LeRouxIsPHat wrote:cormac wrote:LeRouxIsPHat wrote:Yeah I get what you mean, but I was still surprised at the way the senate went. Like I said, maybe that's because of the echo chamber I'm in but for the last few weeks I've seen so many democrat politicians, celebs, journalists etc telling people to get out and vote, my Twitter feed last night seemed to indicate a blue wave at first, and CNN seemed to be expecting that too in the build up, whereas the main thing I saw to counter all that was just what Trump was saying and the high profile visits by his family. Even just the number of absentee votes that were sent in early made me think that the democrats would be in great shape.
To not manage that feels like a big disappointment even if the House did go well, and it sounds like the big huge number of new voters weren't just Democrats who kicked into action but Republicans who were triggered too. Trump did well to manage that to be fair to him.
538 website yesterday morning was giving the Democrats only a 12% chance of winning the Senate, while they were forecasting a 87% chance of them winning the House.
Which doesn't make it surprising, but doesn't change the fact that personally I was surprised and disappointed because of the echo chamber that I've already mentioned twice.
Trump is seriously rattled by the sounds of things, maybe it really is a much bigger victory than I'd thought.
I think there is a lot to digest underneath the numbers. Senate was always going to be impossible to win just down to the luck of which seats were up this year. But the "popular vote" for the senate was very interesting - approx. 55%+ if I remember. What it means is the next Senate elections in two years time will have a lot more Republicans defending seats in more moderate areas.
They also won 7 additional Governor races. Important because the districts will be redrawn after 2020 and holding the Governorship allows significant control over the process. There has been a lot of gerrymandering which caused a lot of issues for Democrats in winning house seats. Likewise a significant shift in state legislature seats which again probably have as much impact in terms of practical measures to drive local politics. The original tea party strategy was to affect national politics by first heavily influencing local politics.
Last point - the house seats won are interesting. Not only did they show a reversal from Trump in the rust belt (which Trump will need to get re-elected), but there was a significant shift in traditionally red states like Texas (well traditional since 1964). The dynamic in areas like Dallas, Houston, Austin etc showed a significant shift in voters. By 2020 there is no guarantee a conservative will be able to win these states - or at least will have a big battle on their hands. So they will end up having to work hard to defend their heartland and also see a loss in support in some of the Midwest which effectively won it for Trump.
Not a "wave" - but a significant shift all the way down the ticket. It's going to be a battle over the next 2 years and now that the house has proper oversight, the battle will be going on with constant investigations happening in public. It'll be pretty nasty I would say
I like your right leg. A lovely leg for the role.
I've got nothing against your right leg.
The trouble is ... neither have you