The numbers aren't all in yet, but Trump will likely end up with 300+ electoral votes. Republicans control the House and have it gerrymandered in their favor through 2020. They only have to defend eight Senate seats in 2018 (one in a blue state - Nevada), while the Democrats have to defend 25 seats (likely 10 in red states). The GOP will likely hold the House and the Senate (with a longshot at a super majority after the midterms) for the entirety of Trump's first term. The Supreme Court could slant significantly to the right for decades (it could be 7-2 by the end of Trump's first term, and will be 5-4 immediately).

Trump obviously resonated, and he flipped the electoral map. If the GOP has the Rust Belt (WI, MI, OH, PA), that's 64 electoral votes going forward. PA, MI and WI, which had been somewhat reliably blue, add up to 46 electoral votes. Minnesota and Virginia, which had been more or less included in the Democratic firewall, are looking more purple than we thought.

If the economy is not in shambles and Trump doesn't totally screw up foreign policy (obviously a big if), he has set up a map that is very difficult for Democrats.

Over the last eight years, we thought the Republican Party was in dire straits and had to win over Hispanic voters. Instead, they nominated a hardliner on immigration and flipped the map by appealing to the white working class, which Democrats had forgotten about and taken for granted.

Now, Democrats need to do better with Hispanic voters (specifically, Cubans in Florida) or significantly change their policies on trade to compete for the white working class, or they're the ones with electoral map problems in four years. They also need to make significant progress on fighting minority voter suppression, or a state like North Carolina could go reliably red for a while. Are there other areas that I'm missing that could help them electorally?

If they rely on demographics alone, they'd need to basically flip Arizona and Texas to offset the 46 electoral votes in the rust belt. Arizona could happen in four years, but Texas is probably many cycles away from being in the mix.

Lastly, but perhaps most importantly, it's time for Democrats to start playing for keeps. Republicans are playing chess, not checkers. Their obstructionism on Obamacare helped to drive up premiums and helped lead to their wave last night. Their obstructionism on the Supreme Court will get them a 5-4 edge, and possibly a 7-2 edge in the not too distant future.

If the Democrats don't get more done when they're in power than Republicans do when they've got control, it doesn't matter how many elections they win... They'll never move the ball forward.

I'm astounded that we're in this position when things looked so grim for Republicans four and eight years ago, but here we stand. Democrats need to turn this around fast, because a lot is going to get done in the next four years and they cannot afford to give the GOP and Trump eight years unchecked.

Well hopefully Bernie can run again in 4 years.

The democrats lose elections because of the things they get done when they are in power. Obamacare is a perfect example. Getting nothing done is better than getting stuff done that the American people do not want.

I'd argue the exact opposite. Instead of doing what they really wanted when they had the numbers to jam it through, they wussed out and basically took the Republican health reform ideas from 20 years ago and went with that.

If they got single payer or a public option through, they probably have a much more popular program right now... and one that would be MUCH tougher to repeal.

Woulda, coulda, shoulda.......what they did give the people is something the people did not want and the people in turn made sure they knew it when the next election came around.

When the democrats stop deciding what the country wants and instead start delivering what the country wants, then they will win elections.

At age 79? Keep dreaming.

Funny, you'd think this would've happened when the next election actually did come around in 2012.

He has four posts, he's trolling.

The Democrats also package things poorly, though, and strategize poorly after the fact. They spent what? Almost 20 years fighting for healthcare reform? Republicans spent like four years blocking everything and blaming every ill in America on the ACA, and they got complete control of the government.

It's not enough to be the smartest people in the room to come up with a policy that is best for a majority of Americans if you can't sell it to them before, during and after.

The Democrats won a wave election on hope and change, had a mandate for healthcare reform and had the demographics tilted in their favor... They should have come away with single payer or at worst a public option in the ACA, which would not have been repealed this easily... Then they'd be touting bringing health insurance to every American for decades.

Instead, this.

Trump is going to have to actually govern instead of bombastically campaigning 24/7.

The election I was referring too was 2010. That year Massachusetts elected a republican senator.

Just because one has only four post does not mean one is trolling. I am merely arguing that the reason democrats lose elections is because they do not listen to the people. Republican "obstructionism" wins because people prefer nothing done to stuff they don't want being done.

So when the overwhelming majority of the country supports a ban on the purchasing of guns by people on the terror watch list, and Republicans do nothing, that would be....?

How can you think that? Obama got in office because people wanted healthcare reform and troops home from overseas.

Exactly. Obama got exactly what he deserved for buckling to the Insurance Corporations and introducing a republican health care policy which nobody wanted in the first place other than the corporations.

The Democrats also got what they deserved for screwing over their best candidate Sanders, for the establishment shill, and Obama got what he deserved for 8 years of weakness, and pandering to his donors and enemies, by allowing his successor to be Trump. That will be his real legacy. An empty corporate suit with charm who gave us Trump.

Its so ironic that the party responsible for the terrible state of the country, now has complete control of the government and soon the Supreme Court for the first time since the 1920s.

The Democrats despite being on the right side of public sentiment in terms of policy, paid for being too weak and sucking up to their corporate donors, and have rightly been wiped out. Hopefully they now learn their lesson and rebuild with someone like Elizbaeth Warren, who would have wiped the floor with Trump.

I have no sympathy for there spineless morons. The republicans should be wiped out yet now they hold all the power.

Both parties got their asses kicked. The establishment got their asses kicked.

Republicans doing nothing is better than what the democrats would do if they got the power to do it. Do you think if the democrats got the power to ban purchasing of guns by people on watch list that is all that they would do on gun control?

There are lots of elections in the united states and democrats lose most of them. Pointing to Obama's election/re-election is cherry picking. Just because 72o sometimes wins doesn't mean it is a winning hand.

You didn't answer the question. You stated Americans don't want anything done. But congress has a low rating because nothing has been done with R's in obstruct mode. Obama was elected on the notion he would bring change. Hell, Trump voters want change of some sort. Your claim just rings of all sorts of falsehoods.

If you said Americans never get what they want from Washington when it comes to actual policies that are implemented and that's why HRC lost tonight, I could agree with that statement.

If he's not dead or demented. He's nearly 80 as is.

Exactly.

I said Americans would rather have nothing done instead of something done that they did not want done. I never said they wanted nothing done.

I believe The people of America's preferences for what the government ought to do are roughly this:

1. Do the will of the people.
2. Do Nothing.
3. Do what the democrats want.
4. Do what the republicans want.

The republican's "obstructionism" amounts to doing nothing and doing nothing is preferable to doing what the democrats want. 3 and 4 might be flip-flopped but I am pretty sure 1 and 2 are spot on.

I believe you are wrong. I believe people want stuff, but are fickle when stuff gets implemented into policies. We are deeply divided nation of issues. Whether is R's or D's making policy, you will never succeed in pleasing everyone.

Take for instance, the want of many Americans to have better wages. No matter what someone is going to be mad at the policy put in place for that.

You are disingenuously suggesting the republicans are protecting the country from the democrats policies when the reality is they are often forcing them into unpopular policy decisions.

Obama got elected because he ran on populist left wing policies which he never delivered partly because he was not a true progressive and partly because the republicans did not let him.

Too soon y'all, need time to grieve and or pray this is the result of a Russian hackjob and everything will be made right soon (denial).

I agree, and the magnitude of that is pretty amazing. Like, I'm 30. If she set them back 30 years, she basically set them back the majority of the rest of my life.

I seem to recall the democrats squandering the majority in the house and their filibuster proof majority in the senate on backroom deals. Don't blame the fiasco that is Obama care on the republicans, that is all the democrats doing. They own that 100%.