Detailed Statehouse breakdown We had 0 flips, lost both NH chambers, may lose the now split AK House

[Celerity]

We also BARELY held the MN House (atm around 560 to 570 total votes spread over 4 districts (6A (only a 40 vote margin for the Dem atm), 33B , 38B, and 39B) are all that is keeping the Rethugs from flipping it back (we flipped it in 2018) as well.

The nation is so partisan now. IF the Rethugs take the Alaska House (it is a nightmare to explain, lol, with power sharing Repugs propping up a split coalition with multiple indies as well), then the ONLY State with divided chambers is Minnesota, and 600 votes (atm, there will be multiple recounts) or so the wrong way and the Rethugs would have grabbed that too and then there would be NO states with divided statehouses. New Hampshire and Montana (they won the Governorship) gave the Rethugs their 22nd and 23rd Trifectas (control of Governor, and both Houses), Alaska would be the 24th. We have only 15 Trifectas. Only 11 or 12 (depending on the AK House) States have divided state government. Of those, 7 are divided only because Democratic governors won in Red (and 2 purples, PA and WI) states. Walz in MN would be all that stood in Minnesota's way if the Rethugs had flipped the House back there.

We are so losing the battle at the lower levels of government, and it has upward negative blowback at the federal level as well. We need a far bigger, more sophisticated state-centric level national apparatus to start to claw these statehouses back and to stop the rot of Rethug systemic control they achieve via voter suppression, election fraud, gerrymandering (both statehouse and US House), etc.

This is all likely going to fuck us when the post-2020 Census redistricting goes down, as the Rethugs can gerrymander away again, both at statehouse and US House levels, and may help cost us control of the US House in 2022 or beyond.

Election results, 2020: State legislative chambers that changed party control

https://ballotpedia.org/State_legislative_elections,_2020

Updated November 13, 2020

Eighty-six of 99 state legislative chambers across 44 states held general elections on November 3, 2020. As of November 13, partisan control flipped in two chambers—Republicans gained majorities in the New Hampshire House of Representatives and the New Hampshire State Senate. Majority control of the Alaska House of Representatives remained undecided.

Heading into the 2020 elections, Republicans had majorities in 59 chambers and Democrats had majorities in 39 chambers. In the Alaska House, there was a power-sharing agreement between the parties as part of a coalition.

The National Conference of State Legislatures' Tim Storey and Wendy Underhill wrote, "With just two chamber flips so far, it looks like 2020 will see the least party control changes on Election Day since at least 1944 when only four chambers changed hands. In the 1926 and 1928 elections, only one chamber changed hands."

As a result of the 2020 elections, Republicans have so far gained trifectas—single-party control of the governorship and both state legislative chambers—in two states: New Hampshire and Montana. In New Hampshire, Gov. Chris Sununu (R) won re-election. In Montana, Republicans maintained majorities in both legislative chambers and Greg Gianforte (R) won the gubernatorial race.

snip

[disalitervisum]

1. When the corporatists obtain a three-fifths majority of statehouses

there will be a constitutional convention. And then forget about it.


(edited to include the term three-fifths)

[Celerity]

2. If we lose the AK House now an the MN House in 2020, and flip nothing back, the Rethugs will

have complete legislative control in 31 states, we will have only 19. That would leave them only three states short of the required 34 to call one, unless a Governor can stop it (I do not know if they can veto it, I hope so).

States Likely Could Not Control Constitutional Convention on Balanced Budget Amendment or Other Issues

https://www.cbpp.org/research/states-likely-could-not-control-constitutional-convention-on-balanced-budget-amendment-or

In the coming months, a number of states are likely to consider resolutions that call for a convention to propose amendments to the U.S. Constitution to require a balanced federal budget, and possibly to shrink federal authority in other, often unspecified, ways. Proponents of these resolutions claim that 28 of the 34 states required to call a constitutional convention already have passed such resolutions. State lawmakers considering such resolutions should be sceptical of claims being made by groups promoting the resolutions (such as the American Legislative Exchange Council, or ALEC) that states could control the actions or outcomes of a constitutional convention. A convention likely would be extremely contentious and highly politicized, and its results impossible to predict.

A number of prominent jurists and legal scholars have warned that a constitutional convention could open up the Constitution to radical and harmful changes. For instance, the late Justice Antonin Scalia said in 2014, “I certainly would not want a constitutional convention. Whoa! Who knows what would come out of it?” Similarly, former Chief Justice of the United States Warren Burger wrote in 1988: There is no way to effectively limit or muzzle the actions of a Constitutional Convention. The Convention could make its own rules and set its own agenda. Congress might try to limit the Convention to one amendment or one issue, but there is no way to assure that the Convention would obey. After a Convention is convened, it will be too late to stop the Convention if we don’t like its agenda.

Such serious concerns are justified, for several reasons:

A convention could write its own rules.

The Constitution provides no guidance whatsoever on the ground rules for a convention. This leaves wide open to political considerations and pressures such fundamental questions as how the delegates would be chosen, how many delegates each state would have, and whether a supermajority vote would be required to approve amendments. To illustrate the importance of these issues, consider that if every state had one vote in the convention and the convention could approve amendments with a simple majority vote, the 26 least populous states — which contain less than 18 percent of the nation’s people — could approve an amendment for ratification.

A convention could set its own agenda, possibly influenced by powerful interest groups.

The only constitutional convention in U.S. history, in 1787, went far beyond its mandate. Charged with amending the Articles of Confederation to promote trade among the states, the convention instead wrote an entirely new governing document. A convention held today could set its own agenda, too. There is no guarantee that a convention could be limited to a particular set of issues, such as those related to balancing the federal budget. As a result, powerful, well-funded interest groups would surely seek to influence the process and press for changes to the agenda, seeing a constitutional convention as an opportunity to enact major policy changes. As former Chief Justice Burger wrote, a “Constitutional Convention today would be a free-for-all for special interest groups.” Further, the broad language contained in many of the resolutions that states have passed recently might increase the likelihood of a convention enacting changes that are far more sweeping than many legislators supporting these resolutions envision.

A convention could choose a new ratification process.............

snip

[angrychair]

3. This looks grim

I can't imagine a US with unbridled religious extremists in control. Well, I can but I don't v want to imagine it.

This is doomsday. We are screwed.

[Celerity]

6. yes, a Con Con would probably be a disaster

[Klaralven]

11. It takes 3/4 of the states (38) to ratify the amendments proposed by a constitutional convention.

[RandySF]

4. That's why I'm so fucking depressed about this election

[Celerity]

5. tbh, when they called FL-15 super early on Tuesday night, I knew we were in for a long night

and that we were in big trouble in FL (for POTUS), in the House overall (we may end up at only a very thin 221-214 majority, so only 4 defections and we cannot pass things, as long as the Rethugs hold together), and probably we will not win the Senate (but I still have hope!). I did still have hope for Biden winning (I called all but 2 states correctly before election day, same as 2016, I missed NC and GA this time, FL and MN last time), but I really got depressed when I saw the initial returns for the IA, MT, NC, and ME Senate races.

I do not know if you remember, but I replied to one of your great posts (thanks aging for all the hard work btw) long ago about how FL-15 was the single most important House race, as it was our only hope to take away one of the 26 House delegations from the Rethugs and thus stop them from electing Trump in the event of a 269-269 tie.

That 269-269 tie came SO close to happening. Switch only 45 thousand or so votes TOTAL (atm, need to see the final counts), split between 3 states (GA, AZ, and WI) and it would be Trump winning the POTUS again via a 269-269 tie. The only way to stop that would be for Pelosi to risk instant kinetic civil war, and invoke Article 1, Section 5 powers, and then seat enough Democratic House members and temporarily refuse to seat enough Republicans House members in order to give us 26 (or more) delegations, and then elect Biden.

[BumRushDaShow]

7. Let's temper this with the fact that

different types of elections happen in different years and in 2018, Democrats gained the governorships in 7 states (NV, MI, WI, KS, NM, ME, & IL) and maintained it in 6, many that have GOP legislatures, as well as gaining (D) governors in Guam & US VI.

