Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Friday Senate Line: Depressed Democrats?

Two new Quinnipiac University polls released Thursday in Ohio and Connecticut provided sobering news for Senate Democrats.

In Connecticut, Sen. Chris Dodd (D), whose numbers experienced something of a resurgence over the summer, trailed former Rep. Rob Simmons (R) by double digits in the latest Q poll.

Even against virtual unknowns like former World Wrestling Entertainment CEO Linda McMahon, state Sen. Sam Caliguri and former ambassador Tom Foley, Dodd is in a statistical dead heat -- evidence that Connecticut voters are looking for any alternative to the incumbent.

Need more evidence? Just 40 percent approve of the job Dodd is doing in Congress while just 39 percent say he deserves re-election next fall. Not good. At all.

The data in Ohio was less daunting for Democrats but still dispiriting. Former representative Rob Portman took 39 percent to 36 percent for Lt. Gov. Lee Fisher (D) in the Q poll, a significant reversal from a September survey when the Democrat led by double digits.

Since neither Portman nor Fisher is particularly well known at the moment, the turnaround is almost entirely attributable to a general decline in the Democratic brand in the state as evidenced by the majorities who disapprove of how President Obama is handling the economy and health care. (Gov. Ted Strickland is feeling the effects as well, having slipped into a dead heat with former Republican Rep. John Kasich.)

Both Connecticut and Ohio make the top five in this month's Line -- thanks to the anti-incumbent, anti-Washington sentiment coursing the country at the moment.

As always, the number one ranked contest is the most likely to switch parties in 2010. And, in a new wrinkle, the geniuses at the Post have figured out a way in which you can rank the top ten races on the Line yourself and then see how your choices compare to those of fellow Fixistas. Isn't technology great?

To the Line!

Coming onto the Line: Arkansas
Coming off the Line: Kentucky, Louisiana

10. Illinois (Democratic-controlled): The Democratic primary is shaping up to be a real fight between state Treasurer Lexi Giannoulias, Chicago Urban League President Cheryle Jackson and former Chicago Inspector General David Hoffman. Giannoulias is still the favorite but his path to the nomination is tougher today than it was a month ago. On the Republican side, Rep. Mark Kirk's ham-handed attempt to woo former Alaska governor Sarah Palin's endorsement shows he is worried about his right flank in a primary, although he is still a clear frontrunner for the GOP nomination. (Previous ranking: 9)

9. Pennsylvania (D): Democratic strategists are quick to dismiss polling that shows former representative Pat Toomey (R) competitive against either Sen. Arlen Specter or Rep. Joe Sestak who is challenging the incumbent in next year's primary. And, while it's true that Toomey has taken a series of positions in his past life as head of the Club for Growth that won't sit well with the Pennsylvania electorate, the primary between Specter and Sestak is going to be an absolute bloodbath -- meaning that making predictions about what will happen in its aftermath is dangerous. (Previous ranking: 10)

8. Arkansas (D): Sen. Blanche Lincoln (D) is getting squeezed between the demands of national liberals who want her to sign on to an up or down vote on the public option and the Republican bent of her state, which gave Obama just 39 percent in 2008. It's not a comfortable place to be -- particularly since polling data suggests Lincoln holds unimpressive leads over a series of unknown Republicans led by state Sen. Gilbert Baker. Lincoln, though, is bracing for a tough race with the national wind blowing directly in her face. And, she has demonstrated through four years in the House and more than a decade in the Senate that she knows how to find the sweet spot between the "D" after her name and conservative tendencies of Arkansas. This contest will almost certainly be her most competitive yet. (Previous ranking: N/A)

7. Colorado (D): Two key unanswered questions will determine how competitive this race is next year. First, can former state House speaker Andrew Romanoff raise enough money -- with the national party working to shut down all possible avenues of cash for him -- to ensure that Democratic primary voters know they have an alternative to appointed Sen. Michael Bennet? Second, how much personal money is former state senator Tom Wiens (R) willing to put into his primary campaign against former lieutenant governor Jane Norton (R)? (He has said he will put in $500,000. Double that and it could be a problem for Norton.) A Bennet-Norton matchup concerns Democratic strategists. And, it should. (Previous ranking: 6)

6. Missouri (Republican-controlled): No Senate race will be more affected by the national political atmospherics than this one. Secretary of State Robin Carnahan (D) is the superior candidate but Rep. Roy Blunt (R) is credible enough -- and will raise enough money -- to be in the game. Will Blunt's ties to Washington -- and his role as a former leader within the House GOP -- be the dominant narrative in the campaign? Or will it be Carnahan being forced to explain the policies of her national party on the economy and health care? (Previous ranking: 5)

5. Ohio (R): Portman is the class of this field -- an able, attractive candidate with real star power. But, he also has direct ties to the unpopular economic and trade policies of the Bush administration (he served as U.S. trade representative and head of the Office of Management and Budget) that Democrats are planning to exploit and will hurt him in the eyes of voters. Fisher is clearly vulnerable to a primary challenge from Secretary of State Jennifer Brunner but her repeated failures on the fundraising front suggest she simply doesn't have the tools to put together a real candidacy. Like Missouri, the national mood will play a serious role in this race too. Recent polling has to hearten Republicans on that front. (Previous ranking: 4)

4. New Hampshire (R): The recently announced candidacies of businessmen Bill Binnie (R) and Ovide Lamontagne (R) make former state attorney general Kelly Ayotte's march to the nomination more complicated. Binnie will likely position himself to Ayotte's left while Lamontagne is sure to cast himself as the only real conservative in the field. National Republicans believe Ayotte's early entrance into the race has allowed her to stake out a series of positions that will make it tough for Lamontagne to get to her ideological right. Still, this is a more real primary fight than it was a month ago. Meanwhile, Rep. Paul Hodes has a free run at the Democratic nod. (Previous ranking: 7)

3. Nevada (D): The current anti-incumbent climate in the country has to worry Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid who has built his career on his insider smarts. Reid's early television ads echo the sort of spots Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) ran in 2008; they are purely transactional -- designed to show voters what Reid gets for the state and what him not being in the Senate would mean. Reid's greatest advantage in this race, however, may not be his ability to bring back pork to the state but rather the quality (or lack thereof) of his Republican opponents. Former state party chairwoman Sue Lowden, the establishment pick for the nomination, flubbed a recent interview when she seemed to be joking about the placing of a bomb in Reid's car several decades ago. (Previous ranking: 3)

