I wonder if you could be a little more specific about the source? Wikipedia has vast amounts of info that shows up with obvious searches like "congressional margins". Though if you had to gather that data by editing URLs, I'm not sure I want to even try to take it back 80 years.

What was on my mind with that post is what might fairly be called the Grand Conundrum of Conservatism. You complain bitterly about the country embracing Liberal ideals and philosophies since the New Deal; yet that same period could fairly be called America's "Golden Age", by every conventional measure of economic prosperity, power, and prestige. Sure it's possible to find episodic exceptions like the Carter years (but in fairness you have to also account for externalities like the oil embargo), but in terms of the "grand sweep of history", it's hard to argue that Liberalism has in any way been bad for America. In fact, it seems to have been stunningly beneficial.

To argue otherwise requires invoking alternate universes: "What if Roosevelt had not been elected in 1932 and nothing had changed?" We know where we were in 1932, and extrapolating no changes in government policy, it's very likely that fascism would've taken hold, America probably would have allied with the Nazis...and so perhaps we'd have done fairly well as the chief vassal state of a victorious Nazi Germany, but would you really call that an improvement over our actual history?

How do you square that circle?