Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity
About Chris Cillizza  |  On Twitter: The Fix and The Hyper Fix  |  On Facebook  |  On YouTube  |  RSS Feeds RSS Feed

The Senate Line: Dems Still Stuck at Five

With Labor Day behind us, the election season kicks into high gear. It's just 63 days to Election Day, so The Fix is moving to a twice-weekly schedule for The Line -- our rankings of the most competitive congressional and gubernatorial races.

From now until Nov. 7, the Line will run every Monday and Friday, rotating between House, Senate and governors races (we'll be giving the presidential Line a break until after the midterm elections).

Today we focus on the Senate where Democrats need a six-seat pick-up to regain control. At the moment, five Republican incumbents appear to be in serious danger. But there doesn't appear -- yet -- to be a sixth seat to put Democrats over the top.

The two best options at the moment are the open Tennessee seat and former Secretary of the Navy Jim Webb's (D) challenge to Virginia Sen. George Allen (R). While both of those contests have potential, they simply are not in the same category as the top five races on the Line this week. Given that, we still see Republicans holding the Senate -- narrowly -- today. But most of these campaigns have not truly engaged yet and much will change between now Nov. 7.

Remember that the No. 1 ranked race represents the seat most likely to switch party control in the fall. Kudos and criticisms are welcome in the comments section below.

To the Line!

10. Michigan: In a cycle that has given Republicans little reason for optimism, this race is one of the few that brings a smile to GOP strategists. Why? Oakland County Sheriff Mike Bouchard (R) won a surprisingly easy primary victory last month and hails from the right part of the state to be competitive in the general election. Republicans believe incumbent Debbie Stabenow (D) is imminently beatable, arguing that she has accomplished almost nothing during her six years in the Senate. But Stabenow has been consistently underestimated during her political career and defeating her will be no easy task. Still, recent polling shows this race is winnable for Republicans -- especially considering the dismal economic conditions in the state. (Previous ranking: N/A)

Candidate Profiles/Links/Fundraising: Stabenow, Bouchard | Incumbent's Voting Record | Michigan Political Profile

9. Tennessee: Rep. Harold Ford Jr. (D) and former Chattanooga Mayor Bob Corker (R) are both trying to claim the mantle of change in this contest. Ford is seeking to tie Corker to President Bush while Corker is painting Ford as just another politician from Washington. Democrats in the state and nationally are convinced that past history in southern open Senate seats is immaterial in this race where the pro-Democratic national environment and Ford's candidate skills make it a pick-up opportunity. We're skeptical, but polling shows the race is currently competitive. (Previous ranking: 10)

Candidate Profiles/Links/Fundraising: Corker, Ford | Ford's Voting Record | Tennessee Political Profile

8. Washington: When we wrote last week about Mike McGavick's (R) decision to write an open letter to voters about mistakes he had made in his past, we noted that the strategy would likely make or break his candidacy. The "break" option appears more likely at the moment. Stories published in the wake of McGavick's revelations brought out more details about the drunk driving incident he referenced in the letter. If you are going to confess past foibles in the context of a political campaign, you need to put everything on the table -- not offer it up in bits and pieces. McGavick still has a chance to unseat Maria Cantwell (D), but it has diminished over the past week. (Previous ranking: 6)

Candidate Profiles/Links/Fundraising: Cantwell, McGavick | Incumbent's Voting Record | Washington Political Profile

7. Maryland: Count us as fans of Lt. Gov. Michael Steele's (R) first TV ad, which has been running statewide for the last week or so. The ad, which features Steele talking directly to the camera, is different than most political commercials -- a good thing for a Republican running in a state that tilts heavily toward Democrats. Steele must convince large numbers of Democrats to vote for him, and to do so he must run an unorthodox campaign. For Steele much depends on the result of next week's Democratic primary. If Rep. Ben Cardin (D) beats former Rep. Kweisi Mfume, Steele's path to the Senate becomes more rocky. If Mfume wins, this race may well move up the Line. (Previous ranking: 7)

Candidate Profiles/Links/Fundraising: Cardin, Mfume, Steele | Maryland Political Profile

6. New Jersey: For the moment this race moves up a few slots. State Sen. Tom Kean Jr. (R) has effectively drawn attention to Bob Menendez's (D) work to secure federal funding for an organization that paid him several hundred thousand dollars in rent over the past decade. A debate over ethics between the candidates accrues to Kean's benefit since it plays into the Republican storyline that electing Menendez is in keeping with New Jersey's reputation as one of the most corrupt states in the union. We still believe that once Menendez brings his considerable financial edge over Kean ($7.4 million on hand to Kean's $2.3 million on hand at the end of June) this race will broaden out. New Jersey voters rarely make up their minds until the last minute, but in the end they almost always side with the Democrat. (Previous ranking: 8)

Candidate Profiles/Links/Fundraising: Kean Jr., Menendez | Incumbent's Voting Record | New Jersey Political Profile

5. Missouri: This race has always been the most difficult of the top five for Democrats to win. Sen. Jim Talent (R) has leveraged his financial advantage over state Auditor Claire McCaskill (D) over the past months, running nice-looking ads that make no mention of his party affiliation. There are two ways to read the new Research 2000 poll showing McCaskill ahead 47 percent to 46 percent. On one hand, Talent is now in a dead heat with McCaskill. On the other, he has spent a considerable amount of money to pull into a statistical dead heat with a challenger. We tend to believe the latter view, which suggests Talent has his work cut out for him. (Previous ranking: 5)

Candidate Profiles/Links/Fundraising: McCaskill, Talent | Incumbent's Voting Record | Missouri Political Profile

4. Ohio: As regular readers of The Fix know, we have been skeptical about Democrats' chances in this race for months. Republicans have begun their expected onslaught against Rep. Sherrod Brown (D), mining his voting record for alleged weaknesses on tax and national security measures. But, polls continue to show Brown with a lead (albeit within the margin of error.) Ask Republicans privately about the playing field in Ohio and they scramble to find words bad enough to fit the bill. Incumbent Mike DeWine (R) hasn't really committed any fireable offense, but it may not matter if the national and state winds are blowing strong enough in his face. (Previous ranking: 4)

Candidate Profiles/Links/Fundraising: Brown, DeWine | Voting Record: Brown, Dewine | Ohio Political Profile

3. Rhode Island: Two polls came out last week measuring where Sen. Lincoln Chafee (R) and Cranston Mayor Steve Laffey (R) stand in the Sept. 12 GOP primary race. The first, conducted by Rhode Island College, showed Laffey with a 51 percent to 34 percent lead. The second, funded by the National Republican Senatorial Committee, had Chafee ahead 53 percent to 39 percent. Which one is right? Probably neither. From what we here from both camps, this is a nip-and-tuck affair that could go either way in the next week. One other point: Coverage of this primary as a battle between the moderate Chafee and conservative Laffey is entirely misleading. Laffey is more conservative than Chafee, but he has campaigned as a populist outsider, not a firebreathing conservative. The primary winner faces Attorney General Sheldon Whitehouse (D) in the fall (Previous ranking: 3)

2. Montana: Sen. Conrad Burns's campaign continues to implode. The three-term incumbent is drawing negative press for a variety of public comments, ranging from implying that his house painter -- "a nice little Guatemalan man" -- might be an illegal immigrant to painting the war on terror as a fight against those who "drive taxicabs in the daytime and kill at night." Late last week Burns called on Gov. Brian Schweitzer (D) to declare a state of emergency in Montana to handle an ongoing fire; Schweitzer had already done so a month before. Republicans will attack state Sen. Jon Tester (D) as a liberal who is out of step with the state's voters, but Burns is making it easy to make this race a referendum on his service. He is in dire straits. (Previous ranking: 2)

Candidate Profiles/Links/Fundraising: Burns, Tester | Incumbent's Voting Record | Montana Political Profile

1. Pennsylvania: For the first time this cycle, we seriously weighed moving Pennsylvania down to the second position on the Line. Although Sen. Rick Santorum (R) appears to have closed the gap a bit (the USA Today/ Gallup poll not withstanding) in his race against state Treasurer Bob Casey Jr. (D), this race still looks close to unwinnable for the incumbent. Republican attempts to finance a Green Party candidate's bid for the ballot reveals that many within the party simply don't see a way Santorum can get to 50 percent. We agree. (Previous ranking: 1)

By Chris Cillizza  |  September 5, 2006; 6:00 AM ET
Categories:  Senate , The Line  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: The Friday Line: U.S. House Races
Next: Florida Primary Preview

Comments

I think that there are still too many races too close to the line to anticipate this far out. Maryland, New Jersey, Rhode Island, Tennesse, Washington, Missouri, Minnesota could flip on a dime with a well placed add a week before election day. Arizona, Virginia, Michigan, Pennsylvania, these races, with wider margains for either party, are easier to predict.

Posted by: P Chase | September 8, 2006 9:41 PM | Report abuse

ensign in Nevada was only 3.4 ahead of carter in the latest zogby/wsj poll. no one finds that interesting?

a tidal wave perhaps?

Posted by: scotty | September 8, 2006 12:39 PM | Report abuse

"Republicans don't care about world opinion."

I completely agree. Republican controlled White House and Congress have shown complete apathy towards world opinion, virtually ignoring diplomatic process in favour of unilateral force.

Yes I agree that it does make it very difficult for a candidate to win an election after they tie themselves to an "international test." But in a time when the US in no longer the global economic hyperpower, and must look towards other countries for support and international dialogue, it would be very short-sighted not to do so.

Where is the US now? If the current Administration had payed due credence to the UN Security Council in the lead up to Iraq, then perhaps over 2000 soldiers and thousands of innocent Iraqis would not be dead.

