Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Friday Senate Line: The 2010 Landscape

The day after the 2008 election ended, the 2010 cycle began for political junkies.

For both parties and their political operatives this is a time filled with possibility and hope. Maybe, just maybe, that governor who has held out on a Senate race for so long will finally make the leap. Maybe, just maybe, a wealthy candidate willing to write his or her own check, will emerge to take on that surprisingly vulnerable incumbent.

In other words: at this point in the cycle, hope springs eternal.

A quick glance at the playing field, however, suggests that Republicans could -- yet again -- be in for a difficult time in 2010.

Republicans must defend 19 seats including six (North Carolina, Iowa, New Hampshire, Florida, Pennsylvania and Ohio) in states won by President-elect Barack Obama earlier this month.

Democrats have far less vulnerability; only one incumbent up for re-election (Colorado Sen. Ken Salazar) won with less than 55 percent of the vote in 2004 and several potential races are entirely contingent on one Republican candidate deciding to run.

Below are what we believe to be the top 10 Senate races of the 2010 cycle. We've arranged them alphabetically since it's too early -- even for the Fix -- to order the likelihood of their takeover.

Agree or disagree? The red neon "OPEN" sign is flashing in the comment section.

To the Line!

* California (D): While Republicans acknowledge beating Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D) is something close to an impossibility, they have long believed that Sen. Barbara Boxer (D) is far more vulnerable. In her first re-election race in 1998, Boxer took 53 percent but improved on that margin six years later when she took 58 percent against former Secretary of State Bill Jones. The hottest name among Republicans to take on Boxer is Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger although the Governator has offered no public comment on the contest. The only announced Republican to date is state Assemblyman Chuck DeVore.

* Florida (R): This Sunshine State seat -- currently held by Sen. Mel Martinez (R) -- is at the top of nearly every Democratic strategist's list of potential pickups. Why? Obama's win in the state has bolstered Democrats' confidence and the $14,000 Martinez raised between July and September has Republicans worried. Rep. Ron Klein (D) is giving every indication that he will run; as of Oct. 15 he had $1.8 million in his House bank account. A number of other Democrats -- including Florida's Chief Financial Officer Alex Sink and state House Minority Leader Dan Gelber -- are mulling the race. For Democrats to win, they must try to avoid the nasty primary fights that have foreclosed their chances in other recent statewide races.

* Kansas (R): Sen. Sam Brownback (R) is planning to leave the Senate after two terms to make a run for the open governor's office in 2010. Gov. Kathleen Sebelius (D), who will be term limited out of office in 2010, is seen as a leading candidate to run for Brownback's seat and may well be the only Democrat who can make it a legitimate takeover possibility. (If Sebelius -- a close ally of Obama -- takes a job in the new Administration, Democrats have next-to-no chance of winning this seat.) On the Republican side, Rep. Jerry Moran has already announced he is running to replace Brownback and Rep. Todd Tiahrt -- among others -- is considering the contest.

* Kentucky (R): For those Republican strategists hoping that Sen. Jim Bunning (R) would retire rather than seek a third term, think again. Sources close to Bunning insist the Kentucky Senator has made up his mind to run and is beginning to put the pieces into place to do just that. Bunning is absolutely certain to be one of Democrats' highest priorities in 2010 since he has never won with more than 51 percent of the vote. Democrats' strongest candidate would be Rep. Ben Chandler but the smart money seems to believe he will stay in the House. If Chandler does stay out, Lt. Gov. Dan Mongiardo, who lost to Bunning by 23,000 votes in 2004, probably has the right of first refusal. State Auditor Crit Luallen and state Attorney General Jack Conway are also mentioned and would be serious and credible candidates.

* Louisiana (R): Sen. David Vitter's admission (sort of) of his involvement in the "D.C. Madam" prostitution ring virtually ensures that he will have a serious race in 2010. Rumors are that Secretary of State Jay Dardenne could challenge Vitter in a primary and, while no serious Democrat has stepped forward so far, you can bet the national party will find someone soon enough.

* Nevada (D): Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid is as wily a politician as there is operating in national politics today. Knowing that national Republicans would be gunning for him in 2010, he worked to recruit and fund a serious challenge to Rep. Jon Porter this election in hopes of taking out his strongest potential Republican opponent before his re-election bid even started. It worked, as Porter fell to 2006 gubernatorial nominee Dina Titus. Reid still isn't out of the woods yet, however, as Lt. Gov. Brian Krolicki (R) announced on Thursday that he is considering a race against the Democratic leader. No matter who runs, this race will be a priority for national Republicans, particularly Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (Ky.).

* New Hampshire (R): Over the past four years, the Granite State has collapsed on Republicans. In 2006, both incumbent House members were defeated. Then this November not only did Obama carry the state by a whopping nine points but Sen. John Sununu (R) was defeated in his rematch against former Gov. Jeanne Shaheen. That leaves Sen. Judd Gregg (R) as one of the last of his kind and makes him a potential target in 2010. Gregg is something of an institution in the state -- his father, Hugh, served as governor and he has been in the Senate since 1992 -- and so Democrats would have to find a top tier candidate to take him out. The strongest nominee would be popular Gov. John Lynch but even the most optimistic of Democratic strategists don't believe he will run. Rep. Paul Hodes is apparently interested, however, and could be credible enough to make this a top-tier race.

