With the recent election result we find ourselves back in 2004. We may have a battle royal for the heart and soul of 2020, but now is not the time for casting blame or refighting old battles. For the present, the course is elect more Democrats is the priority over electing better Democrats.
Fighting 2018 from out of power is easier than from in power
Here are the House results of first term mid-term elections for the party controlling the White House:
1946 -54
1954 -18
1962 -4
1970 -12
1978 -15
1982 -26
1990 -8
1994 -54
2002 +8 (because of 9/11/2001)
2010 -63
Also relevant are LBJ 1966 -48 and Bush 2006 -30.
In the past results in state office elections were sometimes different than federal elections, but in recent years the results seem to be more uniform at all levels. Unfortunately, Democrats seem to be more prone to state level defections in bad times than Republicans (see Illinois, Massachusetts). The 2006 election shows that with favorable winds in an out-of-power mid-term, large Democratic victories are very feasible.
2018 Elections — Governors
The road to a Democratic future lies though the 2018 Governor races. We lose those and we are F8cked. The Democratic Party is in the worst shape in the states since before the Great Depression. Two big reasons: Governors can block gerrymanders (outside of Indiana) and Governors can block anti-democratic electoral measures. Outside of Indiana, legislative redistricting occurs through legislation, and Governors have veto power. Thus, normally a hostile legislature must either compromise with the Governor or the legislative plan is vetoed. When the legislative plan is vetoed, the redistricting is done by the courts, both for House districts and for the state assemblies. Thus, winning a gubenatorial election usually brings the electoral process back into balance if you don’t control the legislature and allows you to gerrymander things your way when you do.
Blocking electoral rigging — Democrats pass a terrible electoral vulnerability under the current distribution of governorships and house districts. Adoption of the Maine/Nebraska plan of allocating electoral college votes by Congressional districts would provide an enormous handicap for Democrats under current House districts. Under those districts, Romney would have won. If states like WI, PA, MI, were to adopt such plans, Democrats would likely have to win the Presidential election by more than 5% to carry the electoral college. Right now we control the governorship of PA and we can hope than Republicans are overconfident of Presidential success in the states they currently control.
The economic cycle
The longest positive economic cycle in the US was 10 years. The previous recession ended in June 2009. The chances are good that there will be a recession before 2018 and highly likely before 2020. If Trump actually follows his rhetoric and unilaterally cancels trade treaties, the ensuing trade war would mean a bigly recession. Such is fertile territory for gains.
The bad news — Senate and House
Unlike the Governor’s races, where we can pick up seats on small swings of 2% or so, to win the House with its gerrymandering probably requires a national margin of 8-12%. Not an impossibility if Trump follows through on his rhetoric and causes a trade war or disrupts our economy through mass deportations. The Senate is probably bleaker. It would take a miracle to make gains. Dems have realistic chances of pickups in only Nevada and Arizona; meanwhile they must defendant ND, MT, WV, and Indiana, not to mention Wisconsin and Michigan. It will take a small miracle to hold our number.
Until 2108 we need unity and all the allies we can get. We need the tactics of 2006 — a fifty-state strategy so we can take advantage if the political environment and a concentration on more D’s. We have wedge issues that have broad popularity, such as raising the minimum wage in Republican states. We’re back in 2004, only much worse.