I am NOT saying ALL unopposed seats should be challenged. However, in areas where changes have happened in political atmosphere, we need to rethink possibilities. The following articles show changes are taking place.
These articles show a view that unexpected change in left/right seats have happened due to Dem/Republican popularities; or the moving of people into those districts with different political views. HOWEVER, if there is NO Challenger during an election cycle, HOW WOULD YOU KNOW WHAT CHANGES EXIST without votes? Exposure of Clinton e mails changes a lot of Dem votes due to J Assange/WikiLeaks, for Trump win.
Opportunities can be lost to measure the possibilities of a changing political atmosphere, when no opposition exists.
And only reading BIASED POLITIAL ARTICLES WILL NOT PRESENT YOU WITH THE TRUTH, be they totally left or right. It is wiseer to find unbiased opinions, as mucha as is possible, to get to crux of the political changes.
Sometimes it isn’t about winning, as much as it is in finding where money could be a vote changer in next election...the reason for taking the temperature of change! That is why I said a lot of money may not be needed to challenge a usually Dem area. Most people already know who they won’t support, or stay home if no challenger to do so. Politics is NOT rocket science.
My state went from a Female Dem Gov to a Republican Gov, and back to a Dem Gov due to being over confident of a win, or lack of really understanding the real changes due to Dem voters moving into our state.
http://www.governing.com/topics/politics/govs-2018-election-what-can-democrats-really-do.html
http://www.governing.com/about/
https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/02/trump-house-seats/515223/
The Atlantic is less biased than many others.
Ambrosia - This is a fantastic post! I take it back with an apology - you are not naïve at all, as it turns out. I agree with every word you wrote and you show a lot of depth and understanding of politics.