* North Dakota (D): The math on this one is very simple. If Gov. John Hoeven (R) decides to challenge Sen. Byron Dorgan (D) then this is one of the top contests in the country and perhaps Republicans' best takeover opportunities. If he doesn't, Dorgan will be a heavy favorite to win a fourth term.

* Ohio (R): The last two elections have been very good to Ohio Democrats. In 2006, they claimed the governor's mansion and Sen. Sherrod Brown (D) defeated then Sen. Mike DeWine (R). Earlier this month, Obama carried the state -- the first Democrat since Bill Clinton to do so. All of that adds up to potential trouble for Sen. George Voinovich (R) who is up for a third term in 2010. The Democratic field remains a work in progress and party strategists acknowledge that their bench is not as deep as they would like. A number of Ohio House Democrats -- Tim Ryan, Zack Space, Betty Sutton -- are likely to look at the race as are some statewide elected officials including state Attorney General Richard Cordray and Lt. Gov. Lee Fisher.

* Pennsylvania (R): Every indication is that Sen. Arlen Specter (R) is running for a sixth term in 2010. And, from what we hear, "Hardball" host Chris Matthews is very serious about running as a Democrat against Specter. As we wrote earlier this week, if that race comes to pass it will be the biggest -- and most high profile -- contest of the 2010 midterms. Several other Democrats including Reps. Alyson Schwartz and Joe Sestak are also mentioned as potential challengers to Specter.

By Chris Cillizza  |  November 14, 2008; 10:35 AM ET
Categories:  The Line  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Michael Steele to Run For RNC Chair
Next: HRC for Secretary of State: Crazy or Crazy Like a Fox?


funny how dems say such great things about the people who they support to run for the house and senate...
problem is the people they elect have to do what reid and pelosi want them to do....
so far I have not heard or read where conservative dems have voted against the herd...
if they continue to do so, they are just another bunch of liars...

Posted by: DwightCollins | November 19, 2008 2:54 PM | Report abuse

Michael Coleman should be looking at the Ohio race. He became the first black mayor of Columbus--Ohio's biggest city, in political swing territory--in 1999. He's a moderate who's compiled a solid record, getting reelected in 2003 and 2007. Sutton and Space seem too new to me. Lee Fisher would be AWESOME if he's not too old, as would Richard Cordray who was just elected to fill the last two years of Marc Dann's term as AG. Coleman, Cordray, or Fisher would be top tier challengers to Voinovich. The first two would bring Central Ohio support with them along with Democrats' Northeast Ohio base in the state. Cordray is young and very bright--a former Jeopardy champion!

Posted by: JonSM99 | November 17, 2008 2:04 PM | Report abuse

2010 is a long way away, so who knows whether bunning will make a run or not. he's got to make people think he's decided so that he still has options later on. if he's waffling now, then all the fundraising starts going to trey grayson and richie farmer. mitch might throw his weight around and try to push bunning out if there's a strong democratic challenger (i don't think chandler will do it, but mongiardo or conway might--luallen would make a really good governor). if bunning (the old codger) doesn't seek another term, then look to see trey grayson, richie farmer and some rich business person no one knows make a go of it. who knows, fletcher might try to make his comeback. there are some rumblings that paul patton (!) might try to make his political comeback in 2010 as the democratic candidate.

Posted by: plathman | November 17, 2008 11:20 AM | Report abuse

Ed Rendell is not going to run for Senator to serve a single term, and there's NO WAY he has any thoughts of doing 12 years in the US Senate. Rendell either takes another term as Governor, or he retires. Matthews, on the other hand, could run a good race against a moderate Republican who is a very good candidate.

Posted by: Exleyfan | November 16, 2008 1:40 PM | Report abuse





There is something fundamentally wrong with the Obama campaign keeping Ayers held back for the election - and now Ayers comes out and talks - the public deserves to have all the information BEFORE THE ELECTION.

There is something fundamentally wrong with the Obama campaign keeping Rev. Wrigtht held back for the election - and now Wright comes out and talks - the public deserves to have all the information BEFORE THE ELECTION.

There is something fundamentally wrong with the Obama campaign keeping Joe Biden held back for the election - and now Biden comes out and talks - the public deserves to have all the information BEFORE THE ELECTION. - well we all sort of knew he was a nut all along.

GO JOE !!!

Find that Kenyan Birth Certificate yet???





Posted by: 37thOSt | November 15, 2008 8:58 PM | Report abuse

Good analysis, a couple of points though: First in the ND race the "math is not that simple". The state is not blood red anymore after Barack Obama put the state in play in the last election (45%). Second, CA will not be in play unless Arnold's approval rating is over 60% when he leaves office (current 41% -SurveyUSA- is not going to cut it). CA is a blue state under any definition and Dems should be able to retake the governor's mansion as well.