And here is the kicker and the irony, or perhaps not ironic given the RW-owned media continue with the anti-Democratic narrative while continuing to praise the GOP - Roy Cooper (D-NC) just won re-election, and despite the state going for 45, HE as a DEMOCRAT will be in place when it comes time for redistricting, which will determine what is going to happen for the next 10 years in terms of the makeup of both the state legislatures AND Congress.

[Celerity]

8. there are some Dem governors in place (I mentioned that in my OP) to stem some of the damage

but not nearly enough. If you were playing Post Census Gerrymander, The Game, you would much rather be the Rethugs atm.

AZ, FL, GA, IA, OH, and TX, are all swing or near (in the near future for TX) swing states with Rethug Trifecta control and WI (WI due to supermajorities by the Rethugs in both chambers) might as well be. Plus the Red non swing states still have US House and statehouse districts that will be gerrymandered by the Rethugs.

[BumRushDaShow]

9. Compared to what it looked like in 2010

where here in PA we have suffered immensely from the teabagger scourge and Democrats running away from Obama, we are, IMHO, in MUCH better shape now then we were then, for the next 10 years.

And WI does NOT have a GOP supermajority thankfully. That was thwarted. In 2018 we got rid of ALL GOP supermajorities and so far as I can find, KEPT IT THAT WAY in 2020.

All three Democratic incumbents whom Republicans targeted — Robyn Vining, Beth Meyers and Steve Doyle — defeated their challengers. As of late afternoon, Republicans had won 59 seats compared to the Democrats' 36, with four races still too close to call. Even if Republicans win all four contests, the best they could do would be 63 seats, which would be three shy of the 66 they’d need for a supermajority.

https://www.wbay.com/2020/11/05/wisconsin-democrats-beat-back-gop-supermajority-push/

In 2018, we put our all into taking back the House and gaining seats in our states. This year we HAD HAD HAD TO put almost every bit of energy into getting 45 the hell out of office given that the GOP was going to go all-in with cheating, lying, Russian, dark money, exploitation of social media where the owners of such were lax and late to start policing, reawakened racist scum who had never voted before in the past, and having the media, including much of the mainstream type, shilling for them.

Next year (2021), there will be some gubernatorial races (like VA) and some state races, so now that we got the top of the ticket prize, we can put all our energies into those down-ballot/state-wide AND local races including the Counties.

The states that you mention are "in transition", just like over the years we saw VA, CO, and NV "in transition" and finally flip over, so I am NOT going to wallow in praising the GOP while they hold super-spreader events and slowly kill off their base.

We need to make sure that the populace doesn't just vote "every 4 years" or even "every 2 years".

THERE IS SOME ELECTION THAT HAPPENS EVERY SINGLE YEAR AND THEY NEED TO VOTE IN 2021!

(sorry for the screaming )

[Celerity]

10. Good to hear about Wisconsin, you could make an OP as I was going off a slew of posts that claim

they had them in both chambers, even after this election (more so before it tbf).

[BumRushDaShow]

14. I'm not a big OP creator

but I want to see us NOT continuing with pushing the media narrative that despite the huge win by Biden and what is not being talked about except locally - the seat pickups of a good number of marginalized groups, like LGBTQ candidates running for public office, who had big wins - 9 state legislative seats - in both blue AND red states, somehow "Democrats lost".

[Celerity]

15. it is not just the media unfortunately, many of the centrists are trying to play 'burn the

witch' with some of the more left members over the losses in the Senate races and the House. That feeds the narrative as well.

Biden did have a huge raw popular vote total win (I predicted 7 million pre election day, he may get there), but in terms of the electoral college is was even closer (atm, I am waiting for the final vote tallies) than Rump's 77,000 votes in 3 states victory in 2016.

Shift just 45,000 (again, so far, we shall see what the final numbers are) votes spread out in just 3 states as well (AZ, GA, WI) and Trump wins the POTUS.

[BumRushDaShow]

18. The media is picking and choosing what they push

in order to amplify the "Democratic left vs the Democratic conservative" divide. And rather than look for commonalities that we share, many continue to promote the division by emphasizing the back-biting and whining rather than take note of that we do share as a vision but differ on how to get there.

