As we approach the midterm elections, there is a great deal of hope on the left for a "blue wave" in which the Democrats, so energized by their opposition to the Trump administration, turn out in great numbers and win majorities in Congress and some state legislatures. The potential to win majorities in Congress is limited for the Democrats by gerrymandering, and also many of the Senate seats up for re-election are currently held by Democrats. We believe that winning this year's midterms, particularly in dramatic fashion, is not in the best interest of either party. The bigger prize is the 2020 election, which includes selecting a president and will decide which party will be in power for the next round of redistricting.

There are historical patterns that are encouraging for Democrats. The party of the president nearly always loses seats in midterm elections. President Ronald Reagan's party lost 26 seats in 1982; President Bill Clinton's party lost 53 seats in 1994; President Barack Obama's party lost 63 seats in 2010. Nevertheless, all three men were re-elected two years later. Even though the electorate empowers the opposition party at midterm, two years later, voters with few exceptions give the president a second term.

President Donald Trump has been somewhat successful in blaming Democrats for various public policies even though they are virtually powerless. Imagine if, after a "blue wave" in the midterms, a Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi could reasonably be blamed for blocking certain initiatives. Trump would help the GOP rally against the Democrats in 2020. At the same time, Democratic legislative priorities would be unlikely to be enacted into law. A presidential veto would stop Democratic legislation that passed Congress. Furthermore, most of the objectionable parts of the Trump agenda to Democrats (environmental decisions, travel bans) have been the product of unilateral executive action, outcomes that Democratic majorities in Congress could not easily change.

We think whichever party "wins" the midterms is likely to lose nationally in 2020. Thus, it is the Republicans that should be cheering for a huge 2018 blue wave, while the Democrats ought to hope to retain their minority party status in the House and the Senate.

There are 36 gubernatorial elections this fall along with thousands of state legislative seats to be filled. Parties should concentrate on winning these lower profile elections. Although success in these elections is important for influence over state public policy, there is a much bigger prize at stake — which party will control the redistricting process in each state. The U.S. Supreme Court just passed on an opportunity to control the degree of partisan influence that is acceptable in the redistricting process, so, at least at this moment, partisan gerrymandering will remain more or less unregulated.

Winning gubernatorial races and state legislative seats is the undercurrent that parties need this year. High-profile red or blue wave elections for Congress could plant the seeds for a 2020 backlash against the party that benefits from the wave. Although we don't see either party tanking the 2018 election on purpose with the hopes of cashing in two years later, they could redirect some efforts and finances toward smaller victories at the state level and then push hard for wins at both the federal and state level in 2020, which is bound to be the most important election in the next decade.

Thomas L. Brunell and Paul F. Diehl are political science professors at the University of Texas at Dallas. They wrote this column for The Dallas Morning News.

What's your view?

Got an opinion about this issue? Send a letter to the editor, and you just might get published.