2. Delaware (D): State Attorney General Beau Biden (D) continues to play coy about whether he will run for his father's old seat and, if so, when he'll announce those plans. But, there seems very little doubt among Democrats that the only relevant question about Beau Biden's Senate plans is "when" not "if." Assuming Biden gets in sometime soon, it will set up an absolutely terrific race against Rep. Mike Castle (R) whose long record of electoral successes in the First State make him a formidable opponent. (Previous ranking: 1)

1. Connecticut (D): When Dodd's numbers tanked last spring, his allies insisted that there was still plenty of time for him to set things right with Connecticut voters. And, over the intervening months, he seemed to get his feet under him -- and his poll numbers improved as well. That's why the Q poll numbers are so troubling for Dodd as they not only show a significant regression for the incumbent but they also come less than one year before he has to face voters. Expect there to be increased pressure from party leaders -- behind the scenes, of course -- for Dodd to step aside in the wake of these poll numbers. If he does back down, state Attorney General Richard Blumenthal (D) would immediately step in and be a strong favorite. If Dodd keeps running, it's getting harder and harder to see how he wins. (Previous ranking: 2)

By Chris Cillizza  |  November 13, 2009; 11:00 AM ET
Categories:  The Line  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: The Palin Tapes
Next: N.C.'s Etheridge bows out of running for Senate seat

Comments

I don't care what people say, Arlen Specter is vulnerable to Pat Toomey in PA.

==

Well you must have some Spirit of Wishful Thinking whispering in your ear because there is no way a redstate social conservative like Toomey is going to win in PA.

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | November 16, 2009 1:13 PM | Report abuse

Chris,

I don't care what people say, Arlen Specter is vulnerable to Pat Toomey in PA.

Posted by: jgarecht | November 16, 2009 12:51 AM | Report abuse

"There's the lonely pederast. Waiting for a friend. Gonna be a long night staring at the screen. Can't you go over to the swing set and rent a friend as usual? Seems like you have run everyone else off. The story of your life.
Posted by: snowbama"

This story of snowbama's life is pretty grim. It's like he's pleading for help here, stop him before he does it again. Too bad someone at the WaPo doesn't call the FBI to trace his computer. God only knows how much kiddie porn is on it.

Posted by: drindl | November 14, 2009 2:23 PM | Report abuse

KBH is not resigning her Senate seat. She is thus, IMO, ceding the R gov primary to Goodhair. The other ramification: no special election for the Senate seat.

Posted by: mark_in_austin | November 13, 2009 11:45 PM | Report abuse

There's the lonely pederast. Waiting for a friend. Gonna be a long night staring at the screen. Can't you go over to the swing set and rent a friend as usual? Seems like you have run everyone else off. The story of your life.

Posted by: snowbama | November 13, 2009 10:18 PM | Report abuse

Smith also reveals that Taitz stopped speaking to him after he told people that she was sleeping with Charles Lincoln, a member of her legal team

==

Poor JakeD must be sobbing inconsolably.

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | November 13, 2009 9:31 PM | Report abuse

So many liberal incompetents it's hard to pick just one. Ok how about the most bumbling non decider. Barry obimbo himself.

Posted by: snowbama | November 13, 2009 8:53 PM | Report abuse

The comments section is deadly dull today. CC may as well have posted I'm in the shower and can't decide between my regular shampoo or simply using conditioner. We'd still have the same comments. Either get a life or find something interesting to say.

Oh yeah, Dodd is Dedd.

BB

Posted by: FairlingtonBlade | November 13, 2009 8:25 PM | Report abuse

"More importantly, I wonder if our allies are still with us? I am pretty sure our enemies now think we are led by a wimp. who wouldn't.
Posted by: snowbama | November 13, 2009 4:01 PM |"
-----------
Since Obama took office over half of the most dangerous terrorists on the CIA's most-wanted list have been killed including the Al Qaeda leader in Pakistan and many top Taliban leaders in Afghanistan.

Posted by: JRM2 | November 13, 2009 8:20 PM | Report abuse

An Oily Taitz associate has filed an affidavit indicating the BHO Kenyan birth certificate claims by Ms. Taitz were fraudulent from the get-go. The associate also provides testimony regarding Oily's hidden, uh, charms--way too much information IMO.

Excerpt from HuffPo:

"In his decision dismissing a lawsuit filed by Orly Taitz late last month, U.S. District Court Judge David O. Carterr mentioned that some witnesses complained that the birther chief urged them to lie on the stand. Now, more details are out, as one of the witnesses has made his affidavit public.

Lucas Smith, a fellow conspiracy theorist who Taitz identified in her lawsuit as the discoverer of Obama's Kenyan birth certificate, gave his statement to the Orange County Register.

Among the allegations Smith makes is that Taitz asked him to say that he was the one who obtained a document that was alleged to be a 1964 Kenyan birth certificate for Barack Hussein Obama II. He says he didn't. That document had been called a forgery by experts, and Smith said his own research also concluded that the document was fake. He also alleges that Taitz asked him to give false testimony about speaking to specific people in Africa, and that she asked two other people to lie under oath.

* * * * *

Smith also reveals that Taitz stopped speaking to him after he told people that she was sleeping with Charles Lincoln, a member of her legal team. And he describes in detail Lincoln, who has been disbarred in three states, relating his opinion of Taitz's sexual performance."

The article embeds a PDF of Smith's affidavit which details Taitz's alleged, er, "performance." The Taitz legend continues...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/11/12/birther-lawsuit-witnesses_n_355550.html

Posted by: broadwayjoe | November 13, 2009 7:22 PM | Report abuse

"It's been a "Brownie" year."

Uhh, Brownie is a symbol of Republican incompetence. Maybe better to not bring that up.

Posted by: drindl | November 13, 2009 6:52 PM | Report abuse

Republicans Hate Abortion their RNC Cigna Insurance has been paying for them since 1991.
Steele is calling for the end of "ELECTIVE ABORTIONS" But for some reason is still allowing Therapeutic Abortions.

I wonder how many RNC Employees have used those little jewel Benefits?

Posted by: ddoiron1 | November 13, 2009 5:12 PM | Report abuse

It's been a "Brownie" year.

the latest is Greg Craig. how dare he intefere with naifs promise to close gitmo in a year.

then there is Anita dunn, who declared her fidelity to Mao. Maybe she meant ObaMao. either way, get in glenn's sites and you're through. that is the nature of liberal majorities. Sarahs facebook page has more power than Obimbo.

It must be hard to govern when everyone around you is a laughingstock. Might as well continue the campaign then. Send money.

Posted by: snowbama | November 13, 2009 4:47 PM | Report abuse

"but wait, didn't I see Barry in NOLA for two or three hours last month. that is a clear and determined signal that he is very concerned with his fellow citizens.

Or maybe NOT.

Maybe he just doesn't like dirt in his coffee.

and now he gave a speech with shout outs in alaska. while his plane was refuling. He must really care.

Posted by: snowbama"

and I am sure you wished for a "Brownie" moment when he was there.

Posted by: ModerateVoter | November 13, 2009 4:37 PM | Report abuse

"I'm not an advocate of quick withdrawal, but I do wonder how we're supposed to leave it better than we found it."

Who says we are suppose too? I subscribe to the school of bomb the heck out of them, then get out, and let them sort it out.

Posted by: ModerateVoter | November 13, 2009 4:31 PM | Report abuse

but wait, didn't I see Barry in NOLA for two or three hours last month. that is a clear and determined signal that he is very concerned with his fellow citizens.

Or maybe NOT.

Maybe he just doesn't like dirt in his coffee.

and now he gave a speech with shout outs in alaska. while his plane was refuling. He must really care.

Posted by: snowbama | November 13, 2009 4:29 PM | Report abuse

With an incompetent in the WH like Barack Obama--who obviously hasn't a clue what he's doing in Afghanistan and Iraq--who's now hedging on his pre-election promise to fight the "good war" in Afghanistan, defend Democracy, and punish the Taliban, al Quaeda and the bin Laden gang there, by the 2010 midterm elections don't be surprised when he and his chickens**t Democrap Socialist Party scumbags do what they did during the Vietnam war--cut and run. Back then, when they also controlled both houses of congress, they cut off all funding for that war, forcing GOP President Richard Nixon to withdraw--i e cut and run. With a Democrap Socialist incompetent president in the WH, there's no need for a similar cut-off, all Obama has to do is order it. Don't be surprised when Obama does, and our brave military once again comes home with their tails between their legs and in disgrace because of political ineptness, and with our soldiers getting spat on by the liberal Democrap Socialist Obama worshippers who have always hated our military and our country.
Don't be surprised when the Democrap Socialists do exactly what they did in Vietnam, cut and run. The midterm elections might reflect that scenario.

Posted by: armpeg | November 13, 2009 4:27 PM | Report abuse

"No Republican will ever set foot in New Orleans again. The news organizations will remind us of the epic failures that occurred and how little of that once great city has been rebuilt. Fresh reminders of republican failures make for crappy poll numbers.

Posted by: ModerateVoter"

And this is compounded by the fact that the Obama administration has been doing a hell of a lot to help out the city.

Posted by: DDAWD | November 13, 2009 4:24 PM | Report abuse

No Republican will ever set foot in New Orleans again. The news organizations will remind us of the epic failures that occurred and how little of that once great city has been rebuilt. Fresh reminders of republican failures make for crappy poll numbers.

Posted by: ModerateVoter | November 13, 2009 4:20 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: edtroyhampton | November 13, 2009 4:20 PM | Report abuse

He's gone. He tried to be smart, but got ridiculed for that notion that the US invaded Iraq because they wanted to create an ally. hahahaha

Did Rush say that? I doubt even he is that stupid. But then again, at least one of his listeners is that stupid, so probably a lot of them are.

I don't see why Republicans hate New Orleans so much. Well, there is the whole black population thing. But you'd think that they'd be grateful for providing the Republican party with an excuse for not coming to the RNC a year ago. "ZOMG, Bush cares about New Orleans SOOOOOOOOO much!! Oh darn, I guess he can't be photographed with John McCain hugging him"

Posted by: DDAWD | November 13, 2009 4:13 PM | Report abuse

I love how DDAWD, the only poster on here with a more endangered representative than NY23rd, informs us about the national mood. this is from some piece of swamp in the middle of no where.

==

Remind us where YOU'RE posting from.

(*chuckle*)

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | November 13, 2009 4:01 PM | Report abuse

I suppose you're right. We can just FedEx 40,000 troops and all their equipment over there.

More importantly, I wonder if our allies are still with us? I am pretty sure our enemies now think we are led by a wimp. who wouldn't.

In the Lib world, the only thing that matters is Lord Teleprompter. all else pales.

Posted by: snowbama | November 13, 2009 4:01 PM | Report abuse


What part of the equation:

3 months << 1 year

do you not understand?

Posted by: mikenmidland | November 13, 2009 3:51 PM | Report abuse


Obviously, there was no reason for there to be a two-front war to begin with. Dubya should have listened to Papa instead Uncle Dick.

So we knocked down two autocratic regimes, and try to install democracy where long lasting hatreds make civil war much more likely.

I'm not an advocate of quick withdrawal, but I do wonder how we're supposed to leave it better than we found it.

Posted by: mikenmidland | November 13, 2009 3:48 PM | Report abuse

I'm glad we have a CIC that doesn't do "ready, fire, aim" like the last one.


>>>>>>>>>>>>>

in this current case, the CinC is even more basic:

Ready?
Ready?
Ready?
Ready?
Ready?
Ready?
Ready?
Ready?
Ready?
endif new president

you get the idea

Posted by: snowbama | November 13, 2009 3:45 PM | Report abuse

I love how DDAWD, the only poster on here with a more endangered representative than NY23rd, informs us about the national mood. this is from some piece of swamp in the middle of no where.

how is it that the temporary rep from NY 23 was so nimbly able to flip flop on health care if it was not a national topic? Or is it just that all Libs lie to get elected, then promptly ignore the voters that brung em.

Posted by: snowbama | November 13, 2009 3:43 PM | Report abuse

"When fighting a two front war, you usually send most of your troops to the more pressing strategic problem. In our case, establishing Iraq as a US base and ally was important. the enemy took the bait and deployed their resources there, where they were easier to kill. We fought a delaying engagement on the other front.

Now that the more important front has been secured, we can turn our attention to the other. the enemy now also turns his resources to the last remaining battle field. Of course, the situation changes and both sides will ramp up. also, the enemy has learned to adapt. (I know this learning to adapt thing is a difficult concept for Libs)."