There will always be valid criticisms regarding party policies but IMHO, the fact that the GOP even had groups like "Never Trumpers" and "The Lincoln Project", who were "divisive groups" related to the GOP - these groups were praised rather than vilified by the media in the manner that differing groups within the Democratic party who "agitate for change", are vilified all around rather than being considered a "feature" rather than a bug when it comes to dealing with a "big tent".

And right now, based on the last update from PA, we are, so far, more than 20,000 votes AHEAD of what Trump got in 2016 (and we are still counting).

Biden is +65,061 in PA in 2020 -

2020 PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION - PA



(from here - https://www.electionreturns.pa.gov/)

versus Trump with +44,292 in PA in 2016 -

2016 PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION - PA



(from here - https://www.electionreturns.pa.gov/General/SummaryResults?ElectionID=54&ElectionType=G&IsActive=0)

We seem to love snatching defeat from victory.

[Celerity]

22. I agree on all, except I never brought up PA. My 45,000 vote swing and Trump (atm) would be POTUS

comes from AZ, WI, and GA.

But great points on the framing.

[BumRushDaShow]

26. But GA was NEVER on the radar for us in 2016 and AZ was a "wish"

but AZ finally got us a breakthrough in 2018 with the election of Sinema, and ultimately in 2020, with their contribution to the electoral college in a win only happening in 2020. We now, after suffering (even from afar) with fucking loons in AZ like this -



and this -



we now have 2 Democratic Senators from Arizona including one whose focus is on gun control!!!!!!!







Once PA was in the pocket, the others like NV, AZ, and GA were just icing on the cake.

This is what I mean by "snatching defeat from victory".

[Celerity]

28. it doesnt matter whether they were expected or not, flip WI, AZ, GA to Trump, he wins

and atm, it would only take a total of 45,000 or so votes to flip all three

Once PA was in the pocket, the others like NV, AZ, and GA were just icing on the cake.

that literally makes no sense

it just doesn't

AZ, GA, and WI were the closest 3 states

they were not icing on the cake, and it doesn't matter what their pre-election status was

Biden could have won PA by 1 million votes and if those 3 went to Trump we would have lost the election for POTUS

that was the entire point about 2016 and MI, PA, and WI

flip 77,000 votes in those 3 states and Clinton wins

[BumRushDaShow]

33. Look at the electoral votes for those states

PA = 20

WI = 10

AZ = 11

GA = 16

NV = 6

And as much angst as was happening with NV, I really don't think it was really contested except that it was taking forever to call. We also picked up electoral votes in both NE and ME vs 2016.

We had a situation where you had the Green Party thrown off the ballot, which was a big issue here in PA back in 2016. The number of votes for Jill Stein here in PA was about 5,000 more than the difference of votes that 45 got vs Clinton here.

So there are a whole lot of dynamics going on this year that is different from 2016. One of the things about the "popular vote" in 2016 vs 2020 is that in 2016, a big chunk of that "excess" apparently came out of CA just due to their population. This year, from what I can see, you have it more spread out.

There is still a lot of counting going on so we will have to wait until the votes are certified before we can make a true judgement call on what is going on.

[Celerity]

36. I never brought up Nevada, and my maths are 100% spot on,

If, (atm, we need to see the final totals to give the exact number) 45,000 votes were flipped in 3 states, then we would have lost WI, GA, and AZ this election, thus we would have lost the POTUS to Trump.

You are going off into the weeds and bringing up non-germane issues to that simple statement. I am not trying to make some grand unified field theory here, just stating simple maths, the same as millions of people did with 77,000 votes and 3 states in 2016.

cheers

[BumRushDaShow]

38. Again, GA and AZ were not really 2016 contenders

The big focus would be on OH, MI, WI, and PA. You have to go back to 2012 to get a better idea of the "changed landscape" that was happening that lead to 2016, particularly when compared to 2008 -



Oddly enough, 2012 was the race where Gallup flubbed it up and ended up permanently ceasing any predictions (other than "issues" ) for Presidential forecasting.

What you are calling "weeds" is "data" that is telling you something about the "shifting electorate". It was something that was (as is often talked about here on DU) what people like Howard Dean zoomed in on back in 2007 with his "50-state strategy" and what the potential might have been. In 2008 you have the ultimate of picking up "swing states" -



And after that, we had a Census and redistricting where the GOP was going to make sure that 2008 wasn't going to happen again.

