i need to state again that i didn't analyse the polls leading into the election, i was simply expressing some concern surrounding things like voter id laws, based on what i learned in 2016.

and, what happened tonight?

well, it seems like the democrats did find a way to win back some white voters, after all. watching the early results come in, it looked like a replay of 2016, but when the numbers come in, you're going to see that the important swing is amongst whites in the midwest, not amongst blacks or hispanics in the south.

the irony with kobeck losing is that his tactics weren't applicable to his own district, out in cornfield, kansas, where there weren't any duplicate mexican names to purge. oops.

so, understand this: if the plan was to win a lot of seats in the south on the strength of minority voters, as has been broadcasted for the last several cycles, then that appears to have failed, yet again. they may have flipped a few, but just barely - they lost almost all of the seats that they were relying on minority strength to win. the more convincing wins are in the mostly white rust belt, and i guess you'll have to ask the voters there why they flipped back. you'd think these people would be broadly happy with the new trade deal. isn't that why they voted for trump in the first place? and, perhaps you may find that these particular democrats are more likely to back it, whether the voters realized it or not.

so, if one accepts the idea that trump's strength in the region was due to his opposition to nafta (even if he won due to voter suppression tactics - and, yes, there's plenty of documented evidence of this), it may seem like a strange reward to lose the house, when he delivered on something better - but when you realize that a democratic controlled house is more likely to ratify the new agreement than a republican one, it turns the logic on it's head. after all, trump is governing more like a democrat than a republican. and, like i say, who really knows if this is conscious or not.

regardless, it seems like the balance of power in the new democratic house is actually going to be disproportionately white, and operate disproportionately in the interests of rust belt workers, who have demonstrated themselves as the most important swing in the country. so, it's going to be interesting to see how well trump can work with the house - and whether or not he finds it easier to deal with a democratic house than he does with a republican senate.

i went over a lot of this in my analysis of the 2016 election, which i've been sprinkling into the page over the last several months, and i'm now almost caught up with. seems like i may have jumped the gun a little.

fwiw, i don't think that clinton would have picked somebody less conservative than kavanaugh. she is, after all, on the record as supporting a constitutional amendment to restrict abortion rights for essentially her whole life, and very purposefully picked a pro-life running mate to get the point across. those are the facts, here. sorry.