Just a quick reminder -- 2018 was the biggest electoral landslide in 32 years

[GeneralMacArthur]

That's right.  The 2018 blue wave was bigger than the Obamacare backlash, bigger than the Iraq War backlash, bigger than the Contract With America.  The American public favored the Democratic Party by 8.6%.  That's the largest margin by which America has ever favored a single party since 1986 when Americans overwhelmingly voted to give Democrats full control of Congress.

And on top of that, all polls show that the Democrats are favored by similarly dominant margins this year, with the generic congressional ballot consistently between +6 and +10 for the Democrats, and Biden's margin over Trump in the same range.

So I don't want to hear a peep from Republicans about any sort of "respecting the will of the voters" or "the voice of the people" or anything like that.  The voters rejected your party by a historically large margin in the last election and are poised to do the same in this election.  Also, you guys lost the 2016 election by 2.1%.

If you're gonna cheat, cheat.  If you don't care what people think, just say it.  We all know that this is minority rule.  Be like Mitch McConnell and just proudly own it.  Don't try to hide behind some veneer of morality.  It just makes you look ridiculous.

Popular vote margins by election (president for presidential year, house for midterms):

2018:  D +8.6%
2016:  D +2.1%
2014:  R +5.7%
2012:  D +3.9%
2010:  R +6.8%
2008:  D +7.2%
2006:  D +8.0%
2004:  R +2.4%
2002:  R +4.8%
2000:  D +0.5%
1998:  R +1.1%
1996:  D +8.5%
1994:  R +6.8%
1992:  D +5.6%
1990:  D +7.8%
1988:  R +7.8%
1986:  D +9.9%

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

A net loss of 2 Senate seats in the "biggest landslide in 32 years"? And you can talk about deep red states, but Bill Nelson failed to win a 4th term in Florida.

[MT Treasurer]

A net loss of 2 Senate seats in the "biggest landslide in 32 years"? And you can talk about deep red states, but Bill Nelson failed to win a 4th term in Florida.

That’s not how this works. Republicans benefited from a historically favorable Senate map + a galvanized GOP base (especially after the Kavanaugh hearings) + a "booming" economy and nonetheless vastly underperformed most states' partisan leans even against unpopular Democratic incumbents, lost seven states Trump won in 2016, couldn’t beat a Democratic incumbent in a Trump +42 state, blew winnable Senate races in MT and OH, and lost more House seats than in 2006.

One single result (FL-SEN 2018) does not not make 2018 a massive Democratic wave.

[ibagli]

A net loss of 2 Senate seats in the "biggest landslide in 32 years"? And you can talk about deep red states, but Bill Nelson failed to win a 4th term in Florida.

Democrats won 69% of the Senate seats that were up in 2018. It does suck that winning 24 of 35 seats results in Democrats getting less control, but it wasn't because Democrats were unpopular.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

A net loss of 2 Senate seats in the "biggest landslide in 32 years"? And you can talk about deep red states, but Bill Nelson failed to win a 4th term in Florida.

That’s not how this works. Republicans benefited from a historically favorable Senate map + a galvanized GOP base (especially after the Kavanaugh hearings) + a "booming" economy and nonetheless vastly underperformed most states' partisan leans even against unpopular Democratic incumbents, lost seven states Trump won in 2016, couldn’t beat a Democratic incumbent in a Trump +42 state, blew winnable Senate races in MT and OH, and lost more House seats than in 2006.

One single result (FL-SEN 2018) does not not make 2018 a massive Democratic wave.

Well, by any standard, 2012 was better than 2018 for the Democrats in the Senate.

[President Johnson]

A net loss of 2 Senate seats in the "biggest landslide in 32 years"? And you can talk about deep red states, but Bill Nelson failed to win a 4th term in Florida.

That’s not how this works. Republicans benefited from a historically favorable Senate map + a galvanized GOP base (especially after the Kavanaugh hearings) + a "booming" economy and nonetheless vastly underperformed most states' partisan leans even against unpopular Democratic incumbents, lost seven states Trump won in 2016, couldn’t beat a Democratic incumbent in a Trump +42 state, blew winnable Senate races in MT and OH, and lost more House seats than in 2006.