Very funny nice spin. I like the part about an "ally". Base? you’re a hoot. So it was not about WMD? Front Secure? Wait, next you will say the insurgents are on their last legs.

Posted by: ModerateVoter | November 13, 2009 3:35 PM | Report abuse

I'm glad we have a CIC that doesn't do "ready, fire, aim" like the last one.
______________________________________

Maybe it actually went "aim, fire!" and now we have to decide what we are ready for, what we want to accomplish in the AfPak war is finally being debated.

They were not ready to chase over Tora Bora, they were not ready with Pakistan, but we may be now. These are crucial issues and spending time considering what we are ready for is a good choice.

Posted by: shrink2 | November 13, 2009 3:34 PM | Report abuse

The lesson from NY23 isn't that there is a big nationwide tide coming against the Republicans and that they will never win another election. The lesson is that entities like CFG and Palin are asking for trouble by screwing around with an area's natural political ecosystem. The actual Republican candidate was a much better suited Republican for the district and would have just steamrolled if Hoffman wasn't so crudely propped up. The Republican ended up leaving the race, so the voters elected the next closest thing - a moderate Democrat. If you try and prop up candidates that don't fit an electorate, that's a blueprint for losing.

That's the lesson from NY23. Nothing to do with national mood.

Posted by: DDAWD | November 13, 2009 3:33 PM | Report abuse

In the hopes of enlightening the ignorant anti-military libs, I shall explain a little military strategy.

When fighting a two front war, you usually send most of your troops to the more pressing strategic problem. In our case, establishing Iraq as a US base and ally was important. the enemy took the bait and deployed their resources there, where they were easier to kill. We fought a delaying engagement on the other front.

Now that the more important front has been secured, we can turn our attention to the other. the enemy now also turns his resources to the last remaining battle field. Of course, the situation changes and both sides will ramp up. also, the enemy has learned to adapt. (I know this learning to adapt thing is a difficult concept for Libs).

The leader of our forces, fired his first general and announced a brilliant new, well-thought-out strategy in March. Now we learn it was not so brilliant and not thought out.

What do you expect from a guy who's biggest decision in life was what sort of dog to buy. and that took him 6 months. I suppose it will be President Palin who in four years will inherit the mess that indecision in Afghanistan has left us.

Posted by: snowbama | November 13, 2009 3:22 PM | Report abuse

@mike: Iguess. All it shows is that there are a few remaining in the GOP who aren't completely crazed; an endorsement of Hoffman would have been most irresponsible and yes I do give Dede Scozzafava credit for choosing responsibility to her district over loyalty to the twitching corpse of her Party.

Hope she switches.

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | November 13, 2009 3:18 PM | Report abuse

To be fair, G&T, at least one prominent local Republican did ENDORSE the winner of NY-23. Shouldn't that count?

Posted by: mikenmidland | November 13, 2009 3:11 PM | Report abuse

hahahahah NY23 is a Republican victory hahahhahahahah

CAN'T MAKE THIS SH*T UP!!

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | November 13, 2009 3:08 PM | Report abuse

Now I've seen it all. Are the right-wingnuts really saying our Commander-in-Chief needs to defer to the (cough) FRENCH FOREIGN MINISTER?? WTF zouk have you lost your mind??

For the umpteenth time, McChrystal is not the CIC. And he asked for more troops within a YEAR. There are 50% more troops there now than when Bush left office. Bush is the one who dithered in Afghanistan for 7 years. I'm glad we have a CIC that doesn't do "ready, fire, aim" like the last one.

Posted by: mikenmidland | November 13, 2009 3:07 PM | Report abuse

That "base" is the albatross around your-plural neck.

Sarah Palin gave them a voice, and being challenged in the intelligence department, especially where electoral math is concerned, they're tearing the GOP apart demanding that candidate be as crazed as they are. It's a losing proposition no matter how you slice it.

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | November 13, 2009 3:00 PM | Report abuse

yeah like the 2006 and 2008 elections and NY23. I tell ya, they're on a roll. Pounding their chests at the victory over an "establishment" Republican in NY23.

People who point out that the seat went to a Democrat after seven generations in GOP hands ... don't "get it."

Posted by: NAMBLA


I see. If you have to go back to the moonbat salad days when all you had to do was chant "Not Bush" you are in trouble.

Plus as usual you have no facts to go on. the NY 23rd went to a handpicked Dem that the WH had singled out for a pick off. the existing congressman was there for 7 terms, taking over from a Democrat before that. Repubs had no bench to pull from in such a district. despite no charisma, knowledge or experience, the third party candidate ran against the WH machine and came within 3000 votes or less (still counting the ACORN votes that put the Lib over the top). And this was in a district that Obama took by 52% in NY. Hardly the deep south.

but desperate Libs will look for any measure to claim a single first victory for their AA naif. I know, how about anyone that got a raise qualifies as a saved job? seems a little sketchy to me too.

Posted by: snowbama | November 13, 2009 2:59 PM | Report abuse

My rankings:
1) Connecticut - I wish Christopher Dodd would just retire already. If Democrats lose his Senate seat in 2010 it is entirely his fault, not Obama's.
2) Nevada - Even if Harry Reid does manage to pull off a victory, I hope he resigns as Senate Majority Leader.
3) Delaware - Once Beau Biden runs for Senate the race will become much more competitve.
4) Missouri
5) Ohio
6) New Hampshire
7) Colorado
8) Arkansas
9) Pennsylvania
10) Illinois - I wish Lisa Madigan was running.
11) Kentucky
12) North Carolina

Posted by: fable104 | November 13, 2009 2:59 PM | Report abuse

Illinois should be a great pick-up opportunity, but Republicans here are still well in their conservatives-and-moderates-eat-each-other phase. I have been advocating for Kirk here, despite being much more conservative then him, because I think he represents the state well and has a very strong election chance..

But my fellow conservatives don't seem to want to buy in to that logic...his vote for the wretched energy bill hurt him bad, and confirmed what many conservatives were thinking about. many might choose to sit this one out. it he can get out the base, he wins the general. i don't think he can.

Posted by: lajdawg | November 13, 2009 2:56 PM | Report abuse

In New York, [Giu]liani could, at the top of the ticket, bring a new senator across the finish line.

==

I stopped reading at this point. If you think this nonentity is anything but finished in politics then you're daydreaming

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | November 13, 2009 2:51 PM | Report abuse

When the tall, skinny guy from Illinois was elected president a year ago, many Americans were hoping for another Honest Abe. Ironically, they seem to have gotten George McClellan -- the timorous general Lincoln had to fire for refusing to fight the Civil War.

