Larger Midterm Win: 1994 for the GOP or 2006 for the Dems
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 29, 2024, 04:20:02 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion
  Congressional Elections (Moderators: Brittain33, GeorgiaModerate, Gass3268, Virginiá, Gracile)
  Larger Midterm Win: 1994 for the GOP or 2006 for the Dems
« previous next »
Pages: [1] 2
Poll
Question: Larger Midterm win
#1
1994
 
#2
2006
 
Show Pie Chart
Partisan results

Total Voters: 68

Author Topic: Larger Midterm Win: 1994 for the GOP or 2006 for the Dems  (Read 1157 times)
OSR stands with Israel
Computer89
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 44,357


Political Matrix
E: 3.42, S: 2.61

P P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: February 21, 2021, 10:33:23 PM »

I have decided to make this a tournament series which I will do the  8 largest midterm wins in the post war era(im going with 1946 , 1958, 1974, 1994, 2006, 2010, 2014, 2018) and today the matchup will be 1994 vs 2006 .

Both were elections where the opposition party took both houses of congrees , with one chamber being a chamber nobody would have expected a couple of months before the election(the House for the GOP in 1994 and Senate for the Dems in 2006) . Im going with 1994 for this one
Logged
Coolface Sock #42069
whitesox130
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,695
United States


Political Matrix
E: 4.39, S: 2.26

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: February 21, 2021, 10:48:47 PM »

2006, man. Democrats did not lose a single seat in the House. That’s a truly impressive feat.
Logged
Fmr. Gov. NickG
NickG
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,150


Political Matrix
E: -8.00, S: -3.49

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: February 21, 2021, 10:55:42 PM »

I voted 1994.  This was an enduring change to the American political alignment in a way that 2006, as impressive as it was, was not.

However, I’m surprised this would be a first-round match up if this is a seeded tournament format.  I’m also surprised 2014 would even be in the field.
Logged
OSR stands with Israel
Computer89
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 44,357


Political Matrix
E: 3.42, S: 2.61

P P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: February 21, 2021, 10:56:45 PM »

2006, man. Democrats did not lose a single seat in the House. That’s a truly impressive feat.

Its pretty close but I think the fact the GOP made more gains at the Gubernatorial gives them the edge there , and the major gains state legislature level.

At the Congressional level I think it was around the same but at the state level , 1994 gets the edge
Logged
Virginiá
Virginia
Administratrix
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 18,856
Ukraine


Political Matrix
E: -6.97, S: -5.91

WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: February 21, 2021, 10:58:31 PM »

1994 was more meaningful in the grand scheme of things but Republicans also received less votes nationally, as they usually do compared to the Democratic Party's waves.

Despite that, Republicans in 1994 still won a larger Congressional majority than 2006, given that they won more Senate seats overall even with a few less House Reps.

I'd have to go with 1994 here.
Logged
Orser67
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,947
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: February 21, 2021, 11:02:58 PM »

1994 by a fairly wide margin imo. Republicans had bigger gains in each of the House, Senate, and gubernatorial races, and you have the added significance of flipping the Dem-controlled House for the first time since the 1950s. From some brief research, it looks like the out-party gains in the state legislatures in 1994 were at least as extensive as they were in 2006.

Also, as NickG noted, with hindsight it's pretty clear that 1994 was the more historically important election. 1994 produced a lasting realignment both geographically and in the overall functioning of national politics and also set the stage for the remainder of the Clinton administration, whereas 2006 did have a big impact on the 2007-2010 period but didn't have the same level of lasting effects as 1994.
Logged
Born to Slay. Forced to Work.
leecannon
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,792
United States


Political Matrix
E: -6.45, S: -6.78

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6 on: February 22, 2021, 12:07:43 AM »

In defense of 2006, whereas 1994 didn’t see the party who took over congress make major policy, and they didn’t build on it much in the following cycles, 2006 saw democrats take the house, and then go on to expand the majority in 2008 giving them a powerful mandate to enact sweeping policy changes in healthcare.
Logged
ChiefFireWaterMike
LordRichard
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,351


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #7 on: February 22, 2021, 12:39:21 AM »

Hmm, it couldn't be the one that returned the house to Republicans for the first time in 4 decades, could it?
Logged
MillennialModerate
MillennialMAModerate
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,009
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8 on: February 22, 2021, 05:49:11 AM »

1994 for sure. No doubt about it.

Without 1994, I don’t think the GOP wins the house till 1998. Plus, it gave the GOP both chambers for the first time since 1954. It was a complete realignment of the political landscape in ways we still feel today. Dems hardly ever get such victories.
Logged
Frenchrepublican
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,278


P P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #9 on: February 22, 2021, 06:30:04 AM »

Probably 1994 as these elections had a much more lasting impact than those of 2006, the 1994 midterms were basically the last gasp of the New Deal Coalition.
Logged
Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers
olawakandi
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 87,805
Jamaica
Political Matrix
E: -6.84, S: -0.17


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10 on: February 22, 2021, 08:55:57 AM »

You can't compare midterms from 1994 to 2010 to 2022, we had divided govt back during those days, in the state legislature a and most of our Senate Delegations were split.

Now, except for the Bible belt, states are becoming more D and electing more D's to Senate Delegations that's why Ds can net gain seats instead of lose seats in a Recession and we won both GA Runoffs in this Recession.

