2014 US Congressional Election Results

[smoltchanov]

Junk election!

Because Democrats are likely to lose a lot of close elections? If so - yes.

[smoltchanov]

^ Ol' Bev Perdue was right. I think we just suspend these elections, preferably until 2016.

May be - cancel midterm elections at all? Who, but Democrats themselves, are to blame if their voters don't care to vote?

[smoltchanov]

Well, we got Maffei by 20 points. That was good enough for me, even if getting Slaughter as well would have been even better... I wonder if Maggie Brooks would have won in a midterm or if the under the radar nature of Assini's campaign was what helped him get so close to such a massive upset.

LOL, I'm fine with conservadems losing D+5 districts by 20 points. A real Democrat will win next time. I'm glad Slaughter survived.

Maffei is anything, but conservadem. Only absolute idiots and loonies may think so. He is a typical "moderate liberal". Bad campaigner and politician in general - yes, bit conservadem - no way. He wasn't Barrow or McIntyre or Matheson, even less - Larry McDonald. They REALLY were conservadems))))

[smoltchanov]

Well, we got Maffei by 20 points. That was good enough for me, even if getting Slaughter as well would have been even better... I wonder if Maggie Brooks would have won in a midterm or if the under the radar nature of Assini's campaign was what helped him get so close to such a massive upset.

LOL, I'm fine with conservadems losing D+5 districts by 20 points. A real Democrat will win next time. I'm glad Slaughter survived.

Maffei is anything, but conservadem. Only absolute idiots and loonies may think so. He is a typical "moderate liberal". Bad campaigner and politician in general - yes, bit conservadem - no way. He wasn't Barrow or McIntyre or Matheson, even less - Larry McDonald. They REALLY were conservadems))))

I think I'll take my idea on who is conservative and liberal from someone who doesn't have his views skewed by his government's absurdity.

And i reserve the right to comment these "your ideas" accordingly to my thinking..

[smoltchanov]

By the way: The BlueDogs were nearly halved (-8/19) - as everytime...

Regretfully - yes. Their districts gradually become too difficult even for them. Left-wing loonies may rejoice:  now they have "real" representatives in these districts - ultra-right Republicans. These loonies make me laugh loudly: for them - the worse - the better! Everything for the sake of "purity" and "principles" (THEIR principles, of course).

[smoltchanov]

So when are going to get the final results (aside from the LA runoffs)? What appears to be the most likely GOP # now...247?

Exactly. Almost universally recognized that it's 244-188 now. With Barber probably losing and 2 almost surely guaranteed Republican seats in Louisiana - 247-188

[smoltchanov]

I can only repeat here what i wrote in another topic:

Hail, Mary!!! To get more then 44%  in conservative Louisiana after being utterly abandoned and thrown under bus by her own party is really something!

[smoltchanov]

^ I was kinda shocked when I saw that LA-03 went more Republican than LA-01.

It really shows how Republican rural whites have gotten. LA-01 is actually the most white, but Landrieu's crossover appeal in the New Orleans metro cancelled that out.

10 years ago, it would have never seemed that CD3 would be more R than CD5.

Well Dems are always going to have a higher floor in the 5th due to the black population.

Yep. Still, given the north's history of being more like the rest of the deep south with Acadiana being more liberal, its interesting.

Acadiana is (AFAIK) more populist economically (though most of this populism is in the past), but deeply socially conservative (Catholic belief?), so now, when Democratic party is substantially more liberal socially, then economically (as in FDR time), that makes lot of sense...

[smoltchanov]

Acadiana is (AFAIK) more populist economically (though most of this populism is in the past), but deeply socially conservative (Catholic belief?), so now, when Democratic party is substantially more liberal socially, then economically (as in FDR time), that makes lot of sense...

The problem, IMO, is that you're not really gonna see that liberal populist streak return as long as the region votes Republican. It really disappoints me that LA seems to be losing its 'uniqueness'; that economic populism is part of what makes (made) LA different.

Yes, voters there are very hung up on social issues. Basically, they now vote the Catholic way on social issues, but not the Catholic was on economic issues as they used to.

Exactly what i wanted to say (though the "Anti-Long" faction of Democratic party wasn't especially liberal on economy either). But Acadiana still sends considerable number of Democrats (usually - not especially liberal, and in some cases - simply conservative) to the legislature. It seems to me - there will be less of them after 2015 elections.

[smoltchanov]

Oh, how I hope the Massachusetts GOP can cross the necessary threshold in the State House so the State House couldn't override a potentially re-elected Charlie Baker's three wonderful gerrymander vetoes. Your smugness would go away, quickly.

Almost impossible. Republicans need to have 14 seats in state Senate or 54 in state House for that. Even after relatively good 2014 they now have 6 and 35.....