Maybe the Republicans should have realised that in the aftermath of 9/11, US opinion (on the whole,) is no longer objective. World opinion may not always be very appealing, but isn't Democracy, (the same "Democracy" Bush is so eager to spread to other countries) based on the idea that the majority is correct?

For the Republican party to trumpet its defiance of International consesus as an attribute is a sad reflection of our own selfishness.

Posted by: Concerned | September 8, 2006 12:53 AM | Report abuse

Concerned: Republicans don't care about world opinion. We believe were right and we move against such statutes as world view, unless of course world view is our view. Remember Kerry saying in one of the debates in 04' "international test". That is one thing Bush used to define Kerry. That he's afraid to be an American innovator and would only move with world view. This helped Bush win that election. Kerry buried himself under the "international test" standard. That helped conservatives define him as a liberal and didn't set too well with many independents nor even southern/midwestern democrats. That could have been the difference in places like Iowa and New Mexico. Maybe even Ohio. Bottom line: American politicians make it tough to win national elections when tieing themselves to an international test.

Posted by: reason | September 7, 2006 4:40 PM | Report abuse

Before I forget - why should a Democrat be elected?

Because for the past 6 years, a period of time that has seen America's standing in the world plummet to an all time low, all three branches of elected office have been controlled by the Republican Party.

In 2004, every country surveyed about the Presidential Election voted overwhelmingly for John Kerry and the Democratic Party by a margin of at least 5% (other than America that is.) For the sake of the US, people around the world fervently wished for a Democratic President.

You live in America KOZ - I don't. Why don't you go to another country and inquire about a Republican-led America's international reputation?

Still determined to brand every Democrat as evil?

Posted by: Concerned | September 7, 2006 12:56 AM | Report abuse

Why is the word 'liberal' such a terrible insult? Certain people, (who personally oppose the virtues of liberalism,) sling it around like mud, belittling people of different political persuasions in an atmosphere of polarizing animosity.

My copy of the Oxford Dictionary has the word liberal defined as "a social-political belief: progressive and tolerant."

Is that so bad?

Nor do I believe that people who aren't liberal are mindless and stupid conservatives. No one deserves to be denigrated in a political discussion.

Posted by: Concerned | September 7, 2006 12:53 AM | Report abuse

Joan,
To compare Dole with Russert is like comparing George Bush to Steven Hawkings.

She has yet, in ANY Senate floor speech or panel to speak freely. But you probably don't watch C-span, and you obviously didn't watch the show.

Posted by: hazmaq | September 6, 2006 12:16 PM | Report abuse

RobMilette - Thanks for the information on Virginia.

Zogby Interactive* 08/15 - 08/21
Allen 47
Webb 48
Undecided 5

Very interesting that Webb has been able to close the gap, considering the lack of much visible campaigning yet far. You'd have to guess that Allen truly shot himself in the foot with the Macaca comment.

Posted by: Nor'Easter | September 6, 2006 11:53 AM | Report abuse

Florida Results
No surprises

US Senate
Nelson (D)* vs. Harris (R)

Governor
Crist (R) vs. Davis (D)

Poll Watch

Governor
Actual Results

Dem Primary
Davis 47.4%
Smith 41.1%
margin 6.3%

Rep Primary
Crist 64%
Gallagher 33.4%
margin 30.6%

US Senate
Rep Primary
Harris 49.4%
McBride 30%
Collins 15.3%
Monroe 5.3%
margin 19.4%

Polls

Quinnipiac
Aug 10-13
Dem Primary
Davis 43%
Smith 32%
margin 11%
Call= 1pt
Margin= 0
Candidate totals= 0
Total= 1 pt
Quality pick= 4pts

Rep Primary
Crist 57%
Gallagher 32%
margin 25%

Call= 1pt
Margin= 0
Candidate totals= 1 pt (gallagher total within margin or error)
Total= 2 pts
Quality pick= 4pts

US Senate
Rep Primary
Harris 38%
McBride 22%
Collins 11%
Monroe 3%
margin 16%
Total= 3 pts

6 pts in 3 race= 2.0 avg
Overall average= 2.4 pts on 5 races polled

Mason Dixon
July 24
Dem Primary
Davis 29%
Smith 14%
margin 15%
Total= 1 pt

Rep Primary
Crist 55%
Gallagher 24%
margin 31%
Total= 2 pts

US Senate
Rep Primary
Harris 36%
McBride 11%
Collins 8%
Monroe 2%
margin 25%
Total= 2 pts

5 pts in 3 races= 1.67 avg
Overall average= 1.9 pts on 11 races polled

Strategic Vision
Aug 30
Dem Primary
Davis 43%
Smith 37%
margin 6%
Total= 2 pts

Rep Primary
Crist 52%
Gallagher 36%
margin 16%
Total= 2pts

US Senate
Rep Primary
Harris 48%
McBride 11%
Collins 6%
Monroe 4%
margin 37%
Total= 3 pts

7 pts in 3 race= 2.33 avg
Overall average= 2.6 pts on 5 races polled

Survey USA

Rep Primary
Crist 57%
Gallagher 34%
margin 23%
Total= 2 pts

US Senate
Rep Primary
Harris 45%
McBride 22%
Collins 12%
Monroe 5%
margin 23%
Total= 4 pts

6 pts in 2 race= 3.0 avg
Overall average= 3.18 pts on 22 races polled

St. Pete Times
August 11
US Senate
Rep Primary
Harris 28%
McBride 11%
Collins 9%
Monroe 5%
margin 17%
Total= 5 pts

Only race polled

Posted by: RMill | September 6, 2006 11:22 AM | Report abuse

Is everyone who ever disagrees with the radical liberal agenda mindless or stupid? when did you all get awarded the world's smartest human award? From the tone of this discussion with the rumors, the mudslinging, the gay allegations, etc, it certainly doesn't seem like you all are possessed of any exquisite ability to reason and debate.

I never did get an answer to the most simple question - why should a Dem be elected?
If you consider this to be thoughtful and illuminating, I am at a loss to participate in that miasma. I would say shame but it is clear your morality does not line up well with any that I know. What exactly do you all stand for?

you just can't be taken seriously anymore and the word is getting out.

Posted by: kingofzouk | September 6, 2006 10:48 AM | Report abuse

I will defend Senator Elizabeth Dole on the bet to keep Republicans in charge of the Senate. Tim Russert has been asking for bets on election turnout for years, and the money goes to the Girls and Boys Clubs of America. It is pretty pathetic to think Elizabeth is scheming to take away the chance for Democrats to win. Pathetic and goofy. Perhaps the Democrats are plotting to sabotage candidates and this guy to is badmouthing Mrs Dole thinks she is just as underhanded?

Posted by: Joan | September 6, 2006 10:35 AM | Report abuse

King of Zouk.....sigh. Why do you mindlessly suppport the NSA Wiretapping Programme when we have no knowledge or understanding of what actually takes place?

Perhaps if a Congressional Oversight Committee were established to prevent any deviation from the laws enshrined in our legal system, and this body were to publish its findings, then I could respect your right to an opinion.

However we know nothing. Absolutely squat. We are just expected to blithely accept this intrusion into our personal lives, and if we raise any questions about the legality of such a programme - we are branded as supportive of terrorists.

KOZ, ponder now the words of Europe's most distinguished terrorism expert:

"Even when a terrorist plot fails, the terrorists win. This is because, by trying to enforce new laws and push through legislation to protect ourselves, when only erode the very civil liberties of our society that terrorists seek to destroy."

Posted by: Concerned | September 6, 2006 1:21 AM | Report abuse

Nor'Easter

Zogby Interactive* 08/15 - 08/21
Allen 47
Webb 48
Undecided 5

As for the Ohio Story, I too am intrigued by whats going on. Who's got the story.

Posted by: Rob Millette | September 5, 2006 7:56 PM | Report abuse

I like the Tenn. race and look for Ford to win this one. Off topic, talking earlier a person gave me the meaning of the word "queer", I don't have a dictionary, wonder if someone would look it up. The latest I have on the Tenn. it is pretty well even. I mean the open seat.

Posted by: lylepink | September 5, 2006 7:48 PM | Report abuse

" 'Tagging back to last weeks wrap up, I am flat out mind boggled that an Ohio government official spent hours and hours every day on this board, tossing off insults and half witted coments, all the while on the public payroll.'

I just feel sorry for the intelligent residients of Ohio -- that their states hires such dummies and do-nothings...and then there's Ken Blackwell..." - drindl

OMG! Did Vivian finally get exposed for the government fat-cat, taxpayer-money-wasting republican hypocrite that he is!?!?

What did I miss while I have been away?

Someone tell me what happened!


Posted by: Ohio guy | September 5, 2006 6:59 PM | Report abuse

Umm, sad part, I meant. Although I have to say the republicans are a sad party, a sorry excuse for a party.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 5, 2006 6:18 PM | Report abuse

Yes you are right, Nor'easter, it's all about the money. And that's the truly sad party.

Posted by: drindl | September 5, 2006 6:16 PM | Report abuse

MikeB - "I am flat out mind boggled that an Ohio government official spent hours and hours every day on this board, tossing off insults and half witted coments, all the while on the public payroll. I thought that was the sort of things Republican's accused iberals of doing and demanded they be fired! But the rules only apply to 'others'."

I must have missed this. Rather than guess at what I think is obvious, only to be incorrect, please enlighten me.

Posted by: Nor'Easter | September 5, 2006 6:12 PM | Report abuse

"...Allen is LOSING in Va, can we hear about that?"

I haven't seen anything which shows Allen "losing" yet. Looking at the trend of the polls, "losing ground" yes; losing the election, not yet.

His SurveyUSA Approval rating was still over 51% (but trending downward), and that may be before the Macaca flap.

