Never too early to start talking, especially now that the Dems are running for their lives...

Mark Dayton won't run for reelection.

This is sort of good news for the GOP, which is gaining strength in MN, but bad too, because Dayton would have been a great guy to run against (Rod Gram lost more than Dayton won, Dayton closed his Senate office for fear of terrorism, etc.)

My predictions -

1) GOP probably picks up MN, also North Dakota, Florida and Washington.

2) Social Security reform helps Republicans, contrary to conventional wisdom.

3) Harold Ford wins TN (Frist is retiring).

4) Santorum loses in PA.

5) MO stays Republican.


Info on Senate races from a source I'm sure you will all trust...

The geezer vote will prove you wrong on this. No offense to geezers, of course.

William, don't forget the sea-change that could occur if Governor Schwarzenegger's redistricting initative passes, which I believe will.

And I thought your source was going to be RNovak!

William, youre even more nuts that I ever imagined if you think the GOP is picking up something in my state of Washington!! Too funny. Thanks for the laugh tonight.

Re: MN it's good and bad for both parties. Dayton was doomed -- but the do the Dems. really have anyone in his stead? There's talk about Al Franken (yikes -- he's supposed to announce his decision this a.m.), Garrison Keilor (double yikes). There are no up-and-coming D House members, so they may fall back to an oldliner, Betty McCollum from St. Paul (snooze). Their wet dream is to either entice Tim Penny back in to the fold or, better yet, former Viking Alan Page, who's now a judge. I see Rep. Kennedy is the odds-on fave for the GOP nomination, but has Grams decided to try again too?

The CW I hear on Washington State is that since the GOP has their undies in a bundle over the Gregoire - Rossi recount/s they will be totally ginned up to take down Cantwell. I don't see it happening. Rick White would be a good candidate for the rematch -- and Rossi has the name recognition now. But it reminds me of all the talk in 2001 when the Dems were upset about the Florida presidential recount and blaming Gore's loss in part on Jeb Bush -- they were gonna take him down in 2002. Right.

Harold Ford Jr. is the best chance for the Dem pickup of a GOP seat ... but ... I ain't holding my breath.

btw -- what about the upcoming 2005 elections? Like Kilgore v. Kaine in Virginia?

[ February 10, 2005, 06:49 AM: Message edited by: DCBucky ]

Hopefully a lot of them will be dead by then.

Congratulations for being so easily amused. You must be so proud.

We're making new ones every day! And with the Boomers approaching, we're making 'em faster than they're dying off. Bad news for the Bushies.

Gee, Al Franken sounded downright reasonable and statesman-like in announcing he's not running for the Senate.

Franken: "So anyway, I'm not running for Senate in 2006. Minnesotans are very serious about their politics, and it would be silly for me to run. I don't live there. But if I do run in 2008, I'll move back there.

Politics is important. It's about doing well for other people, as Paul Wellstone said."

Wrong!

Page keeps the MN seat Democratic

North Dakota and Washington stay Democratic as well

Harold Ford might as well be a Republican so it doesn't matter if he wins or not

Man on Dog Santorum goes down, and not in a good way either

and who cares about Missouri

Missouri is important, especially since it once was a moderate-to-conservative midwestern state that traditionally fielded important Democratic senators (Stuart Symington, Tom Eagleton) alongside moderate Republicans (John Danforth, once-upon-a-time Kit Bond, etc.) The last few Republicans have elected from Missouri, Ashcroft, and Talent, are far-right. So it would be a major coup if the Democrats were to win back Talent's seat, which had originally been won by the late Mel Carnahan (defeated living Ashcroft), though his wife was appointed to hold it till the special election. Also the Democrats need any seats they can get in red states, so Missouri is very, very important.

Why does anyone think Santorum will not win? Isn't he quite popular in rural and western Pennsylvania? It's also amazing to consider that ultraliberal Harris Wofford once held his seat. If a Democrat won the Pennsylvania seat, that would be very important, since every time Arlen Specter shows some moderate mettle, the right-wing attack dogs start snapping and he crawls back into his shell. Pitiful.

Page winning in Minnesota would be excellent--two liberal African-American senators who very likely could be reelected for years! I don't think Ford can win; will Tennesseeans vote statewide for a Black man?

Above all, the Democrats have to keep EVERY seat they can, and try to win 1-2. Ensign's seat in Nevada and Chafee's seat in Rhode Island seem like the best possibilities.

