139 out of 139... Why is this not news?

[Dale Cooper]

Originally Posted by afoigrokerkok

Most of them bring home the bacon and, thus, will continue to win most of the time - even in primaries.

That's not why they win. They win on name recognition.

[katzpaw]

Originally Posted by odanny

Yes, it is disturbing, and it is the result of gerrymandering. Something needs to be done to quit carving districts into either blue or red.

These were primaries. Gerrymandering would have little or no impact. Of more importance was the Republican party spending much money and effort to thwart Tea Party challengers.

[dsjj251]

Originally Posted by Listennow32

So apparently I've been hearing that out of the 139 primary races that we had across the country, not one incumbent was unseated. Despite having historically low congressional approval ratings. This is ludicrous! I find it really odd however, that I can only find information about this on various blogs and offbeat newspapers.. Does anyone else find this disturbing?

No. I see a couple of people have made claims, but it is as simple as most people hate congress as a whole or the other party, NOT their own congressmen.

In 2008 only 23 incumbents lost(not counting open seats where the incumbent resigned/died/appointed to other position)

in 2010 only it was 56

in 2012 it was 53


But you need to remember, those numbers are based on Both the primary and the general election, not a single general election contest has taken place, we arent even done with the run off, heck we arent even done with the primaries. only 139 out of 435.

So come November, we could be talking about just as many being gone as previous years.

[dsjj251]

Originally Posted by katzpaw

These were primaries. Gerrymandering would have little or no impact. Of more importance was the Republican party spending much money and effort to thwart Tea Party challengers.

Gerrymandering does matter. A +90 Republican district is going to have different candidates than a +5 Republican district.

[LoveToRow]

Ralph Hall lost in Texas, the first incumbent to go down in 2014. The winner, John Ratcliffe, does not have a Democrat opponent in the general.

Hall was the oldest member of the House, ever, at age 91.

So now it's 139 out of 140?

[BentBow]

Originally Posted by Listennow32

So apparently I've been hearing that out of the 139 primary races that we had across the country, not one incumbent was unseated. Despite having historically low congressional approval ratings. This is ludicrous! I find it really odd however, that I can only find information about this on various blogs and offbeat newspapers.. Does anyone else find this disturbing?

I find it a lie.

Look at Texas.
David Dewhurst, the same guy that was a shoe-in for senate when Ted Cruz beat him, lost his race to remain Texas attorney general, too. Get this, to a Tea Party backed Texan.

[nmnita]

and I just found out a candidate here in AR lost his primary. It was a state position. OP might be referring to national candidates only.

[btownboss4]

Eric Canton the House Majority Leader may lose his primary he is down 15.6 points with 56% of precincts reporting.

[Egbert]

AP called it. Eric Cantor lost his primary.