MSNBC gloating about Dems winning California by single digits in 2010

[IceSpear]

I thought this was pretty hilarious considering what things are like today. All the MSNBC anchors were gloating about Brown and Boxer winning by single digits in California, lol. It reminds me of all the Republicans gloating about winning Mississippi by single digits, or gloating when they won districts that were like R+204824718 by like 5 points in special elections.

https://youtu.be/WC_YZQqyjlY?t=245

[Woody]

They still do this. Lawrence O'Donnell was bragging about how 2018 was the democrats best midterm in history, simply on the house net gain for the dems. This was worse wave than 2006, considering the fact that republicans held on to the senate and gubernatorial majorities.

[Zaybay]

They still do this. Lawrence O'Donnell was bragging about how 2018 was the democrats best midterm in history, simply on the house net gain for the dems. This was worse wave than 2006, considering the fact that republicans held on to the senate and gubernatorial majorities.

Well, no, it really depends on how you look at it. Do you see the Dems making the largest house gain since Watergate as the main result, then it was the largest Wave, ever, for the Democrats. If you look just at the net loss of two senate seats, then it sounds like a rather below average year(though 2016, an above average year for the GOP also saw a loss of 2 senate seats). If you look at squarely the gubernatorials, then it was a wave, just a rather small one, with the Ds taking 7 governorships. Overall, it was a wave, but its debatable in quality when compared to 2006 and 2008.

[lfromnj]

They still do this. Lawrence O'Donnell was bragging about how 2018 was the democrats best midterm in history, simply on the house net gain for the dems. This was worse wave than 2006, considering the fact that republicans held on to the senate and gubernatorial majorities.

Well, no, it really depends on how you look at it. Do you see the Dems making the largest house gain since Watergate as the main result, then it was the largest Wave, ever, for the Democrats. If you look just at the net loss of two senate seats, then it sounds like a rather below average year(though 2016, an above average year for the GOP also saw a loss of 2 senate seats). If you look at squarely the gubernatorials, then it was a wave, just a rather small one, with the Ds taking 7 governorships. Overall, it was a wave, but its debatable in quality when compared to 2006 and 2008.

net gain is a stupid metric to use.
The house gains were decently and a tad bit above expectations
but republicans had a net loss of 0 among R PVI states
They gained 4 senate seats including florida. Democrats only gained 2 back.
Democrats lost florida governor now making a florida gerrymander possible due to FL SCOTUS. thats atleast 5-6 seats gone in 2022.
They lost GA gov too.

[Thatkat04]

They still do this. Lawrence O'Donnell was bragging about how 2018 was the democrats best midterm in history, simply on the house net gain for the dems. This was worse wave than 2006, considering the fact that republicans held on to the senate and gubernatorial majorities.

Well, no, it really depends on how you look at it. Do you see the Dems making the largest house gain since Watergate as the main result, then it was the largest Wave, ever, for the Democrats. If you look just at the net loss of two senate seats, then it sounds like a rather below average year(though 2016, an above average year for the GOP also saw a loss of 2 senate seats). If you look at squarely the gubernatorials, then it was a wave, just a rather small one, with the Ds taking 7 governorships. Overall, it was a wave, but its debatable in quality when compared to 2006 and 2008.

net gain is a stupid metric to use.
The house gains were decently and a tad bit above expectations
but republicans had a net loss of 0 among R PVI states
They gained 4 senate seats including florida. Democrats only gained 2 back.
Democrats lost florida governor now making a florida gerrymander possible due to FL SCOTUS. thats atleast 5-6 seats gone in 2022.
They lost GA gov too.

Lol what are you talking about.

[lfromnj]

They still do this. Lawrence O'Donnell was bragging about how 2018 was the democrats best midterm in history, simply on the house net gain for the dems. This was worse wave than 2006, considering the fact that republicans held on to the senate and gubernatorial majorities.

Well, no, it really depends on how you look at it. Do you see the Dems making the largest house gain since Watergate as the main result, then it was the largest Wave, ever, for the Democrats. If you look just at the net loss of two senate seats, then it sounds like a rather below average year(though 2016, an above average year for the GOP also saw a loss of 2 senate seats). If you look at squarely the gubernatorials, then it was a wave, just a rather small one, with the Ds taking 7 governorships. Overall, it was a wave, but its debatable in quality when compared to 2006 and 2008.

net gain is a stupid metric to use.
The house gains were decently and a tad bit above expectations
but republicans had a net loss of 0 among R PVI states
They gained 4 senate seats including florida. Democrats only gained 2 back.
Democrats lost florida governor now making a florida gerrymander possible due to FL SCOTUS. thats atleast 5-6 seats gone in 2022.
They lost GA gov too.

Lol what are you talking about.

a 7-20 map is quite easy gerrymander for the Florida GOP
Desantis now gets to appoint new justices who will in effectiveness nullify the fair redistricting amendment. Florida is now under complete republican control with the exception of some random row officer.

