OtherGround Forums So was it a “Blue Wave”?

14 days ago
6/3/03
Posts: 96941

So it seems like the Dems won the house, which nearly everyone was saying was going to happen anyway. 

They needed to pick up 23 seats and it looks like they picked up about 26-28, but at the same time lost seats in the Senate. 

So with the average swing for House seats in the mids being about 30, and the Dems underperforming should this be considered a “Blue Wave”?

I mean the term is very ambiguous so are we just agreeing that winning the House was enough to call it a Wave, or should the Dems have done a lot better last night?

14 days ago
11/11/14
Posts: 1820
I would consider it a defeat for the Democrats for the reasons you mentioned above, as well as that two of their rising young faces (Beto and Gillum) lost even though so much effort and money was spent trying to develop them

14 days ago
11/20/13
Posts: 7106
ShortyMac - I would consider it a defeat for the Democrats for the reasons you mentioned above, as well as that two of their rising young faces (Beto and Gillum) lost even though so much effort and money was spent trying to develop them

I wouldn't go as far as calling it a defeat. They won control of the house...that's not a loser's prize.

14 days ago
3/23/07
Posts: 58044

It was an unremarkable midterm result, so no, not really.

14 days ago
1/1/01
Posts: 21858

Nope... It amounted to a puddle splash. Not a defeat because they do have the House, but even without Trump being President and all the ‘resist’ bullshit this was nothing out of the ordinary.

Edited: 14 days ago
12/26/05
Posts: 39367

For all the hype, this is about the most predictable, boring midterm in recent history.

 

It's so standard, it's nearly surprising.

 

Radically mediocre on every possible front.

 

 

 

14 days ago
5/5/07
Posts: 11332

Both sides won imo 

14 days ago
10/15/13
Posts: 25672

Blue Ripple

 

Image result for blue ripple

14 days ago
1/1/01
Posts: 16589

Sidenote:  after watching all major networks intermittently through the evening, I can state with absolute certainty that Fox has the hottest news chicks.

Edited: 14 days ago
7/14/17
Posts: 7824

 

From what I can see, as far as the Senate goes, 4 flipped to red, 1 flipped to blue.

 

14 days ago
10/15/13
Posts: 25674
Lancifer -

Sidenote:  after watching all major networks intermittently through the evening, I can state with absolute certainty that Fox has the hottest news chicks.

Without comparison.

14 days ago
1/14/07
Posts: 13217
Nitecrawler - 

So it seems like the Dems won the house, which nearly everyone was saying was going to happen anyway. 

They needed to pick up 23 seats and it looks like they picked up about 26-28, but at the same time lost seats in the Senate. 

So with the average swing for House seats in the mids being about 30, and the Dems underperforming should this be considered a “Blue Wave”?

I mean the term is very ambiguous so are we just agreeing that winning the House was enough to call it a Wave, or should the Dems have done a lot better last night?


I think a 30 seat gain would have been a huge upset. With the amount of republican led states at the time of last redistricting, the levels of gerrymandering are still pretty crazy.

You can see the difference. There is some analysis out there about states with independently or court drawn maps and how they more accurately represent the state level split between parties.

Goes back to the point that districting should never be done by the people it directly benefits.
14 days ago
3/3/18
Posts: 4923
Five Thirty Eight says 28 seats flipped and their last projection last night at around 4am was +34 seats, 10% above the average flip. I wouldn't call that a wave but it's still good for Dems.
14 days ago
10/6/17
Posts: 2658
CavemanDave -

For all the hype, this is about the most predictable, boring midterm in recent history.

 

It's so standard, it's nearly surprising.

 

Radically mediocre on every possible front.

 

 

 

This.

There’s a natural ebb and flow set by historical precedent. All wishful thinking aside, you can’t claim a “blue wave” out of such standard predictability.

14 days ago
3/3/18
Posts: 4925
Dems also flipped 7 governorships.
14 days ago
3/15/06
Posts: 21815

Not a blue wave, but putting aside any arguments about what could or should have happened historically, etc. The dems are in a better position and have more power than they had yesterday and the republicans are in a worse position and have less power.

14 days ago
1/14/07
Posts: 13218
KavanaughTouchedMyOrcus - Dems also flipped 7 governorships.

This one, specifically, is the biggest 'win' of the night.

Redistricting is coming up in 2020 which shapes races in the House for a decade.
14 days ago
1/13/04
Posts: 9253
KavanaughTouchedMyOrcus - Dems also flipped 7 governorships.

The lower house (House wins for the democrats) means jackshit when compared to the Senate wins (projected) for the Republicans. It looks like the R's picked up 4 additional seats giving them a total of 55. The House led Dem's do have some power but for the "impeach" talk, if they pass an action on this, they would need 2/3's of the Senate to vote yes which won't happen..
14 days ago
1/14/07
Posts: 13219
Graduate1 - 
KavanaughTouchedMyOrcus - Dems also flipped 7 governorships.

