More information on this race --- https://www.courier-journal.com/sto...son-linda-belcher-special-election/345868002/
If you read the article -- this is a district is one that has been held by Democrats for decades until 2016. It was held by the Democrat, Linda Belcher, from 2008 and prior to her it was held by her husband. In the Trump sweep in 2016 Bemocrat Linda Belcher lost the seat, but only by 150 votes or so. Republican Dan Johnson took the seat but he died in December. His wife, Rebecca Johnson, as the Republican candidate in the recent special election. It is not surprising that the Democrat, Linda Belcher, took the seat she previously held in a district that has been held by a Democrat for decades. That a Democrat took the seat in this instance is hardly indicative of a trend of "red" seats going "blue".
The data is showing very little as a trend. On Tuesday of this week, two special elections were held. The one described above in Kentucky, and the other one in Mississippi - which merely led to a run-off of the top two vote getters being held on March 13th.
The other data points show pretty much an even split in mid-terms results -- with traditional Democratic districts generally going Democratic, and traditional Republican districts going Republican. Nothing strange or unusual -- and certainly no trend... even though the Democrats fervently keep trying to claim one..... but on the other hand the Democrats are the ones who invented "new math".
You don't seem to understand how to read the very data points you are referring to. A solid R district that has been historically 20+ goes to a Republican by 3+ means a shift of 17 points which further means that districts that are only 15+R suddenly become battlegrounds causing the whole map to change. You are like a trader who sees end of day change from previous close to current close while completely ignoring volatility - volatility is the precursor to directional movement because of the simple principle of volatility clustering in non stationary time series.
You don't seem to understand how elections work. A Democratic district that has been Democratic for decades but went Republican in 2016 -- going back Democratic in a special election is hardly a trend.... in fact it is expected. The 2016 election of Trump should not be used as a reference point for special elections --- when trying to compare that Trump won by + 37 in a district but now the Republican only won by +3 (let's suppose) in a special election in a district that has been held by a Democrat for decades. The reality is that the Republican won by +3 in a district that has been Democrat +6 in the past 5 elections for the seat (but they don't mention this). They just want to provide the illusion that the district tilted 34 points to the left by going +37 in 2016 (for Trump) to only +3 in a special election -- while ignoring a national election is very different than a state election.