The 2008 election is considered to have been a democratic wave election. But I never hear about the 1992 election as having been a democratic wave election. However when you look at the results you see a Democrat decisively winning the White House after a period of a Republican presidency. In the House the democrats won 258 seats, one more seat than the 257 seats they won in 2008. Meanwhile in the Senate the Democrats had 57 seats after the 1992 election while the Democrats began 2009 with 58 seats, only one more seat then in 1993, as Arlen Specter didn’t switch parties until April of 2009 and the Minnesota election wouldn’t be resolved until that summer when Al Franken was finally seated. So why is it that 2008 is widely regarded as a wave year while 1992 isn’t?
1992 wasn’t really a blue wave in the same sense that 2020 wasn’t a blue wave either.
A blue wave refers to the shift in ideology, not the current number itself.
In 1992, Democrats won the presidency, along with a net of one senate seat. They lost seats in the house. Was there a change? Sure. Was it drastic? No. Some may call this a “blue ripple”.
Now let’s look at the before and after of 2008. Just like ‘92, executive control switches from the GOP to the Democrats in a landslide, but on top of that, they gain 7 seats in the Senate (ultimately 9 because of Specter and Franken) and they gain 24 seats in the House.