Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

melm00se

(4,992 posts)
Thu Jul 30, 2020, 08:01 AM Jul 2020

Place your bets - place your bets

As you know, we are coming up to the 2020 elections.

With Trump at the helm of the Republican Party, it does not bode well for the Republicans.

If we look back in history, the single biggest loss by one party in any House of Representative's election was 130 seats (or approximately 36% seats switched sides). This occurred between the 53rd and 54th Congresses (1894).

Scaling to address the change in the number seats in the House of Representatives, that would be a loss of 157 seats.

Will we see an historical switch in the House of Representatives in 2020?

4 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Place your bets - place your bets (Original Post) melm00se Jul 2020 OP
Close but no cigar. Bluethroughu Jul 2020 #1
As to court packing melm00se Jul 2020 #2
+1 Alacritous Crier Jul 2020 #3
I totally understand your argument Bluethroughu Jul 2020 #4

Bluethroughu

(5,168 posts)
1. Close but no cigar.
Thu Jul 30, 2020, 08:12 AM
Jul 2020

There are a lot of dummies and a lot of gerrymandering. As long as we get a super in House and Senate along with White House I will be dancing in the streets.

Then it's time to add seats to the Supreme Court and prosecute these traitors. This isn't politics, this is treason.

melm00se

(4,992 posts)
2. As to court packing
Thu Jul 30, 2020, 08:24 AM
Jul 2020

(which is exactly what you are proposing):

Then it's time to add seats to the Supreme Court and prosecute these traitors. This isn't politics, this is treason.

FDR attempted to do that. His own party rebuffed him and the political fallout to that failed attempt was:

- an 87 seat loss of seats in the House.
- a 20% decline in his approval rating.

That is a fool's errand.

It is better to gain the White House and a majority in the Senate and replace Alito (70) and Thomas (72) when they retire.

Plus, a move like that sets the stage for the opposition party to do exactly the same thing when (not if but when) they regain power. Politics is a game that requires a long term strategy. You cannot look at it from a this year/next year perspective but a 5, 10, 15 year point of view.

Bluethroughu

(5,168 posts)
4. I totally understand your argument
Thu Jul 30, 2020, 09:01 AM
Jul 2020

And the history to look at as precedence.

I'm tired of politics over governance. I understand we all don't get what we want, but one clause in the Constitution that speaks to me louder than any other, "Promote the General Welfare". It says we must do better for the greater good of the majority, which means to innovate and progress as a country.

It is times like today and throughout the history of our country, that the foundational statement has been undermined by policy that creates inequality and division. This political game is getting old, we need a collaborative governance for the majority of people in this country and on this earth.

It's time to build a bright future, and leave the dark money, politics and division in the history books and museums.

I would like to see accountability of these elected officals who've sowen treason, sedition, or just plain negligence into their governance.

It seems as if we fight the same fights throughout history, it's frustrating.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Place your bets - place y...