Posted by: prog_FL | November 15, 2008 8:26 PM | Report abuse

I'm really annoyed by Chris Matthews to the point where I could find myself despising him. He's a premadonna and loves to hear the sound of his own voice, kind of like Bill O'Reilly.

While personal qualities are a POOR reason to vote against someone, I'm sure Democrats can find a candidate more qualified to challenge Matthews in the Dem primary and be formidable against Specter in the general.

PA is a blue state, and Specter should be an underdog no matter who the Dem opponent is. I'd love to see Rendell run or one of the House reps.

Posted by: Cowb | November 15, 2008 4:23 PM | Report abuse

If McCain is smart, he'll land the SecDef job and avoid the embarrassment of defeat (or even a close race) in 2010.

Posted by: jrob822 | November 15, 2008 12:14 PM | Report abuse





There is something fundamentally wrong with the Obama campaign keeping Ayers held back for the election - and now Ayers comes out and talks - the public deserves to have all the information BEFORE THE ELECTION.

There is something fundamentally wrong with the Obama campaign keeping Rev. Wrigtht held back for the election - and now Wright comes out and talks - the public deserves to have all the information BEFORE THE ELECTION.

There is something fundamentally wrong with the Obama campaign keeping Joe Biden held back for the election - and now Biden comes out and talks - the public deserves to have all the information BEFORE THE ELECTION. - well we all sort of knew he was a nut all along.

GO JOE !!!

Find that Kenyan Birth Certificate yet???





Posted by: 37thOSt | November 14, 2008 9:37 PM | Report abuse





Posted by: 37thOSt | November 14, 2008 8:38 PM | Report abuse

What about AZ? If I'm not mistaking, Napolitano is term-limited in 2010 and I don't know if McCain will go for another six years (especially if his party decides they lost because they were too moderate). Even if he does run for another term, McCain v. Napolitano would be a close race IMO.

Posted by: CohtR | November 14, 2008 8:26 PM | Report abuse

"If the Illinois Republican Party could dig up a quasi-reputable candidate, they might be able to mount a challenge for Obama's old seat depending on who fills it."

I tend to doubt that; their bench was so weak in 2004 that they had to important *Alan Keyes*, and in 2006 they couldn't oust Blago despite the fact that he's incredibly, obviously crooked and ruinously unpopular.

Posted by: SeanC1 | November 14, 2008 6:35 PM | Report abuse

"Florida should be exciting with the right candidarte, but I would guess Martinez would get by in a squeeker."

Martinez barely won last time, in a Republican wave year, and his ratings are rather poor for an incumbent; in a squeaker, I think he loses.

"Louisiana should go against Vitter with his scandal, but I do not count on anything after what happened in Alaska.."

Alaska and Louisiana are a bit different, since the former basically has no Democratic tradition, whereas Louisiana already has a Dem senator, so voting Democrat isn't that foreign to voters; and Vitter doesn't have anything like the institutional status Ted Stevens has there.

"and one surprise loss for the Dems (Salazar?)"

Can't see that happening; the Colorado Republicans are in disarray, having lost both Senate seats, three House seats, the governorship, etc. in the course of six years. Even if the race gets competitive, it won't take anyone by surprise.

Posted by: SeanC1 | November 14, 2008 6:33 PM | Report abuse

1. Kansas: I respect Senator Brownback's positions on foreign aid and his voice is a good thing in the Senate, but if you cannot defeat him in a governor's race then the Democrats have no right to call themselves a party.

2. Chris Matthews? If I lived in Pennsylvania I'd be looking for a third party candidate to vote for. Voters of Pennsylvania, it is a very simple rule: if a candidate is running for statewide or federal office and they have a TV show: DON'T VOTE FOR THEM. State assembly, sometimes state senate and local offices sure, but make them prove themselves at a lower level before sending them to statewide or federal office.

Posted by: caribis | November 14, 2008 5:45 PM | Report abuse

If the Illinois Republican Party could dig up a quasi-reputable candidate, they might be able to mount a challenge for Obama's old seat depending on who fills it. If Blagojevich tries to cover his own tail and picks another African-American who may not play as well state wide (say, Emil Jones?), there might be a GOP opportunity here. But then again probably not given the state of the party there...

Posted by: LandofLincoln97 | November 14, 2008 4:08 PM | Report abuse


I can see history isnt your strong point. You and your GOP supporters seem to want to re-write history to your liking but the facts cant be changed. I was born in 64 so lets look at your leaders since i was born:

1. Richard Nixon, resigned before he could be impeached.

2. Gerald Ford, not around long enough to judge but did a good job.

3. Ronald Reagan, ah yes the GOP messiah,sold arms to terrorists. Did the first cut and run after the lebanon bombing and last but not least IRAN-CONTRA.

