Skip to main content

View Diary: Could the 2008 Election be Like the 1932 Election? (Part 3) (321 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  They Gerrymandered a Lot of Their Members... (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Asak, Harkov311, gloryous1

    ...in to seats that in the late 90's through about 2004 were 52% to 57% Republican performance.  If you get a change in the partisan "water table" a lot of seats that looked too high to reach the summit become reachable, because while in the past the Dem would have to perform 6 or 8 or 10 points better than the average Dem performance to win, in many of those seats the Dem challenger can perform worse than the baseline Dem percentage.  A lot of seats that weren't competitive 4 years ago are likely to be Dem-leaning battleground in 2008.  That's where the current Dem advantages in candidate recruitment and the astronomical cash advantages combine with the Repub retirements to possibly allow us to do major, major damage.

    The revolution will not be televised, but we'll analyze it to death at The Next Hurrah.

    by Dana Houle on Sun Dec 16, 2007 at 04:31:59 PM PST

    [ Parent ]

    •  The Envelope Please? (0+ / 0-)

      They Gerrymandered a Lot of Their Members

      Would you please give us some examples so that we might look at the electoral histories?  How many seats is "a lot"?

      •  Only a Moron Would Put a Number on It Right Now (0+ / 0-)

        We don't know who's going to retire, for one thing.

        I'm not foolish enough to put any number on it over 10 months from the election when we don't even know who will be at the top of the ticket.  

        The revolution will not be televised, but we'll analyze it to death at The Next Hurrah.

        by Dana Houle on Sun Dec 16, 2007 at 04:58:00 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  But If It's a Huge Trend - (0+ / 0-)

          I'm curious to see the possibilities.
          How many seats constitutes a landslide in 1932 terms?  
          Ballpark, not specific.

          If 1932 involved 100 seats, 50 seats might be an acceptable definition.  I doubt many people would find 20 seats comparable to 1932.  Are there 50 seats out there that are possible/likely to switch to the Dems?

          The reality is that these seats have incumbents sitting in them - D and R.  Incumbents have a 95% reelection rate.  There are long-term voting patterns in districts.  So, I'd like to see 50 GOP seats that have a chance of switching parties.

          PS - And that does not include holding on to seats the Dems won in 2006 that are in tough districts.  The greatest likelihood for a seat switching is in the first reelection cycle.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

  • Recommended (148)
  • Community (70)
  • Memorial Day (29)
  • Civil Rights (27)
  • Elections (27)
  • Culture (26)
  • Environment (26)
  • Media (26)
  • Science (24)
  • Law (24)
  • Trans-Pacific Partnership (23)
  • Labor (22)
  • Economy (20)
  • Josh Duggar (20)
  • Rescued (20)
  • Marriage Equality (18)
  • Republicans (18)
  • Ireland (17)
  • Education (17)
  • Climate Change (17)
  • Click here for the mobile view of the site