But, Allen has a ton of money to spend and his people won't hestiate to spend it in whatever manner they think is necessary for him to win the election. Remember, Virginia is the home of the Swift Boat people. You have to believe that a number of them are working with Allen; and if Kerry can be tarred, why can't Webb.

The Post's Bellwether site (http://projects.washingtonpost.com/elections/keyraces/56/) shows Webb with $424,245 on hand, while Allen has $6,616,620. That's a 16 to 1 advantage. That's huge!

You really think that this seat is in the Top Ten of those most likely to change hands at this minute? I don't.

Jim Webb still has an awful lot to overcome.

Posted by: Nor'Easter | September 5, 2006 6:04 PM | Report abuse

FH and conservative posters like him go on at great length about "personal responibility". They attack schools and teachers and parents becasue the SAT score are down. But, as drindl says, it's sometimes a little difficult to figure out what's going on in the public schools (or Washington) when you're working two or three jobs just to make ends meet. What make me ANGRY is that the victims of this vote for the very conservatives who stuck them in this position to begin with. I'm waiyting for people to realize how badly they've been taken in by this crowd and, then, I expect we'll have some actual criminal trials... The Republican Party is as much a criminal organization as is the MAFIA. The Rico statutes were written to cover organizations and individuals like this!

Posted by: MikeB | September 5, 2006 5:54 PM | Report abuse

Well, FH, I strongly believe in personal responsibility...but what has that to do with the dems 'saving them'. Personal responsibility can't prevent a powerful corporation from taking advantage of you. Only government can do that. And that's what I believe government should do--the first function of it, in fact -- protect its citizens from predators.

Posted by: drindl | September 5, 2006 5:42 PM | Report abuse

"These are people who are often overwhelmed and busy, but still, they are creating their own suffering."

And the dems are here to save them...personal responsiblilty be dam.ed.

Posted by: FH | September 5, 2006 5:09 PM | Report abuse

I think MikeB is angry that people are so lazy, and rightfully so. It's a tragedy. The girl who cuts my hair is a good example. She's a bright girl, too, but she works fulltime, and she's got 3 young boys. She has no idea what's going politically... she never reads or watches the news.

I asked her last week if she knew who Jack Abramoff is. Never heard of him. Doesn't have any idea who's running for any office in November. Doesn't vote. Believes Democrats are evil, becuase that's what her husband, a real jerk, tells her. And yet I like her a lot... but she doesn't have health insurance for her kids, and thinks that somehow that's becuase of immigrants. These are people who are often overwhelmed and busy, but still, they are creating their own suffering.

Posted by: drindl | September 5, 2006 4:46 PM | Report abuse

MikeB;
"And so, those foolish soccer moms and cowardly lions we call "Nascar Dads" will act like a mindless mob and pretty much do and vote based on the last thing they see on the boob tube."

Lighten up, Mike, there's more to the soccer moms and nascar dads than you allow. Its hard to stereotype them like you have.

Sure, some of them are intractably ignorant, but I disagree about "people" in general having a mutual stupidity, that is much more an individual thing.

Unfortunately too many of those same individuals are in one political party, wooing ingnorant idiots was the only way the Republicans could grow their base after the Clinton impeachment debacle...

Your vitriolic "soccer-mom" perspective sounds pretty effete to me. And assuming ignorance in any group that you harbor resentment towards can be easily called "prejudiced.

I believe one of the best things about Democracy is that the "average" of ALL our opinions most often represents the truth.

Which is why I promote mandatory voting.

If people believe we should give up our right to privacy (NSA) to help secure our nation, then giving our right "not to vote" makes even more sense.

I say, lets keep the right to privacy and take away the right not to vote. That will protect all those other rights, henceforth and forever, from further and future neocon tampering.

Later

Posted by: JEP | September 5, 2006 4:36 PM | Report abuse

'Tagging back to last weeks wrap up, I am flat out mind boggled that an Ohio government official spent hours and hours every day on this board, tossing off insults and half witted coments, all the while on the public payroll.'

I just feel sorry for the intelligent residients of Ohio -- that their states hires such dummies and do-nothings...and then there's Ken Blackwell...

And Will, I think you're right about Cheney being gay, and Lynn too, but Bush I think has a thing going with condi, at least that's what I hear from friends in DC,,,Laura, on the other hand has a long-term female friend who spends a lot of nights there. Then there was that gay male prostitute, Gannon/guckert who spents hours in the White House, on almost 100 occasions...wonder who he was visiting.

And really Chris, come on, Allen is LOSING in Va, can we hear about that?

Posted by: drindl | September 5, 2006 4:33 PM | Report abuse

JEB - "The Republican supposition that there is a class of soccer-mom and nascar-dad "out there" that can be tapped for future public support, ignores the fact that these middle-class blue-collar people are their biggest victims in this upper-class economy"

In the deep South, the cracker bosses successfully enslaved poor white workers for over a century by simply turning them against blacks "...you're better than them, you were born with white skin...". Today, these same morons are the NASCAR dads and the drooling fat soap opera fan soccer moms. I don't really like admitting this, but most people are incredibly stupid. The Fundimentalists support the most single most wicked President in our nations history, they support an adminstration and party that is rife with sexual perversions and criminal behavior of every sort and not a fellow believer in sight. Although I don't particularly like her, at least Hillary Clinton is and always has been a devout Methodist. Bush never set foot in a church until Rove decided to go after the Fundimentalist vote. ANd Bush's economic policies are flat out wrecking forever the Middle Class in this country. He and the Republican Party created a permanent oligarchy of investors, bankers, and administrators that only understand self interest..forget patiotism and country and God. Tagging back to last weeks wrap up, I am flat out mind boggled that an Ohio government official spent hours and hours every day on this board, tossing off insults and half witted coments, all the while on the public payroll. I thought that was the sort of things Republican's accused iberals of doing and demanded they be fired! But the rules only apply to "others". And so, those foolish soccer moms and cowardly lions we call "Nascar Dads" will act like a mindless mob and pretty much do and vote based on the last thing they see on the boob tube.

Posted by: MikeB | September 5, 2006 4:13 PM | Report abuse

"If you don't think it's a serious race then please at least do us the favor of explaining why, since most of us seem to be laboring under the impression that an incumbent polling beneath his challenger is typically supposed to mean serious trouble."

I posted about this long ago, Chris can't over-rule his publisher.

If Allen loses this Senate race, for whatever macacan reason that might occur, he's "done" for in terms of presidential politics, and few publications stand to gain more advertising revenue from a Virginia psuedo-native son running for Pres, than the WASHINGTON POST.

I would guess Allen anticipated saving bookoo Senate campaign bucks for his presidential dash (balderdash, it would appear)by having such an easy time of it this election.

Surprise!

Shades of macaca!

He's in the race of his life, against a REAL Navy man in a REAL Navy state, and he's gonna' have to spend all that hard-earned campaign money NOW, just to stay in the Senate game.

Allen is Presidential Toast. He may even be Senatorial Toast. Only the next couple months will tell.

But until that verdict is in, don't expect anyone from the WaPo to sit on the jury. They get too much campaign advertising money from the defendants.

Are there any other races this scenario applies to?

JEP

Posted by: JEP | September 5, 2006 3:56 PM | Report abuse

Will,
Is the McGavick screw-up really resonating out in the rainy Pac-west? Just curious what the local's are saying.

And CC, I second the need for an article explaining why VA is not in the top ten.

Posted by: Andy R | September 5, 2006 3:45 PM | Report abuse

One last quip:
how many "casualties" make a "Kerfuffle?"

Posted by: JEP | September 5, 2006 3:31 PM | Report abuse

Oh, I for one don't think Karl Rove is gay. Sure, Bush is gay, and Cheney is gay, but Karl is obviously a straight - if too geeky - guy.

History is funny - years from now we'll have the memoirs and it will all come out how the first closeted gay Presidency was a total failure.

Posted by: Will in Seattle | September 5, 2006 3:27 PM | Report abuse

Virginia? According to 3 new polls, Webb is either tied or he leads the race. There's always one Senate race that suddenly becomes competitive that a lot of people didn't anticipate. Kentucky was the same way last time and had Democrats bothered to fund their candidate, they could have won.

Posted by: Q | September 5, 2006 3:26 PM | Report abuse

Re Washington State and the imploding candidacy of Red McGavick - most of this has been due to his being proven to have lied repeatedly and often, about both his arrest for drunk driving, how often he drove drunk, his repeated lying in the press about what he's done in business, and a whole host of other things.


All of which makes him the consumate Bushie - a proven repeated liar with a drinking problem who can't tell the truth even when he should.

And that just ties him to the President even more.

Posted by: Will in Seattle | September 5, 2006 3:23 PM | Report abuse

Chris,

Your exclusion of Virginia is starting to look absurd. I get the impression that maybe you just don't want to add what is obviously now a top-tier race to the top 10 list because it would mean bumping a would-be GOP pickup from the list and looking biased against them. You've got Webb polling dead even or ahead of Allen now. This is head and shoulders above NJ or MD. Webb is polling much better than Steele is vs. Cardin for the general election. Seiously, your refusal to even discuss the VA race with anything longer than half a sentence is starting to look absurd. If you don't think it's a serious race then please at least do us the favor of explaining why, since most of us seem to be laboring under the impression that an incumbent polling beneath his challenger is typically supposed to mean serious trouble.

Posted by: Jackson Landers | September 5, 2006 3:21 PM | Report abuse

I know, I'm way off thread, but I'm just trying to add some provocative posts...

They "kinda-sorta" fit with the whole theme, though... Especially the part about the Republicans claiming successful "Homeland Security" when it is the American Public that is protecting ITSELF.

signing off

JEP

Posted by: JEP | September 5, 2006 3:16 PM | Report abuse

Democrats need to start reminding America about something very important, that has to do with REAL "Homeland Security" in this election cycle coming up.

Bush and his pantywaist security plans had little or nothing to do with protecting America from new airplane attacks. The real fact is, since 9-11, there's not a plane or bus load of Americans on the planet that will let some crazed terrorist take over their vehicle.

Before 9-11, we all supposed that, if our plane got hijacked we would be held hostage at some remote runway and, hopefully, traded for cash or political concessions.

Nowadays, we ALL believe, if our plane gets hijacked, we're toast.

And we just won't let that happen.

I agree with Mencia on this one; if a crazy person jumps up on a US plane and runs down the aisle threatening to hijack that plane, that poor sucker's toast.

If Harley doesn't take him out first, Bubba's gonna do it, and if he misses, Manuel will be standing there to take that hijacker down. While he's on the floor, Gramma hits him hard with her backpack, and the soccer mom in seat 11A administers a deadly coup-de-grace with her right heel,(she learned some Wing Chun after 9-11.)

Power Rangers, Unite!!!

That, my friends, is the real essence of "Homeland Security."

Bush and his apologists, especially Mehlman, are trying to claim responsibility for the fact that no hijackings have occurred since 9-11, and that is pure baloney.

It is the American public that made that change, and that change happened on 9-12, 2001. From that day forth, the easy opportunity for any hijacker to take a plane full of fearful Americans evaporated forever.

Ask any Arab-American traveller you might know, they will tell you how right I am.

Since 9-11, The Public itself is like a cocked pistol, waiting and watching for any suspiscious activity, especially on our airplanes.

Pity the fool who tries to hijack another plane full of American citizens. They'll likely leave that plane on a gurney, face covered, before those American passengers will let anything like 9-11 happen again.

Posted by: JEP | September 5, 2006 2:40 PM | Report abuse

I don't mean to carry on a dialogue of futility, but all we've got on the blogs these days is the likes of bhoomes and K O' Z, whose ignorance is not bliss, it is just dangerous...

There was a time when "The Right" had advocates aplenty, intelligent debators with seemingly reasonable arguments.

They are gone now. They know, now, they were defending a lie, (remember these are the "smart ones" we are talking about).

No really intelligent conservative person I know tries to defend Bush publicly any more, they are all embarrassed with the K o'Z types who keep spouting debunked dogma, (but then, so does Cheney.)

Many of the intelligent Republicans I know regret voting for Bush, or they did not even vote for him last time around.

And we are talking about Kansas here.

While living in California back in the early days of the 21st Century, back when the word "blog" was first born,I cut my blogteeth debating some of the best and brightest neocons on the net

This was back when some intelligent people actually still believed what Bush and his neocon handlers were telling them.

But over the past year or two, the really debate-worthy conservative challengers have literally departed the blogs, retreating into their WSJ turtleshells. They simply can no longer support a lie, but they are too egotistically or ideologically bound to apologize for aiding in the deception.

There are still some pathological public liars (just listen to Clear Channel or watch Sinclair and Fox) working the Turdblossom talking points on a daily basis.
But their public is waking up every day to the ongoing lie.
The Republican supposition that there is a class of soccer-mom and nascar-dad "out there" that can be tapped for future public support, ignores the fact that these middle-class blue-collar people are their biggest victims in this upper-class economy. The economic boom is top-heavy, and blinds it beneficiaries to the sacrifice of the middle class and the suffering of the working-poor.

Like the French aristocrats, before that Heady Revolution, our ruling "class" (I use the term quite loosely) is not capable of recognizing its own demise, because of rampant, unbridled greed.

Soccer moms and nascar dads don't always "get it", we are insulated by our own comforts, but at the heart of it all, we do want the truth, not a continued, fearmongering lie.

Iran is a replay of Iraq, even with their nuclear research, they do not represent the terrible threat to the US that we are being spoonfed. All they threaten is our monopoly on oil.

Don't threaten us with mushroom clouds when all you want is the oil.

We won't be fooled again.

Posted by: JEP | September 5, 2006 2:06 PM | Report abuse

k of z - go back and read Louisa's article. It stated that there are natural cyles over the past 8000 years but that the recent increases in carbon dioxide are far outside anything previously experienced. I quote:

"Each time, the world also experienced the relatively high temperatures associated with warm, inter-glacial periods, which were almost certainly linked with levels of carbon dioxide and possibly methane in the atmosphere.

However, existing levels of carbon dioxide and methane are far higher than anything seen during these earlier warm periods, said Eric Wolff of the BAS.

"Ice cores reveal the Earth's natural climate rhythm over the last 800,000 years. When carbon dioxide changed there was always an accompanying climate change," Dr Wolff said. "Over the past 200 years, human activity has increased carbon dioxide to well outside the natural range and we have no analogue for what will happen next.'"

So it does say that there are naturally occuring cycles but that human activity has resulted in changes well beyond what occurs naturally. I am pretty much a centrist. One reason why I am down on Republicans lately is their willful disregard of scientific data. Whether it is supporting teaching religion instead of biology in the public schools, censoring NASA scientists who comment on the Big Bang theory or climate change, suppressing EPA studies, or denying federal funding for stem cell research, the Republican party willfully ignores the scientific consensus on a number of fronts.

Posted by: JimD in FL | September 5, 2006 1:53 PM | Report abuse

Should have added:

'For almost five years, Pakistani soldiers and paramilitary forces have battled local tribesmen, many believed allied to the Taliban and Osama bin Laden's al-Qaida network, in this fiercely independent mountain region where central government powers were not applied. Bin Laden is also believed to be hiding along the porous Pakistani-Afghan frontier.'

This is a very big deal, becuase it means that Pakistan is essentially dropping out of the fictional GWOT and not even bothering to try to get bin Ladin or to stop the Taliban from retaking Afghanistan, which they are rapidly doiing,

Bin Ladin is getitng off scot-free, no one, not even the US is looking for him now. So much for President Codpiece's crowing right after 9/11--'dead or alive'. What a completely impotent administration. Maybe rush could give them some viagra....

Posted by: Drindl | September 5, 2006 1:52 PM | Report abuse

'Pakistan's government and pro-Taliban militants signed an agreement Tuesday to ensure "permanent peace" in a tribal region bordering Afghanistan, seeking to end five years of violent unrest in the area.'

Can anyone say, 'appeasement'?

Posted by: Anonymous | September 5, 2006 1:45 PM | Report abuse

drindl - The word on thje street in Washington is that Karl Rove is a pretty weird homosexual.

kingofzouk - I tried to answer your post and provide web citations concerning the many documented irregularities surrounding both the Ohio and Florida votes, but Chris (the Moderator?) banned it because I suggested that ALL Bush supporters are criminals.

Posted by: MikeB | September 5, 2006 1:45 PM | Report abuse

A little insight into Karl Rove. There are so many gay men and women in the republican 'leadership' -- it's ... interesting.

'In The Architect, a new book chronicling Karl Rove's life and conservative agenda, authors James Moore and Wayne Slater, reveal Rove's father, Louis Rove, was homosexual.

Louis Rove left his family during the 1969 Christmas holidays and moved to Los Angeles where he eventually "came out." According to Rove's father's best friend, an openly gay man named Joseph Koons, "Louie didn't hide the fact that he was gay. But he didn't play it up either." The Architect describes Louis Rove as a shy man, encumbered by his three hundred pound figure. To encourage Rove to socialize, Joseph Koons, invited him to join a retired gay men's group called the "Old Farts Club," jokingly referred to among the men as the "Rainbow Casket."

Karl Rove frequently visited his father in the 1980s. Joseph Koons said he didn't sense "any great tension" between Karl and his father.

Rove keeps a photograph of his father on his White House desk and has remarked to reporters that his father "lived life exactly the way he wanted to live it."

Posted by: drindl | September 5, 2006 1:31 PM | Report abuse

All the zouk troll knows are the lies and slander and 'playgound insults' of his mentor, rush.

'a total lack of any original thought' he says, while he zings out his tired and trite and hackneyed rightwing lies.. he can't comprehend science, economics, even simple metaphors. It's sad, really. But totally unworthy of anyone's attention. You can't have a conversation with someone incapable of listening, or learning.

Posted by: drindl | September 5, 2006 1:30 PM | Report abuse

Actually, unless I am mistaken, according to Florida law, Harris had the power to hold up the certification of that election at any time, if she believed that it did not represent the actual intentions of the voting public.

Florida law reads this way, expecting their elected officials would never allow a clearly questionable election to proceed.

They did not ever expect that the same person entrusted with certifying the elections would be Bush's State Campaign Manager. In most law books, that is known as a conflict of interests.

Her conflict of interests, established well before the election, would have sent KofZ and his kind through the roof, if she had been a Democrat.

Admit it K, if Harris had been a Democrat IN CHARGE OF Gore's FLORIDA campaign, SHE WOULD NEVER HAVE BEEN ALLOWED TO SIT IN THAT CHAIRMAN'S SEAT IN THE FIRST PLACE!

But no, since she is a Republican, according to K o'Z, she is just another "I WAS ORDERED TO DO IT!" victim, subject to "the rules" that seem to come and go so selectively in and out of the picture.

Hypocrisy eventually comes back on you, no matter how self-righteous one might imagine themselves to be. Ms. Harris is learning that lesson as her party abandons her.

I wonder how long til' our happy trolls figure it out.

Probably never, at least in this lifetime. Ignorance is bliss, especially if you are incapable of admitting you are wrong, and in denial of the obvious failures of the current administration.

Denial and ignorance are such a comfortable combination these days...

