Putting the Democrats’ Impending Congressional Victory in Historical Context

Let our journalists help you make sense of the noise: Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily newsletter and get a recap of 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?

DOES IT FEEL LIKE POLITICS IS AT A BREAKING POINT?

Headshot of Editor in Chief of Mother Jones, Clara Jeffery

It sure feels that way to me, and here at Mother Jones, we’ve been thinking a lot about what journalism needs to do differently, and how we can have the biggest impact.

We kept coming back to one word: corruption. Democracy and the rule of law being undermined by those with wealth and power for their own gain. So we're launching an ambitious Mother Jones Corruption Project to do deep, time-intensive reporting on systemic corruption, and asking the MoJo community to help crowdfund it.

We aim to hire, build a team, and give them the time and space needed to understand how we got here and how we might get out. We want to dig into the forces and decisions that have allowed massive conflicts of interest, influence peddling, and win-at-all-costs politics to flourish.

It's unlike anything we've done, and we have seed funding to get started, but we're looking to raise $500,000 from readers by July when we'll be making key budgeting decisions—and the more resources we have by then, the deeper we can dig. If our plan sounds good to you, please help kickstart it with a tax-deductible donation today.

Thanks for reading—whether or not you can pitch in today, or ever, I'm glad you're with us.

Signed by Clara Jeffery

Clara Jeffery, Editor-in-Chief

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest