It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


1946 and 2010, the similarities are shocking!

page: 1

log in


posted on Oct, 19 2010 @ 03:11 PM

1946 Midterm Elections


House of Representatives:

Republicans = +55 seats


Republicans = +13 seats

The Republicans gained 13 seats in the Senate to give them 51 seats to the Democrats 45. In the House the Republicans gained 55 seats giving them 248 seats to the Democrats 185.


According to a new Rasmussen poll the Republican Party is set to gain a huge 55 seats in the House of Representatives and as many as 12 seats in the Senate. If both events occur it would look just like 1946.



The House would have a makeup of 233 Republicans and 202 Democrats while the Senate would have 53 Republicans and 47 Democrats.


In 1946 the top issues were the War, Labor Unions, Big Government and Socialism. The citizens were very angry at the excessive growth of government, the nation building, intrusion by Labor Union, what they saw as Socialism, price controls, government intrusion and rationing. This led to an angry public who fought back against Harry Truman and the Democratic policies of 1946.

But why is 1946 so crucial when comparing it to today? Well the Democrats and Republicans were disliked in 1946 but the Democrats had control for 14 years so the people decided to give the power to the Republicans which prior to 1946 were assumed dead and the party could never return to power. But they did and what came after that was a nightmare for the Republican Party. Harry Truman did such a good job with a Republican Congress that he was re-elected and he kicked out the Conservative Coalition of Conservative Democrats and Republicans in 1948 and the Liberal Democrats took control of Congress.

In 1950 however the war in Korea hurt the Democrats and the Republicans retook the House and in 1952 with the landslide victory of Eisenhower the Republicans retook both Chambers until 1954. From 1954 to 1994 the Democrats held control of Congress virtually every election.

Also what is similar between 1946 and 2010 is that the politics were extremely partisan where Democrats refused to work with Republicans and vice-versa. So the question must be raised will this be 1946 election where Republicans make massive short term gains then lose it for 40 years? Or can they take the Congress, both chambers and unlike 1946, hold them for a long time?
edit on 10/19/2010 by Misoir because: (no reason given)

posted on Oct, 19 2010 @ 03:51 PM
Any replies?? Come'on!!

posted on Oct, 19 2010 @ 03:52 PM

Originally posted by Misoir
Any replies?? Come'on!!

History repeats itself?
It is interesting. Can't wait too see what the final numbers are.

posted on Oct, 19 2010 @ 04:28 PM
reply to post by Nexdominus

That's a very good interpretation of it. But will what comes after that be the same too?

posted on Oct, 19 2010 @ 05:59 PM
well, I bet barack will throw out the liberal democrats and a new wave of progressives will come in.

posted on Oct, 19 2010 @ 06:07 PM
It only seems like history repeats.
You heard that somewhere, but can't really give any good examples.
The reason for the seeming repetition is because the writers ran out of plots.
Most history from the 1500's and back are fabricated, The further back you go, the less actual writing there was and so writers in the 1500 and 1600's had to do more fabricating to fill those much in demand history books.

posted on Oct, 19 2010 @ 09:50 PM

posted on Oct, 19 2010 @ 10:07 PM
I am not sure what any of this means really, historically

the only thing I am certain of is the GOP did a fantastic job of re - branding and the Democrats have done a horrible job at controlling their own message. Because of the timing of the economic misery the Democrats
are in a horrible position of having to govern during such a time, the Republicans have the simple advantage
of their out of phase status. This simple dynamic is extremely powerful rhetorically speaking - Partisans have no need to reference nuance - I think it is not all that deep, politics 101, the present
edit on 19-10-2010 by Janky Red because: (no reason given)

new topics

top topics


log in