Anyway the new Florida SCOTUS is 6-1 conservative instead of 4-3 liberal. when dems sue next decade for fair districts the court will shut em down and it will be something like 8-20 or a 8-21 gerrymander. I guess Stephanie Murphy might survive if she threatens to go statewide if they go for her.

[Zaybay]

They still do this. Lawrence O'Donnell was bragging about how 2018 was the democrats best midterm in history, simply on the house net gain for the dems. This was worse wave than 2006, considering the fact that republicans held on to the senate and gubernatorial majorities.

Well, no, it really depends on how you look at it. Do you see the Dems making the largest house gain since Watergate as the main result, then it was the largest Wave, ever, for the Democrats. If you look just at the net loss of two senate seats, then it sounds like a rather below average year(though 2016, an above average year for the GOP also saw a loss of 2 senate seats). If you look at squarely the gubernatorials, then it was a wave, just a rather small one, with the Ds taking 7 governorships. Overall, it was a wave, but its debatable in quality when compared to 2006 and 2008.

net gain is a stupid metric to use.
The house gains were decently and a tad bit above expectations
but republicans had a net loss of 0 among R PVI states
They gained 4 senate seats including florida. Democrats only gained 2 back.
Democrats lost florida governor now making a florida gerrymander possible due to FL SCOTUS. thats atleast 5-6 seats gone in 2022.
They lost GA gov too.

Yeah, so the Ds have a wave, just not a tsunami. Thats basically what you just summarized.

THe House gains were excellent, especially for what the Ds were up against, such as gerrymandering.

The senate seriously wasnt that bad, a net loss of only 2 seats(which you should use as your metric, BTW, it makes little sense to count it separately) on a map that could have turned out much worse. While FL was a real upset for the Rs, it was the only upset.

The Governor map was great, but could have been better. Ds were able to take KS, and a multitude of other important governorships. The Ds lost out on OH, FL, IA, and GA, which means that Ds did great, but not excellent on that front.

I also dont know what you are smoking to think a loss of 6 seats is possible in FL, the Ds are already clustered as is, and you would seriously have to mess up the state to even cause the Ds to lose 2 seats.

GA-Gov was never favored for the Ds, so I see no point in addressing that.

Seriously, it wasnt that bad a night.

[lfromnj]

They still do this. Lawrence O'Donnell was bragging about how 2018 was the democrats best midterm in history, simply on the house net gain for the dems. This was worse wave than 2006, considering the fact that republicans held on to the senate and gubernatorial majorities.

Well, no, it really depends on how you look at it. Do you see the Dems making the largest house gain since Watergate as the main result, then it was the largest Wave, ever, for the Democrats. If you look just at the net loss of two senate seats, then it sounds like a rather below average year(though 2016, an above average year for the GOP also saw a loss of 2 senate seats). If you look at squarely the gubernatorials, then it was a wave, just a rather small one, with the Ds taking 7 governorships. Overall, it was a wave, but its debatable in quality when compared to 2006 and 2008.

net gain is a stupid metric to use.
The house gains were decently and a tad bit above expectations
but republicans had a net loss of 0 among R PVI states
They gained 4 senate seats including florida. Democrats only gained 2 back.
Democrats lost florida governor now making a florida gerrymander possible due to FL SCOTUS. thats atleast 5-6 seats gone in 2022.
They lost GA gov too.

Yeah, so the Ds have a wave, just not a tsunami. Thats basically what you just summarized.

THe House gains were excellent, especially for what the Ds were up against, especially with gerrymandering.

The senate wasnt that bad, a net loss of only 2 seats(which you should use as your metric, BTW, it makes little sense to count it separately) on a map that could have turned out much worse. While FL was a real upset for the Rs, it was the only upset.

I dont know what you are smoking to think a loss of 6 seats is possible in FL, the Ds are already clustered as is, and you would seriously have to mess up the state to even cause the Ds to lose 2 seats.

GA-Gov was never favored for the Ds, so I see no point in addressing that.

Seriously, it wasnt that bad a night.

gerrymandering was overrated in 2018(Im not denying it hurt dems) but the trump realigment nullified gerrymanders quite heavily such as in Texas and NJ.

[Thatkat04]

They still do this. Lawrence O'Donnell was bragging about how 2018 was the democrats best midterm in history, simply on the house net gain for the dems. This was worse wave than 2006, considering the fact that republicans held on to the senate and gubernatorial majorities.

Well, no, it really depends on how you look at it. Do you see the Dems making the largest house gain since Watergate as the main result, then it was the largest Wave, ever, for the Democrats. If you look just at the net loss of two senate seats, then it sounds like a rather below average year(though 2016, an above average year for the GOP also saw a loss of 2 senate seats). If you look at squarely the gubernatorials, then it was a wave, just a rather small one, with the Ds taking 7 governorships. Overall, it was a wave, but its debatable in quality when compared to 2006 and 2008.

net gain is a stupid metric to use.
The house gains were decently and a tad bit above expectations
but republicans had a net loss of 0 among R PVI states
They gained 4 senate seats including florida. Democrats only gained 2 back.
Democrats lost florida governor now making a florida gerrymander possible due to FL SCOTUS. thats atleast 5-6 seats gone in 2022.
They lost GA gov too.

