2016 GOP White House victory: blessing in disguise for Dems?

[Progressive]

Would this/could this result in taking back House/Senate?

[Penelope]

Somehow I don't think the GOP holding the Presidency and large majorities in both houses of congress while also controlling most state legislatures would be a good thing for the Democrats or this nation, no.

[Kingpoleon]

No.

The Democrats are unable to recover, even if Hillary wins in 2016.

The GOP's rising stars caused by a fall from the top would be: Potential Speaker Catherine McMorris Rodgers, Potential Senate GOP Leader John Thune, etc. etc. These are all more electable to the public and more appealing to the GOP than Speaker Boehner and Senator McConnell.

Meanwhile, the Democrats have followed Rahm Emanuel's "competitive only" strategy at their cost rather than Howard Dean's fifty-state strategy. Read "Democratic Blues," and you can understand how it is the Democrats appear doomed for the next eight or twelve years. At least Bush didn't have incompetent leaders.

[DrScholl]

Losing is never a good thing. If Republicans got total control, they would make sure they never lost it again and that is a guarantee.

[Attorney General & Senator Dwarven Dragon]

IceSpear explained pretty well why dems shouldn't go for this scenario:

No.

Setting themselves up for an even more GOP senate and congress!

This doesn't even make sense. Do you think it makes more sense for Democrats to throw the presidential election and potentially risk a right-wing majority on SCOTUS, repeal of most legislation passed during the Obama presidency, forfeiting all executive power, etc. for the sake of MAYBE winning Congress in 2018?

How much is hillary going to pass when the GOP supermajority going to come around?

First of all, I highly doubt there will be a GOP "supermajority" (either 66% or 60%) in the House or Senate even after 2018. Secondly, even if there was, it still makes no sense whatsoever to throw a presidential election and hand the GOP a trifecta on a silver platter for a MINIMUM of 2 years. Dems gain nothing in this scenario. There's only two possible Senate pickups for Dems in 2018, even in a massive wave. Assuming they win the presidential election, the GOP probably has 52 seats or more after 2016. So taking back the Senate is likely a nonstarter. The House is gerrymandered to hell, but in a wave Dems could take it back. But it's no sure thing that 2018 would be a Democratic wave even if the incumbent Republican is unpopular, particularly because of turnout issues which plague Democrats in midterms. So the stategery here is apparently to throw a presidential election, hand the GOP all the executive power, let them possibly replace Ginsburg and some of their own justices on the SCOTUS, let them repeal countless pieces of legislation passed since 2009, all for...an outside shot at taking the House? Uh, no thanks on that deal.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

We got that in 2000; it took six years to get back in power. Having Jeb; speaker Boehner and Leader McConnell will give us a 30 yr Scalia Crt.

[bobloblaw]

yes, and vice versa. Hillary wins and by 2020, the Dems will be weaker than anytime since the 1860s

[OSR stands with Israel]

yes, and vice versa. Hillary wins and by 2020, the Dems will be weaker than anytime since the 1860s

1920s was pretty bad for the Dems

[bobloblaw]

yes, and vice versa. Hillary wins and by 2020, the Dems will be weaker than anytime since the 1860s

1920s was pretty bad for the Dems

We are there already.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

yes, and vice versa. Hillary wins and by 2020, the Dems will be weaker than anytime since the 1860s

1920s was pretty bad for the Dems

.

We are there already.

The worst the Dems will do in 2018; is lose 4-5 senate seats; going feom 51 or 50- 46 again; and being at about 195 house seats from 205 in a nightmare 2018 scenario. That isnt 1920.