Rs think D's can't net gain seats in a Covid Environment is incorrect, and this is the same Biden that ushered in Obama sweeping victories in OH, NC and FL 2008/12.

The Rs like East of Eden whom is obviously a newbie forgot what happened in GA, D's won both GA Runoffs on a Recession

We can win NC even in this Recession.

But, Biden still has 21 mnths to get the Economy back on track, everyone should be vaccinated by next yr
Logged
Hope For A New Era
EastOfEden
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,729


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #11 on: February 22, 2021, 01:09:19 PM »

1994 is clearly the bigger win, as we are still feeling strong effects from it today. Since 1994, Democrats have only won the house during R midterms and presidentials that replaced an R president with a D president.
Logged
Skill and Chance
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,522
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #12 on: February 22, 2021, 01:52:50 PM »

1994 and 2010 were both more impressive than any Dem midterm win since 1974, arguably since 1958.  It's not really a close call.  The Dem coalition post-1990 has been at an inherent disadvantage in midterms vs. in presidential years, but this is starting to reverse.  I do expect a 1974 or 1958 style blowout to occur during the next GOP presidency.
Logged
Del Tachi
Republican95
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 17,711
United States


Political Matrix
E: 0.52, S: 1.46

P P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #13 on: February 22, 2021, 02:57:51 PM »

Easily 1994, since it was the first GOP House majority in decades and lasted for 12 years.  Democrats' 2006 majority only lasted them for 4 years.   
Logged
Mr. Smith
MormDem
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 33,080
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #14 on: February 22, 2021, 08:33:35 PM »

1994 by far, might possibly more earth-shaking than even 1930 for Dems...certainly more than '74.

Only 1894 did more for sure.
Logged
Mexican Wolf
Timberwolf
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,298


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #15 on: February 22, 2021, 08:50:50 PM »

I voted 1994 because it had (or at least seemed to have) a longer-lasting political impact on America than 2006 did. But I also think that the 2006 lockout on any federal gains for the incumbent WH party is overall more impressive and not something we're likely to see again for a long time.
Logged
dw93
DWL
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,870
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #16 on: February 22, 2021, 10:23:26 PM »

1994. 1974 and, in some respects, 2018 (the House) were more impressive than 2006.
Logged
Skill and Chance
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,522
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #17 on: February 22, 2021, 10:55:58 PM »

1994. 1974 and, in some respects, 2018 (the House) were more impressive than 2006.

The net loss of senate seats makes 2018 kind of 2nd tier IMO.  1994 and 2010 are the 2 most impressive midterm wins since the VRA and are up there with 1958 and 1946 for the most impressive since WWII. 
Logged
freepcrusher
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,828
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #18 on: February 22, 2021, 11:13:00 PM »

The Dem coalition post-1990 has been at an inherent disadvantage in midterms vs. in presidential years

what's your reasoning. Because 2010 and 2014 were sh-tshows?
Logged
Ferguson97
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 27,812
United States


P P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #19 on: February 23, 2021, 12:06:43 AM »

1994 and this isn't even close tbh.
Logged
freepcrusher
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,828
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #20 on: February 28, 2021, 02:29:33 PM »

could the GOP downballot numbers have been prevented if Bush had won again? Otoh, Harry Blackmun was already mid 80s by the 92 election and he might have just given up.
Logged
OSR stands with Israel
Computer89
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 44,357


Political Matrix
E: 3.42, S: 2.61

P P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #21 on: February 28, 2021, 03:45:36 PM »

could the GOP downballot numbers have been prevented if Bush had won again? Otoh, Harry Blackmun was already mid 80s by the 92 election and he might have just given up.

If Bush won again there is a chance 1994 could have happened in 1992 but if it didnt then no then 1994 doesnt happen in a 14th year itch .


Logged
Bootes Void
iamaganster123
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,682
Canada


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #22 on: February 28, 2021, 04:09:32 PM »

could the GOP downballot numbers have been prevented if Bush had won again? Otoh, Harry Blackmun was already mid 80s by the 92 election and he might have just given up.

If Bush won again there is a chance 1994 could have happened in 1992 but if it didnt then no then 1994 doesnt happen in a 14th year itch .



You mean 1998 right?
Logged
OSR stands with Israel
Computer89
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 44,357


Political Matrix
E: 3.42, S: 2.61

P P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #23 on: February 28, 2021, 04:10:32 PM »

could the GOP downballot numbers have been prevented if Bush had won again? Otoh, Harry Blackmun was already mid 80s by the 92 election and he might have just given up.

If Bush won again there is a chance 1994 could have happened in 1992 but if it didnt then no then 1994 doesnt happen in a 14th year itch .



You mean 1998 right?

no I mean if Bush won in 1992 by a confrontable margin like he was expected to in 1991 the Republicans could have potentially taken congress in 1992 .


Logged
freepcrusher
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,828
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #24 on: February 28, 2021, 10:36:31 PM »

could the GOP downballot numbers have been prevented if Bush had won again? Otoh, Harry Blackmun was already mid 80s by the 92 election and he might have just given up.

If Bush won again there is a chance 1994 could have happened in 1992 but if it didnt then no then 1994 doesnt happen in a 14th year itch .



You mean 1998 right?

no I mean if Bush won in 1992 by a confrontable margin like he was expected to in 1991 the Republicans could have potentially taken congress in 1992 .




is there a president for not holding the u.s. house for twelve years in the white house and then winning it back?
Logged
Pages: [1] 2  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.052 seconds with 13 queries.