Lol what are you talking about.

a 7-20 map is quite easy gerrymander for the Florida GOP
Desantis now gets to appoint new justices who will in effectiveness nullify the fair redistricting amendment. Florida is now under complete republican control with the exception of some random row officer.

Anyway the new Florida SCOTUS is 6-1 conservative instead of 4-3 liberal. when dems sue next decade for fair districts the court will shut em down and it will be something like 8-20 or a 8-21 gerrymander. I guess Stephanie Murphy might survive if she threatens to go statewide if they go for her.

A 20-7 map ain't happening. Florida is currently 11D-16R(12-15 come January). At worst, the new districts Florida gets will be drawn in R favorable areas. Gerrymanders happen, they do not happen like that.

[Zaybay]

They still do this. Lawrence O'Donnell was bragging about how 2018 was the democrats best midterm in history, simply on the house net gain for the dems. This was worse wave than 2006, considering the fact that republicans held on to the senate and gubernatorial majorities.

Well, no, it really depends on how you look at it. Do you see the Dems making the largest house gain since Watergate as the main result, then it was the largest Wave, ever, for the Democrats. If you look just at the net loss of two senate seats, then it sounds like a rather below average year(though 2016, an above average year for the GOP also saw a loss of 2 senate seats). If you look at squarely the gubernatorials, then it was a wave, just a rather small one, with the Ds taking 7 governorships. Overall, it was a wave, but its debatable in quality when compared to 2006 and 2008.

net gain is a stupid metric to use.
The house gains were decently and a tad bit above expectations
but republicans had a net loss of 0 among R PVI states
They gained 4 senate seats including florida. Democrats only gained 2 back.
Democrats lost florida governor now making a florida gerrymander possible due to FL SCOTUS. thats atleast 5-6 seats gone in 2022.
They lost GA gov too.

Lol what are you talking about.

a 7-20 map is quite easy gerrymander for the Florida GOP
Desantis now gets to appoint new justices who will in effectiveness nullify the fair redistricting amendment. Florida is now under complete republican control with the exception of some random row officer.

Anyway the new Florida SCOTUS is 6-1 conservative instead of 4-3 liberal. when dems sue next decade for fair districts the court will shut em down and it will be something like 8-20 or a 8-21 gerrymander. I guess Stephanie Murphy might survive if she threatens to go statewide if they go for her.

A 20-7 map ain't happening. Florida is currently 11D-16R(12-15 come January). At worst, the new districts Florida gets will be drawn in R favorable areas and one or two Dems are drawn out. Gerrymanders happen, they do not happen like that.

[lfromnj]

They still do this. Lawrence O'Donnell was bragging about how 2018 was the democrats best midterm in history, simply on the house net gain for the dems. This was worse wave than 2006, considering the fact that republicans held on to the senate and gubernatorial majorities.

Well, no, it really depends on how you look at it. Do you see the Dems making the largest house gain since Watergate as the main result, then it was the largest Wave, ever, for the Democrats. If you look just at the net loss of two senate seats, then it sounds like a rather below average year(though 2016, an above average year for the GOP also saw a loss of 2 senate seats). If you look at squarely the gubernatorials, then it was a wave, just a rather small one, with the Ds taking 7 governorships. Overall, it was a wave, but its debatable in quality when compared to 2006 and 2008.

net gain is a stupid metric to use.
The house gains were decently and a tad bit above expectations
but republicans had a net loss of 0 among R PVI states
They gained 4 senate seats including florida. Democrats only gained 2 back.
Democrats lost florida governor now making a florida gerrymander possible due to FL SCOTUS. thats atleast 5-6 seats gone in 2022.
They lost GA gov too.

Lol what are you talking about.

a 7-20 map is quite easy gerrymander for the Florida GOP
Desantis now gets to appoint new justices who will in effectiveness nullify the fair redistricting amendment. Florida is now under complete republican control with the exception of some random row officer.

Anyway the new Florida SCOTUS is 6-1 conservative instead of 4-3 liberal. when dems sue next decade for fair districts the court will shut em down and it will be something like 8-20 or a 8-21 gerrymander. I guess Stephanie Murphy might survive if she threatens to go statewide if they go for her.

A 20-7 map ain't happening. Florida is currently 11D-16R. At worst, the new districts Florida gets will be drawn in R favorable areas. Gerrymanders happen, they do not happen like that.

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/redistricting-maps/florida/#GOP

Looks ez enough to me for a 18-2-7 gerrymander and htats 538. A 20-7 would be ez to draw atm.
Can you explain why the florida GOP wouldn't go for a 20-7 or anything close to that?

[Virginiá]

net gain is a stupid metric to use.
The house gains were decently and a tad bit above expectations
but republicans had a net loss of 0 among R PVI states
They gained 4 senate seats including florida. Democrats only gained 2 back.
Democrats lost florida governor now making a florida gerrymander possible due to FL SCOTUS. thats atleast 5-6 seats gone in 2022.
They lost GA gov too.