One single result (FL-SEN 2018) does not not make 2018 a massive Democratic wave.

Well, by any standard, 2012 was better than 2018 for the Democrats in the Senate.

On paper yes, but voter coalitions have shifted in these six years. Democrats have lost support in rural areas, that were key in keeping McCaskill, Heitkamp and Donnelly. Only Nelson's loss was totally unnecessary. In the meantime, Democrats have gained support in areas that were not crucial for winning senate seats in 2018. At least not to the same degree as a result of the bad map. Arizona was the only pickup option as a result of these trends. Texas wasn't there, but the result was impressive; who would have thought a Democrat can get within two percent in a midterm year? Gains in areas like NoVa and Orange County, California are useless for the senate if you lose in rural midwestern states. Only Tester and Manchin were able to escape the trends for strengths of their own.

[Brittain33]

A net loss of 2 Senate seats in the "biggest landslide in 32 years"? And you can talk about deep red states, but Bill Nelson failed to win a 4th term in Florida.

That’s not how this works. Republicans benefited from a historically favorable Senate map + a galvanized GOP base (especially after the Kavanaugh hearings) + a "booming" economy and nonetheless vastly underperformed most states' partisan leans even against unpopular Democratic incumbents, lost seven states Trump won in 2016, couldn’t beat a Democratic incumbent in a Trump +42 state, blew winnable Senate races in MT and OH, and lost more House seats than in 2006.

One single result (FL-SEN 2018) does not not make 2018 a massive Democratic wave.

Well, by any standard, 2012 was better than 2018 for the Democrats in the Senate.

Yes, in 2018 Dems moved the needle hugely in Texas (Beto) and California (7 House seats) with better performance but it had 0 impact on the Senate, while Dems losing tens of thousands of votes in North Dakota and not much more than that in Indiana and Missouri cost them seats.

[Darthpi - Crush the Oligarchy]

A net loss of 2 Senate seats in the "biggest landslide in 32 years"? And you can talk about deep red states, but Bill Nelson failed to win a 4th term in Florida.

That’s not how this works. Republicans benefited from a historically favorable Senate map + a galvanized GOP base (especially after the Kavanaugh hearings) + a "booming" economy and nonetheless vastly underperformed most states' partisan leans even against unpopular Democratic incumbents, lost seven states Trump won in 2016, couldn’t beat a Democratic incumbent in a Trump +42 state, blew winnable Senate races in MT and OH, and lost more House seats than in 2006.

One single result (FL-SEN 2018) does not not make 2018 a massive Democratic wave.

Well, by any standard, 2012 was better than 2018 for the Democrats in the Senate.

Which is further proof of how the Senate is wildly unrepresentative of the country.

[Arizona Iced Tea]

That was because of healthcare, not Supreme Court. The house can't vote on SCOTUS, and in the Senate Rs gained seats so it seemed that it may have helped there.

[OSR stands with Israel]

In no way was 2018 larger than 1994 lmao, and its just not the Senatorial results but the Gubernatorial Results too where the Republicans gained 6 seats in states Bill Clinton won in 1992 compared to the Democrats 3 gains in seats won by Trump.

In 1994 unlike 2018 , not a single Republican Incumbent lost even ones in solidly blue states(like RI).


Lastly that statement is false the biggest house PV victory was in 2008 when Democrats won the House PV by 10.6 points .

[Brittain33]

In no way was 2018 larger than 1994 lmao, and its just not the Senatorial results but the Gubernatorial Results too where the Republicans gained 6 seats in states Bill Clinton won in 1992 compared to the Democrats 3 gains in seats won by Trump.

In 1994 unlike 2018 , not a single Republican Incumbent lost even ones in solidly blue states(like RI).

True but didn't some open seats fall to Dems? I remember Santorum's House seat flipped to the Dems, for example.

[SWE]

A net loss of 2 Senate seats in the "biggest landslide in 32 years"? And you can talk about deep red states, but Bill Nelson failed to win a 4th term in Florida.

