The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums here.
The Guiding Principles and New Rules document is now in effect.
2018 Congressional/Senate Election Results Thread
enlightenedbum
Registered User regular
Registered User regular
This is a thread to discuss the results of the midterm elections at the federal level. What we know so far:
The Democrats have won a House majority. How large the majority will be we are waiting on a few outstanding races, especially in California. Projections are pickups in the mid to high 30s when we're finished. This means that Nancy Pelosi will be the Speaker (DO NOT DISCUSS THIS), and Democrats will take over the committee chairmanships and have the authority to investigate various aspects of the Trump administration.
In the Senate, the GOP picked up seats in Indiana, Missouri, and North Dakota. Democrats picked up a seat in Nevada. Races in Florida and Arizona are too close to call. Scott is a definite favorite in Florida, Arizona we have no idea because there are an enormous number of votes out there still to count.
In this thread:
Discuss House/Senate results as they come in.
DO NOT discuss Democratic leadership battles, 2016, or 2020.
The Democrats have won a House majority. How large the majority will be we are waiting on a few outstanding races, especially in California. Projections are pickups in the mid to high 30s when we're finished. This means that Nancy Pelosi will be the Speaker (DO NOT DISCUSS THIS), and Democrats will take over the committee chairmanships and have the authority to investigate various aspects of the Trump administration.
In the Senate, the GOP picked up seats in Indiana, Missouri, and North Dakota. Democrats picked up a seat in Nevada. Races in Florida and Arizona are too close to call. Scott is a definite favorite in Florida, Arizona we have no idea because there are an enormous number of votes out there still to count.
In this thread:
Discuss House/Senate results as they come in.
DO NOT discuss Democratic leadership battles, 2016, or 2020.
The idea that your vote is a moral statement about you or who you vote for is some backwards ass libertarian nonsense. Your vote is about society. Vote to protect the vulnerable.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Posts
Well done, duders
The Monster Baru Cormorant - Seth Dickinson
Steam: Korvalain
~232-203. That's 538's current projection, I think.
The Monster Baru Cormorant - Seth Dickinson
Steam: Korvalain
GOP would have to flip 15 to win the House back if that number holds. Not that hard to do.
At the same time, this is with a heavily gerrymandered map. Dem's won the popular vote by, what, 54%-45%. With hopefully better maps in future elections due to court cases and changes in election law enacted now, that makes the lift less difficult.
All those governorships we won were massively important for 2020 redistricting, especially states like Wisconsin and Michigan and Kansas and Maine
PSN/Steam/NNID: SyphonBlue | BNet: SyphonBlue#1126
Short of incumbent advantage, there's really no such thing as a buffer in the house. Since everything goes up every two years, it's super susceptible to changes in mood.
A lead in the house right now means we have a lead in the house right now, nothing more.
Maine only has 2 congressional districts, and that might shrink to at large after 2020.
Regardless, though, there were so many headwinds for this election and Democrats still came out on top. And with a sufficient margin to be a real working majority. The wave election of 2010 was in part the result of the Recession literally only bottoming out that year after 4 full quarters of contraction. Unemployment was at 10%. &c. This is the result, even with a gerrymandered House, with the economy in pretty great shape, and without the protection of the Voting Rights Act. Good work everyone.
Cause it was!
pleasepaypreacher.net
Oh so you guys have a Steve Lonegan of your own?
Come Overwatch with meeeee
Yeah Dino has failed to be a senator twice and now failed to represent a house district. I mean even when the states media was trying to give him the nudge he still fucking lost in a GOP district. He sucks, but I do love seeing him lose.
pleasepaypreacher.net
Hey, don't sell Dino short - he also lost as the GOP gubernatorial candidate in 2004 & 2008.
Oh god I forgot about those runs. As did the electorate.
pleasepaypreacher.net
And yet he's also served multiple years in the State Senate because he's the go-to for Appointed Replacements for the GOP.
twitch.tv/Taramoor
@TaramoorPlays
Taramoor on Youtube
Who the fuck is this guy and who is he blowing that this is all the case?
There is no popular vote!!
There’s not one for president, either, but it’s an interesting bellwether for how the country feels vs. how it’s represented
Sure there is. It's not legally significant, but it is indicative of the national mood. Combining the vote for the Senate races is substantially less meaningful, I will grant.
Of course there's not. But conservatives should think long and hard about what it means for the founding assumptions of democracy when most people are ruled by a party they did not select. You might say "well you got to select your Senator" or whatever but I never got to vote on McConnell and he has far more control over my life than either of my Senators.
Minority rule won't hold forever.
I don't think that's true in some important ways. I'm not sure how much in the scope of the thread it is to discuss, but I think generally speaking, "The Popular Vote" has some coded beliefs packed into it that are imo bad for the country, as well as being bad for understanding this (or any) election.
Saying "well, 55% of people voted for some Democrat" is interesting in some demographic ways, but to go further and say "therefore 55% of the House should be Democratic" is both uninteresting and incorrect, and to go further and say "... and because it's not, this list of bad things is true" is actually bad for winning elections.
Patricia is the NY Times FL bureau chief.
Beto had 495,000 votes for him from people who also voted for Greg Abbot for Governor in Texas.
That's around 13% of the voters in Texas, split between a guy who advocated for a Medicare expansion and a guy who refused to do it multiple times, a charismatic progressive who advocated impeaching the President and a grumpy rightwing conservative Trump supporter.
These two dudes could not be less alike, but a half a million people thought they should both be in office. I'm not really sure what that says about Texas politics, but I think it's pretty interesting.
Truely, telling Ted Cruz to fuck off is a thing that unites many on the left and right.
It wasn't a Democrat that termed him "Lucifer in the flesh"
I think it says the Texas Democratic Party needs to find some better people to run for Governor
PSN/Steam/NNID: SyphonBlue | BNet: SyphonBlue#1126
Where are you getting this number from? I'm interested in seeing voter participation numbers.
steam | Dokkan: 868846562
Google really: AP reports the vote total for Cruz / Beto was 4,241,980 to 4,019,058
Abbott vs Valdez was 4,636,029 to 3,524191
That's a pretty crushing victory for Abbott, just as an aside. Lupe Valdez was really bad at campaigning.
Change the nouns around and this explains a couple million Obama votes in 2008.
We saw this in wisconsin. The votes for tammy baldwin our senator were higher than for evers for governor. So apparently there was a fair amount of split ticket scott walker/tammy baldwin voters which just blows my mind.
Even for low info voters if they just go by the main stuff you see on TV its really hard to figure how anybody who would vote for walker would want anything to do with baldwin or visa versa.
I disagree with Thomas Jefferson about a lot of things, but the just power of the State being derived from the consent of the governed isn't one of them. But that's for another thread.
For this thread, the demographic fact of Democrats managing to get a lot of voter support in areas whose lines may look rather different soon bodes much better than Republicans continuing to not have as broad support among voters. Better to rely on people than electoral geography, since eelctoral geography is not nearly as permanent as the mountains.