The 2010 "Citizen's United" ruling kicked it all off and the 2012 election started to reflect that voter-suppression effort brought about with unlimited "dark money" into the GOP campaign coffers. The 2013 SCOTUS ruling that threw out Section 4 (and by requirement, Section 5) of the Voting Rights Act, pretty much sealed the deal, and that also helped to bring about 2016. Nothing has changed since 2010 - YET - other than Biden being forced to go on a fund-raising spree that literally brought in over $700,000,000 in 2 months this past August/September, in order to get the boots on the ground and infrastructure in place to get what we got. That is unprecedented and points to big campaign finance problems that should have been dealt with 10 years ago.

Just this year, even with the pandemic, the Philly Elections Commissioners had breathed a sigh of relief about ONLY "10,000" ballots thrown out due to them missing the secrecy envelope. That is 10,000 lost votes (even if their fears were of "hundreds of thousands being thrown out), so there are factors about the "only 45,000 votes" that may actually have to do with the dynamics of the targeted voter suppression going in our states.

On 10/22/20, my poor Eagles beat the Giants 22 - 21, meaning they were only 2 points away from a loss. But they won anyway and that game went into the "win column". We play them again today in a couple hours. We have no idea how they will do but at the moment, we are still in 1st place in the NFC East.

The same should apply here - we are still in 1st place, keeping in mind that there were hurricane-level headwinds that we were battling to get what we got this year, and we need to dust off our shoulders, and get ready for the next battle.

[OnDoutside]

39. Thanks.

[In It to Win It]

40. IIRC, NC governor has no power over redistricting. He can't veto redistricting maps

[BumRushDaShow]

41. NC is in a similar position as we in PA

with a (D) Governor AND a (D)-majority State Supreme Court, so there are some options available there. That linked article also notes the possibility of cajoling the legislature to get bipartisan legislation through to do add a ballot question asking voters if an amendment to the state Constitution be done to update how they would do the redistricting (similar to what their immediate northern neighbor - VA - did). So that type of legislation, if it did get off the ground, would have a better chance of final passage with a Democratic governor doing the signing!

[moonscape]

42. Chief Justice Beasley is ahead by just 35 votes last I saw,

with some conservative counties still out. Recount inevitable. Does this race affect redistricting in any way? I'm woefully unclear how it works. NC was forced to change some districts before 2020 weren't they?

[uponit7771]

12. We need the polling companies to answer for this, of they see cheating they should say so

[FM123]

13. Very important information here - thanks for breaking it all down for us.

"We are so losing the battle at the lower levels of government, and it has upward negative blowback at the federal level as well."

[My Pet Orangutan]

16. Dump NH from the first primary NOW.

No excuses.

[Celerity]

19. they almost picked Trump in 2016 (2736 votes), barely elected

Hassan (she won by only 1017 votes) and now have went full Rethug at state level. Thank fuck they voted for Biden in bigger numbers (+59,000 so far) this time

Hassan in 2022 worries me, especially if Sununu and/or Ayotte run against her.

The last 'first term Dem POTUS' midterms were in 2010

we lost a net 64 House seats and lost a net 6 Senate seats

2022 US Senate 'in-play' races

At-Risk (even if marginally) Dems

In order of risk

Georgia (IF Warnock wins the runoff with Loeffler)
Nevada Catherine Cortez Masto (Brian Sandoval would be by far the toughest Rethug to beat)
Arizona Mark Kelly (It will not be McSally running against him, lolol)
New Hampshire Maggie Hassan (her two strongest opponents would probably be Former Senator Kelly Ayotte and Governor Sununu)
Vermont Patrick Leahy (IF he retires, the very popular Rethug Governor Phil Scott may prove to be trouble)
Colorado Michael Bennet (I see little chance for him to lose)

[calguy]

17. Democrats have a lot of work to do

Have to learn to use language that appeals to a broader spectrum of voters if they want to see lasting change. When our more liberal members shout about stuff like defunding the police and paying reparations to black people, it just plain scares the crap out of a huge segment of voters we need to really control the government at all levels.

