Name: Why Democrats Weren’t Going To Reverse The Result In Iowa
Brand: fivethirtyeight.com
SKU: fivethirtyeight-com-131
Availability: OnlineOnly

critic

Why Democrats Weren’t Going To Reverse The Result In Iowa

preview

That whoosh you just heard? That was House Democrats breathing a sigh of relief now that Democrat Rita Hart the result in Iowa’s 2nd Congressional District, which she lost to Republican Mariannette Miller-Meeks — one of the in .Democrats at the prospect of having to vote on whether to unseat Miller-Meeks, especially considering how loudly they protested former President Trump and Republicans’ attempts to overturn the 2020 election earlier this year. Additionally, there were concerns it would undermine Democrats’ efforts a massive voting rights and election reform bill. That, along with the Democrats’ narrow majority, suggested it was going to be very challenging for Democrats to reverse the outcome — even if they felt Hart had a valid case.Moreover, Republican messaging had put Democrats on the defensive. For instance, House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy trying to “steal” the election, while Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell major businesses and organizations that were critical of GOP objections to the Electoral College on Jan. 6 to hold Democrats to “the same standard” for contesting the Iowa result.Related:Why Joe Manchin Is So Willing And Able To Block His Party’s GoalsThe Iowa situation was pretty unusual, as contested elections are fairly uncommon nowadays — and reversing election outcomes is even rarer. As the table below shows, contested House elections , especially in the years following the Civil War, when many disputes , according to data compiled by at the University of Southern California. But now the number has tailed off considerably, averaging barely one case every five congresses.YearsCongressesNo. ContestedAvg. Seats/CongressAvg. % contested1789–17981–518904.0%1799–18086–10101281.61809–181811–15141671.71819–182816–2092020.91829–183821–25112301.01839–184826–30362333.11849–185831–35142341.21859–186836–40502054.91869–187841–45752735.51879–188846–50603123.81889–189851–55853474.91899–190856–60343751.81909–191861–65364181.71919–192866–70294351.31929–193871–75304351.41939–194876–80174350.81949–195881–85124350.61959–196886–90154360.71969–197891–95154350.71979–198896–10094350.41989–1998101–10564350.31999–2008106–11084350.42009–2020111–116*44350.2In the past 50 years, the House has voted only once: In 1985, the Democratic-controlled House investigated and recounted the votes in the 1984 election for Indiana’s 8th Congressional District and determined that Democratic Rep. Frank McCloskey after the Republican candidate had led by 418 votes following a state-run recount. The House then to seat McCloskey, .But Democrats had a much larger majority in 1985 than they do today, so they could have afforded 30 or more defections when they voted to seat McCloskey. By comparison, fewer than five Democratic “nays” could have sunk an attempt to seat Hart because Democrats currently hold only a 219-to-211 . And some Democrats — — let it be known to unseat Miller-Meeks.In the end, the math wasn’t there for Democrats to reverse the outcome, and the potential fallout doesn’t seem to have been worth it, either.Geoffrey Skelley is a senior elections analyst at FiveThirtyEight.Filed underYou are now subscribed!Email AddressSign me up

That whoosh you just heard? That was House Democrats breathing a sigh of relief now that Democrat Rita Hart the result in Iowa’s 2nd Congressional District, which she lost to Republican Mariannette Miller-Meeks — one of the in .Democrats at the prospect of having to vote on whether to unseat Miller-Meeks, especially considering how loudly they protested former President Trump and Republicans’ attempts to overturn the 2020 election earlier this year. Additionally, there were concerns it would undermine Democrats’ efforts a massive voting rights and election reform bill. That, along with the...

public

Geoffrey Skelley is an elections analyst at FiveThirtyEight.

https://fivethirtyeight.com/contributors/geoffrey-skelley/

Geoffrey Skelley

Data-driven news and analysis from ABC News’s FiveThirtyEight

fivethirtyeight.com

Credible

Speculation

Anecdotal Evidence

Generalization

Stacking the Deck

Appeal to Authority

Straw Man

Slippery Slope

Emotional Appeal

Red Herring

False Dilemma

Illogical

Moral Equivalency

Ad Hominem

Correlation w/o Causation

Semantics

Begging the Question

Faulty Analogy

Non Sequitur

Bandwagon

Dogmatism

Failing Occam's Razor

Biased

Pure Opinion

Hit Piece

Racial Bias

National Bias

Religious Bias

Financial Incentive

Political Agenda

Gender Bias

Misused Image/Video

Study Misinterpreted

Mistake

Misused Term

Science Misrepresented

Factual Error

Satire

Surface Level

Lack of Reliable Sources

Sensational

Not Credible

Investigative

Balanced

Well Sourced

Great Context

sports

entertainment

U.S.

international

business

technology

science

culture

politics

media

health

Why Democrats Weren’t Going To Reverse The Result In Iowa

No article scores yet.

CRITIC REVIEWS

PUBLIC REVIEWS