Another way to look at it:

1. Democrats won the same # of Senate seats as 2006, but because they had so many already, couldn't help but lose some. This shouldn't be surprising for those who say incumbency doesn't matter as much anymore and that the playing field is smaller due to polarization.

2. House seat gains surpassed 2006 in both net gain, total seats and popular vote.

3. Gubernatorial elections fell behind 2006 but Democrats also started out further behind.  They didn't win FL or GA in 2006 either, and lost by comfortable or worse margins. Those states are quite inelastic. I do agree wrt to R+ states.

-

It really seems like we're all just making up their own metrics for determining the size or even validity of it being a wave. I still think the House popular vote is one of the better methods of measuring this. >= D+8.2 is very big for the modern, post-Reagan era. Democrats can't really help it if the field has shrunk for them though.

Also, FL isn't worth worrying about right now because it's probably likely some group at least tries to get a restricting commission amendment on the ballot for 2020.

[Zaybay]

They still do this. Lawrence O'Donnell was bragging about how 2018 was the democrats best midterm in history, simply on the house net gain for the dems. This was worse wave than 2006, considering the fact that republicans held on to the senate and gubernatorial majorities.

Well, no, it really depends on how you look at it. Do you see the Dems making the largest house gain since Watergate as the main result, then it was the largest Wave, ever, for the Democrats. If you look just at the net loss of two senate seats, then it sounds like a rather below average year(though 2016, an above average year for the GOP also saw a loss of 2 senate seats). If you look at squarely the gubernatorials, then it was a wave, just a rather small one, with the Ds taking 7 governorships. Overall, it was a wave, but its debatable in quality when compared to 2006 and 2008.

net gain is a stupid metric to use.
The house gains were decently and a tad bit above expectations
but republicans had a net loss of 0 among R PVI states
They gained 4 senate seats including florida. Democrats only gained 2 back.
Democrats lost florida governor now making a florida gerrymander possible due to FL SCOTUS. thats atleast 5-6 seats gone in 2022.
They lost GA gov too.

Lol what are you talking about.

a 7-20 map is quite easy gerrymander for the Florida GOP
Desantis now gets to appoint new justices who will in effectiveness nullify the fair redistricting amendment. Florida is now under complete republican control with the exception of some random row officer.

Anyway the new Florida SCOTUS is 6-1 conservative instead of 4-3 liberal. when dems sue next decade for fair districts the court will shut em down and it will be something like 8-20 or a 8-21 gerrymander. I guess Stephanie Murphy might survive if she threatens to go statewide if they go for her.

A 20-7 map ain't happening. Florida is currently 11D-16R. At worst, the new districts Florida gets will be drawn in R favorable areas. Gerrymanders happen, they do not happen like that.

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/redistricting-maps/florida/#GOP

Looks ez enough to me for a 18-2-7 gerrymander and htats 538. A 20-7 would be ez to draw atm.
Can you explain why the florida GOP wouldn't go for a 20-7 or anything close to that?

I knew this would be your source. The problem? FL law. You need more VRA districts than required by the nation for FL. There will have to be a seat in the North because of this, and many of the Latino seats have to stay because of this.

[lfromnj]

net gain is a stupid metric to use.
The house gains were decently and a tad bit above expectations
but republicans had a net loss of 0 among R PVI states
They gained 4 senate seats including florida. Democrats only gained 2 back.
Democrats lost florida governor now making a florida gerrymander possible due to FL SCOTUS. thats atleast 5-6 seats gone in 2022.
They lost GA gov too.

Another way to look at it:

1. Democrats won the same # of Senate seats as 2006, but because they had so many already, couldn't help but lose some. This shouldn't be surprising for those who say incumbency doesn't matter as much anymore and that the playing field is smaller due to polarization.

2. House seat gains surpassed 2006 in both net gain, total seats and popular vote.

3. Gubernatorial elections fell behind 2006 but Democrats also started out further behind.  They didn't win FL or GA in 2006 either, and lost by comfortable or worse margins. Those states are quite inelastic. I do agree wrt to R+ states.

-

It really seems like we're all just making up their own metrics for determining the size or even validity of it being a wave. I still think the House popular vote is one of the better methods of measuring this. >= D+8.2 is very big for the modern, post-Reagan era. Democrats can't really help it if the field has shrunk for them though.

Also, FL isn't worth worrying about right now because it's probably likely some group at least tries to get a restricting commission amendment on the ballot for 2020.

fl scotus will just strike down the redistricting commision like the PA scotus basically made fair maps(I think the maps were good but the judicial reasoning was weak)

[libertpaulian]

net gain is a stupid metric to use.
The house gains were decently and a tad bit above expectations
but republicans had a net loss of 0 among R PVI states
They gained 4 senate seats including florida. Democrats only gained 2 back.
Democrats lost florida governor now making a florida gerrymander possible due to FL SCOTUS. thats atleast 5-6 seats gone in 2022.
They lost GA gov too.