[BumRushDaShow]

20. "shout about stuff like defunding the police and paying reparations to black people"

So ditch all the POC and "their problems" and just go all Michael Moore and aim for all the white folk?

[calguy]

23. I'm not saying ditch all that

What I am saying is learn to to communicate about in such a way that it doesn't scare the shit out of the very voters we need to make it happen. If we can't be disciplined in our messaging then we are doomed to fail.
The only reason we won the White House is because trump was such a terrible president. Down ballot results show that the very left agenda is just not winning enough voters to make it happen.

[BumRushDaShow]

30. If you look at what happened this year, that formed a major SCOTOMA among the media

and many even here on DU, is that the MAJORITY of BLM protests consisted of those who WERE WHITE.

I watched these protests - both nationally and locally, for 7 fucking months, images after images after images of WHITE PEOPLE who were protesting FOR BLM. People in literal almost all-white enclaves, were protesting the treatment of black people at the hands of the cops.

The media's "photojournalists" - both for stills and video, like they normally do to attempt to show an event as "diverse", carefully cherry-picked their shots to show the couple black people at the head of a march and made it seem like there were "hoards of black people in the streets".

The reality? There WEREN'T. I give credit where credit is due.

This year was a WATERSHED. It will take time to move some of those "suburban" and "small town" whites to go full slate to the Democratic party, but then in order to do that, Democrats need to be competitive in or even run in many of these races too.

AND we are still dealing with state seats that were GERRYMANDERED after the 2010 census. These seats will not change until after this year when they start the redistricting process.

At present, there are still far too many state/county/local seats where the GOP runs unopposed. This is where groups like Indivisible came into play in 2018, with teaching people how to run for office and all the details that need to happen in order to do so and a similar push would need to happen, literally in 2021 because those types of races are NOT only in "even" years or the traditional "mid-terms", but they also occur in "off years" as well in some states/localities.

(sorry to shout )

[Celerity]

21. What members went out and campaigned on defund the police and reparations?

[calguy]

24. All it takes is a few statements from a few people

Look at how AOC has become a target for some of the things she's said. The right uses this stuff in ads and slogans to scare voters away from us.

[Celerity]

25. The Rethugs always scream the same dross election after election. Non elected

people are not under some whip hand where we can instantly silence them. AOC and the more left leaning elected members did tremendous heavy lifting in GOTV for Biden, bringing in their bases and energising the younger voters.

[calguy]

27. Until the far left thinking people learn to tone down their rhetoric

It's going to be a hard sell to middle America.

[Celerity]

29. well, perhaps remove the negatives that they are raising their voices about and will not be an issue

people bashing them (sometimes even adopting RW talking points) and trying to ice them out certainly will not get them to vote for us either

[calguy]

31. Can't do that unless they learn how the game is played

Do they want to win or do they want to be right?
Moral victories ain't worth a shit if you lose the vote.

[Celerity]

32. none of us have any control over what non elected citizen protestors do, other than to

work to remove what they are protesting about or find some solution that gets them to come off the boil a bit

if white power coppers keep murdering us PoC, that is not going to go away

global climate change is only going to get worse and worse, so that issue is not going to go away (fossil fuels and related issues like fracking are 3rd rail items in the US atm)

wealth inequality is only going to get worse, and has been turbo charged by COVID-19 (millions of jobs lost to it are not coming back) so that is also going nowhere

healthcare, even if we somehow manage to save the ACA, is only going to become more expensive, more problematic, and now we have zero chance to put into place the Public Option, so it is still going to be a focal point

etc etc etc

[calguy]

35. I share your frustration

I've been voting for fifty years. My own expiration date is approaching and I don't know how many more elections I'll be around for. I've watched how conservatives have slowly but surely taken over the mind of the country. I've seen the mistakes our side has made and I can only share my thoughts.
It's not my future that's at stake.

[Celerity]

37. Thanks for the reply, and I wish you many more elections in the future!

I think it is just going to take generational and demographic change to sort things unfortunately. Hopefully the ties that bind the union can hold it together for that long.

[Snake Plissken]

34. not hard, it will be impossible