For the ‘Dice have no memory’ files: the DSCC argument for 2014.

In a nutshell: Only three Democratic incumbents have lost reelection in the last decade.

…which is interesting, until you remember that the Democrats lost seven Democrat-held Senate races in 2010, and one in 2012.  If you’re wondering how that could be, well, either way you look at it it’s easier to maintain a high incumbent-reelection ratio when you’re sufficiently ruthless about getting weak incumbents out of the door. I don’t criticize the Democrats for that; pruning is what you have to do.  But it does a disservice to your own party’s contributors when you pretend that any election cycle is like any other.  The brutal truth is that this time around the Democrats have a large number of freshman Senators up for re-election who can’t be tossed out; and that their best two pickup states at this time are both long shots.  So you assume defense, going in. And it’s an off-year, which will help the Republicans more.

The Republican party is in a good position, in other words. Not good enough to suit its own partisans, but a deep and abiding pessimism is frankly baked into that particular partisan cake and there’s not much that any of us can do about it.

Moe Lane

5 thoughts on “For the ‘Dice have no memory’ files: the DSCC argument for 2014.”

  1. I’ve been told the last 2 cycles that the R’s would take the Senate. Couldn’t get out of our own way. I’ll believe it when I see it.

    1. Even Nate Silver is thinking it’s even money whether Republicans take the Senate or not, last I heard.

    2. Nobody really thought they could take the Senate in 2010. Too many Dem seats needed to flip.

Comments are closed.