Posted by: JEP | September 5, 2006 1:16 PM | Report abuse

I agree that the US supeme court should have stayed out of it. but the 24 hour cable news channels couldn't wait. the result would have always been Bush wins since the House would have eventually decided. but that is the design for these situations. It is too bad we rely so heavily on courts when legislatures won't do their jobs.

Posted by: kingofzouk | September 5, 2006 1:11 PM | Report abuse

Louisa responds with playground insults and a total lack of any original thought. that seems to be the Dem platform these days.

Discourse can't have an IQ. although I do belive that if you averaged a bunch of leftists' IQs you could possibly come up with negative numbers.

why can't any of you contrive a decent plausible argument, with no insults and sticking to policy differences? Is name calling and moronic chanting all you have?

Keep chanting - "Yeah but Bush (et al) is dumb"....

Posted by: kingofzouk | September 5, 2006 1:07 PM | Report abuse

I believe that 2000 Florida election count should be left to the Historians and Ethicists, but there seem to be "revisionists" at work on both sides.

Seems to me that the Main Stream Media "recount" determined that Bush actually won Florida using most standards (hanging chads, etc.); albeit ever so slightly.

Among the travesties though were the importing of Washington political operatives to pose as Floridians and intimidate local election officials [see
Al Kamen 01/24/05 "Where are they now" follow-up, http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A31074-2005Jan23.html ]; and a United States Supreme Court which flouted 200+ years of tradition in staying out of the election process at the state level and issued a "this time only" decision.

It's why Cassidy & Associates used to begin their ads with "In a town where one vote can change an entire industry..." [That's right, the Cassidy and Assoc. linked to Jack Abramoff.]

Posted by: Nor'Easter | September 5, 2006 1:05 PM | Report abuse

the Big G I was talking about is health care, retirement, taxes, economy, schools, etc. these are things that actually effect me on a daily basis. Having the NSa listing in on my calls to Iran does not bother me in the least, unless I am doing something I shouldn't be doing. Is this really that hard to comprehend?

you stated the middle class created all the wealth - so you admit that this economy is doing fabulously, as all the data shows. what would you change? Increase taxes on capital so that the middle class stops inventing and investing?

I have not heard a decent reason why any Dem should be elected. without bashing Bush, can you provide one?

Government has gotten bigger under Bush, but consider that the Dems only want more of this. The solution to Big G (if you admit it is a problem, which you seem to waffle on) is most certainly not to elect more Dems. can you provide a consistent view on anything today?

Posted by: kingofzouk | September 5, 2006 1:00 PM | Report abuse

I told you not to try to understand it, braindead. Because obviously, you didn't. I could try to explain it to you slowly, but I'm afraid it's just not worth it. It's funny how the IQ of the discourse drops 50 points after you show up...

Posted by: louisa | September 5, 2006 12:59 PM | Report abuse

Hard core Republicans are much less in numbers than last cycle and hard core Dems are greater in number. If Independents lean much more to the left as I predict they will I can't see any Democratic losses, other than by self-destructiveness or Diebold.

Speaking of crooks I'd like to hear someone elses take on Senator Elizabeth Doles comments on Fox News Sunday with Chris Wallace. Normally a very well programmed and controlled Senator, in a bit of frustration she blurted out that she "guaranteed Republicans will control the Senate". In fact she was so confident, she bet on it.

You'd almost have to see the piece to feel it wasn't just spin. It came from somewhere else. ??

Posted by: hazmaq | September 5, 2006 12:56 PM | Report abuse

Louisa - you clearly do not have much aptitude in the sciences. the article you posted makes the conclusions void. you stated on one hand that there is a naturally occuring cycle, yet on the other hand, humans caused it. which is it? I don't think that auto emissions had much to do with this 8000 years ago. so this is the worst yet. Like last years hurricane season? And this year is more moderate. did you know that there is always a worst when it comes to averages. someday you may want to look into some mathematical statistics. Even if this is man-made, do you want to ruin the world economy over 2 or 3 degrees of temperature. but that decision would involve clear thinking, something for which you seem to be well-below average. Is that caused by being a Dem or does being a Dem result in lack of clarity of thought?

Posted by: kingofzouk | September 5, 2006 12:52 PM | Report abuse

"did you ever consider that we don't want Big government in our lives?"

Are you talking about the NSA here?

Big Brother or Big Government, it is all the same, KofZ, you are making our arguments for us.

You just don't realize, the "Big Government" you talk about has gotten even bigger under Bush, and not to protect you and me, but to protect the Billionaires Oil club from real competition.

You can live in trickle-down subserviance, if you choose, I consider it a cultural attack on the middle class, which is where all that new wealth came from in the first place.

Pick your own heroes, K, but at least try to pick the ones who really defend you, not your confused ideology.

You've got your good guys and your bad guys mixed up.

Posted by: JEP | September 5, 2006 12:52 PM | Report abuse

Chris, have you really looked at Michael Steele's TV ad in MD? You say it is different, but it's completely corny and laughable! Seriously, it's produced as though it is a cheap and fake lawyer commercial, with its close up shots to Steele's arched eyebrows and crossed arms. And the music and the lighting, it all adds up to something pathetic! I hope he runs it between now and election day, spending all of his money on it.

Posted by: Jason D | September 5, 2006 12:52 PM | Report abuse

'did you ever consider that we don't want Big government in our lives? It really is that simple.'

Omigod, I knew this clown was delusional but I don't even know what to say about this comment. Republicans must truly be mentally ill. Does clown not know that the bushis have created the biggest, most expenisve, most instrusive ever? Is he joking, or he is just delusional?

Oh and her's a little bit of science news [note: don't bother trying to read this, zouk, you need a brain to comprehend it:]

'The rapid rise in greenhouse gases over the past century is unprecedented in at least 800,000 years, according to a study of the oldest Antarctic ice core which highlights the reality of climate change.

Air bubbles trapped in ice for hundreds of thousands of years have revealed that humans are changing the composition of the atmosphere in a manner that has no known natural parallel.

Scientists at the British Antarctic Survey (BAS) in Cambridge have found there have been eight cycles of atmospheric change in the past 800,000 years when carbon dioxide and methane have risen to peak levels.

Each time, the world also experienced the relatively high temperatures associated with warm, inter-glacial periods, which were almost certainly linked with levels of carbon dioxide and possibly methane in the atmosphere.

However, existing levels of carbon dioxide and methane are far higher than anything seen during these earlier warm periods, said Eric Wolff of the BAS.

"Ice cores reveal the Earth's natural climate rhythm over the last 800,000 years. When carbon dioxide changed there was always an accompanying climate change," Dr Wolff said. "Over the past 200 years, human activity has increased carbon dioxide to well outside the natural range and we have no analogue for what will happen next.'


Posted by: louisa | September 5, 2006 12:51 PM | Report abuse

MikeB - convenient lies. I would like to see the links to a factual basis for this. Even the WaPo conceded that 3 of 4 recounts went for Bush. I suspect you read this report in Kruggman's column. shame on you for believing that rubbish. Regardless, not one person requested an entire recount, they only wanted to count the Dem counties and that was shown to be insufficient. But all those facts aside, the point was that absent a recount which was not lawful, Harris only did what her job description allowed. to do otherwise would have been quite astonishing. Presented with a majority of votes for Bush, are you saying she should have ignored the law and declared Gore the winner? whatsort of reality do you live in?

Let's see the "pretty convincing evidence" for a steal in OH. that would involve facts, not opinion and partisan slurs.

Posted by: kingofzouk | September 5, 2006 12:46 PM | Report abuse

kingofzouk - re: Florida

You certainly ought to be aware of the several independent studies that were run after the Florida election. Every single one of them showed, given a complete recount, Gore would have won Florida. Further, in a UPI study of the Ohio vote returns, at least 118,000 votes for Gore were not counted (and that study was only of the largest county in Ohio). Now, since Bush only won Ohio by 138,000 votes, we have some pretty convincing evidence that Bush and the fanatics who pass as his supporters, stole not one, but TWO presidential elections. You can choose to disregard this, but at your own peril. About half of this country is convinced that Bush took office in an unarmed coup and he and his followers are quite literally criminals who ought to be prosecuted.

Posted by: MikeB | September 5, 2006 12:43 PM | Report abuse

Interesting juxtaposition of Chaffee and Laffey on This Week with George Stephanopoulos. Chaffee formally attired sitting stiffly in a studio across from Stephanopoulos; while relaxed no necktie Laffey comfortably leaning in towards Stephanopoulos in an informal setting. No wonder Laffey was successful in finance; it was a great "Give me your money and I'll do wonders with it!" image.

Fortunately voters in Rhode Island get to see their candidates far more than just in a few debates on C-SPAN or on the Sunday talk shows. They see a lot of them.

[It's beginning to make me think that having New Hampshire first in the primaries is actually a good idea.]

I suspect that Rhode Island voters as a whole will see that Laffey is not really the "outsider," but will fit in perfectly with the current Republican majority. He's promising everything, and will pay for everything with tax cuts. But, that doesn't help Chaffee in the Primary.

Seven days and the race for this seat moves up to #1?

Two trips border to border on I-95 in Connecticut in the past two weeks, and I saw only one political bumper sticker. It was for John Kerry.

Posted by: Nor'Easter | September 5, 2006 12:42 PM | Report abuse

"Republican attempts to finance a Green Party candidate's bid for the ballot"

Republicans giving money to the Greens to help Santorum win? Just one more proof of patent Republican hypocrisy at every juncture.

Seems as if there's a neocon like Santorum, still apologizing for Bush, at the center of each of these Republican political cunundrums. Maybe its time they consider "moderation" rather than "extremism" as their party's calling card, these ultra conservatives are draggin' the party right down into the pit.