The lower house (House wins for the democrats) means jackshit when compared to the Senate wins (projected) for the Republicans. It looks like the R's picked up 4 additional seats giving them a total of 55. The House led Dem's do have some power but for the "impeach" talk, if they pass an action on this, they would need 2/3's of the Senate to vote yes which won't happen..

Wait, what?

For 1, I thought they went from 51 to 54...
For 2, Republicans are going to have a similar issue in the Senate in 2020 that the Dems had last night (its just how the split looks)
For 3, losing the House is pretty big. It means Democrats can pull a Benghazi and spend the next two years completely tearing into Trump's finances/etc regardless if they find anything. Add to that the ability to stall any and everything they want and its a pretty big hit.

Should they go full obstructionist? No. But that didn't stop Republicans during Obama's tenure. Sadly, the rise of team game politics has made it so both sides are completely uninterested in anything being completed in a bipartisan manner. Compromise is seen by the teamers as a loss.

This is our government now.
14 days ago
12/2/05
Posts: 77245

For the reasons you said, no. But the committee shit will be really fun in the house. I like it when the Chambers are split. 

 

The marquee races didn't go their way though like gillum, Beto or abrams. Those were satisfying. 

14 days ago
1/13/04
Posts: 9255
RdotC - 
Graduate1 - 
KavanaughTouchedMyOrcus - Dems also flipped 7 governorships.

The lower house (House wins for the democrats) means jackshit when compared to the Senate wins (projected) for the Republicans. It looks like the R's picked up 4 additional seats giving them a total of 55. The House led Dem's do have some power but for the "impeach" talk, if they pass an action on this, they would need 2/3's of the Senate to vote yes which won't happen..

Wait, what?

For 1, I thought they went from 51 to 54...
For 2, Republicans are going to have a similar issue in the Senate in 2020 that the Dems had last night (its just how the split looks)
For 3, losing the House is pretty big. It means Democrats can pull a Benghazi and spend the next two years completely tearing into Trump's finances/etc regardless if they find anything. Add to that the ability to stall any and everything they want and its a pretty big hit.

Should they go full obstructionist? No. But that didn't stop Republicans during Obama's tenure. Sadly, the rise of team game politics has made it so both sides are completely uninterested in anything being completed in a bipartisan manner. Compromise is seen by the teamers as a loss.

This is our government now.

Agreed that it will be a shit show for the next 2 years with the Dem's running the house - it's just a matter of how much of a shit show it will be. I thought it was 55 but you may be right with the 54 number..
14 days ago
1/14/07
Posts: 13220
Graduate1 - 
RdotC - 
Graduate1 - 
KavanaughTouchedMyOrcus - Dems also flipped 7 governorships.

The lower house (House wins for the democrats) means jackshit when compared to the Senate wins (projected) for the Republicans. It looks like the R's picked up 4 additional seats giving them a total of 55. The House led Dem's do have some power but for the "impeach" talk, if they pass an action on this, they would need 2/3's of the Senate to vote yes which won't happen..

Wait, what?

For 1, I thought they went from 51 to 54...
For 2, Republicans are going to have a similar issue in the Senate in 2020 that the Dems had last night (its just how the split looks)
For 3, losing the House is pretty big. It means Democrats can pull a Benghazi and spend the next two years completely tearing into Trump's finances/etc regardless if they find anything. Add to that the ability to stall any and everything they want and its a pretty big hit.

Should they go full obstructionist? No. But that didn't stop Republicans during Obama's tenure. Sadly, the rise of team game politics has made it so both sides are completely uninterested in anything being completed in a bipartisan manner. Compromise is seen by the teamers as a loss.

This is our government now.

Agreed that it will be a shit show for the next 2 years with the Dem's running the house - it's just a matter of how much of a shit show it will be. I thought it was 55 but you may be right with the 54 number..

I could also be wrong on the 54. That was just the last number I saw.
14 days ago
8/11/12
Posts: 8077

I’m just happy these fucking commercials are over with.

14 days ago
11/10/11
Posts: 2936

Jumping the gun a little NC. Still 14 seats left. Dems projected to win 33-34 seats total. 

I also think the term "blue wave" has been overblown. IMO most midterms are "waves". It's the natural pushback/reaction to the President's win. Now, "tsunami" would imply something special or out of the ordinary. 

As far as the Senate, I don't think many people (including Dems) really expected Dems to take control. If you look at the seats up for election, it just wasn't logical. The seats the Dems lost are all states that voted overwhelmingly for Trump in 2016 (ND, MT, MIZZ, IND). Florida is always a coin flip. Meanwhile, most of the incumbent Rs we're from traditional R strongholds. 

I think this whole argument over the strength of the "wave" is just a way for Rs to try to feel like they didn't get their asses kicked. The D pickups and the closeness of some traditional R blowouts suggests a tough road for the R candidate in 2020. Then again, it's Trump and I don't think traditional rules apply to him in that regard. 

 

14 days ago
1/13/04
Posts: 9257
Funny nobody is talking about Pelosi. I believe some of the Dem's that won last night said they do not support Pelosi and also that 38% of voters disliked her..