under a future dem president

[freepcrusher]

how many seats should the party expect to lose in state legislatures? I've always hated it when people (such as krazen) would talk about how the republicans are at there highest position in 90 years and what not. My hope is that it won't be as bad as the 900 or so seats lost under Obama. I feel like the dems lost a lot of seats that were time bombs and made us look worse than we actually did.

Otoh, the dems lost "only" 500 seats under Clinton so it was thought that under Obama we didn't have as much to lose. And it ended up being worse.

[freepcrusher]

A dem president over 2 terms will probably lose 600 seats, the average loss in a 1st midterm alone is 420 legislative seats for the party that controls the WH, the GOP only lost 295 in 2018 because they were able to outperform historical trends and minimise their losses owing to Trump's strength outside urban areas, in many states they basically lost almost no seats, in WI they had a net gain of 1 legislative seat and in Iowa the net loss was only 2 legislative seats.

I think the 1st midterm for a dem president will be closer to the average loss of 420 unless they can expand their base outside urban areas, there are still hundreds of dems in legislative seats in areas that are trending Republican that will be wiped out the next time there is a midterm under a democratic president.

https://ballotpedia.org/State_legislative_elections,_2018

No way it would be 600 seats.  Dems are still like 200 seats away from a majority and do not hold the level of rural GOP double digit PVI districts that they held in 2010.  What would likely happen is that they lose around 300 (which is about what happened in 2014, when Dems were far less overexposed than 2010)

if they lost 300 seats - wouldn't that put them at there 2017-2018 numbers? Which is to say there lowest point since the 1920s?

[freepcrusher]

A dem president over 2 terms will probably lose 600 seats, the average loss in a 1st midterm alone is 420 legislative seats for the party that controls the WH, the GOP only lost 295 in 2018 because they were able to outperform historical trends and minimise their losses owing to Trump's strength outside urban areas, in many states they basically lost almost no seats, in WI they had a net gain of 1 legislative seat and in Iowa the net loss was only 2 legislative seats.

I think the 1st midterm for a dem president will be closer to the average loss of 420 unless they can expand their base outside urban areas, there are still hundreds of dems in legislative seats in areas that are trending Republican that will be wiped out the next time there is a midterm under a democratic president.

https://ballotpedia.org/State_legislative_elections,_2018

No way it would be 600 seats.  Dems are still like 200 seats away from a majority and do not hold the level of rural GOP double digit PVI districts that they held in 2010.  What would likely happen is that they lose around 300 (which is about what happened in 2014, when Dems were far less overexposed than 2010)

if they lost 300 seats - wouldn't that put them at there 2017-2018 numbers? Which is to say there lowest point since the 1920s?

Yes.

well at what point does the wind finally get to be at the democrats' back? Like if you look at state legislative losses under Eisenhower and Nixon/Ford, they lost 800 seats under each while the dems only lost 400/500 seats under Kennedy/Johnson. By the time of the Reagan/Bush years, the GOP on net actually gained a seat or two. I would have thought that by 2017, the dems are where the republicans were circa mid 1970s but I guess you're saying they still have negative headwinds.

Whatever happened to the Emerging Democratic Majority?

[freepcrusher]

Total number of seats isn't a good metric to go by anyway.   A state house seat in Wyoming isn't on the same level as a state senate seat in California.  Also chamber size is an issue,  like having only 80 house seats in NJ while having 400 in New Hampshire.

It'd be better to go by percentages of the population represented by each party or something.

well yes but its all about optics. I hated it when guys like krazen would always harp about all the losses under Obama. Even guys who are not bad faith actors like Sean Trende would mention it. If a future dem president only loses 200 or so state legislative seats - then maybe we won't have to hear the talk about how the dems are in disarray from those people.

[freepcrusher]

Most of this can be explained by 1994 being basically the only Republican wave at the downballot level since 1946. 

not 1966?