Impact of a Clinton victory in 2016

[bobloblaw]

I don't think you really contradicted anything I said. The Early Boomers were liberal draft dodger hippies, but the later, larger wave of Boomers are much more reactionary. Starting with Nixon, the Boomers voted remarkably Republican for a young generation, and have continued to vote Republican since, much to the detriment of the country, if you look at the presidents they chosen or would have chosen. They're really one of the objectively worst generations we've ever had the misfortune to produce in this nation, so it is no surprise that they vote heavily Republican.

Boomers are the second worst. Their ignorant, narcissistic, self absorbed kids, the millennials are the worst.

[Ebsy]

Well, while the Millenials are struggling with all the problems created by the Boomers, we'll fondly recall the days of global economic panic, brushfire wars, and deficit exploding tax cuts advanced by such luminaries as Ronald Reagan, Bush 41, and Bush 43.

[bobloblaw]

Well, while the Millenials are struggling with all the problems created by the Boomers, we'll fondly recall the days of global economic panic, brushfire wars, and deficit exploding tax cuts advanced by such luminaries as Ronald Reagan, Bush 41, and Bush 43.

The deficit is going to explode under the next president.

But you certainly arent the Greatest Generation are you?

BTW Bush 41 didnt cut taxes. Not once.

[Bojack Horseman]

This will happen:

That's not true at all. If Hillary wins in 2016, 2018 will be an even bigger disaster for the Democrats than 2010 and 2014 combined.

[Ebsy]

This will happen:

That's not true at all. If Hillary wins in 2016, 2018 will be an even bigger disaster for the Democrats than 2010 and 2014 combined.

I don't think that is electorally possible. Sure, Democrats might lose as many Senate seats, but it is hard to see the Republicans winning any more House seats then they are currently holding. It could maybe be worse than 2014, but there is no way it will be worse than the two combined.

[Simfan34]

I expect the Democrats to catch on to the whole "midterm turnout" thing sooner or later.

[YaBoyNY]

I don't think you really contradicted anything I said. The Early Boomers were liberal draft dodger hippies, but the later, larger wave of Boomers are much more reactionary. Starting with Nixon, the Boomers voted remarkably Republican for a young generation, and have continued to vote Republican since, much to the detriment of the country, if you look at the presidents they chosen or would have chosen. They're really one of the objectively worst generations we've ever had the misfortune to produce in this nation, so it is no surprise that they vote heavily Republican.

Boomers are the second worst. Their ignorant, narcissistic, self absorbed kids, the millennials are the worst.

The ignorant, narcisstic, self absorbed kids who work more for less, and are more likely to be college educated than any other generation?

[Skill and Chance]

I expect the Democrats to catch on to the whole "midterm turnout" thing sooner or later.

This. 2018 will be a real "turnout battle" again, I doubt that it is a safe bet that Democratic turnout will be low. Hillary's strategists will do everything they can to drive up minority turnout in key states such as FL, VA, OH, PA and WI.

Well, considering that Hillary's core coalition is more likely to turn out consistently and it's pretty much either Hillary or a Republican in the White House, I have to agree it won't be as bad as 2010/14 for Democrats.  We seem due for a 1998 situation, particularly if there is divided government going in.

[IceSpear]

I expect the Democrats to catch on to the whole "midterm turnout" thing sooner or later.

This. 2018 will be a real "turnout battle" again, I doubt that it is a safe bet that Democratic turnout will be low. Hillary's strategists will do everything they can to drive up minority turnout in key states such as FL, VA, OH, PA and WI.

Well, considering that Hillary's core coalition is more likely to turn out consistently and it's pretty much either Hillary or a Republican in the White House, I have to agree it won't be as bad as 2010/14 for Democrats.  We seem due for a 1998 situation, particularly if there is divided government going in.

A 1998 situation is far more likely for an incumbent Republican president, since their base will always vote. Even if Republicans won the presidency in 2016, I'm not convinced 2018 would be a good Dem year.

[Skill and Chance]

I expect the Democrats to catch on to the whole "midterm turnout" thing sooner or later.

This. 2018 will be a real "turnout battle" again, I doubt that it is a safe bet that Democratic turnout will be low. Hillary's strategists will do everything they can to drive up minority turnout in key states such as FL, VA, OH, PA and WI.