When it came to combat, McClellan just couldn't make up his mind.

Nor, it seems, can President Obama.

It's been two-plus months and counting since Obama announced he was reconsidering his options for the war in Afghanistan.

Now those options are being rewritten yet again -- which likely will delay the president's announcement of a new Afghan strategy until well into December.

No wonder French Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner has wondered aloud why Obama is leaving his ostensible NATO allies -- who may be called on to provide more troops -- completely in the dark.

"Where are the Americans?" he asked. "It begins to be a problem. We need to talk to each other as allies."

It isn't any clearer to the American people or to members of Congress -- most of whom are wondering just what's taking the president so long to make a decision.

After all, it's been eight months since Obama announced that he'd decided on a "comprehensive new strategy" -- which turned out to be no such thing.


A mind is a terible thing to make up. Of course, being a liberal, a mind is a rare thing to have.

As soon as someone offers the option of surrendering and apologizing, Obambi will seize it. he always does.

Posted by: snowbama | November 13, 2009 2:50 PM | Report abuse

Has anyone else noticed that liberal Mike Castle voted against healthcare reform? If he votes no on the final vote, the ads will equate him with the far right, which will bury him, especially in an anti incumbent year ( I know he's not the incumbent but he certainly is a lot closer to being one.). Dodd is in horrible shape and Colorado belongs further up the line. In New York, guiliani could, at the top of the ticket, bring a new senator across the finish line. Even if it's Cuomo vs. Guiliani, wait until they have to give specifics on where they will make budget cuts, Cuomo will be in trouble with his fellow big spending Dems, Guiliani will happily take on the special interests. It's not like they can raise taxes anymore, they are sky high already. In Pa., Sestak has plenty of time. Spector is very unpopular!!!

Posted by: gckarcher | November 13, 2009 2:48 PM | Report abuse

Hmm, looks to me like America needs a few more years of GOP incompetence and mismanagement. Americans respond to pain and with the GOP in control of congress, in a few years time more than half of Americans will have little or no healthcare and we'll have another financial bubble that will effectually strip a majority of baby boomers of their life saving. It's all for the best.

Posted by: unscum | November 13, 2009 2:44 PM | Report abuse

The GOP tears itself apart while winning elections.

==

yeah like the 2006 and 2008 elections and NY23. I tell ya, they're on a roll. Pounding their chests at the victory over an "establishment" Republican in NY23.

People who point out that the seat went to a Democrat after seven generations in GOP hands ... don't "get it."

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | November 13, 2009 2:42 PM | Report abuse

I agree that it won't be more than four. That's why the top four are important. CC has the top 3 as Ds.

Silver has two of the top 4 as D, but also: He says DE is #1 because Beau Biden has not announced, and the ranking will change if he does. I agree with that.

I think the Dems will end up between 58 and 62 next year. If CC agrees with that, he certainly does a good job of hiding it.

Posted by: mikenmidland | November 13, 2009 2:38 PM | Report abuse

"Andy,

I agree with your comments. CC has seven Democrats and only three Republicans on his list. He puts the Rs in the middle of the pack to make it look somewhat balanced, but this is wishful thinking.

I think it is silly to talk about the top ten in the Senate, since not nearly that many will switch hands. The Dems will gain or lose one or two seats, net. Compared to the House, where dozens of seats are competitive, it seems like misplaced attention.

Posted by: mikenmidland "

for what it's worth, 538.com has a similar list and Silver is an unabashed Democrat. I think it's a pretty reasonable list.

And I don't think anyone is saying all ten of these seats are going to change hands. Almost certainly no more than four.

Posted by: DDAWD | November 13, 2009 2:29 PM | Report abuse

The White House finally released on Thursday a photograph of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's meeting Monday with U.S. President Barack Obama, after speculation that the lack of a photo opportunity was an intentional slight. Commentators have suggested that the Obama administration had wished to ''humiliate'' Netanyahu by not issuing an official photograph of the talks, in order to highlight dissatisfaction over the premier's unwillingness to make further concessions on West Bank settlement construction.


the pettiness of this Obimbo knows no bounds.


Meanwhile Lib economics begins to show:

Confidence among U.S. consumers unexpectedly dropped in November as the loss of jobs threatened to undermine the biggest part of the economy. The Reuters/University of Michigan preliminary sentiment index decreased to a three-month low of 66 from 70.6 in October.

Posted by: snowbama | November 13, 2009 2:27 PM | Report abuse

The GOP tears itself apart while winning elections.

The Libs tear themselves apart while arguing about abortion and finally, someday, soon, I promise, making a military decision. Next it's on to whether an 80% tax on the only few working americans left, is too high. the moderates will accept 75% as long as no health care is included. and they drive a Prius.

Posted by: snowbama | November 13, 2009 2:24 PM | Report abuse

Heh heh heh the GOP is tearing itself apart, thanks to the elevation of that horrid Palin woman to national prominence.

Note to self: picka pounda Reddenbacher onna way home

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | November 13, 2009 2:20 PM | Report abuse

Interesting how quickly the blame will be assessed and the person fired. This from the same people who claim everyone who leaves the Obama administration has been "thrown under the bus."

Posted by: mikenmidland | November 13, 2009 2:14 PM | Report abuse

Why no one watches the Lib networks anymore. they are an ongoing joke. Olberman and Madcow in primetime. Air America level ratings:

On the Friday edition of Morning Meeting, host Dylan Ratigan featured fake photos of Sarah Palin during a mocking segment on why Americans are fascinated with the former vice presidential candidate. While listing the show’s top ten reasons, Ratigan showed a doctored photo of Palin’s head on the bikini-clad body of a woman holding a weapon. The host never admitted or addressed the fact that his network was passing off counterfeit

Posted by: snowbama | November 13, 2009 2:12 PM | Report abuse

Someone please give snowbama his pacifier

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite


always with something in the mouth ehhh? Maybe you could enthrall us all with some stories about your jacuzzi adventures today?

