenarios.

[Skill and Chance]

It won't get better for Dems if Hillary wins in 2016...

That's unclear.  Working white women turn out much more reliably in midterms.  And even so, a Kennedy/Scalia retirement with a Dem president and senate could be worth 40 state legislatures and 230 R+5 house seats IMO.

[publicunofficial]

Lol Kraushaar, the hackiest of hack political writers.

[RFayette]

It won't get better for Dems if Hillary wins in 2016...

That's unclear.  Working white women turn out much more reliably in midterms.  And even so, a Kennedy/Scalia retirement with a Dem president and senate could be worth 40 state legislatures and 230 R+5 house seats IMO.

Good point.  The worst scenario for Dems long-term is a narrow, narrow Clinton victory with the GOP keeping a strong hold on the House/Senate, followed by a 2019-2020 recession.  While improbable, this outcome is somewhat plausible and would make life very, very hard for the Democrats.

[The Dowager Mod]

RealClearPolitics analysts Sean Trende and David Byler.

[🦀🎂🦀🎂]

Don't worry guys, when Clinton wins in 2016 we can look forward to another two years of how Republicans are DOOMED, until the Democrats are wiped out in 2018 when we find out the Democrats are IN IRREVERSIBLE DECLINE until Clinton is reelected in 2020 with massive coattails that prove THE REPUBLICAN PARTY IS LITERALLY DYING until 2022 etc.

[Vega]

I guarantee that had the Democrats turned in a respectable performance in 2014 like they did in 1998, this would be about the Republicans.

[Skill and Chance]

It won't get better for Dems if Hillary wins in 2016...

That's unclear.  Working white women turn out much more reliably in midterms.  And even so, a Kennedy/Scalia retirement with a Dem president and senate could be worth 40 state legislatures and 230 R+5 house seats IMO.

Good point.  The worst scenario for Dems long-term is a narrow, narrow Clinton victory with the GOP keeping a strong hold on the House/Senate, followed by a 2019-2020 recession.  While improbable, this outcome is somewhat plausible and would make life very, very hard for the Democrats.

Yes, and the SCOTUS consequences of a Hillary win are limited because Democrats need a miracle to keep the Senate past 2018.  Democrats have gotten too excited about trends that are likely to help them in 2040, not now.  If/when the demographic tide does roll in, note that they probably just trade the House problem for a Senate problem.  AZ/FL/GA/NC/TX are all large states.

[Pandaguineapig]

I guarantee that had the Democrats turned in a respectable performance in 2014 like they did in 1998, this would be about the Republicans.

The media has a very bad habit of reading way too much into single elections ie: "The Obama coalition has made it impossible for republicans to win", "The republicans are now dominant because muh turnout", "Democrats are the majority party because they have won the last 4 of 6 presidential elections", or "Republicans are the majority party because they have held the house 18 of the last 22 years"

[OSR stands with Israel]

2018 if Hillary wins could be like 1958 was for the Republicans, which could lock the Dems out of COngress for a generation. For the Republicans it took big wins in 1966, 1980, 1994 to get back the house, and a enormous win in the senate in 1980 to take it back.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

It won't get better for Dems if Hillary wins in 2016...

I dont think Dems will be sad that they beat the GOP again, if Dems win presidency and Senate.

Dems are worried about 2016,  first, than some trens that the GOP is dominant in House and state and local govt.

Tester, McCaskill and Manchin have won 1 election before and Sherrod Brown. They arent freshmen like Hagen or Begich.

But Donnelly and Heikamp are new.

[aktheden]

I agree..the future looks bleak for the Dems...if the dems win the WH in 2016,I see a bloodbath in 2018

[Landslide Lyndon]

Oh look, it's the Kraushaar guy who thought "Clinton Cash" was the gospel and would doom Hillary's campaign.

[aktheden]

Oh look, it's the Kraushaar guy who thought "Clinton Cash" was the gospel and would doom Hillary's campaign.

Does not mean he is wrong

[Skye]

RealClearPolitics analysts Sean Trende and David Byler.

Why? I think Trende is pretty good.

[Orser67]

It won't get better for Dems if Hillary wins in 2016...

That's unclear.  Working white women turn out much more reliably in midterms.  And even so, a Kennedy/Scalia retirement with a Dem president and senate could be worth 40 state legislatures and 230 R+5 house seats IMO.

Good point.  The worst scenario for Dems long-term is a narrow, narrow Clinton victory with the GOP keeping a strong hold on the House/Senate, followed by a 2019-2020 recession.  While improbable, this outcome is somewhat plausible and would make life very, very hard for the Democrats.

Yes, and the SCOTUS consequences of a Hillary win are limited because Democrats need a miracle to keep the Senate past 2018.  Democrats have gotten too excited about trends that are likely to help them in 2040, not now.  If/when the demographic tide does roll in, note that they probably just trade the House problem for a Senate problem.  AZ/FL/GA/NC/TX are all large states.

I'd much rather have her appointing moderate candidates that could get confirmed by a Republican Senate than a Republican president appointing the next Alito.

[100% pro-life no matter what]

I agree..the future looks bleak for the Dems...if the dems win the WH in 2016,I see a bloodbath in 2018

I think a Republican wins in 2016, but, if not, I could see the Republicans in the mid-60s in the Senate after the midterms (maybe a veto-proof majority?).

[smoltchanov]

RealClearPolitics analysts Sean Trende and David Byler.

Why? I think Trende is pretty good.

Look at TexasGurl political Matrix numbers)))

[smoltchanov]

I agree..the future looks bleak for the Dems...if the dems win the WH in 2016,I see a bloodbath in 2018

I think a Republican wins in 2016, but, if not, I could see the Republicans in the mid-60s in the Senate after the midterms (maybe a veto-proof majority?).

No. Wishful thinking.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

GOP will not win a veto proof majority in 2018.