number of senators, house members, governorships, statehouses

Not that interesting of a metric. The American people tend to be fickle and blame the President's party party for everything that goes wrong even if the other party has control of the rest of the government. Historically speaking, the party exiting the White House tends to find themselves with far fewer senators, house members, governors, and statehouses than when they entered. The true litmus test of the popularity of a political mandate isn't gaining the power, it's holding onto it.

funding

You fell victim to a disinformation campaign unfortunately. While it is true that the RNC is doing better in terms of fundraising than the DNC, the gap between individual Democratic candidates and individual Republican candidates is even bigger. The net result is that the Democrats are outpacing the Republicans in terms of overall fundraising.

special election

Winning special elections is a given because the President generally tries to strategically pick safe seats to vacate when filling their cabinet. Reddit was just being delusional about the prospects of picking up seats during these. Far more interesting is how much Democrats were able to close the historical gap in all of these elections. If they're able to keep up that momentum then things do not look good for the Republicans in the next midterms.

It's at it's lowest point since 1928, and about to get worse.

Doubtful. It's extremely rare for the President's party to gain seats in both chambers of Congress during a midterm. Quickly glancing over the historical results, it appears that the same holds true for governorships and state legislatures. I'll also point out the irony of gloating about how much more power is coming your way by drawing parallels to 1928 considering what happened in the 1930/1932 elections.