Putting the Democrats’ Impending Congressional Victory in Historical Context

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.


In 2006, the Democrats picked up 30 House seats. This year, they are slated to pick up anywhere from 15 to 30. Those numbers hold some pretty historic potential. Here’s CQ:

The last time a party made a net gain of 15 House seats in consecutive elections was when the Republicans did it in 1978 (15 seat gain) and 1980 (34 seat gain). No party has made a net gain of 20 House seats in consecutive elections since the Republicans accomplished the feat in 1950 (28 seat gain) and 1952 (22 seat gain).

In the Senate, Democrats are poised to pick up anywhere from five to 10 seats. The last time the Senate saw movement like that was 1980, when Republicans picked up 12 seats and Ronald Reagan took the White House. CQ notes that the 19th century saw far more volatility in both chambers, but particularly the House. “It’s less common today to see huge seat swings because of demographic shifts and a surgical precision in redrawing congressional district lines to create politically “safe” seats for both parties.” Can you imagine what next Tuesday would look like if politicians couldn’t gerrymander their way into near lifetime appointments?

We've never been very good at being conservative.

And usually, that serves us well in doing the ambitious, hard-hitting journalism that you turn to Mother Jones for. But it also means we can't afford to come up short when it comes to scratching together the funds it takes to keep our team firing on all cylinders, and the truth is, we finished our budgeting cycle on June 30 about $100,000 short of our online goal.

This is no time to come up short. It's time to fight like hell, as our namesake would tell us to do, for a democracy where minority rule cannot impose an extreme agenda, where facts matter, and where accountability has a chance at the polls and in the press. If you value our reporting and you can right now, please help us dig out of the $100,000 hole we're starting our new budgeting cycle in with an always-needed and always-appreciated donation today.

payment methods

We've never been very good at being conservative.

And usually, that serves us well in doing the ambitious, hard-hitting journalism that you turn to Mother Jones for. But it also means we can't afford to come up short when it comes to scratching together the funds it takes to keep our team firing on all cylinders, and the truth is, we finished our budgeting cycle on June 30 about $100,000 short of our online goal.

This is no time to come up short. It's time to fight like hell, as our namesake would tell us to do, for a democracy where minority rule cannot impose an extreme agenda, where facts matter, and where accountability has a chance at the polls and in the press. If you value our reporting and you can right now, please help us dig out of the $100,000 hole we're starting our new budgeting cycle in with an always-needed and always-appreciated donation today.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate