The silver lining of 2016 is that 2018 is going to be a fantastic year. If Republicans manage to hold on to the Senate, I might even say an argument exists that it was worth it.
Well, may be. But - may be not too. With Republican party running too many right-wing idiots in too many districts (and districts favorable to such idiots (in the South, for example) are mostly represented by similar congressmen already).... And 2018 elections will be at least somewhat "tilted" to North-East (for example - out of 9 North-East states 8 will hold Senate elections and 8 - Gubernatorial in 2018)....
That's true, but there are Democratic Senate incumbents up in North Dakota, Montana, Missouri, Indiana, and West Virginia. Those are all states Trump is favored to win, and with the exception of Manchin in WV all of them won in 2012 through a mixture of bad opponents and presidential turnout; and the landscape in WV has shifted quite a lot from 2012 already, never mind by 2018. Even if Josh Mandel, whom I strongly support, doesn't succeed in his second Senate attempt here in Ohio, Republicans will still win back/significantly expand upon their Senate majority in 2018.
The silver lining of 2016 is that 2018 is going to be a fantastic year. If Republicans manage to hold on to the Senate, I might even say an argument exists that it was worth it.
Luckily if Clinton gets to put a few more liberals on the Supreme Court, gerrymandering will probably be declared unconstitutional.
Luckily that'll undo partisan gerrymanders in Illinois and Maryland. The net helps your party, I agree, but by no more than 10-15 seats; still not enough to take the House without a PV victory of a few points. The Democratic Party has the intractable problem that its areas of strength are both more compact and more intensely Democratic than Republican areas of strength, and therefore narrow Democratic victories will always result in Republican majorities under the system of single-member geographic districts (not as large as in 2012, but still). Remember how the neutral, non-partisan map in Illinois in the 2000s once gave Republicans a majority of the delegation? The only fix for this is either multi-member seats or a proportional system, and neither is achievable without a constitutional amendment.
I also question how easy it'll be and especially how long it'll take for a Clinton SCOTUS appointee to be confirmed, but that's incredibly difficult to discuss without knowing exact Senatorial numbers.
