(THREAD) The GOP winning a few seats in the Senate means MUCH LESS than the Democrats winning control of the House and gaining a number of governorships—a fact that adds up to the midterm elections being a BIG WIN for Democrats. I offer my thoughts on the election in this thread. 
1/ With a number of races yet to be called, it looks like Democrats will gain between 28 and 37 seats in the House and lose 2 to 5 seats in the Senate. Meanwhile, they'll gain between 5 and 7 governorships, some of them critical to their chances in the 2020 presidential election.
2/ The GOP already controls the Senate, with 51 seats—with 53 (or 54, or 55, or 56) seats, very little will change. Why? Because the Republicans are already getting almost every single federal judge confirmation they want, and that's most of what the Senate is good for right now.
3/ The main reasons Dems want the Senate to be a better split for them than—say—55-45 are 1) they want to be close enough to 50-50 to make it possible to take the Senate in 2020, and 2) they want to be close enough to 50-50 to get a few Republicans on their side to win key votes.
4/ But if Democrats control the House—and they do—the chance there'll be close votes in the Senate on legislation is fairly remote. With a divided Congress, only clearly bipartisan legislation is going to pass, anyway (if anything at all). So those extra Senate votes mean little.
5/ In other words, you're unlikely to see a dramatic "McCain crossing the aisle to give a thumbs down to a repeal of Obamacare" moment, because the Democrats in the House wouldn't—with their current majority—ever have allowed such a repeal to get to the Senate in the first place.
6/ But surely, you say, the Democrats being 2 votes from a Senate majority—as they were yesterday—is far better than being 5 votes away? And of *course* it is. But *if* Trump runs in 2020, and because the map will be better for Democrats than it was in 2018, anything is possible.
7/ My point is this: Trump—if he's able to run at all in 2020—will be a deeply wounded animal, because of the Russia investigation. Add to that a much better Senate map and a better Democratic candidate, and I don't think anyone would say gaining five seats in 2020 is impossible.
8/ So while the Republicans can be *pleased* they've extended their majority, it won't change much at all for them *now* and it might not change *anything* for them if they have a bad enough 2020—which is perfectly likely—that they lose control of the Senate in two years anyway.
9/ On the other hand, Democrats now control EVERY HOUSE COMMITTEE and can INVESTIGATE TRUMP LIKE NEVER BEFORE—they can hold whatever hearings they want, subpoena who they want, control every element of a probe into Trump's collusions, unconstitutional actions, and other misdeeds.
10/ Meanwhile, the Democrats flipped governorships in purple states Michigan, Maine, and Wisconsin. Keep in mind that Democrats lost the 2016 election because of 3 states—two of which are Wisconsin and Michigan (the third is Pennsylvania, which Dems won, though it wasn't a flip).
11/ Overall, the Democrats—who had a 33-16 deficit in governorships—picked up a net of 5-7 new gubernatorial positions, which is quite good. It's made even more important by the fact that the Democrats made *major* gains in state legislatures in purple states—including NC and NH.
12/ I'm largely putting aside here ballot measures—e.g. on transgender rights laws, marijuana, and other progressive causes. What I won't put aside is that 1.4 million felons who've finished their sentences will now be able to vote in Florida—which could swing that state in 2020.
13/ The upshot is that yesterday Republicans won an almost entirely symbolic victory—holding the line in a year when the map was as favorable to them in the Senate as it had been for the last 50 years. Trump can crow all he wants about it, but it's largely meaningless long-term.
14/ Long-term, yesterday's results show that states Trump won by double-digits in '16 were decided by 1-3 points in '18: South Dakota's gubernatorial race, say, or Georgia's gubernatorial race, or too many House races in blood-red districts to count. That bodes HORRIBLY for 2020.
15/ I don't doubt for a second that a win is a win: but the largely symbolic GOP win in the Senate masks *massive* losses in support in almost every state Trump won in 2020. Which doesn't just bode ill for Trump in 2020, but *also* for (as I mentioned) the GOP holding the Senate.
16/ We'll look back on tonight as a VERY bad night for Republicans. Frankly, it's only a few high-profile disappointments in Senate races—Beto; Nelson; McCaskill—that gives us, if only momentarily, a vague sense that Republicans did all right.
Spoiler: they did not do all right.
Spoiler: they did not do all right.
17/ That the media set a narrative early in the night—"there's no blue wave"—that it later had to ENTIRELY RETRACT has a sort of negative afterglow to it, i.e. it makes many who went to bed early last night arise today with a false sense that the midterms were essentially a wash.
18/ In fact, Dems knew that if they managed to stay in striking distance of regaining the Senate in 2020—which they did—taking over the House was so much more valuable than anything that happened in the Senate (or any gubernatorial disappointments) such defeats would be eclipsed.
19/ I say all of this even as—at the moment—ongoing ballot-counting in Nevada, Montana and Arizona could lead to the Republicans gaining only two net seats in the Senate, which goes from being a purely symbolic victory to, in practical terms, little more than a blip on the radar.
20/ I was dreading tonight. Like Van Jones, I felt the early returns implied the country was embracing Trumpism. But I go to bed, now, feeling like this was a great night for Dems and that the country—in both Democratic wins and near-misses—showed that it *rejects* Trumpism. /end
PS/ I'd be remiss not to mention the demographics underlying some Dem victories—many of them historic. 100+ women in Congress for the first time, and many LGBTQI+, veteran, young, non-Christian, and non-white candidates won—ushering in a new generation of Democratic politicians.
PS2/ And really I *don't* want to ignore ballot measures—as besides some clunkers (e.g. an anti-abortion amendment in AL), there were key victories in transgender rights (MA), voting rights (MI), and medical marijuana (MO). This underscores that much of the nation is *with* Dems.
PS3/ I should also note that the Democrats won the popular vote in House races by nearly 10%—when a mere 6% win would have been considered a "wave" election. This is the other element (along with much recent policy polling) of my continued belief that the nation *is* center-left.
PS4/ As I was writing this thread, Democrat Jacky Rosen flipped the Senate seat in Nevada, meaning the best Republicans can do is gain 4 seats in the Senate—a very nice haul, but with 45 seats the Democrats would only need 5 seats in 2020 (plus the presidency) to hold the Senate.
PS5/ Florida just slipped into automatic recount territory in the Scott-Nelson Senate race; meanwhile, Tester moved to within .9% of his GOP opponent with 30% of Montana ballots yet to be counted. Arizona's Senate race won't be called until Thursday—and the Dem has a real chance.
NOTE/ I want to give the most up-to-date information here that I possibly can, so I'll say that, as of 3:38AM EST—and per the NEW YORK TIMES—the Democratic popular-vote lead is 7.1% (likely to rise due to California), and the Dems projected seat pick-up in the House is 36 seats.
NOTE2/ And the Democrats just flipped another purple state governorship! The next Governor of the State of Nevada will be a Democrat—a pick-up that (as with those in Michigan and Wisconsin) has *major* implications for the 2020 presidential election, no matter who runs in it.