Well, considering that Hillary's core coalition is more likely to turn out consistently and it's pretty much either Hillary or a Republican in the White House, I have to agree it won't be as bad as 2010/14 for Democrats.  We seem due for a 1998 situation, particularly if there is divided government going in.

A 1998 situation is far more likely for an incumbent Republican president, since their base will always vote. Even if Republicans won the presidency in 2016, I'm not convinced 2018 would be a good Dem year.

Explain 2006?  Last gasp of the old Dem coalition?

[Ebsy]

The trampled masses arose and cast out the Republicans in a righteous rage.

[IceSpear]

I expect the Democrats to catch on to the whole "midterm turnout" thing sooner or later.

This. 2018 will be a real "turnout battle" again, I doubt that it is a safe bet that Democratic turnout will be low. Hillary's strategists will do everything they can to drive up minority turnout in key states such as FL, VA, OH, PA and WI.

Well, considering that Hillary's core coalition is more likely to turn out consistently and it's pretty much either Hillary or a Republican in the White House, I have to agree it won't be as bad as 2010/14 for Democrats.  We seem due for a 1998 situation, particularly if there is divided government going in.

A 1998 situation is far more likely for an incumbent Republican president, since their base will always vote. Even if Republicans won the presidency in 2016, I'm not convinced 2018 would be a good Dem year.

Explain 2006?  Last gasp of the old Dem coalition?

In 2006, Dubya was so horrific and unpopular that even a lot of the old white people in the GOP base either stayed home or voted Dem. I suppose that's possible again if the incumbent Republican is similarly disastrous, but I'm not going to bank on it.

[bobloblaw]

This will happen:

That's not true at all. If Hillary wins in 2016, 2018 will be an even bigger disaster for the Democrats than 2010 and 2014 combined.

I wouldnt say combined since the GOP doesnt have that many more competitive seats left to win. But I could see the GOP closing in on 35+ Govs, 250 House members, getting back all the Senate seats they lose in 2016 plus 1 or 2 more. Closing in on 70 state legislative bodies.

Just look at where the GOP was in 1975. That will be the Dems in 2019

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

It seems as though the GOP will be a state short again; as Hillary will win the map with CO 9; with NV, IA, NM, Pa and NH; for 272 electors or with OH 18 electors, for 290 electors.

As Kaine or Julian Castro will be picked as the VP pick.  As Dems will control the Senate once again.  The GOP has punted once again on immigration reform.  They must, along with boarder control, and everify find a way to work Latinos into their voting bloc. Otherwise, the same result will happen in 2020; along with Democrat new governors, control 3 branches again, as Xavier Beracerra as Speaker after reapportionment. Pernament minority.

[bobloblaw]

I expect the Democrats to catch on to the whole "midterm turnout" thing sooner or later.

The whole midterm thing is a myth. And it is based on a preposterous notion, that Dem voters are somehow less civically minded. Ok if that is what the left thinks of their own voters. How about 2006? Their voters didnt turn because they didnt approve of their own party. Also in some state like GA they did turn out in the same proportion as in 2012. It is just everyone turned out less in a midterm.

Look at GOP Senators who run is midterms versus Presidential elections year. They get more votes in the  Presidential election year as well.

[bobloblaw]

It seems as though the GOP will be a state short again; as Hillary will win the map with CO 9; with NV, IA, NM, Pa and NH; for 272 electors or with OH 18 electors, for 290 electors.

As Kaine or Julian Castro will be picked as the VP pick.  As Dems will control the Senate once again.  The GOP has punted once again on immigration reform.  They must, along with boarder control, and everify find a way to work Latinos into their voting bloc. Otherwise, the same result will happen in 2020; along with Democrat new governors, control 3 branches again, as Xavier Beracerra as Speaker after reapportionment. Pernament minority.

Hillary wont win CO, she is horribly unpopular there.
The GOP may lose the Senate but it wont fall under 48.

There wont be new Dem governors in 2020, in fact there will be less in 2020 than in 2014. If Hillary wins in 2016, the Dems will be locked out of the House until 2032.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

It seems as though the GOP will be a state short again; as Hillary will win the map with CO 9; with NV, IA, NM, Pa and NH; for 272 electors or with OH 18 electors, for 290 electors.