Posted by: snowbama | November 13, 2009 2:10 PM | Report abuse

hahaha -- eating their own

"A RedState blogger demands the RNC names name and fire people involved in designing (long before Steele assumed his post) its health care plan, and opting in to abortion coverage:

For thirty years, we have fought tooth and nail to prevent our tax money from being used to pay for abortions. Turns out, we were apparently doing it through donating to the political party that was ostensibly on our side. This betrayal is so fundamental to the majority of people who donate to the RNC that it’s almost unspeakable. I have no doubt that many of the staffers there will miss the point, so allow me to make it clearly: you have caused every person who donated to support your livelihood to become involved in what they perceive to be a grave moral evil.

The RNC’s defense thus far seems to be excusable negligence; blaming it on some (surely departed) staffer who checked a box almost 20 years ago, and whoops, we weren’t careful enough. So sorry. It won’t happen again.

Not good enough....

In order for the RNC to regain the trust of their donors, they must disclose the names of all people involved in any way of the selection of their health care plan. And those people must be summarily fired. No severance packages, no golden parachutes; fired. For cause.

No pro-lifer in good conscience can give them a dime until this happens."

Posted by: drindl | November 13, 2009 2:06 PM | Report abuse

Drindl, thanks for the link. I always figured there was some kind of confidentiality for these policies. I sure wouldn't want people to know if I had or didn't have abortion coverage.

Also, this line...

"ll House Republicans, except one, voted for an amendment imposing restrictions of coverage for abortions in the health care bill that passed the House last Saturday."

Anyone know who this Republican is?

Posted by: DDAWD | November 13, 2009 2:03 PM | Report abuse

Andy,

I agree with your comments. CC has seven Democrats and only three Republicans on his list. He puts the Rs in the middle of the pack to make it look somewhat balanced, but this is wishful thinking.

I think it is silly to talk about the top ten in the Senate, since not nearly that many will switch hands. The Dems will gain or lose one or two seats, net. Compared to the House, where dozens of seats are competitive, it seems like misplaced attention.

Posted by: mikenmidland | November 13, 2009 2:01 PM | Report abuse


Thanks for the link, drindl.

reason5: It's fine that you agree with Mr. Steele. How do you feel about past RNC Chairmen and the Republicans they have helped get elected?

"...the policy has been in effect since 1991."

Posted by: mikenmidland | November 13, 2009 1:55 PM | Report abuse

CC, I think you are completely wrong about Reid's chances. He has a ton more money than any of his challengers and he is already spending it. Also I think you should have Florida on this list instead of Illinois or Pennsylvania. Sestak isn't catching on like people thought he might, and Toomey is a Looney who doesn't have a snowball's chance of getting elected.

Crist is in a lot more precarious position in his primary then Specter. Also Illinois is way to blue to elect a republican. The President is loved in Chicago which can carry the whole state if need be. Whomever wins the Democratic primary will be the next senator from Illinois.

Even if the top six switch parties (not likely IMO) the democrats will still be even in the Senate.

Posted by: AndyR3 | November 13, 2009 1:50 PM | Report abuse

Zouky:

When exactly were you laid off?

Posted by: Bondosan | November 13, 2009 1:48 PM | Report abuse

Someone please give snowbama his pacifier

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | November 13, 2009 1:45 PM | Report abuse

I respect & agree with Chairman Steele to deny the RNC employees abortion coverage. They shouldn't have it nor should anyone else.

Posted by: reason5 | November 13, 2009 1:43 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: drindl | November 13, 2009 1:40 PM | Report abuse

Nope, it not, dawd. in any case, Steele confirmed it.

Contributors to the R party were paying for RNC women's abortions. Awesome for hypocrisy, eh?

Posted by: drindl | November 13, 2009 1:37 PM | Report abuse

Connecticut voters = Dumb Rocks. Our Country is suffering as a result of their stupidity.

Posted by: RobMc1 | November 13, 2009 1:33 PM | Report abuse

Dodd = Corrupt

Posted by: RobMc1 | November 13, 2009 1:31 PM | Report abuse

"The memo said the RNC received a phone call from a reporter on Wednesday asking whether the RNC's health care policy, through Cigna, covered elective abortions for employees. On Thursday, Politico.com published a report citing two sales agents for Cigna who said the RNC's policy covered elective abortion.

The Cigna employees said the RNC didn't choose to opt out of abortion coverage when given the opportunity, Politico.com reported.

Posted by: drindl"

Got a link for this? That's weird that the agents would talk about this. It's not proprietary?

Posted by: DDAWD | November 13, 2009 1:30 PM | Report abuse

Last month, when 30 Republican senators signed on as corporate sponsors of rape, the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee (DSCC) was handed an extremely potent line of attack to use during next year's elections.

And what's the response from the GOP on being called out for their disgusting actions?

Privately, GOP sources acknowledge that they failed to anticipate the political consequences of a “no” vote on the amendment.

Seriously? They voted against an amendment that was prompted by the brutal gang-rape of a young woman by her co-workers while she was working for a company under contract for the United States government, after which she was locked in a shipping container without food or water, threatened if she left to seek medical treatment, and was then prevented from bringing criminal charges against her assailants. And they failed to anticipate the political consequences?

Boy, are they stupid (among other, less flattering things).

And now they are kicking themselves for that stupidity -- no, not because they showed an utter lack of sensitivity, decency, humanity, or sense of justice -- but because they shouldn't have:

... agreed to a roll-call vote on the measure, rather than a simple voice vote that would have allowed the opposing senators to duck criticism.

Yes, that was the problem with their vote. It was public.

Posted by: drindl | November 13, 2009 1:26 PM | Report abuse

'Pawlenty rising'? Hardly. His own state wouldn't even vote for him.

'A new Rasmussen poll of Minnesota, where Republican Gov. Tim Pawlenty is widely seen as a potential presidential candidate, finds that a plurality of likely voters in the state would not vote for him.

Respondents were asked: "Suppose Governor Tim Pawlenty runs for President in 2012 and wins the Republican nomination. If Pawlenty was the Republican Presidential candidate, would you vote for him?"

The numbers: Yes 42%, No 46%,, with 47% disapproval."

Posted by: drindl | November 13, 2009 1:24 PM | Report abuse

I used to defend Dodd, but now that he has revealed his so called financial reform package I say get him out of there and the sooner the better.

Posted by: caribis | November 13, 2009 1:22 PM | Report abuse

Of course Republicans need abortion coverage. How else are they to hide their out-of-wedlock pregnancies from each other??

Posted by: mikenmidland | November 13, 2009 1:18 PM | Report abuse

"I mean really libs, Obama has had 10 whole months to fix a financial crisis that was brought about by a quarter century of an unregulated market (Reagan era philosophy), low interest rates even in boom times (Greenspan philosophy), and huge costs of wars started by Bush.

