13th November 2018, 11:06 PM
It really wasn't close in the House, it was only "close" because of gerrymandering. It'll probably end up as a 9-point margin wave, with most likely 39 US House seats won. That's the best outcome for the Democrats since Watergate! And without gerrymandering it'd have been even better, because the 2010 Republican wave which won them 60 seats in the House was only a R+6 wave, significantly below this years' in electoral margin. If we can continue fighting gerrymandering, a fight which has had victories in recent years -- see Pennsylvania, where the court ruling getting rid of gerrymandering helped us win four seats there this year in the House -- the result will get closer to where it should be.
Yes, the Dems lost two seats in the Senate, presuming that Scott holds on in Florida as seems likely (not certain, but likely), but given the historically bad Senate map, that's not a bad outcome at all; indeed, that we only lost two overall shows just how good of a year this was for Democrats. In a normal year we'd have lost a lot more than two with a map this terrible.
Of course there's a lot more to do, but the anxiety and worry about politics for the past few years should be significantly reduced now, at least for me... things are actually getting better. Trump lost, and he knows it: http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-na-po...um=twitter
Yes, the Dems lost two seats in the Senate, presuming that Scott holds on in Florida as seems likely (not certain, but likely), but given the historically bad Senate map, that's not a bad outcome at all; indeed, that we only lost two overall shows just how good of a year this was for Democrats. In a normal year we'd have lost a lot more than two with a map this terrible.
Of course there's a lot more to do, but the anxiety and worry about politics for the past few years should be significantly reduced now, at least for me... things are actually getting better. Trump lost, and he knows it: http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-na-po...um=twitter