Comments on: President Obama Scores Victory in US House 2014 Election

By: Why Political Pundits are a Waste of Time | Compromise and Conceit

Why Political Pundits are a Waste of Time | Compromise and Conceit — Thu, 13 Nov 2014 04:04:00 +0000

[…] this is normal, and they didn’t do badly at all. This counter-narrative is exemplified by this post I found on Greg Laden’s blog, which is so simple it’s ridiculous. Laden plotted number of seats lost vs. presidential […]

By: Greg Laden

Greg Laden — Tue, 11 Nov 2014 03:16:03 +0000

Well, at least it is not declining!

By: Tim

Tim — Mon, 10 Nov 2014 20:31:48 +0000

That does not look like a ‘hockey stick’, Greg Laden. In fact, it *looks* like a pool cue. I’m not really sure what you’re hiding…

By: Eric Ferguson

Eric Ferguson — Mon, 10 Nov 2014 05:21:45 +0000

The losses in the house were pretty normal for a midterm, and the Senate was always going to require massive Republican failure to be saved. We got spoiled by Republicans failing just as we needed them to in 2010 and 2012, and I like our odds of retaking the Senate in 2016. The disappointment was in governor races. That said, losses by the president’s party in midterms isn’t necessarily inevitable, and they can be less or more. We could have done better. Candidates of the president’s party always run from him, both parties, and it fails every time. But they never learn. The hidden victory for Democrats is that we nearly ran the table in referenda. Even the midterm voters agree more with Democrats on issues, but they don’t know they agree with the Democrats. They actually trust Republicans more on issues where they oppose Republican positions. That’s nothing new, as there have always been a chunk of voters who don’t connect candidates and positions on issue. At least having a majority with us on issues is a place to start rebuilding.

By: Democratic Loss in the Senate Was Not Exceptional or Unexpected – Greg Laden's Blog

Mon, 10 Nov 2014 03:56:11 +0000

[…] I noted earlier that the Democratic losses in the House were less than expected given what usually happens during the midterms. It is harder to make such a statement with the Senate because of the lower numbers, with fewer than a tenth of the total number of elections at stake when compared to the house. But, there is a pattern that makes the loss of a few seats in the Senate not unexpected. As is the case with the House race, the null model — what is expected despite any other political factors — is that this particular year for Senate races would favor Republicans when a Democrat is in office. […]

By: Greg Laden

Greg Laden — Sun, 09 Nov 2014 22:16:28 +0000

Peter: OK, whatever.

Ron, this post is just about the house. The Senate is a potentially different situation, I may post about that later. I haven’t personally taken much of a look at the governorships. State politics and national are not that closely linked. Probably not very interesting.

By: ron

ron — Sun, 09 Nov 2014 21:26:15 +0000

And what about the Senate and the governorships?

By: Peter Smith

Peter Smith — Sun, 09 Nov 2014 21:09:24 +0000

Greg, that’s probably because I’m wearing worn veldskoene in the dusty Kalahari!

By: Greg Laden

Greg Laden — Sun, 09 Nov 2014 20:40:29 +0000

Peter, no, actually, I didn’t say “my side won.” You missed the two points I made her by about five miles each.

By: Peter Smith

Peter Smith — Sun, 09 Nov 2014 20:17:55 +0000

Translated, I got a bloody nose but at least I didn’t lose my teeth, so that was a victory. No, I don’t think so.

There was a victor, and that was the democratic process. It reflected the will of the people, even if you did not like their will.

You define the right outcome as your side winning. I define the right outcome as the one chosen in a fair electoral process.