It's obviously the Dem's fault people'

---------------------------------------
Yes, The dem's are the greatest panderers of all time. They use the federal reserve as the tool of pandering.

Posted by: leapin | November 13, 2009 1:17 PM | Report abuse

More hypocrisy:

The memo said the RNC received a phone call from a reporter on Wednesday asking whether the RNC's health care policy, through Cigna, covered elective abortions for employees. On Thursday, Politico.com published a report citing two sales agents for Cigna who said the RNC's policy covered elective abortion.

The Cigna employees said the RNC didn't choose to opt out of abortion coverage when given the opportunity, Politico.com reported.

Posted by: drindl | November 13, 2009 1:14 PM | Report abuse

reason5:

DE is currently a D seat. If Biden doesn't run, you're right that it won't be competitive. That means it is DEFINITELY the most likely to switch parties.

Posted by: mikenmidland | November 13, 2009 1:13 PM | Report abuse

oh look -- the rodent Tancredo plans to run for Gov of Colorado. He'll be on the Racist ticket:

'The Denver Post reports that, “while he has yet to formally declare his candidacy or fill out paperwork with the secretary of state’s office,” Tom Tancredo told a reporter that he “fully intends to run” for governor. When asked if he is running for Governor, Tom Tancredo told another local news station, “That is exactly what I anticipate doing.” After a brief run for President in 2008, Tancredo has been polishing his credentials over the past year by doing his part to coarsen the political discourse on television:

– Said he “didn’t know” if Obama “hates white people.”

– Argued Justice Sonia Sotomayor is a member of the “Latino KKK without the hoods or the nooses” and that she “appears to be a racist.”

– Claimed Obama may “indeed” be “a racist” because he nominated “Sonia Mayer” for the Supreme Court."

Posted by: drindl | November 13, 2009 1:02 PM | Report abuse

So Jim, your reply is, OK we Libs spend a lot but at least we love to raise taxes too?

OK, we agree.

Posted by: snowbama | November 13, 2009 1:00 PM | Report abuse

Darn math. so Lib unfriendly.

In fiscal 2002 through 2008, according to the historical tables published by the Office of Management and Budget last fall, the annual deficits were $157.7 billion, $377.5 billion, $412.7 billion, $318.3 billion, $248.1 billion, $162 billion and $410 billion. (The Congressional Budget Office has since calculated that the fiscal 2008 deficit actually ended up being $454.8 billion.)

President Obama said Monday that his "administration has inherited a $1.3 trillion deficit" for fiscal 2009.

The extraordinary size of that deficit is due, of course, to what one would have hoped were passing circumstances and one-time policies: a recession, a $700 billion bailout of the banking industry and that part of the $787 billion "stimulus" President Obama signed last week that will actually be spent in this fiscal year.

Posted by: snowbama | November 13, 2009 12:58 PM | Report abuse

Those are single fiscal year deficits. Hopefully somebody will finally raise taxes a little bit, which Reagan and Bush refused to do for political reasons. Bush Sr. and Clinton at least had the guts to raise taxes a little bit to cover deficits.

So when the economy gets kicking again, raise them up for millionaires.

Yes, I know it's morally reprehensible to raise taxes on the super wealthy.

Posted by: Jimibristol | November 13, 2009 12:58 PM | Report abuse

ooops, facts. Duck Libs:

"And that's why today I'm pledging to cut the deficit we inherited in half by the end of my first term in office," President Obama said at his summit.

But what does that mean? The administration says President Obama's promise to "cut the deficit we inherited in half" means he will reduce it from $1.3 trillion in fiscal 2009 to $533 billion in fiscal 2013.

This $533 billion deficit -- that President Obama vows will be the lowest annual deficit he runs in any of the next four years -- is larger than any deficit the profligate President Bush ran before this recessionary year.

Posted by: snowbama | November 13, 2009 12:57 PM | Report abuse

In fact, President Obama's planned $533 billion deficit for fiscal 2013 is more than twice as large as the $248.1 billion deficit Bush ran in 2006 and more than three times as large as the $162 billion deficit Bush ran in 2007.


http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=30851

chant with me:

Libs are frugal!!!

Posted by: snowbama | November 13, 2009 12:55 PM | Report abuse

I mean really libs, Obama has had 10 whole months to fix a financial crisis that was brought about by a quarter century of an unregulated market (Reagan era philosophy), low interest rates even in boom times (Greenspan philosophy), and huge costs of wars started by Bush.

It's obviously the Dem's fault people.

Posted by: Jimibristol | November 13, 2009 12:53 PM | Report abuse

How's that glass house amigo?

Posted by: Jimibristol | November 13, 2009 12:50 PM | Report abuse

For Snowbama:

Two biggest deficits in U.S. history:

1. George W. Bush
2. Ronald Reagan

That is all.

Posted by: Jimibristol | November 13, 2009 12:49 PM | Report abuse

:Let me see 90% of the posts are from the village idiot.

Too bad your blog is a sewer, CC.

Posted by: drindl | November 13, 2009 12:48 PM | Report abuse

It seems in the new administration, the front lines are safer than being at home. you Libs are some peculiar sort of military genius. If all the enemy simply comes here, then we have no need to go there. Problem solved. No decision needed.

Posted by: snowbama | November 13, 2009 12:47 PM | Report abuse

AP - Morale has fallen among soldiers in Afghanistan, where troops are seeing record violence in the 8-year-old war, while those in Iraq show much improved mental health amid much lower violence, the Army said Friday.

Which would you rather fight, Bush's war where decisions were made and battles won, or Barry's necessary war where a single decision can take agonizing years and only be switched a few months later.

Posted by: snowbama | November 13, 2009 12:32 PM | Report abuse

I think:

1. Delaware
2. Connecticut
3. Colorodo
4. Missouri
5. Arkansas
6. Nevada
7. New Hampshire
8. Pennsylvania
9. Ohio
10. Illinois

Honorable mention: North Dakota, Wisconsin & New York...depending on decisions from Gov. Hoeven & frmr. NY Governor George Pataki. Wisconsin if either US Rep. Paul Ryan or Frmr. Gov. Tommy Thompson gets into the race. Florida is also an honorable mention, due to the R primary between Rubio & Crist.

