The Senate race in Nevada is tightening while they're not even bothering to count votes in Arizona. I guess the old image of vote counters toiling through the night has been relegated to the ash bin of history. In any case, the latest numbers have improved the odds of Democrats winning the Senate even without the Georgia runoff.
What really gets me, though, is that the election is so close that even after a day of counting Republicans remain stuck at about 207 seats in the House. The odds are still in their favor, but this is sure the mother of all non-landslides. Instead, it's turned into a historic nailbiter. I guess that nominating a bunch of election-denying nutters didn't work as well as they hoped. Long live the median voter theory.
*Maybe. They're inching toward something not so great, anyway. And in a midterm!
Republicans don't inch toward anything. They slither along on a trail of their own slime, just like garden slugs.
Nice -- this comment wins!
Did Kevin write that headline bleary-eyed, pre-coffee? Republicans are going to win a House majority, though by a much slimmer margin than they had hoped.
Here in Arizona, it is crazy in every way. But I feel relatively good, because blue counties have the most ballots outstanding. Sadly, it looks like Engel will lose here, and I think because the national Dems didn't give any love.
I really hope the Dems get to 50 before the Georgia runoff. Yes, I want the guarantee baked in as soon as possible. And I've been "Republican" in my attitude about judicial appointments -- they're hugely important and worth making a voting priority. The past 2 years of Senate control was vital. (And 2016 was the greatest missed opportunity of my lifetime -- I've wondered if Scalia hadn't died whether Trump would have won; Republicans know when to hold their noses and just vote.) I'm hoping that if it's clearly 50-50 before the runoff, the Republicans get discouraged knowing that Walker's election doesn't matter to them, and the odds of Warnock winning increase.
I also kind of wish Wisconsin Dems had put their progressive dreams on hold, and found someone who would have beaten Ron Johnson. It's why, although I disagree with Manchin on tons of issues, I don't complain about him. It's West Virginia, and you're not getting anyone better no matter how hard you wish, and partly thanks to him there's another 70 or so Democratic appointed Federal judges. That's a big effin deal.
Sinema, on the other hand, I don't get. I think there are enough examples that AZ Democrats can find someone more palatable that still can win.
You are right re Sinema. We will primary her out.
2024 is the perfect opportunity. If it's a weak year for Democrats the Republican is probably going to win that seat anyway. But if not, yes, please give the country a non-flaky, reliable Democrat.
Wildest thing (besides Democrats keeping the House) would be the GOP only controlling it with a 1 or 2 seat margin. That'd be close enough that McCarthy would be living in dread of any GOP House retirements - a single special election could flip control.
If Republicans do manage to eke out a slim majority in the House, the Speaker will have a worse time than Boehner or Ryan did -- the crazies are crazier, and the (maybe) Speaker would have to have every one of the nutjobs on board ...
Yep. GOP would arguably be better off narrowly losing the House than having a conference of 219. Also, as Nate Silver points out, there will be a handful of members from the Greater NYC area, and those reps won't be very reliable on MAGA priorities, because of the difficult reelection bids they'll face in 24.
I always wonder why the few moderate republicans don't put as much pressure as the wackadoodles. Why can't the republicans a have a few joe manchins.