4. George Bush Sr.- No new taxes, enough said.

5. Dubya- started a war against a country that didnt attack us. Flew bin ladens family out of the country secretly at tax payer expense. Still cant find the guy who attacked us. Worst fiscal president of all time.

Facts hurt dont they????

Posted by: rharring | November 14, 2008 3:50 PM | Report abuse

Why isn't John McCain on this list?

Gov. Janet Napolitano is much more popular now and Ol' Mac might retire since he obviously has no more clout in the Senate and is bored with it too.

Posted by: Fairfax3 | November 14, 2008 3:43 PM | Report abuse

Thanks, Chris, I was starting to Jones for a discussion of open seats, even the dust has barely settled ( and not totally yet in some states).

Anyways, this is fun this far out. Assuming things stay where they are (Begich wins for Dems, and Chambliss and Coleman remain for Reps) that would mean 56 D's 2 I's and 42 Rep's, with the I's possibly caucusing with the Dems. In eefect at least 57 Dems.

California, Kansas, and North Dakota all depend on one person running (Arnold, Sebelius, and Hoevan, respectively). If they don't run, then those states, easily remain in their party columns. If they do, it will be a good race in each state.

Having lived and voted in Nevada recently, krolicki is kind of joke. Porter was Reid's main opposition, and he is done, probably. I would think Reid is rather safe, consider the state's new found blue hue.

Florida should be exciting with the right candidarte, but I would guess Martinez would get by in a squeeker. Louisiana should go against Vitter with his scandal, but I do not count on anything after what happened in Alaska..

If Obama and the Dems are halfway competant for the next few years, the blue wave will continue to roll from 06 and 08, and make Spector's, Voinovich's, and Gregg's lives exceedingly more difficult.

And Bunning is an old coot, who was almost done in 04 and will be finished in 10. My guess is a pick up of 5 for the Dems with two surprises ousting Reps (maybe Burr in NC and Grassley in IA) and one surprise loss for the Dems (Salazar?) So, 62 D, 2 I, and 36 Rep. If Obama and the Dems are halfway competant.

Posted by: bradleyhirsh | November 14, 2008 3:40 PM | Report abuse

If the hard right wants the GOP to remain the party of the angry white man, well so be it. Liberals want you to do that as well!

This election the GOP became the party of the old, undereducated, rural angry white voter. This group is becoming a smaller and smaller percentage of the electorate. It became the party of the Southern core of the Confederacy and states like Wyoming where nobody lives. It lost in every major metropolitan area. It lost affluent diverse suburbs in Philadelphia, Charlotte, Raleigh, Fairfax and Northern Virginia, Alberquerque and Las Vegas, Miami and Tampa, Seattle and Minneapolis, Cleveland and Indianapolis, New York and Boston Los Angeles and San Francisco. It even lost Dallas and Houston.

It lost hispanic voters by 2 to l. It lost virtually 100% of the black vote. It lost the "youth" vote 2 to 1. The Democrats won every growing demographic.

It was difficult for the TV cameras to find a black face at the GOP Convention. McCain/Palin rallys were virtually 100% white with many videos of outright bigots outside waiting to get in.

The growth of the Hispanic vote will put Texas and Arizona in play in future elections. Any party that can start with New York, California and Texas in its electoral column is in pretty good shape.

There is no longer a GOP House member from all of New England including those bastions of Republicanism, New Hampshire and Maine. There are only 3 GOP House members from New York and only one is urban.

Make Pallin the leader of your party! Please!!

The GOP needs to decide what it is FOR......calling the opposition names ain't gonna cut it as "policy". Continuing to emphasize the culture wars will lead to a smaller, waiting for the rapture, lily-white regional Southern party.

Look at the faces of the new America........the demographics are against you. :-)

Posted by: toritto | November 14, 2008 3:36 PM | Report abuse

I'm a pretty solid Democrat, but I'd vote for the moderate Arlen Specter a million times over before I'd vote for Chris Matthews.

Posted by: webmonarch | November 14, 2008 3:24 PM | Report abuse

Palin for president in 2012 -- it's a "no brainer"!

Posted by: koolkat_1960 | November 14, 2008 3:23 PM | Report abuse

Do we seriously have to keep reading the crap from the "king of puke"? The guy's just another right-wing nut job.

Posted by: jasperanselm | November 14, 2008 3:18 PM | Report abuse

I'm a bit surprised that the Delaware Senate Race to finish VP-elect Biden's term is not listed as a possible GOP pickup. GOP At-large Rep. Michael Castle, although getting older, could pick up the seat for the GOP since there are no Dem. candidate (even with a 2 year head start for the Dem. assigned by the Del. Dem. governor) that has statewide name recognition and respect like Rep. Castle.