Another way to look at it:

1. Democrats won the same # of Senate seats as 2006, but because they had so many already, couldn't help but lose some. This shouldn't be surprising for those who say incumbency doesn't matter as much anymore and that the playing field is smaller due to polarization.

2. House seat gains surpassed 2006 in both net gain, total seats and popular vote.

3. Gubernatorial elections fell behind 2006 but Democrats also started out further behind.  They didn't win FL or GA in 2006 either, and lost by comfortable or worse margins. Those states are quite inelastic. I do agree wrt to R+ states.

-

It really seems like we're all just making up their own metrics for determining the size or even validity of it being a wave. I still think the House popular vote is one of the better methods of measuring this. >= D+8.2 is very big for the modern, post-Reagan era. Democrats can't really help it if the field has shrunk for them though.

Also, FL isn't worth worrying about right now because it's probably likely some group at least tries to get a restricting commission amendment on the ballot for 2020.

fl scotus will just strike down the redistricting commision like the PA scotus basically made fair maps(I think the maps were good but the judicial reasoning was weak)

A state supreme court can't strike down a state constitutional amendment unless the suit is made on federal constitutional grounds.

[Gass3268]

net gain is a stupid metric to use.
The house gains were decently and a tad bit above expectations
but republicans had a net loss of 0 among R PVI states
They gained 4 senate seats including florida. Democrats only gained 2 back.
Democrats lost florida governor now making a florida gerrymander possible due to FL SCOTUS. thats atleast 5-6 seats gone in 2022.
They lost GA gov too.

Another way to look at it:

1. Democrats won the same # of Senate seats as 2006, but because they had so many already, couldn't help but lose some. This shouldn't be surprising for those who say incumbency doesn't matter as much anymore and that the playing field is smaller due to polarization.

2. House seat gains surpassed 2006 in both net gain, total seats and popular vote.

3. Gubernatorial elections fell behind 2006 but Democrats also started out further behind.  They didn't win FL or GA in 2006 either, and lost by comfortable or worse margins. Those states are quite inelastic. I do agree wrt to R+ states.

-

It really seems like we're all just making up their own metrics for determining the size or even validity of it being a wave. I still think the House popular vote is one of the better methods of measuring this. >= D+8.2 is very big for the modern, post-Reagan era. Democrats can't really help it if the field has shrunk for them though.

Also, FL isn't worth worrying about right now because it's probably likely some group at least tries to get a restricting commission amendment on the ballot for 2020.

fl scotus will just strike down the redistricting commision like the PA scotus basically made fair maps(I think the maps were good but the judicial reasoning was weak)

A state supreme court can't strike down a state constitutional amendment unless the suit is made on federal constitutional grounds.

The fear is that they won't interpret it to its full intent. The best bet would be to get a Independent Redistricting Commission (similar to say California) on to the ballot in 2020 and hope that you can get 60%.

[Virginiá]

fl scotus will just strike down the redistricting commision like the PA scotus basically made fair maps(I think the maps were good but the judicial reasoning was weak)

No. It would be a constitutional amendment with little room for interpretation (as opposed to current FD amendments). I get being pessimistic with a very conservative court, but there are still limits. I suppose they could try and rule that way but that should remain as something to see to believe.

[lfromnj]

net gain is a stupid metric to use.
The house gains were decently and a tad bit above expectations
but republicans had a net loss of 0 among R PVI states
They gained 4 senate seats including florida. Democrats only gained 2 back.
Democrats lost florida governor now making a florida gerrymander possible due to FL SCOTUS. thats atleast 5-6 seats gone in 2022.
They lost GA gov too.

Another way to look at it:

1. Democrats won the same # of Senate seats as 2006, but because they had so many already, couldn't help but lose some. This shouldn't be surprising for those who say incumbency doesn't matter as much anymore and that the playing field is smaller due to polarization.

2. House seat gains surpassed 2006 in both net gain, total seats and popular vote.

3. Gubernatorial elections fell behind 2006 but Democrats also started out further behind.  They didn't win FL or GA in 2006 either, and lost by comfortable or worse margins. Those states are quite inelastic. I do agree wrt to R+ states.

-

It really seems like we're all just making up their own metrics for determining the size or even validity of it being a wave. I still think the House popular vote is one of the better methods of measuring this. >= D+8.2 is very big for the modern, post-Reagan era. Democrats can't really help it if the field has shrunk for them though.

Also, FL isn't worth worrying about right now because it's probably likely some group at least tries to get a restricting commission amendment on the ballot for 2020.

fl scotus will just strike down the redistricting commision like the PA scotus basically made fair maps(I think the maps were good but the judicial reasoning was weak)

A state supreme court can't strike down a state constitutional amendment unless the suit is made on federal constitutional grounds.

