The Dems will sweep into power in both the House and the Senate as well as the Presidency

[Pleonast]

@YogSothoth

Even during this historic Republican obstructionism, Obama was able to do things like pass Obamacare, win the gay marriage case, kill Bin Laden, reduce incarceration rates, stop torture, work towards more equal pay and allow women more time and opportunity to sue for discrimination, sign a nuclear treaty with both Russia and Iran, normalize relations with Cuba, and (hopefully) prevent children of undocumented immigrants to stay in the US.

But what has he done for us lately.

@Saint_Cad

@Pleonast

The Democrats will take control of the Senate. (And their first action should be to change the filibuster rules. Do it immediately while the iron is hot, or they’ll regret it later.)

Like the last time Reid was in control?

Yes, like last time, the Democrats should’ve changed the filibuster rules, and then they later regretted not doing it.

The Republicans should’ve changed the filibuster rules, as well, but they haven’t had a chance to regret it, yet.

@XT

Pretty much this. It would take something extraordinary for the Dems to take the House in the next election cycle. And to sweep into power? The OP is dreaming. Perhaps if Hillary presides over something similar to what happened in her husbands time in office wrt the economy…

I think many people underestimate the potential impact of gerrymandering. Take Ohio, for example. The voting indices by district, in order from pro-Republican (+) to pro-Democrat (-) are: +14, +9, +9, +8, +8, +6, +6, +5, +5, +5, +3, +2, -12, -14, -15, -30. The baseline is 12 R and 4 D in the House, if the presidential race has no down-ticket impact. If there’s a 3.5-point effect in favor of the Democrats, it’ll go 10 R, 6 D. A 5.5-point effect, results in 7 R, 9 D. And 6.5 goes to 5 R, 11 D. In contrast, even a 10-point shift in favor of the Republicans does not result in the Democrats losing any seats.

Gerrymandering really tilts the results non-linearly.

Of course, what are the odds of a 5 or 6 point shift in favor of the Democrats? I’m not sure, but when something like 30% of the Republicans are not happy with their nominee, it wouldn’t take “something extraordinary”. More like “against the odds, but possible”. I’ll be very interested in Nate Silver’s analyses.