Posted by: wildwest | November 14, 2008 3:14 PM | Report abuse

First things first: let's focus on the aftermath of the 2008 elections. We have a 57-38-2-3 roll call as of right now. In Ga., the election is just now heating up. Chabliss vs. Martin is shaping up to a good one. In my view, Chambliss will likely keep the seat and be re-elected. McCain even won in Ga., and Gov. Perdue is still very popular in Ga. I think Chambliss wins re-election. That makes it 57-39-2-2. Then we have Minn. & Alaska. At this stage in the counting, Alaska is just too unpredictable. They are counting absentee ballots. Begich has now taken a lead of about 800 votes or so against convicted senator Ted Stevens. Did the Alaska family forgive and re-elect "Uncle Ted"? Or did they believe he really is a corrupt old man and elect Begich? Only time will, and possibly a re-count or 2 will tell. In Minn., I believe Norm Coleman pulled it out. He won the election and will win the re-count. When it's over, I think Coleman gets 6 more years. That puts the count at 57-40-2-1. Either way, if I'm right, Dems. will not get 60 seats. They will come close, and how close they come will depend on Ted Stevens seat being retained or lost.

In 2010, who knows how the wind will blow? I was glad to see Richard Burr not on the list, as I doubt he will be. Burr has been an honest, transparent & conservative senator...the type that NC appreciates. He has actually been in this state and represents this state...unlike Washington insider Liddy Dole. Burr is very well liked in this state. In Ohio, I believe Republicans are really going to make a come back. R's have a great shot of not only keeping our senate seat, but also winning back the governor's mansion. The same goes for Spector & Atty. General Tom Corbett winning the open governor's mansion in Pennsylvania. We will see how the landscape shapes out and how the Obama Presidency is going then.

Posted by: reason5 | November 14, 2008 3:10 PM | Report abuse

"And it is not possible to advance the idea that bush is "worse" than carter when he was re-elected and peanut brain lost badly."

Some of the worst presidents were two-term presidents, Bush and Grant to name two.

Lucky for Carter's reputation that Bush had four extra years to prove what an inept president he was.

Posted by: koolkat_1960 | November 14, 2008 3:01 PM | Report abuse

"I always get a good laugh when I receive advice from moonbats about what the Rs should do... Only thing is we took your advice and nominated a democrat -and lost to the socialist."

Maybe nominate Brownback next time, or Palin. See how that goes for you.

Posted by: bsimon1 | November 14, 2008 2:49 PM | Report abuse

"when you say worst president ever, did you forget about the one-term Jimmy carter who diddled his way to misery for all?"

If we're now measuring presidential success by time served, Zouk apparently agrees that FDR was the absolute best president ever, bar none. Better than Reagan, Lincoln, TR, Jefferson, Washington, etc.

Posted by: bsimon1 | November 14, 2008 2:47 PM | Report abuse

If your only criteria is reelection. Jr is a better president than his father. Jr would also be listed as a better president than John Adams. Sorry W or 43 as he is referred to is a good name. He is the 43rd worst president. Don't worry that number will continue to move down as we get better presidents be they R or D. Your problem with McCain is you nominate people who are not smart. If you nominate someon intelligent with an intelectual desire for learning we can talk. Keep nominating people that are less intelligent than my 4 year old. Please show me a succesful ex R president or nominee? They have done nothing. D two Noble Peace prize winners. R start to contribute instead of suckling on the teet of the Republic.

Posted by: dganderson13 | November 14, 2008 2:41 PM | Report abuse

I always get a good laugh when I receive advice from moonbats about what the Rs should do.

Only thing is we took your advice and nominated a democrat -and lost to the socialist. We picked someone with even more experience than the messiah (as VP even) and were chastised for no experience. We laid out plans to fix different things and were beaten by an enigma with no plans, only hope

so you will excuse me if I don't take your advice anymore.

And it is not possible to advance the idea that bush is "worse" than carter when he was re-elected and peanut brain lost badly. Certain concepts require facts to support them. I know you have certain allergies as Libs so I do understand.

Posted by: king_of_zouk | November 14, 2008 2:30 PM | Report abuse

This began as a very good discussion; thank you to all who posted views from their respective states. The local flavor is what makes forums like this so interesting and informative to me.

Hey Zouk, keep listening to Rush and calling people names. The quicksand will suck you and the rest of the angry right down. Obama, while socially liberal, is calculated and pragmatic; he will govern from the center, you can bet on it.

McCain lost because he and the party are devoid of forward thinking. If you really care about conservatism and the Republican party, start coming up with real-world solutions. Otherwise, enjoy the wilderness for a quarter century.

Posted by: Jimibristol | November 14, 2008 2:21 PM | Report abuse

"when you say worst president ever, did you forget about the one-term Jimmy carter who diddled his way to misery for all?"

Carter wasn't a good President, but Bush isn't even close. There are probably ten to fifteen Presidents Bush needs to leapfrog in order to reach Carter status.

Posted by: DDAWD | November 14, 2008 2:13 PM | Report abuse

"The Borgen Project has some good info on the cost of addressing global poverty.
$30 billion: Annual shortfall to end world hunger.
$540 billion: Annual U.S. Defense Budget."