As Kaine or Julian Castro will be picked as the VP pick.  As Dems will control the Senate once again.  The GOP has punted once again on immigration reform.  They must, along with boarder control, and everify find a way to work Latinos into their voting bloc. Otherwise, the same result will happen in 2020; along with Democrat new governors, control 3 branches again, as Xavier Beracerra as Speaker after reapportionment. Pernament minority.

Hillary wont win CO, she is horribly unpopular there.
The GOP may lose the Senate but it wont fall under 48.

There wont be new Dem governors in 2020, in fact there will be less in 2020 than in 2014. If Hillary wins in 2016, the Dems will be locked out of the House until 2032.

I fail to see how IL and NM and MI and MD dont fall in 2018, when bulk of GOP govs are term limited.

3 straight landslide midterms are unlikely and we are due for a 1998.

Who cares about the House; with a Dem Prez Hilary; and no filibuster proof GOP majority, in Senate, even if 2018 turns out badly, Dems will have Dems confirmations on Scalia, Kennedy and Ginnsberg, by 2024, on SCOTUS.

I care about winning OH 18 electors anyway, moreso than any other state, because of Clinton wins, Strickland is gonna win.

[OSR stands with Israel]

It seems as though the GOP will be a state short again; as Hillary will win the map with CO 9; with NV, IA, NM, Pa and NH; for 272 electors or with OH 18 electors, for 290 electors.

As Kaine or Julian Castro will be picked as the VP pick.  As Dems will control the Senate once again.  The GOP has punted once again on immigration reform.  They must, along with boarder control, and everify find a way to work Latinos into their voting bloc. Otherwise, the same result will happen in 2020; along with Democrat new governors, control 3 branches again, as Xavier Beracerra as Speaker after reapportionment. Pernament minority.

Hillary wont win CO, she is horribly unpopular there.
The GOP may lose the Senate but it wont fall under 48.

There wont be new Dem governors in 2020, in fact there will be less in 2020 than in 2014. If Hillary wins in 2016, the Dems will be locked out of the House until 2032.

I fail to see how IL and NM and MI and MD dont fall in 2018, when bulk of GOP govs are term limited.

3 straight landslide midterms are unlikely and we are due for a 1998.

Who cares about the House; with a Dem Prez Hilary; and no filibuster proof GOP majority, in Senate, even if 2018 turns out badly, Dems will have Dems confirmations on Scalia, Kennedy and Ginnsberg, by 2024, on SCOTUS.

I care about winning OH 18 electors anyway, moreso than any other state, because of Clinton wins, Strickland is gonna win.

We are not due for a 1998, in the past 100 years there as been 3 times where an incumbant party gained seats in congress(1934, 1998, 2002)

1934: Due to the Great Depression caused by the GOP
1998: Was due to anger of GOP impeaching Clinton who had 70% approval
2002: Due to 9/11

From 1934 to 1998 there was 64 years when we had a situtuion when the incumbant pasty does well in a midterm

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

The Presidency is the most important office in govt; I would rather have it, than Congress. Nixon and Reagan did quite well governing with divided govt, Dems can do same.

[All Along The Watchtower]

I expect the Democrats to catch on to the whole "midterm turnout" thing sooner or later.

The whole midterm thing is a myth. And it is based on a preposterous notion, that Dem voters are somehow less civically minded. Ok if that is what the left thinks of their own voters. How about 2006? Their voters didnt turn because they didnt approve of their own party. Also in some state like GA they did turn out in the same proportion as in 2012. It is just everyone turned out less in a midterm.

Look at GOP Senators who run is midterms versus Presidential elections year. They get more votes in the  Presidential election year as well.

It's more the reality of the Democrats being dependent on working class, poor,  and non-white voters.
These demographics tend to have less formal education and lower incomes than the American population as a whole  - factors which are strongly correlated with lower turnout. They also have less time to pay attention to politics. And they feel (with considerable justification) that neither party really cares about them.

