The Reps retaking the House in this election would be flying in the face of history. In the 100 years since we have been electing Senators directly, the house has never flipped majorities unless the Senate did first. Never. Not even once. It takes a partisan tidal wave to flip majorities in the House, and that wave always flips the Senate first. As Doug points out, the Dems have a huge structural advantage in this cycle in the Senate. It would take a a “Foley-gate” level of scandal to keep them from increasing their majority in the Senate.

The nastier the left gets trying to prop up Obama, the more likely those seats switch back.

Not rocket science.

Maybe I should have said, “Accomplished something meaningful.” They crafted some legislation that they knew would be vetoed, again, as the stage dressings of political theater.

I’m not saying a Republican takeover would be any better, unless those who are newly elected genuinely learned their lesson from 2006.

Excellent points both, but a GOP takeover could still happen even given historically high incumbent re-election rates. In 2006, the Democrats had a net gain of about 30 seats but, still, 94% of incumbents were re-elected

Theoretically, all the GOP needs to do this year is a net-pick of about 14-16 seats. That would be well-within historic incumbency re-election numbers.

I just don’t think its politically possible.

And that’s just the House where a GOP takeover is improbable, the odds that the GOP could take back the Senate are next-to-impossible.

1. Incumbents. They’re historically hard to beat.
2. Most people — even if they disapprove of Congress on the whole — they tend to say, when true, “my congressman does a good job for me” on Election Day.

Well, the voters saw through it and they have decided it’s not just the Republican bums who need to be thrown out, but all the bums.

It is a good time to be a challenger.