That’s not how this works. Republicans benefited from a historically favorable Senate map + a galvanized GOP base (especially after the Kavanaugh hearings) + a "booming" economy and nonetheless vastly underperformed most states' partisan leans even against unpopular Democratic incumbents, lost seven states Trump won in 2016, couldn’t beat a Democratic incumbent in a Trump +42 state, blew winnable Senate races in MT and OH, and lost more House seats than in 2006.

One single result (FL-SEN 2018) does not not make 2018 a massive Democratic wave.

Well, by any standard, 2012 was better than 2018 for the Democrats in the Senate.

And the fact that there's such a big discrepancy here is a pretty good case for abolishing the senate

[OSR stands with Israel]

In no way was 2018 larger than 1994 lmao, and its just not the Senatorial results but the Gubernatorial Results too where the Republicans gained 6 seats in states Bill Clinton won in 1992 compared to the Democrats 3 gains in seats won by Trump.

In 1994 unlike 2018 , not a single Republican Incumbent lost even ones in solidly blue states(like RI).

True but didn't some open seats fall to Dems? I remember Santorum's House seat flipped to the Dems, for example.

Yah they won 4 seats held by Republicans in 1994 compared to Republicans taking 3 seats held by Democrats in 2018.

Also FL 2018 Senate is something that just didnt happen to the GOP in 1994 though ironically FL Governor did(to the same state as well with Jeb losing) but in Governor races Republicans did far better in 1994 than the Democrats did in 2018.


So in the House they did around the same, in the Senate Republicans clearly did better and in the Gubenrtorail races Republicans clearly did better as well

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Amazingly, House Republicans actually won the House Popular Vote in 2016, in spite of Trump. This is because Republican incumbents in places like So-cal, South Florida, and suburban areas across the country outran Trump considerably.

The fact that Trump won though, ensured that House Republican support would retrench into the confines of the areas that Trump won and decline in those areas he didn't.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

A net loss of 2 Senate seats in the "biggest landslide in 32 years"? And you can talk about deep red states, but Bill Nelson failed to win a 4th term in Florida.

That’s not how this works. Republicans benefited from a historically favorable Senate map + a galvanized GOP base (especially after the Kavanaugh hearings) + a "booming" economy and nonetheless vastly underperformed most states' partisan leans even against unpopular Democratic incumbents, lost seven states Trump won in 2016, couldn’t beat a Democratic incumbent in a Trump +42 state, blew winnable Senate races in MT and OH, and lost more House seats than in 2006.

One single result (FL-SEN 2018) does not not make 2018 a massive Democratic wave.

Well, by any standard, 2012 was better than 2018 for the Democrats in the Senate.

And the fact that there's such a big discrepancy here is a pretty good case for abolishing the senate

A large part of comparing Senate PV numbers is because not all states are up in a given cycle. Also there was the top 2 situation in California as well that would naturally skew the numbers to the Democrats even more.

[Raccoon]

A net loss of 2 Senate seats in the "biggest landslide in 32 years"? And you can talk about deep red states, but Bill Nelson failed to win a 4th term in Florida.

That’s not how this works. Republicans benefited from a historically favorable Senate map + a galvanized GOP base (especially after the Kavanaugh hearings) + a "booming" economy and nonetheless vastly underperformed most states' partisan leans even against unpopular Democratic incumbents, lost seven states Trump won in 2016, couldn’t beat a Democratic incumbent in a Trump +42 state, blew winnable Senate races in MT and OH, and lost more House seats than in 2006.

One single result (FL-SEN 2018) does not not make 2018 a massive Democratic wave.

We did not have wave conditions at all in 2018. No real reason for a large Democratic wave. With the state of the economy and the relatively peaceful world 2018 should have been just a modest Democratic year.

Instead the wave was quite strong. But the strong economy and energized GOP base probably stopped Democrats from winning like Iowa Governor, etc.

[Migrant Crime]

Republicans won the House popular vote in 2016.  This is a sham.