Ok fine I admit that was a little bs but I dont think the redistricitng amendment passes. The Florida GOP will fight tooth and nail to stop it. The michigan commision barely hit 60 with much less opposition. Florida needs 60% for an amendment so losing Florida gov is basically losing 5 house races All it takes is for Trump to say the COMMISION WILL ACKUALLY Gerrymander it for the dems and 40% of the state will go out and vote no on it.

[Zaybay]

net gain is a stupid metric to use.
The house gains were decently and a tad bit above expectations
but republicans had a net loss of 0 among R PVI states
They gained 4 senate seats including florida. Democrats only gained 2 back.
Democrats lost florida governor now making a florida gerrymander possible due to FL SCOTUS. thats atleast 5-6 seats gone in 2022.
They lost GA gov too.

Another way to look at it:

1. Democrats won the same # of Senate seats as 2006, but because they had so many already, couldn't help but lose some. This shouldn't be surprising for those who say incumbency doesn't matter as much anymore and that the playing field is smaller due to polarization.

2. House seat gains surpassed 2006 in both net gain, total seats and popular vote.

3. Gubernatorial elections fell behind 2006 but Democrats also started out further behind.  They didn't win FL or GA in 2006 either, and lost by comfortable or worse margins. Those states are quite inelastic. I do agree wrt to R+ states.

-

It really seems like we're all just making up their own metrics for determining the size or even validity of it being a wave. I still think the House popular vote is one of the better methods of measuring this. >= D+8.2 is very big for the modern, post-Reagan era. Democrats can't really help it if the field has shrunk for them though.

Also, FL isn't worth worrying about right now because it's probably likely some group at least tries to get a restricting commission amendment on the ballot for 2020.

fl scotus will just strike down the redistricting commision like the PA scotus basically made fair maps(I think the maps were good but the judicial reasoning was weak)

A state supreme court can't strike down a state constitutional amendment unless the suit is made on federal constitutional grounds.

Ok fine I admit that was a little bs but I dont think the redistricitng amendment passes. The Florida GOP will fight tooth and nail to stop it. The michigan commision barely hit 60 with much less opposition. Florida needs 60% for an amendment so losing Florida gov is basically losing 5 house races All it takes is for Trump to say the COMMISION WILL ACKUALLY Gerrymander it for the dems and 40% of the state will go out and vote no on it.

Cut it with the hysteria. We wont lose that many seats, its literally impossible to do. We lose 2 at max, nothing to cry over.

[Thatkat04]

net gain is a stupid metric to use.
The house gains were decently and a tad bit above expectations
but republicans had a net loss of 0 among R PVI states
They gained 4 senate seats including florida. Democrats only gained 2 back.
Democrats lost florida governor now making a florida gerrymander possible due to FL SCOTUS. thats atleast 5-6 seats gone in 2022.
They lost GA gov too.

Another way to look at it:

1. Democrats won the same # of Senate seats as 2006, but because they had so many already, couldn't help but lose some. This shouldn't be surprising for those who say incumbency doesn't matter as much anymore and that the playing field is smaller due to polarization.

2. House seat gains surpassed 2006 in both net gain, total seats and popular vote.

3. Gubernatorial elections fell behind 2006 but Democrats also started out further behind.  They didn't win FL or GA in 2006 either, and lost by comfortable or worse margins. Those states are quite inelastic. I do agree wrt to R+ states.

-

It really seems like we're all just making up their own metrics for determining the size or even validity of it being a wave. I still think the House popular vote is one of the better methods of measuring this. >= D+8.2 is very big for the modern, post-Reagan era. Democrats can't really help it if the field has shrunk for them though.

Also, FL isn't worth worrying about right now because it's probably likely some group at least tries to get a restricting commission amendment on the ballot for 2020.

fl scotus will just strike down the redistricting commision like the PA scotus basically made fair maps(I think the maps were good but the judicial reasoning was weak)

A state supreme court can't strike down a state constitutional amendment unless the suit is made on federal constitutional grounds.

Ok fine I admit that was a little bs but I dont think the redistricitng amendment passes. The Florida GOP will fight tooth and nail to stop it. The michigan commision barely hit 60 with much less opposition. Florida needs 60% for an amendment so losing Florida gov is basically losing 5 house races All it takes is for Trump to say the COMMISION WILL ACKUALLY Gerrymander it for the dems and 40% of the state will go out and vote no on it.

Cut it with the hysteria. We wont lose that many seats, its literally impossible to do. We lose 2 at max, nothing to cry over.

I dont think Democrats lose any, I just think Republicans gain the new drawn seats. That's generally what happens in situations like these.

[Zaybay]

net gain is a stupid metric to use.
The house gains were decently and a tad bit above expectations
but republicans had a net loss of 0 among R PVI states
They gained 4 senate seats including florida. Democrats only gained 2 back.
Democrats lost florida governor now making a florida gerrymander possible due to FL SCOTUS. thats atleast 5-6 seats gone in 2022.
They lost GA gov too.

Another way to look at it:

1. Democrats won the same # of Senate seats as 2006, but because they had so many already, couldn't help but lose some. This shouldn't be surprising for those who say incumbency doesn't matter as much anymore and that the playing field is smaller due to polarization.