I've always wondered if that "lake of fire" they all fear falling into is actually "oil." Seems an apt analogy, if not an accurate description.

Shades of 2000!

Nader's Raiders have been bought out by the Republicans, cuz' they can't win fair and square, so they support Green Party candidates, who represent their true ideologically diametric opposition, certainly much more than centrist Democrats.

These Republicans support their own "extreme" political adversaries, in order to help defeat those sane centrists of the Democratic Party.

The neocons will do whatever it takes to hold onto power; cheat, steal, lie and buy. One would think that at least some of the Green party idealogues would expose this subterfuge, I've been ashamed of this shady group of willing Greens since they lost the 2000 election for us.

Them and The Supremes...

Posted by: JEP | September 5, 2006 12:39 PM | Report abuse

Harris had very little to do with the outcome of the election in FL. this is just media spin. She was supposed to certify the results handed to her. Otherwise the FL legislature would have accomplished the same outcome. why do you poltroons insist on trying to paint AL Gore's legal attemps as something the Rs did? Al tried to steal the election in the courts. this was clearly demonstrated after the fact by several newspapers. See that commie NYT "economists" Kruggman's lies about these results for example. Rs just did what was prescribed by law. Get over it and Moveon. I can't wait to hear all the conspiracies and slurs after this next big loss. did you ever consider that we don't want Big government in our lives? It really is that simple.

Posted by: kingofzouk | September 5, 2006 12:16 PM | Report abuse

I was so happy to read in the Providence Journal today that the Club for Growth has already poured $700k into the Steve Laffey campaign in RI.

Come on guys, is that the best you can do? We want you to blow at least another $1m on this doomed race. Democrats are crossing all digits in the hope Laffey beats Chafee so you have two more months to spend money in RI before Whitehouse turns Laffey into taffy.

Posted by: Loudoun Voter | September 5, 2006 12:10 PM | Report abuse

Chris: Did you really say you like the Mike Steele commercial? Come on, that spot looks like it was produced by the same people who do the ads for Eastern Motors (Motors) and Senate Insurance. It's an amateurish joke.

Posted by: Loudoun Voter | September 5, 2006 12:06 PM | Report abuse

'scuse me, folks, but I thought Ms. Harris was a true heroine of the Republican Party.

Wasn't it her "official declaration" that finalized the Florida fiasco in 2000? Surely she wan't "a nut" back then.

These bi-polar Republicans, is she a hero or a stooge? Just what is so different now than it was then?

Looks like they have a lot of disposable operatives... by "disposable", I mean, they get them to cheat for "the party", with a promise of political support for their own delusions of greedy GOP grandeur, then dump them when their true colors start to unravel the party lie to the public press.

Harris is a cosmic cartoon, painted by the Republicans' own internal identity crisis, They can not keep it hidden in the closet this time around.

I would enjoy seeing a blog by one of our Constant Bushmen, praising Harris for doing the right thing, back in the days after she helped steal the 2000 election, then compare it with today's commentaries, and see just how vividly she fell from Republican grace, when her neocon aspirations showed how twisted the party had become.

I wonder what they are offering Joe.

JEP

Posted by: JEP | September 5, 2006 11:59 AM | Report abuse

I think the interesting thing about the Talent/McCaskill race here in Missouri is the geographic split between the rural and urban/suburban areas of the state. For Republicans to win, they have to run up large margins in the rural areas to overcome Democratic advantages among urban/suburban voters.

Jim Talent is from St. Louis County, and many rural voters still view St. Louis politicians with extreme suspicion. McCaskill grew up in rural Missouri and started her political career on the western side of the state. She has done well in rural areas during her two statewide victories as auditor, and ran far ahead of John Kerry in rural Missouri during her race for governor in 2004. She probably won't win in the rural areas this time, but she should be able to hold Talent's margins down enough to pull off the win statewide, based on her strength in St. Louis and Kansas City.

Posted by: Tim | September 5, 2006 11:56 AM | Report abuse

Koz, You don't seem to be able to get anyone to rise to your bait today. Therefore I won't comment either on your politically-myopic posts.

http://whathappenedtomycountry.blogspot.com

Posted by: Truth Hunter | September 5, 2006 11:56 AM | Report abuse

I agree with everyone else on Virginia. I'm predicting one party will sweep in Michigan - either Granholm and Stabenow or DeVos and Bouchard. In Michigan, I'll go with the Dems.

I think Tennessee is a couple spots too low. Ford is running a heck of a campaign. He ran adds within days of the British plot and Dubai. Earlier convential wisdom was that Ford couldn't win if Corker won the primary. He's running in a dead heat in the most recent poll.

As for Meet the Press, Santorum probably did win the debate. But I find it hard to believe he has a prayer of winning. Casey is running a low-key populist campaign and the winds are blowing the Dems' way.

Finally, my house prediction.

Democrats 221
Republicans 214

Posted by: Zach | September 5, 2006 11:51 AM | Report abuse

Harris may be bad but even more amusing and pitiful is Carter.

Posted by: kingofzouk | September 5, 2006 11:45 AM | Report abuse

drindl

I thought that was where the Republican Southern Strategy was leading. A return the the pre-civil war "values" and "states rights" in the south.

The conservatives in congress has been patiently working at it and know it takes time. But, a nip at the voting rights act here, a snip at affirmative action there. Putting the Stars and Bars on State flags.

I know. Catty. Catty Catty.

So if the Democrats take back the house and Senate, will a bunch of states move to Secede?

Posted by: zippy | September 5, 2006 11:45 AM | Report abuse

I am waiting for the Wash Post endorsement in the Rhode Island primary, the daily misleading headlines, cutlines and stories favoring the inept Senator, the editorial bleeding into the news section, and, of course, the opposing party talking points being parroted in news and editorial stories (not to mention Meet the Press) about how the Laffee campaign is a threat to our national security and a signal that insurgents have taken control of the GOP and are a threat to the nationalized election in November.

I guess I should not hold my breath, huh?

Posted by: Greg in LA | September 5, 2006 11:44 AM | Report abuse

Allen is safe. I think Menendez is safe too. Casey looked like a stuffed shirt and couldn't answer a question straight. Reminds one of Kerry. but dems don't seem to care much for substance these days. Burns could be in trouble. all of this is still not enough to take over in the Senate. It will be a long night in OH on election night. It will come down to a difference of maybe 2 or 3 seats for control of the house. Watch the dollars. vote early and often.

Posted by: kingofzouk | September 5, 2006 11:43 AM | Report abuse

This is the sad state of our electorate--Looney Tunes Kathy Harris will probably win the primary, because of 'name recognition'--even though she has run the most atonishingly clownish campaign:

'Yet, on the strength of her name recognition, Harris is expected to win Florida's GOP Senate nomination on Tuesday, to the chagrin of many Republicans.

"This campaign will go down in history as one of the most disastrous ever run in the United States," declares Jim Dornan, who helped launch Harris' bid as her campaign manager. He left three months later, unable to work with her.'

Posted by: drindl | September 5, 2006 11:39 AM | Report abuse

Posted by: Sean Estes | September 5, 2006 11:18 AM | Report abuse

On Meet the Press Santorum's support of everything Bush.... Rumsfeld, Iraq war, economy.... sounded like a "so what" defense. These are failed so-whats, that's so what.

Casey kept his cool, and while not knocking it out of the park, didn't stumble either. On the whole, Santorum just stirred the Bush hornet's nest, not smart.

Allen should definitely be on this list.... he can run, but he can't hide, from Macaca.
http://whathappenedtomycountry.blogspot.com

Posted by: Truth Hunter | September 5, 2006 11:16 AM | Report abuse

INteresting aspect of the local races will be the influence of the national party.

Has everyone noticed the "T and T" (Troops and Terror) campaign the president and his folks have started. The president's really stuck to the line this weekend. Then we expect to see the Repbulican congress push through anti terror and FEMA funding, as well as a memorial bill honoring 9/11 victims.

What was telling was that Herself, my Irish apolitical other half, made the astute observation that any mentions of 'The War' have gone unspoken by the President and Co., being replaced by new rhetoric of 'Must Support the Troops'. Almost like there is no fighting in Iraq and absolute peace in Afghanistan. Our troops must be at Summer camp. (no disrespect intended here)

Dead silence on the reality of the war. If they don't talk about it, do they think voters will forget about it?

Will this be enough to assuage the disgruntled conservatives who are also a bit peeved at the adminsitrations perversion of conservative values?

Polls this weekend showed more republicans were concerned about rising insurance costs due to Katrina than erosion of moral values.

On that 100 bucks mentioned earlier. My bets are Dems pick up 13 in the house, net 0 in the senate with Joe L as an independent.

President takes a big sigh of relief and bombs Iran.

Posted by: everyman | September 5, 2006 11:00 AM | Report abuse

Here's something for Tina--your brilliant candidate condi, is now comparing the civil war in Iraq [which is a 1000 year old battle between two rival muslim sects] to the american civil war, which I believe was about something rather different? Disingenious liar, thy name is condi:

'Secretary of State Rice compared the Iraq war with the American Civil War, telling a magazine that slavery might have lasted longer in this country if the North had decided to end the fight early.
"I'm sure there are people who thought it was a mistake to fight the Civil War to its end and to insist that the emancipation of slaves would hold," Rice said in the new issue of Essence magazine.

"I know there were people who said, 'Why don't we get out of this now, take a peace with the South, but leave the South with slaves?'" Rice said.'

Posted by: drindl | September 5, 2006 10:53 AM | Report abuse

I agree with everyone who has said VA should be on the list. Webb is up in the polls which is more then you can say for Michigan, Washington, New Jersey, Tennessee, and Maryland.
Look for a commercial that shows Allen on horseback in Buena Vista this weekend while Webb was sending his son to Iraq to serve. The macaca comment followed by the Nation story, is really eating into Allen's country club GOP base, and Webb is the perfect candidate as an alternative.