Posted by: diana9 | November 14, 2008 2:04 PM | Report abuse

I am glad we can provide you some measure of accomplishment. If Obama can live up to Bush's worst performance, he will have accomplished more than everyone expects of the newcomer.

when you say worst president ever, did you forget about the one-term Jimmy carter who diddled his way to misery for all?

Posted by: king_of_zouk | November 14, 2008 2:04 PM | Report abuse

""to even suggest" - like not attending her funeral. that easily goes beyond suggestion."

This is a public service that the family gave the mortuary permission to hold; her private funeral won't be until later, and that will be the family's.

I say again: you're scum.

Posted by: SeanC1 | November 14, 2008 2:03 PM | Report abuse

Come back, Clintons, all is forgiven. This seems to be Barack Obama's message as he draws up appointments for his administration — two thirds of which come from Bill Clinton's. In a development unimaginable at the height of the primary battle, 31 of the 47 people so far appointed to the President-elect’s transition and White House teams have ties to the Clinton administration.

some change there moonbats. how many broken promises does it take to be a Lib
--all of them

Posted by: king_of_zouk | November 14, 2008 1:58 PM | Report abuse


Of course you will hear that a lot.
Bush is the worst president ever.
The fact that you and the slopeheads can not admit that he is an utter disaster is your problem. If you all would admit that Bush is terrible we can then move on. R think he is awesome and brilliant.

One question what color is the sky where you live?

If it is not blue could be a sign of delusion. Just like your thoughts about Bush.

Posted by: dganderson13 | November 14, 2008 1:56 PM | Report abuse

you know after this runoff in Georgia and we get the results in Alaska and Minnesota.

and after 22 months some with hand to hand combat on the streets and the cyberspace


it can't all be about the next election

Do your job and you won't have to worry about keeping your job.

There is more transparency and the ability for citizens to keep up on the politicians.

Let's go

Let's get it done

Posted by: scarletknight | November 14, 2008 1:52 PM | Report abuse

Bush tops Obama again.

something tells me we are going to hear a lot of "Bush did it too" as the lame excuse for Obama's flaws.

that's some new politics you got there moonbats.

Posted by: king_of_zouk | November 14, 2008 1:47 PM | Report abuse

If you want to go by scummy things.
Bush tops Obama again.
He went on vacation while his daughter (the fat one) was having emergency surgery.

Posted by: dganderson13 | November 14, 2008 1:44 PM | Report abuse

What about Obama's former seat in Illinois?

Posted by: bigskells | November 14, 2008 1:42 PM | Report abuse

Um, I don't know how to tell you this armpeg, but the economy is already in the toilet, and has been there for some time now. Its just now that things are beginning to manifest themselves. Bush and Co was hoping it wouldn't happen until Feb '09, but their disastrous economic policies came home to roost a few months ahead of schedule.

I welcome the Obama administration, just in time to save this country from a complete melt-down. Its funny how some people prefer to be miserable. Why else would they continue to support such a piss-poor administration and the party that stands behind it?

Posted by: PeixeGato1 | November 14, 2008 1:39 PM | Report abuse

Hey Chris,

Nice line. Strategically, it makes more sense for President Obama to nominate current Republican Senators than Democratic Senators to high-profile cabinet spots. Two possible choices would be:

1> Arlen Specter: a moderate in some areas, who would open up the PA seat to a strong Democratic appointment or

2) Judd Gregg: he's smart and tough and would be the favorite against even Hodes, but maybe there's some policy areas where he would a thoughtful voice with common ground with an Obama administration? Or maybe a prominent Judgeship (anyone remember Governor Youngdahl of MN, who, by being named a judge, was taken out of a race against first term Senator Humphrey?).

3> John McCain: On immigration or Health and Human Services, he could be a real leader and leave his mark on our nation while being such a fabulous symbol of non-partisan leadership for both himself and Obama. And think of the deliciousness of Senator Kolbe? It's every political junkie's dream! (well with the possible exception of Gov Napolitano) Maybe Secretary fo the Interior Kolbe?

Of course all 3 of them know they would hurt the current caucus in the Senate by taking such an appointment.

Posted by: stpaulsage | November 14, 2008 1:37 PM | Report abuse

"The Borgen Project has some good info on the cost of addressing global poverty.
$30 billion: Annual shortfall to end world hunger.
$540 billion: Annual U.S. Defense Budget."

Posted by: diana9 | November 14, 2008 1:34 PM | Report abuse

To even suggest that he doesn't care about his grandmother is way, way low.

"to even suggest" - like not attending her funeral. that easily goes beyond suggestion. she is not the first to be discarded out of convenience. except unlike ayers, Rezco, et al, she won't be back. except to vote for him in 2012.

Posted by: king_of_zouk | November 14, 2008 1:30 PM | Report abuse

Obamaganda — Styrofoam columns, fake presidential seal, even placards of imaginary “Offices” of the President Elect and the other narcissistic accoutrements that seem to pop up around Obama wherever he goes.