2. House seat gains surpassed 2006 in both net gain, total seats and popular vote.

3. Gubernatorial elections fell behind 2006 but Democrats also started out further behind.  They didn't win FL or GA in 2006 either, and lost by comfortable or worse margins. Those states are quite inelastic. I do agree wrt to R+ states.

-

It really seems like we're all just making up their own metrics for determining the size or even validity of it being a wave. I still think the House popular vote is one of the better methods of measuring this. >= D+8.2 is very big for the modern, post-Reagan era. Democrats can't really help it if the field has shrunk for them though.

Also, FL isn't worth worrying about right now because it's probably likely some group at least tries to get a restricting commission amendment on the ballot for 2020.

fl scotus will just strike down the redistricting commision like the PA scotus basically made fair maps(I think the maps were good but the judicial reasoning was weak)

A state supreme court can't strike down a state constitutional amendment unless the suit is made on federal constitutional grounds.

Ok fine I admit that was a little bs but I dont think the redistricitng amendment passes. The Florida GOP will fight tooth and nail to stop it. The michigan commision barely hit 60 with much less opposition. Florida needs 60% for an amendment so losing Florida gov is basically losing 5 house races All it takes is for Trump to say the COMMISION WILL ACKUALLY Gerrymander it for the dems and 40% of the state will go out and vote no on it.

Cut it with the hysteria. We wont lose that many seats, its literally impossible to do. We lose 2 at max, nothing to cry over.

I dont think Democrats lose any, I just think Republicans gain the new drawn seats. That's generally what happens in situations like these.

Depends on what they go with. They can take out a maximum of two Democrats, the two being Charlie Chist, and one of the Orlando Dems. The problem with Chist is that his seat is trending D fast, and would create a potential dummymander, and so is the Orlando area. The two new seats will go to the GOP though, there is no doubt about that.

[lfromnj]

net gain is a stupid metric to use.
The house gains were decently and a tad bit above expectations
but republicans had a net loss of 0 among R PVI states
They gained 4 senate seats including florida. Democrats only gained 2 back.
Democrats lost florida governor now making a florida gerrymander possible due to FL SCOTUS. thats atleast 5-6 seats gone in 2022.
They lost GA gov too.

Another way to look at it:

1. Democrats won the same # of Senate seats as 2006, but because they had so many already, couldn't help but lose some. This shouldn't be surprising for those who say incumbency doesn't matter as much anymore and that the playing field is smaller due to polarization.

2. House seat gains surpassed 2006 in both net gain, total seats and popular vote.

3. Gubernatorial elections fell behind 2006 but Democrats also started out further behind.  They didn't win FL or GA in 2006 either, and lost by comfortable or worse margins. Those states are quite inelastic. I do agree wrt to R+ states.

-

It really seems like we're all just making up their own metrics for determining the size or even validity of it being a wave. I still think the House popular vote is one of the better methods of measuring this. >= D+8.2 is very big for the modern, post-Reagan era. Democrats can't really help it if the field has shrunk for them though.

Also, FL isn't worth worrying about right now because it's probably likely some group at least tries to get a restricting commission amendment on the ballot for 2020.

fl scotus will just strike down the redistricting commision like the PA scotus basically made fair maps(I think the maps were good but the judicial reasoning was weak)

A state supreme court can't strike down a state constitutional amendment unless the suit is made on federal constitutional grounds.

Ok fine I admit that was a little bs but I dont think the redistricitng amendment passes. The Florida GOP will fight tooth and nail to stop it. The michigan commision barely hit 60 with much less opposition. Florida needs 60% for an amendment so losing Florida gov is basically losing 5 house races All it takes is for Trump to say the COMMISION WILL ACKUALLY Gerrymander it for the dems and 40% of the state will go out and vote no on it.

Cut it with the hysteria. We wont lose that many seats, its literally impossible to do. We lose 2 at max, nothing to cry over.

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/redistricting-maps/florida/#GOP

This is basically a 19-8 gerrymander. The large purple district seems more competetive then it is. A heavy gerrymander is easy considering that NC had a quite succesful 10-3 gerrymander. and Florida and NC vote quite similarly to each other.

[Zaybay]

net gain is a stupid metric to use.
The house gains were decently and a tad bit above expectations
but republicans had a net loss of 0 among R PVI states
They gained 4 senate seats including florida. Democrats only gained 2 back.
Democrats lost florida governor now making a florida gerrymander possible due to FL SCOTUS. thats atleast 5-6 seats gone in 2022.
They lost GA gov too.

Another way to look at it:

1. Democrats won the same # of Senate seats as 2006, but because they had so many already, couldn't help but lose some. This shouldn't be surprising for those who say incumbency doesn't matter as much anymore and that the playing field is smaller due to polarization.

2. House seat gains surpassed 2006 in both net gain, total seats and popular vote.

3. Gubernatorial elections fell behind 2006 but Democrats also started out further behind.  They didn't win FL or GA in 2006 either, and lost by comfortable or worse margins. Those states are quite inelastic. I do agree wrt to R+ states.