In the meet the press debate I thought they both looked like clowns. Casey didn't add much and looked like a political lightweight, but Santorum looked crazier and angrier then a sitting senator should. Also when Santorum said he didn't have to take a position on the state politicians pay raise issue because he wasn't a state official sounded lame. Also the Santorum extreme vote of confidence for Rumsfeld was foolish and the folks of Pennslyvania will be seeing it again, and again, and again.

Also Menendez is going to cream Kean Jr. This New Jersey and they won't vote in a republican in this current environment.

Posted by: Andy R | September 5, 2006 10:47 AM | Report abuse

Here's a line from VScully's 7:45 post that is either terribly naive or some sort of subtle subterfuge...

"The people who voted for Bush in the 2004 election I think really believed in him and his agenda, and sure the war in Iraq may not be going well (was it ever?), but they don't really care that much."

The brainwashed voters described here are Ben Franklin's biggest nightmare.

Certainly, there is a class of zombie-like Republicans who would vote for Lucifer if it was the only name on the list with an "R" behind it. I believe many of them have done just that in these past two elections, albeit unknowingly, "deceived by the elect."

Which is why many of their "Christian" base won't vote in this upcoming election, sometimes you can only be so brainwashed before reality finally sinks in. War and torture and killing innocent civilians don't go over too well with our "better angels."

But, really, Virginia, I don't think there are as many of those brainwashed dummies remaining as the poster suggests.

Consider this: It was a marginal, if not a questionable victory for the Republicans in both the past Presidential elections, and even if just a couple percentage points (my guess is 20+) peel off in response to consistent failures by the Bush administration, it changes the entire equation, and puts the numbers to a point where the Republicans aren't close enough to cheat this time, without getting caught.

Especailly if just one of the branches of government gets back into the hands of the Democrats, and someone has the power of oversight to prevent the pervasive blackwellian election fraud that I believe some of the less-than-honorable Republicans, Rove in particular, have perpetrated and perpetuated against the voters of America, and not just in Ohio.

If the Democrats held power in just one house of Congress, election hijacking the likes of which we all suspect (and some say they have proven)happened in Ohio, would be brought under the magnifying glass of public scrutiny.

We need a bad-ass, mad-as-hell House Panel or some sort of federal grand jury, with a constitutional chip on its shoulder, that has the power to subpoena anyone they choose, convened as soon as this power is granted again to the Democrats,.

First, lets get Bush in there without Dick on hand, and make him answer his own questions.

Then lets find out about Cheney's $3 a gallon energy task force; and Haliburton's no-bid war, and about that "intelligence" that was fabricated to scare us into war; and about outing CIA agents; and New Hampshire voter-fraud managed from the WH political office; about Jack's "pay-for-play" visits to the WH; the list of dirty laundry that requires the bleach of public scrutiny just grows longer every day.

And while many others would prefer some sort of punishment, I honestly do not care if even one of them ever suffers for what they have done, but me, personally, I just want to know the truth, and I would bet the American People feel quite the same as I do.

We want to know the truth so we can make sure it can never happen again this way.

Unfortunately for our current band of rogue's, the truth tends to lead to justice, and she still wears that blindfold. So no matter how important you make yourself look, she only hears the truth, and she never sees that $1000 silk suit, the $100 tie, or the Rolex, or the limo.

To be quite honest, I would not want to be an "experienced Republican" in politics over the next few years, especially if I was part of the pack of hogs that's been feeding at the Iraq War trough of easy money, and no-bid war profiteering.

A lot of Republicans (Cunningham?) have profited politically and financially by doling out the indulgences from this war, and the war machine in general. The money trail, as chaotic as it may seem, can still be traced. The deals can still be tracked. So, if there ever is a righteous reckoning of real American justice, those trails will be followed to their inevitable ends.

And the American public, Republican, Democrat and Independent, (Greens and Libertarians, too!) will love every scandalous minute of it.

So will the press.

Posted by: JEP | September 5, 2006 10:37 AM | Report abuse

Sen. Burns and Sen. Allen think they are a funny as the original George Burns and Gracie Allen. The truth is George and Gracie were being laughed WITH, while Conrad and George are being laughed at! And also racist jokes are not funny and they should leave the 18th century and join the 21st century.

Posted by: Jason | September 5, 2006 10:29 AM | Report abuse


http://www.waynemadsenreport.com/Nov7%20DemocraticCampaignLinks.php


November 7, 2006 -- THE MOST IMPORTANT ELECTION OF OUR LIVES

These are the Democratic candidates we know, trust, and like. If you live in their districts or states, consider volunteering for their campaigns, donate whatever you can afford, and be sure to tell your family and friends about them.

Check out WMR's State-by-State GOP Scandal Scorecard to find out about the Republican crooks in your state. Confused by the corporate media talking heads and editorialists? Check out their political connections on our Political-Journalist Incest Chart.

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

California 44th Congressional District -- Louis Vandenberg (running against the truly corrupt Republican Ken Calvert).

Florida 6th Congressional District -- Dave Bruderly (running against George W. Bush yes-man Cliff Stearns).

Florida 15th Congressional District -- Bob Bowman (running against Dave Weldon, the major Republican to have the Federal government intercede to keep Terry Schiavo on a feeding tube against the wishes of her husband).

Florida 25th Congressional District -- Michael Calderin (running against one of two GOP Bushbot brothers from Florida, Mario Diaz-Balart).

Michigan 9th Congressional District -- Nancy Skinner (running against Joe Knollenberg, a NAFTA and free trade supporter who has screwed over his own working class constituents).

Michigan 11th Congressional District -- Tony Trupiano (running against Thad McCotter, who likes to serenade George Bush with his country band -- and how sick is that?)

Minnesota 2nd Congressional District -- Coleen Rowley, the former FBI agent who blew the whistle on Bush malfeasance in the investigation of 911 perpetrator Zacarias Moussaoui (running against John Kline, infested with campaign contributions from GOP crooks Tom DeLay, Duke Cunningham (now in prison)).

SENATE

New York -- Jonathan Tasini -- running against Hillary Clinton (who supports Bush's war in Iraq). Democratic primary Sept. 12.

Virginia -- Jim Webb -- running against the virulent racist Republican George Allen.

There are many other Democratic candidates we heartily endorse. We will be posting links to their campaign sites shortly.

Posted by: che | September 5, 2006 10:24 AM | Report abuse

And I thought the Atlanta Hawks could only start 5 guys.

Posted by: FH | September 5, 2006 10:20 AM | Report abuse

Meanwhile, over at the Propaganda Ministry, another $20 million of your hard-earned taxpayer dollars is about to be flushed:

'U.S. military leaders in Baghdad have put out for bid a two-year, $20 million public relations contract that calls for extensive monitoring of U.S. and Middle Eastern media in an effort to promote more positive coverage of news from Iraq.

The contract calls for assembling a database of selected news stories and assessing their tone as part of a program to provide "public relations products" that would improve coverage of the military command's performance, according to a statement of work attached to the proposal.'

What do you think of that, hmm, Chris? It's straight out censorship, propaganda, and bullying the media. It's 20 million toward dismantling the First amendment. It's another lockstep in the march to fascism.

Posted by: drindl | September 5, 2006 10:20 AM | Report abuse

"From homeland security to national security to border security, House Republicans will focus first and foremost on addressing the safety and security needs of the American people throughout the month of September," Boehner said.'

-----------------

Homeland Security:

-- Air cargo NOT inspected AT ALL before getting put into the hold of your passenger flight.

-- No security for critical infrastructure (water plants, electrical generation plants, etc).

-- Ports run in the "Dubai" fashion.

-- Waste and cronyism in the spending of Homeland Security taxpayer dollars.

-- First responders radios STILL not interoperable despite the fact that the Federal Government CONTROLS the radio spectrum.

National Security:

-- Army can't deploy in any numbers to any new hot spot b/c they're bogged down in this optional war in Iraq based on the WMD lies.

-- Troops STILL not getting 100% of the body armor they need. Retrofit of humvees with heavy anti-IED armor still not complete.

-- "Stay the course" = keep our troops in Iraq where they're stuck between warring Islamic factions engaged in a civil war.

Border security:

What border security. Conrad Burns' "little Guatamalan man" and those like him run past the border easier than a RB through the Atlanta Hawks front 7.

-------------

The Republicans are being stupid by playing up their "record" on security issues. They'd be better for talking about tax cuts and social issues to energize their base.

But, if they insist on making the debate about security, Democrats -- armed with the facts surrounding the many failures of the GOP President and Congress -- should all shout: "Bring it on".

Posted by: Gaithersburg, MD | September 5, 2006 10:16 AM | Report abuse

The Rhode Island Dems are PRAYING that Laffey beats Chaffee in the primary,(that all of 3-400 registered Republicans may vote in) as that will give S. Whitehouse a thumping victory in November. The critical message against the neo-con Republicans up here, is that FAILURE to change the Senate and/or the House control, will give neo-cons a perceived mandate to begin "strategic" attacks on Iran, in order to a) "Save" Israel, and, b) stabilize the volcanic religious and tribal eruptions that the US has brought about in the region.

Posted by: L Sterling | September 5, 2006 10:15 AM | Report abuse

Prepare yourself for a veritable deluge of BS from DC:

'It's going to be "Security September" on Capitol Hill.

With GOP control of the House and Senate hanging in the balance in the November midterm elections, Republican leaders want to use the monthlong session that begins today when Congress reconvenes to press what has traditionally been their biggest advantage over Democrats: national security.

