Every second that the GOP controls any part of the government is a loss.
Then they’d still be beating my expectations, but I suspect many of them would feel sort of like they did after all the special elections: ‘damn good showing lads, too bad we couldn’t quite get over the finish line in first place’.
The loser would be the executive branch (cause nothing will get passed by the legislative branch) and the American public cause of the gridlock. Illinois is in gridlock too, you know- and that stings.
I’m not optimistic the scenario is likely. Sabato’s Crystal Ball (at 270 to win) shows that Republicans have 220 seats locked or likely Republican, with a lean of 11 and a tossup of 11 more.
You can only be an obstructionist for so long though before people get weary and tell you to move your ass and get to work. And it’s not a one-party issue either. You hear that, Bruce Rauner?
Because of the previous situation with a House and Senate controlled by Republicans, it would be a win for the Democrats. Running up the score in one house doesn’t matter if the other house is out of your control.
The Republican win scenario would be gaining enough seats in the Senate to override a fillibuster, while still keeping the house. Anything else is currently a draw, albeit a Republican advantage.
If the republican party has a seat in the house after 2018, the real loser is the sanity waterline.
Actually, one flip side: In principle, the House can flip in any given election. But a Senate seat, once won, stays won for six years. So in the longer term, it’s better to control the Senate than the House, because that’ll pay off for a longer time.
Of course, in practice, there are a lot of House districts that aren’t even remotely close to competitive, and there’s very low turnover. But there are still wave cycles, and it can matter then.
It is highly likely the Republicans will keep both houses, but it they are split, the Democrats can claim a victory.
Bolding mine. But as long the public consists of two factions with diametrically opposed ideas of what “get to work” means, the stasis continues.
I’m sure I’m not alone here in thinking that legislative activism is a really bad idea when the activists are mostly Tea Party R folks. Meantime the Tea Party R citizens would sure prefer inaction to congressional runaway left-wingery.
Agree completely.
It is always simpler (though not necessarily easier) to fight your enemy when he is unified and organized. When he’s disorganized, scattered, and incoherent it becomes far harder to counter. Cf. the situation in Syria.
As it applies to current US politics, the Ds will have a hard time agreeing on a coherent counter-strategy as Trump, the Corporate Rs, the Tea Party Rs, and the Defense Hawk Rs are each heading in at least 4 different directions and their comity falls apart.
For institutional reasons the Congressional Rs are more likely to make common-ish cause together leaving Trump’s administration as the odd man out. IMO the smart D move, as you said, is to back at least some Trumpish stuff against the worst depredations of Congress.
Turmp won as a populist. You know, the doctrinal space that used to be the home of the Ds. If he can be persuaded (or fooled) into backing truly populist causes he *could *be an asset. A noisy buffoonish asset, but an asset nonetheless. By comparison, replacing him with Pence would be a total own-goal for the Ds.
In the precise scenario proposed in the OP, I would call the results a mixed decision. Having a one-vote margin in the House means that it could very easily flip back to Republican control – it just takes a couple twists of fate to have a couple Dems leave office early.
That being said, I have a hard time coming up with what the fuck the American electorate is thinking by having what would be more or less a tidal wave of Democratic votes for House seats, and a very strong Republican voting result for the more limited number of Senate seats.
I mean, picking up 24 House Dems means a huge swing of voters in moderate to Republican districts. How that can happen and have Dems lose in states like Ohio, Indiana, Wisconsin, Michigan, Missouri, New Mexico, or several others that lean more to the Red side, makes no sense to me.
If the Democrats can’t make significant electoral gains with all the ammunition that Trump is giving them, they’ve lost. Having said that, I don’t see what difference the Republicans’ Senate majority makes given that the filibuster will be totally gone as soon as McConnell really wants to pass something.
They can likely already get judges passed with ease with only 52 senators.
The dems winning the house is more important. The house can call for impeachment, conduct legitimate investigations into Trump, block legislation from happening, etc. The GOP gaining a slightly larger majority isn’t really that big a deal. Maybe they’ll get a few more conservative judges, but Obama appointed something like 800 judges over 8 years.
Also, if the current trends continue the GOP will not win by much, if at all, in the senate in 2018. They are at a huge advantage, but if they are going to keep latching themselves to Trump who grows more and more unpopular, they will probably leave the 2018 election about where they are, with 51-54 senate seats.
Agree with your second half. As to the first half OTOH …
I admit to not keeping up with the latest Trump news. But my overall impression is that his fans, who listen only to his propaganda, still love him as the True Savior of American Greatness who is single-handedly revolutionizing the world in His Image. The rest of us, who listen to MSM, think he’s an abject disgrace as well as completely useless and ineffectual. Whether we’re R and lament his ineffectivity or are D and celebrate it doesn’t much matter; we both know he’s a useless fraud.
Nothing about Trump himself alters the widespread congressional gerrymandering nor the essential red/blue geographic divide present throughout most of the country. R folks gonna vote R and D folks gonna vote D regardless of who’s in the White House or what he’s doing.
IOW, the only thing that matters for the 2018 midterms is how enthused Trump can make his True Beleivers to turn out and vote for Trump’s chosen candidates. Rest assured that:
A) Trump will be tub-thumping for high turnout amongst his followers AND
B) Trump will auction his support district by district to the highest bidders of either party although the R congressmen will have an inside track.
It will be a novel midterm to say the least.