By the numbers:

On the State legislative front, the Republican Party picked up across the country about 600 seats in 2010 as against about 300 in 1994.  Or so I heard on the radio this morning.  As these seats get less media attention and are highly charged to the most motivated voters, this is probably where the “Tea Party” activists (re: standard conservative activists) are most felt.  I suspect that in the coming couple of years, we will hear a lot about kooky things some of these new state legislatures are saying and proposing — it is the “Take over from the School Board on up” pattern of political activism.  See unelecting Iowa Supreme Court Justices — see the Texas Board of Education — see … Curbside Recycling.

 The House of Representatives:
In 1994, the Repulican Party picked up 54 seats in the House.  The House changed from a 259 to 204 Democratic advantage to a 230 to 177 Republican advantage.
In 2010, the Republican Party picked up… we wait to see for sure, but if we figure the candidate currently ahead will win in all seven outstanding races, 64 seats.  The House changed from a 255 to 190 Democratic advantage to a 243 to 192 Republican advantage.

On this score, the down-ticket ballot, the Republicans did better in 2010 than in 1994.  There are likely some nuances that can be looked at — certainly in both instances, the Democrats were wiped out in the South, with the key difference being that 1994 represented a change-over in which party held the majority of seats in the South, while today they represent a small faction.  Vast regional differences are extant, for instance that in 1994 Washington State was “Ground Zero” for the Republican Revolution, the Democratic Party losing 6 House seats in that state that year, switching from a 8 to 1 Democratic advantage to a 7 to 2 Republican advantage.  In 2010, we see a 6 to 3 Democratic advantage to to 5 to 4 Democratic advantage.

Up-ticket, the “Tea Party” “movement” bogged down Republican gains.  On the Senate, we now see Republicans grumbling that it cost the Republicans the Senate. 

The Senate:
In 1994, the Republican Party picked up 8 Senate seats on election night, followed by 2 change-overs after election night, and one Democratic victory later the year in a special election.  The Senate changed from a 56 to 44 Democratic margin, to a 52 to 48 then 54 to 46 then 53 to 47 Republican Margin.
In 2010, the Democrats started lost a special election early in the year, then lost 6 more on Election Night.  The Senate changed from a 59 to 41 Democratic margin to a 53 to 47 Democratic Margin.

Delaware Republicans knew full well that they were switching from a sure winner to a sure loser, and I guess that’s their perogative.  (Oddly, Sarah Palin insists Mike Castle would probably have lost too.  All we can go on is the polls — which showed a steady and sure double digit Castle lead go to a steady and sure double digit O’Donnell deficit.)  I do wonder now if Harry Reid might have beaten Sue Lowden, who is not that far away from Sharron Angle. 
The Democrats would probably be in a somewhat disproportionate-to-one-seat better mood if Pennsylvania or Illinois had gone their way.
Geographically, I can’t figure a drastic difference on how 1994 shapes up against 2010.  It’s worth noting that Harry Woffold’s special election victory came off the issue of pushing for Health Care Reform, and he was up-ended by Rick Santorum.  In 1994, the Republicans who didn’t win seriously contested races included Oliver North and Mitt Romney.

In 1994, 36 governors were up for election.
Heading into the election, there were 21 seats held by Democrats, 14 held by Republicans, and one by an independent. By the end of the elections, 11 seats would be held by Democrats, 24 by Republicans, and one by an independent.

In 2010, While Democrats did take five governorships from the Republicans (California, Connecticut, Hawaii, Minnesota, and Vermont), Republicans took 11 governorships from the Democrats (Iowa, Kansas, Ohio, Oklahoma, Maine, Michigan, New Mexico, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, Wisconsin, and Wyoming).  Add Rhode Island to the Democratic column, and they picked up six governorships from the Republicans.

Note some other differences.  New York switched to Republican hands in 1994 from out of the hands of a Cuomo, where the Republican Party never had a chance, and indeed the nature of the Republican Party electorate (edging out your George Patakis) had them nominating a national joke.  Also note California went Republican in 1994, and Democratic in 2010 — Pete Wilson rode the immigration issue to re-election, a political hot potato which bogged down Meg Whitman (and in the meantime turned the state “blue”.
With all due respect to the Democrats of Wyoming, I doubt the national party is sweating much the change-over in that state.  Meantime, sucks to be Kansas and good luck to Governor Sam Brownback.

The problem for the Democratic Party and Barack Obama’s re-election bid is, of course, the land from Pennsylvania and Ohio and Wisconsin and Iowa.  (Who are now en route to nix high speed rail.)  But Obama is in better shape after this election than was Clinton after 1994, which, come to think of had him psychologically just two presidential elections away from a Democratic Presidential candidate who lost 49 states.

Meantime, the silver lining with Florida’s result is that the state elected a crook, and by the time Obama’s re-election comes in gear, it may be that running for a state with a Republican governor sliding toward Prison is a better bet than running with a middling carefully plodding Democrat.  (Hey.  It’s a thought.)

This entry was posted on Tuesday, November 9th, 2010 at 2:47 pm and is filed under Uncategorized. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.