Posted by: reason5 | November 13, 2009 12:25 PM | Report abuse

I don't want to rank all 10, but I'd have to think that DE would be at the top. Castle has about a famous brand as the Bidens. He's a Republican that's appropriate for the state (not someone who is getting a lot of CFG cash, though)

Posted by: DDAWD | November 13, 2009 12:13 PM | Report abuse

President Obama's first federal court nominee was Judge David Hamilton of Indiana. If you are drinking your morning coffee as you read what follows here, you might want to put down your cup before reading further: Among Hamilton's "qualifications" is the fact that he is a former fund raiser for ACORN. That fact was conspicuously left out of the White House statement announcing Obama's nomination of the federal district judge for a position

the chicago style paybacks begin. graft is run amok in the WH.

Posted by: snowbama | November 13, 2009 12:10 PM | Report abuse

good riddence chris dudd:

Financial 'Reform': Sen. Chris Dodd's proposed overhaul would replace the Federal Reserve with a "super regulator" to oversee the banking and financial industries. Will it work? Consider the source. Along with fellow Democrat Barney Frank, now chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, Dodd, who heads the Senate Banking Committee, has done as much to damage this nation's financial system as anyone —

Posted by: snowbama | November 13, 2009 12:04 PM | Report abuse

President Barack Obama plans to announce in next year's State of the Union address that he wants to focus extensively on cutting the federal deficit in 2010 – and will downplay other new domestic spending beyond jobs programs, according to top aides involved in the planning.

Hahahahahahahahahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha.

you have got to be a lib to be this gullible. this is code for "raise Taxes" not "cut spending" as some of you may assume.

He has already doubled the deficit and spent about 7 times what anyone else ever did. Even Barry can't flip that far of a flop. In a desperate attempt to keep the majority in congress after endless failures, perhaps he will announce he is converting to Republican.

Posted by: snowbama | November 13, 2009 12:02 PM | Report abuse

1. Delaware- this isn't competitive if Biden bows out. If Biden runs, this is still in the top 5 to switch seats.
2. Connecticut: Dodd could be this year's Corzine.
3. Arkansas: Lincoln is in trouble.
4. Colorodo: Jane Norton is really rolling. She is the overwhelming favorite.
5. Missouri
6. Nevada
7. New Hampshire: Ayotte's primary challenge makes it move competitive. If she's able to stave off the primary easily, she's a winner easily. If the primary is real tough, Hodes has a great shot.
8. Pennsylvania: With the Specter vs. Sestek primary, alot of money will be spent & names will be bashed. Toomey will be able to collect cash, campaign positively and await the GE with whoever wins out between Specter vs. Sestek. Toomey hopes Specter wins, as it would be an easier race against a party switching charmeleon than it would be against the Democratically liberal Sestek. 2 great races are brewing here, a D primary & a great GE. Both will be close.
9. Ohio: Ohio was ranked higher on my list, but Portman has really impressed. Noone will be able to give him a serious race in the R primary. Portman already leads Lee Fisher, who is not overly popular there in Ohio anyhow. Plus, he has a D primary challenge from Sec. of State Brunner. That hurts a bit, and Portman is a huge favorite to retain Voinvich's seat in 2010 fairly easily.
10. Illinois: Republican Mark Kirk is a great candidate & great fundraiser. Republicans got the pick of the litter in terms of candidates in Ill. I think the D primary will hurt the eventual nominee, which I think will be Lexi Giannoulias. Lexi will be in a tough spot against Jackson, and if Jackson is attacked too hard it could hurt Giannoulias with black voters in a GE. If Kirk naps Palin's endorsement, it would clear the R primary field and not hurt in the GE if he continues to govern moderately (he voted for Cap-and-Trade). This makes my top 10 soley on the great candidacy of Kirk, in Ill. no other Republican has a shot to win. Club for Growth, if you want to win, stay out of Illinois!
Honorable mention:
-North Dakota: If Hoeven runs, this pops up into the top 10. If Hoeven doesn't run, the R opportunity drops.
-New York: If Pataki runs this one comes into the top 10. If Pataki doesn't run, it's likely Gillbrand gains fairly safe statues.
-Wisconsin: If Tommy Thompson or US Rep. Paul Ryan runs against Feingold, this races jumps high as Feingold is vulnerable against either 2 of them. If neither runs, Feingold likely becomes safe.
-Florida: With the Crist vs. Rubio R primary, this one becomes very competitive. I do believe either Rubio or Crist beats out Meeks in a GE. Whomever the Republican is has the definate advantage.

Posted by: reason5 | November 13, 2009 12:02 PM | Report abuse

Obamao' frenzy in China
American Thinker, by Ralph Alter

For those of us who thought White House press liaison Anita Dunn was just another Obama moonbat, here is the evidence proving she was simply ahead of the Chinese Communist curve: "The Chinese internet has been flooded with pages and pictures praising Obama and comparing him to Mao Zedong." It seems Obama is huge in China, with comparisons between America's dear leader and the ruthless mass murderer

Posted by: snowbama | November 13, 2009 11:56 AM | Report abuse

"Reid's greatest advantage in this race, however, may not be his ability to bring back pork to the state but rather the quality (or lack thereof) of his Republican opponents."

Now isn't this a nice window through which we can see the ugly problem both parties face?

Posted by: shrink2 | November 13, 2009 11:55 AM | Report abuse

Yes, Ovide is definitely an R. Nobody in the entire Dem party has a name like that. Doesn't he have a nickname like 'Bud' or something?

Posted by: drindl | November 13, 2009 11:31 AM | Report abuse

"Two new Quinnipiac University polls released Thursday in Ohio and Connecticut provided sobering news for Senate Democrats."

DRINKING GAME TIME! EVERYBODY TAKE A SHOT!

Posted by: drindl | November 13, 2009 11:28 AM | Report abuse

CC,

Unless something has changed in the last couple of days, I think Lamontagne is an R. Otherwise, thanks for the nice analysis. Personally, I think that in the absence of Beau Biden declaring his candidacy, DE should be #1.

Posted by: mnteng | November 13, 2009 11:12 AM | Report abuse

1) CT
2) NV
3) AR
4) MO
5) CO
6) PA
7) DE
8) OH
9) IL
10) NH
11) KY
12) NY (if Pataki runs move to top 7)
13) FL
14 ND (if Hoeven runs move to top 7)

Posted by: TexasProud1 | November 13, 2009 11:10 AM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company