By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
DarthMetalliCube said:
JWeinCom said:

Eh... if you think a swing of about 30 seats, and likely five or so governorships, is not a big deal, then you probably don't follow politics that closely.  It's kind of a big deal.  People are generally too set in their political parties for any sort of massive change.  Nobody expected Democrats to take like 50 seats cause that just doesn't happen.  Senate losses were expected simply because more democrats were up for reelection.  |

It's not quite the slam dunk that people would have hoped for (democratic people at least) but if you think this result is sweet for republicans, you're deluding yourself.  

Not really, it's the natural swinging of the pendulum. I pretty much expected at least a slight victory for the Dems in the house. The incumbent president's party tends to lose the seats during the mids. Obama lost a lot more in 2010 for the Dems from what I understand, resulting in the largest swing in like 70 years. Repubs had more to lose.

The "sweet" was meant as sarcasm. Though I suppose that doesn't come across so much over the internet..

The popular vote margin was larger than in 2010. But... gerrymandering is doing its job, I guess. That's sort of a big deal, considering the whole Tea Party thing opposed to the disorganized democratic opposition.

Overall, it seems very similar to 2006, when the economy was doing well, but Bush was largely unpopular.