[ February 14, 2005, 02:25 PM: Message edited by: fantomas ]

Chafee will win reelection in RI, count on it. Besides, he is a Republican in name only. As a Democrat, I would love to see the Dems pick up any seats they can, but I think it would be a shame to see Chafee lose. He is a decent person and is a voice of moderation in a party that doesn't deserve him.

From what I hear some people are up in arms that the Dems are recruiting pro-lifers to run in two states - Pennsylvania and Rhode Island. Forget the RI guy's name, think he's in a wheelchair or something. In PA it's Casey. PA would be a wash, in Santorum is pro-life anyway. RI would be replacing a pro-choicer w/ a pro-lifer for the sake of expanding Dem presence in Senate.

Pretty interesting if the Dems are doing this. It doesn't really benefit them much if both candidates are either as or more conservative than the Repugs, since they'd be more likely to vote with W Unltd., particularly on anti-abortion legislation, than follow the party line as is needed. But never count out the fact that the Democrats, if they risk shooting off a toe, will blow off the whole leg in the process. As for Chafee, yes, he's quite decent and more liberal than even some a few of the Democrats (Ben Nelson of Nebraska, Joe Lieberman of Connecticut, etc.), though most of the moderate Democrats are now gone, and he still votes with W, which is the last thing we need these days. We really do need an OPPOSITION party, not just a shadow version of the psychos in control.

[ February 14, 2005, 02:36 PM: Message edited by: fantomas ]

I'm to the point where I can't even stomach the Democrats any more

I re-registered as Green

The Democrats are becoming more and more Republican lite and in some areas, you can't tell the two parties apart

I'm not willing to give my vote to the party that only gives my civil rights lip service or tells me to wait because it's not time yet

When in the hell is it going to be time?

Bully for you. Given that the Green Party has about as much chance of electing a statewide candidate in any state outside maybe Vermont as the pope has of replacing Ayatollah Ali Sistani as the head of the Iraqi Shias, it's certainly a principled, if not pragmatic, choice.

BTW, your recently re-elected Senator, Barbara Boxer, has been one of the most vocal in opposing Ayatollah W. YOu do know this, right? One of the senators I helped to elect, Barack Obama, has been as timorous and wannabe-hanky-headed as possible. In addition to confirming Condosleazzy Rice's lying ass, he has been far less vocal than either Illinois's other Senator OR my two senators from New Jersey (one of whom is senile, the other of whom is stepping down) in opening his mouth and calling these creepy, Stalinistic Republicans what they really are. And this man won by one of the largest electoral margins in Illinois history! Go figure.

She's doing this so she can raise money for the DSCC. At least that's what she used it for. She's a filthy whore just like the rest of them.

I didn't vote for Boxer--she came out during the campaign and said something about Prop 22 was the right choice for California voters

it was a DOMA-type proposition

and I agree, the Greens don't have much of a chance of electing too many people

but as the Democrats move further and further towards the right, more people will realize that the Greens are the only real alternative to the right wing controlled Republican party.

Don't worry. Give him time and his radical, anti-business, leftism will emerge. Then again, he could let Durbin keep his role as this state's U.S. Senatorial nutjob.

Good for you! That woman is a loon!

Oh please, "nutjob"? I think you might want to look the term up. Tom Coburn is a NUTJOB. Jim DeMint is a NUTJOB. Rick Santorum is a NUTJOB. But you agree with their politics and anti-gay behavior, right? Just remember, Durbin isn't coming after queers like you, and doesn't judge you like your GOP "friends" do--you are homo, aren't you? Or are you?

Only on weekends. It doubles my chances of getting a date.

Senator Paul Sarbanes (D-MD) will announce this afternoon that he will not seek reelection.

You might ask who? Yeah -- talk about a stealth senator. He's best known for the Sarbanes-Oxley Act reforming corporate governance stemming from the Enron / Arthur Andersen scandals.

Gives the GOP a shot at the seat -- esp. if Gov. Ehrlich runs (he seems to be happier in D.C. than in Annapolis). But the Dems have a deep bench with B'more Mayor O'Malley, Montgomery Co. Exec. Duncan, former Rep. and NAACP head Mfume.

You could also see Lt. Gov. Michael Steele give it a go.

Sarbanes is a loss--he was one of the more consistently liberal Democrats. And with Corzine soon to be departing too, for the NJ Exec's mansion, will both states replace them with people as far to the left?

BTW, is it true that Democrats in Connecticut are trying to challenge Lieberman's seat? It would be great if W would nominate him for a post, which would allow moderate GOP gov Rell to nominate a Republican, who'd then promptly be beaten by Richard Blumenthal. What other possible pick-ups are there for the Dems? Who's running against (lack of) Talent in Missouri?