-

It really seems like we're all just making up their own metrics for determining the size or even validity of it being a wave. I still think the House popular vote is one of the better methods of measuring this. >= D+8.2 is very big for the modern, post-Reagan era. Democrats can't really help it if the field has shrunk for them though.

Also, FL isn't worth worrying about right now because it's probably likely some group at least tries to get a restricting commission amendment on the ballot for 2020.

fl scotus will just strike down the redistricting commision like the PA scotus basically made fair maps(I think the maps were good but the judicial reasoning was weak)

A state supreme court can't strike down a state constitutional amendment unless the suit is made on federal constitutional grounds.

Ok fine I admit that was a little bs but I dont think the redistricitng amendment passes. The Florida GOP will fight tooth and nail to stop it. The michigan commision barely hit 60 with much less opposition. Florida needs 60% for an amendment so losing Florida gov is basically losing 5 house races All it takes is for Trump to say the COMMISION WILL ACKUALLY Gerrymander it for the dems and 40% of the state will go out and vote no on it.

Cut it with the hysteria. We wont lose that many seats, its literally impossible to do. We lose 2 at max, nothing to cry over.

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/redistricting-maps/florida/#GOP

This is basically a 19-8 gerrymander. The large purple district seems more competetive then it is. A heavy gerrymander is easy considering that NC had a quite succesful 10-3 gerrymander. and Florida and NC vote quite similarly to each other.

......I literally just told you that this cant actually happen. FL state law demands more VRA districts than required by Federal law. You cant gerrymander Al Lawson out. You cant gerrymander Shalala or Prowell out. You cant gerrymander 2/3 Orlando Dems out.

[Thatkat04]

fl scotus will just strike down the redistricting commision like the PA scotus basically made fair maps(I think the maps were good but the judicial reasoning was weak)

No. It would be a constitutional amendment with little room for interpretation (as opposed to current FD amendments). I get being pessimistic with a very conservative court, but there are still limits. I suppose they could try and rule that way but that should remain as something to see to believe.

I dont think he's being pessimistic, I think he's being optimistic.

[lfromnj]

net gain is a stupid metric to use.
The house gains were decently and a tad bit above expectations
but republicans had a net loss of 0 among R PVI states
They gained 4 senate seats including florida. Democrats only gained 2 back.
Democrats lost florida governor now making a florida gerrymander possible due to FL SCOTUS. thats atleast 5-6 seats gone in 2022.
They lost GA gov too.

Another way to look at it:

1. Democrats won the same # of Senate seats as 2006, but because they had so many already, couldn't help but lose some. This shouldn't be surprising for those who say incumbency doesn't matter as much anymore and that the playing field is smaller due to polarization.

2. House seat gains surpassed 2006 in both net gain, total seats and popular vote.

3. Gubernatorial elections fell behind 2006 but Democrats also started out further behind.  They didn't win FL or GA in 2006 either, and lost by comfortable or worse margins. Those states are quite inelastic. I do agree wrt to R+ states.

-

It really seems like we're all just making up their own metrics for determining the size or even validity of it being a wave. I still think the House popular vote is one of the better methods of measuring this. >= D+8.2 is very big for the modern, post-Reagan era. Democrats can't really help it if the field has shrunk for them though.

Also, FL isn't worth worrying about right now because it's probably likely some group at least tries to get a restricting commission amendment on the ballot for 2020.

fl scotus will just strike down the redistricting commision like the PA scotus basically made fair maps(I think the maps were good but the judicial reasoning was weak)

A state supreme court can't strike down a state constitutional amendment unless the suit is made on federal constitutional grounds.

Ok fine I admit that was a little bs but I dont think the redistricitng amendment passes. The Florida GOP will fight tooth and nail to stop it. The michigan commision barely hit 60 with much less opposition. Florida needs 60% for an amendment so losing Florida gov is basically losing 5 house races All it takes is for Trump to say the COMMISION WILL ACKUALLY Gerrymander it for the dems and 40% of the state will go out and vote no on it.

Cut it with the hysteria. We wont lose that many seats, its literally impossible to do. We lose 2 at max, nothing to cry over.

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/redistricting-maps/florida/#GOP

This is basically a 19-8 gerrymander. The large purple district seems more competetive then it is. A heavy gerrymander is easy considering that NC had a quite succesful 10-3 gerrymander. and Florida and NC vote quite similarly to each other.

......I literally just told you that this cant actually happen. FL state law demands more VRA districts than required by Federal law. You cant gerrymander Al Lawson out. You cant gerrymander Shalala or Prowell out. You cant gerrymander 2/3 Orlando Dems out.

the old map was 20-7 or something like that. They had to remake the map because the LIBERAL florida supreme court voted along partisan lines (besids Crist's appointee who was liberal) 4-3 to make fair maps. Now its 6-1 with 3 conservatives replacing Grahams last justices and only the Crist liberal left.