Obamomatopoeia — The sound of mindlessly repeating phrases such as “Yes We Can” and words like “hope” and “change” until they are sounds that bear no relation to the words they approximate.

Obamahol — The candidate’s proposed alternative energy source. It has enough energy density to replace hydrocarbons, deliver 5 million green-collar jobs and save the U.S. auto industry. The exact formula is a closely guarded secret, but it’s believed to be comprised primarily of tofu, recycled “Jimmy Carter in ‘80” bumper stickers and unicorn flatulence.

Barackalypse — The state of the world if his policies are enacted.

Sample solution: “His inauguration speech was vintage o-blah-ma, and that ginormous statue behind him on the podium as he was being sworn in — the one of Abraham Lincoln and Martin Luther King Jr. holding hands — was the most egregious piece of obamaganda we’ve seen yet. However, the obamedia is so obasequious I’m sure Olbermann’s “special” comment on MSNBC this evening will be a hellbroth of obasms and obamomatopoeia. I can’t wait to see what these jokers have to say when he follows through on his new plan to pull us out of Iraq in three months and Al-Qaeda has us between Barack and a hard place. In the meantime, I’m hoarding all the dried meat and canned food I can get my hands on so I can ride out the coming Barackalypse.”

— Mark Hemingway

Posted by: king_of_zouk | November 14, 2008 1:27 PM | Report abuse

"Watch your back. thugs in charge. Dead people of no use other than voting"

You scum. To even suggest that he doesn't care about his grandmother is way, way low.

This is a fairly good list; there isn't any race that doesn't deserve to be there, at least pending announcements from certain candidates (if Ahnuld doesn't run in California, Hoeven in ND, or Sebelius in Kansas, those basically drop off).

To that, add a few more:

- The aforementioned North Carolina, which isn't dependent on any particular candidate running for the Dems; Burr's ratings are mediocre at best.

- Oklahoma, which is totally dependent on outgoing Governor Brad Henry entering the fray to challenge Tom Coburn; no other Dem has a chance.

- Arizona, if Napolitano runs instead of being whisked off to Washington, will be *the* showdown of the season (unless McCain retires).

Posted by: SeanC1 | November 14, 2008 1:19 PM | Report abuse

By 2010 Barack Obama's Socialist Marxist policies will be in place, with the probable result that we'll have an economy in the toilet, as is always the result when a massive tax-and-spend government tries to become the mommy and daddy for everybody and makes businesses the enemy. Voters then will not likely be voting for the party that is the cause of their misery, unless the Obama administration and their propaganda arm, the Democrat Socialist Party--controlled MSM, can convince voters that it's all Bush's fault.

Posted by: armpeg | November 14, 2008 1:15 PM | Report abuse

"FIX" POSTERS BEWARE: More Signs of 'Big Brother' Censorship

• "Prior restraint" imposed on WaPo blogs


Posted by: scrivener50 | November 14, 2008 1:03 PM | Report abuse

Obama's To Skip Grandmother's Funeral A memorial service for Obama's grandmother, Madelyn Payne Dunham, will be held at the National Memorial Cemetery of the Pacific in Honolulu Friday.The Obama family will not be in attendance

Watch your back. thugs in charge. Dead people of no use other than voting.

Posted by: king_of_zouk | November 14, 2008 12:40 PM | Report abuse

Campaign Diaries has a rundown of the impact Obama's nominations will have on the 2010 landscape - and there's a lot to discuss including the big list of Dems who would be looking to get Hillary's seat or the fact that Sebelius or Napolitano moving to DC would help the GOP keep the AZ and KS Senate seats and give Republicans the AZ governorship:

Posted by: Daniel20 | November 14, 2008 12:23 PM | Report abuse

I totally agree about Napolitano, our beloved governor, if she does not forsake us and leave us to the Reign of Terror of Secretary of State Jan Brewer (one quaint Arizona fact--we don't have a Lt. Gov.). One thing Opa2 doesn't mention is that she's termed out in 2010, just in time for a Senate race. I'm not certain she'd beat McCain (if he runs again), but she'd give him a hell of a fight. If he retires, she's the Mark Warner of 2010.

Posted by: drwohl | November 14, 2008 12:20 PM | Report abuse

Rich Cordray is Ohio's Attorney General-elect. He's currently the State Treasurer.

Posted by: Sighs | November 14, 2008 12:15 PM | Report abuse

You may have overlooked the hottest of them all: John McCain is up for re-election. IF he does not retire he will have one hell of a fight on his hands. IF Janet Napolitano stays and finishes her term as governor she will most likely run for the Senate. Two big Ifs but IF it happens I predict that McCain will be toast. She is about the most popular governor we have had here since Bruce Babbitt.

Posted by: Opa2 | November 14, 2008 12:14 PM | Report abuse


I think Chris's list is alphabetical.

Posted by: philquin | November 14, 2008 12:11 PM | Report abuse


I think Chris's list is alphabetical.