Also keep in mind that presidential elections draw much more media coverage, which filters into everyday conversations. And Americans in general certainly know and care more about who the President is then who controls Congress (or even who their own representatives in Congress are - let alone, all the other Representatives and Senators). The vast majority of Americans aren't political nerds like the members of this forum are.

[bobloblaw]

I expect the Democrats to catch on to the whole "midterm turnout" thing sooner or later.

This. 2018 will be a real "turnout battle" again, I doubt that it is a safe bet that Democratic turnout will be low. Hillary's strategists will do everything they can to drive up minority turnout in key states such as FL, VA, OH, PA and WI.

The Clintons are horrible at driving up turnout.

[bobloblaw]

The Presidency is the most important office in govt; I would rather have it, than Congress. Nixon and Reagan did quite well governing with divided govt, Dems can do same.

Fine. Im the opposite. The SCOTUS cant rule on everything. Ill take the congress and the states. Open Carry, 20 week abortion limits, lower taxes.

[bobloblaw]

I expect the Democrats to catch on to the whole "midterm turnout" thing sooner or later.

This. 2018 will be a real "turnout battle" again, I doubt that it is a safe bet that Democratic turnout will be low. Hillary's strategists will do everything they can to drive up minority turnout in key states such as FL, VA, OH, PA and WI.

Well, considering that Hillary's core coalition is more likely to turn out consistently and it's pretty much either Hillary or a Republican in the White House, I have to agree it won't be as bad as 2010/14 for Democrats.  We seem due for a 1998 situation, particularly if there is divided government going in.

If Hillary's "coalition" includes GOP and Indy leaning women it wont translate into anything for the Dem and will be worse for Her than it was for Obama.

Obama has a much higher floor on his popularity than Hillary does. I can see Hillary falling into the 30s on approval, something that ever happened to Obama at RCP.

[bobloblaw]

It seems as though the GOP will be a state short again; as Hillary will win the map with CO 9; with NV, IA, NM, Pa and NH; for 272 electors or with OH 18 electors, for 290 electors.

As Kaine or Julian Castro will be picked as the VP pick.  As Dems will control the Senate once again.  The GOP has punted once again on immigration reform.  They must, along with boarder control, and everify find a way to work Latinos into their voting bloc. Otherwise, the same result will happen in 2020; along with Democrat new governors, control 3 branches again, as Xavier Beracerra as Speaker after reapportionment. Pernament minority.

Hillary wont win CO, she is horribly unpopular there.
The GOP may lose the Senate but it wont fall under 48.

There wont be new Dem governors in 2020, in fact there will be less in 2020 than in 2014. If Hillary wins in 2016, the Dems will be locked out of the House until 2032.

I fail to see how IL and NM and MI and MD dont fall in 2018, when bulk of GOP govs are term limited.

3 straight landslide midterms are unlikely and we are due for a 1998.

Who cares about the House; with a Dem Prez Hilary; and no filibuster proof GOP majority, in Senate, even if 2018 turns out badly, Dems will have Dems confirmations on Scalia, Kennedy and Ginnsberg, by 2024, on SCOTUS.

I care about winning OH 18 electors anyway, moreso than any other state, because of Clinton wins, Strickland is gonna win.

Youre not "Due" for a 1998 unless the President with a 60% approval rating is impeached. MI will go GOP and Hogan and Rauner can easily hold on in a GOP wave year. Portman will run ahead of Clinton and the GOP Candidate for Pres in OH

[SingingAnalyst]

While it is hard to predict events either before Election 2016 or during Clinton's first term (a major terror attack, economic crisis, etc.), it seems certain that the GOP, if it loses both the PV and the EV in 2016, will fully embrace SSM and abortion rights. It will have to if it doesn't want to appear to anyone under 50 (60? 70?) as the party of the past. It will find other ways to distinguish itself from the Democrats. Green, conservative and libertarian parties will continue to grow in popularity, and the number of communities that use IRV will grow.  I believe Clinton, like her husband, will govern as a centrist.

What seems quite likely, however, is that Clinton will lose the popular vote but still win the election if the GOP wins back FL, OH, and possibly either VA or CO (but not both). In this case the GOP may be energized as the Dems were after 2000 and might not make any platform changes just yet.

Either way, Clinton governs as a centrist.