General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsDemocrats are retiring faster than they can be replaced.
If the alarms bells aren't ringing, that including redistricting, its looking like a blowout. A year from now, the crying won't stop when old Kevin is sitting it the high seat. Better get what you can get now, or you won't later. Those Democrats holding their breaths could be on the other end of getting bounced for sheer stupidity.
[link:https://ballotpedia.org/List_of_U.S._Congress_incumbents_who_are_not_running_for_re-election_in_2022|]
empedocles
(15,751 posts)jimfields33
(15,786 posts)I believe 2017 through 2019, republicans retired at a huge amount.
Tomconroy
(7,611 posts)Mad_Machine76
(24,412 posts)but assuming you've lost before you have and quitting before it actually happens seems pretty stupid JMHO.
ColinC
(8,291 posts)Congress as a whole has 13 Repugs and 14 Dems retiring. 5 Repugs in the Senate with 0 Dems retiring and 8 Repugs with 14 Dems in the House
Historic NY
(37,449 posts)Start now avoid the cluster later. Every Republican seat needs to be contested. Lot of crickets.
[link:https://hillreporter.com/nearly-a-dozen-house-dems-wont-seek-re-election-in-2022-raising-more-midterm-concerns-117198|]
ColinC
(8,291 posts)No, it isn't looking good, but as bad as it is for the house for democrats, it is worse for Republicans in the Senate
Dems at least on track to pick up 1-3 seats in the Senate with 0 incumbent democrats announcing their retirements. And there are about half a dozen anti Trump Republicans in the house who will either lose their primaries or announce their retirements in the next few months, providing open seat opportunities in some vulnerable districts or at least making Repugs have to spend more money in otherwise safe districts.