Posted by: philquin | November 14, 2008 12:09 PM | Report abuse

With the election of Obama/Biden there's at least two new Democratic senators coming to Washington. Obama is seriously considering Kerry, Clinton, Lugar, Webb and Hagel for positions in his administration. If they all get an appointment, there will be many more new faces in the Senate and given the health of Kennedy, there could be two new senators for Massachusetts. The election of Obama is historic in itself. He would continue this historic election by selecting so many senators to serve in his administration.

Posted by: Nevadaandy | November 14, 2008 12:00 PM | Report abuse

@ palmettonajjar

Wow...I didn't realize the Washington Post had an 8-year delay in its posting of comments.

Posted by: KansasDem | November 14, 2008 11:56 AM | Report abuse


Interesting comment considering what we have had for the last 8 years and specifically from 01-07. Especially when you consider the even "narrower" victory GWB won in 04.

It will be tough for Obama to out do what W and the Republican led Congress did for six years to our constitution.

Posted by: filmstarctf | November 14, 2008 11:54 AM | Report abuse

"The election is over. Let the post election parodies begin!!"

What happened to Jib-Jab this year? Seemed pretty quiet.

Posted by: DDAWD | November 14, 2008 11:53 AM | Report abuse

Replacement for Lil Hillary?

Two words

Elliot Spitzer

Posted by: dganderson13 | November 14, 2008 11:48 AM | Report abuse

If 7% is "narrow" than Bush ruled under a micro minority and bankrupted our country.
Why did you not cry and compain about that?

The most overbearing one party rule were the Republicans and they have been taken out.

Why be a hater?

Posted by: dganderson13 | November 14, 2008 11:48 AM | Report abuse


John Hoeven will not run against Byron Dorgan unless the landscape is heavily tilted towards the GOP, and even then, he likes being Governor, and has done a good job according to most NoDaks. More importantly, Dorgan is very popular, and...

While it is no secret that Hoeven has federal ambitions, Conrad makes a much more attractive target in 2012, which would also allow Hoeven to finish his current term, particularly if the Countrywide thing gets traction.

I fully expect that Hoeven will be pressured hard by the NRSCC, and decline like he did in 06 unless he sees beating Dorgan as a sure thing.

Posted by: leuchtman | November 14, 2008 11:40 AM | Report abuse

Chris has California and North Dakota on this list above North Carolina. Boxer and Dorgan won't lose regardless of who runs, and that seat in NC hasn't been held for two consecutive terms in decades. We have a number of potential candidates who can win that race in blue North Carolina. And, regardless of what McCain does in Arizona, we're going to target that seat in rapidly-changing Arizona. Likewise, in Missouri if Robin Carnahan runs this is a prime pickup opportunity.
This first list of 2010 reminds me of those of the last two years when Democratic seats that had no business being on the line were anyway: Stabenow, Maryland's open-seat, Landrieud, etc.
Hoeven won't run because he knows he won't be elected to the Senate until one of North Dakota's Senators retires.
The only way I see the other party having a race in two years is if Daniel Inouye retires and Linda Lingle runs in Hawaii, or if Arnold runs in California, seems unlikely.
Looks to me like 70 should be the goal in 2010.

Posted by: jdunph1 | November 14, 2008 11:40 AM | Report abuse

The strength of a challenge to Barbara Boxer from Arnold depends on his popularity ratings at the time. His popularity is up and down like a yo-yo. Add to that the dismal state of the CA economy and all of the budget issues, and Arnold could have a tough time of it. The most recent round of budget problems damaged his popularity with Repubs as he was seen as "siding" with the Dems against the Repub members of the legislature. Also, his vocal opposition to Prop. 8 won't gain him any votes from the conservatives he will need in order to beat Sen. Boxer.

If Arnold is tapped to serve in the Obama Administration, then Boxer will essentially coast to victory.

Posted by: PeixeGato1 | November 14, 2008 11:40 AM | Report abuse


I don't know what alternate universe you're inhabiting (South Carolina?), but your candidate and your party lost and lost big.

Now go back to listening to Rush and let the adults with some intelligence run the country for the next twenty years or so.

Posted by: Bondosan | November 14, 2008 11:37 AM | Report abuse

The election is over. Let the post election parodies begin!! See “Why Can’t We (at least pretend to) Be Friends?” at


See more at

Posted by: thincaboutit | November 14, 2008 11:24 AM | Report abuse

Has there ever been a more divisive person headed for the White House, even before he gets sworn in? Just remember Mr. President Elect, the same people who graciously handed you a “narrow” victory can snatch it all away. They can do the same to your accommodating House and Senate just two years from now; just ask Bill Clinton. I can see that you intend to preside over the biggest and most overbearing “one party political machine” in history. Just remember how fragile and precarious your thin support really is before you start throwing your weight around. Stay tuned.

Posted by: palmettonajjar | November 14, 2008 11:24 AM | Report abuse

If Hillary is tapped for Secretary of State, I wonder who will be picked to replace her in the Senate?

Posted by: Bondosan | November 14, 2008 11:08 AM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company