House Majority Leader John A. Boehner issued a statement last week emphasizing the theme Republicans plan to hammer. In fact, he reminded voters four times in one sentence.

"From homeland security to national security to border security, House Republicans will focus first and foremost on addressing the safety and security needs of the American people throughout the month of September," Boehner said.'

To amuse yourself, try counting how many times they say 'security' in every speech...

Posted by: drindl | September 5, 2006 10:06 AM | Report abuse

"I disagree with Santorum's positions on major issues and I would vote against him if I lived in PA. But, he outperformed Casey on Meet the Press."

Not only did he outperform Casey, but I thought Casey was laughable. If it was not for one-line zingers he would have contributed nothing to the debate. I guess all the dems really need is another Yes vote anyway...and that's about all they will get with this guy. I find the quality of candidates in these elections to be dismal and disappointing. Has it gotten to the point where good, quality candidates are afraid to run because they know they are going to be subjected to a level of personal mudslinging that makes a run for public office unappetizing? If so, that is a tragedy for this country! That could be one of the worst legacies of the Clinton impeachment fiasco.

Posted by: FH | September 5, 2006 10:05 AM | Report abuse

Chris: Isn't a fair chunk of the action in races 11 - 15? Arizona, Virginia, Minnesota among them? Given the fluidity of this election and the tightness of the margin, expanding your list would at least give you the joy of saying "I had that one on my list" when a deeper upset comes through. All of those states have been targeted as potential party changes at times in this cycle.

Posted by: jon | September 5, 2006 9:56 AM | Report abuse

Oh, did I mention that Richard Perle was one of the very first to set up a war-profiteering business, before the Iraq invasion even happened [becuase of course he knew exactly when it would be]

'Perle is a managing partner in the venture-capital company called Trireme Partners L.P. Trireme's main business is to invest in companies dealing in technology, goods, and services that are of value to homeland security and defense.

The wide-ranging Perle even finds himself involved in Total Information Awareness technology. He was listed as a speaker at a March 13 Washington press briefing on 'data mining,' the use of computer technology to sift out patterns from electronic communications.'

I won't even get into Perle's memebership on the Defense Policy Board and the way he has gotten no-bid contracts, but it involves arms dealers going back to Iran Contra and he has made billions, both on bogus ' security' companies and contracts to spy on americans.

This is why the republicans will do anything to stop the Democrats from taking back the House. If they are ever held accountable for their monstrous deeds and all the billions they have stolen from taxpayers, they will surely face the wrath of americans. Or at least I hope to god they will.

Posted by: drindl | September 5, 2006 9:54 AM | Report abuse

Debbie Stabenow (D) is imminently beatable? Well, perhaps not imminently. If she is beatable, the Republican will have to wait till November.

Posted by: Mike Meyer | September 5, 2006 9:48 AM | Report abuse

Just a quick note to CC - if you happen to read comments to your blog.

Please accept my kudos for a job well done on the new format for the line and for putting the mid-term races into "heavy rotation" on the WP.com pages.

Job well done!

:-)

Posted by: Gaithersburg, MD | September 5, 2006 9:45 AM | Report abuse

JEP,
You are right of course -- and there are even greater dangers than what you mention in Iraq. The neocons are still in power, and they, like nazis, like communists, like all ideologues, are incapble of learning from their mistakes:

'In Washington, the military hawks believe that an airstrike against Iranian nuclear bunkers remains a more straightforward, if risky, operation than chasing Hezbollah fighters and their mobile rocket launchers in Lebanon.

"Fixed targets are hopelessly vulnerable to precision bombing, and with stealth bombers even a robust air defence system doesn't make much difference," said Richard Perle, a leading neoconservative.

The option of an eventual attack remains on the table after President George Bush warned on Friday that Iran must not be allowed to develop nuclear weapons.

While the American State Department favours engaging with President Bashar Assad of Syria in the hope of detaching him from the Iranian alliance, hawks believe Israel missed a golden opportunity to strike at Syria during the Hezbollah conflict.

"If they had acted against Syria during this last kerfuffle, the war might have ended more quickly and better," Perle added. "Syrian military installations are sitting ducks and the Syrian air force could have been destroyed on the ground in a couple of days."

'Kerfuffle' he says of Lebanon, where the entire south of the country is destroyed, where a million are homeless, where a thousand civilians, mainly children, were killed with US cluster bombs. The neocons are monsters, murderers and monsters. And stupid besides. 'Syrian forces' could be destroyed in a couple of days' -- right, and we'll be greeted as liberators, too, won't we? These people are insane and will kill us all if they aren't taken out of power.

This is why I don't take any bets on the election. God only knows what these lunatics will do before November... and how many of us will be left to vote.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2089-2340486,00.html

Posted by: drindl | September 5, 2006 9:42 AM | Report abuse

I find it heartening that even though Dems are at an enormous disadvantage because they have never had access to the huge slush funds of war-profiteering and corporate republicans, they may still be able to take back at least one house.

It gives me hope that even in this age of crooked republican-owned voting machines and sold-out politicians, there's still a glimmer of hope for democracy.

Posted by: drindl | September 5, 2006 9:32 AM | Report abuse

It will prove very hard to predict future election results right now because the future of the Middle East has become too unpredictable. Some of these these political candidates are running on a platform that calls for some sort of continuation of the status quo ("staying the course seems to be the operative terminology,). Yet that "status quo" is so tenuous, it can surely not be counted on for predicting things like US Congressional elections...

There is a perfect storm of political imperfection brewing this very day in Iraq.

Bush's arrogant, Neocon-contrived supposition that a psuedo-nation such as Iraq, held together only by the extreme brutality of Saddam and his Sunni death squads, could be knit in one historic military moment into a democratic example to the whole Middle East, is going to be tested to the brink in the days and weeks to come.

Hidden not too secretly away in a Washington Post story this morning is the evidence of the makings of a perfect storm of political upheaval that threatens to become a full-scale "Iraqi" civil war.

But unlike the Civil War we remember in our own American history, this storm has three "fronts", each with its own well-armed military, its own foreign support mechanism, and its own foreign loyalties.

In Sunday's (September 3) Washington Post story "A Demand For Saddam Hussein's Release" each of these three converging fronts is clearly identified, and acknowledged as being in the process, at this very moment, of solidifying their independent powers into separate and inevitably warring factions.

1. "A coalition of 300 Iraqi tribal leaders, ...most of them Sunni Arabs, ...on Saturday demanded the release of Saddam Hussein so he could reclaim the presidency and also called for armed resistance against U.S.-led force..."

2. "Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki traveled to the southern city of Najaf on Saturday to discuss the deteriorating security situation with Grand Ayatollah Ali Sistani..."

3. "Arabs across the country expressed anger at a decree by Massoud Barzani, president of the regional government in Kurdish-populated northern Iraq, forbidding the Iraqi flag to be raised in government buildings across the north."

Try as they might, while they may be able to control the slow MSM leakage of truth to the American public, when this "imperfect storm" of civil war begins to converge, our upcoming political cycle may well prove even more difficult to control, for Rove and his extensive secret political operatives.

Turdblossom just may not be able to stave off this triple-sided civil war, long enough to keep control of a wayward Republican Congress.

Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld are trying to blame the Iraqi "people", the "liberal media", and the American public (respectively) for this confluence of deadly destinies.

If the full fury of this storm hits before election day, and our soldiers are caught in the crossfire, Bush and Cheney and Rumsfeld will have no one but themselves left to blame.

ANY warmongering US Senator or Representative, Democrat or Republican, man or woman, north or south, who is still attached to this war, to the Bush gang, or to some twisted nationalistic ideology, might just lose their seat sooner than they imagine.

John Patterson

Posted by: JEP | September 5, 2006 9:31 AM | Report abuse

I disagree with Santorum's positions on major issues and I would vote against him if I lived in PA. But, he outperformed Casey on Meet the Press.

Posted by: advocacyman | September 5, 2006 9:16 AM | Report abuse

I grew up in Rhode Island and still have family there. Should Chafee lose the primary, this race would be number 1. It is inconceivable that Laffey could win a state-wide election.

Posted by: JimD in FL | September 5, 2006 8:47 AM | Report abuse

Where's Virginia? There's a greater chance of it changing than Michigan or Washington. Zogby has Webb up 2 points and Allen is going to get destroyed in Northern Virginia come November (meaning for Webb to win he has to only have a decent showing, within 3 or 4 points of Allen, in Richmond and Hampton Roads). Allen's popularity numbers before this race began were inflated and Virginia is turning more blue every day...Allen is in a lot of trouble.

Posted by: Eugene | September 5, 2006 7:51 AM | Report abuse

Quite interesting, I find, especially the news about the Burns and Allen campaign falling apart. Losing both of them would be a big blow to the conservatives.

From what you read in the press, the polls do seem to indicate at least the possibility of a Democratic takeover of one house of Congress, and as much as I'd like to see it, somehow I just don't think it will happen. The people who voted for Bush in the 2004 election I think really believed in him and his agenda, and sure the war in Iraq may not be going well (was it ever?), but they don't really care that much. Plus, there's a huge financial advantage to the Republicans, and they are much better organized. I don't think voter dissaffection is enough to overcome that. When you start seeing huge protest marches in Washington every weekend, then you'll know people are ready for some change....

Posted by: V Scully | September 5, 2006 7:43 AM | Report abuse

Consider adding the Virginia Senate race as tied for 10th, or 11th, because Allen is down, Webb is up and Virginia Democrats are fired up. It's remarkable that Webb is being outspent 10 to 1 and still has pulled even (Zogby poll). But the real signal of change is that Allen's Republicans are dispirited by Senator Macaca. Driving around normally Republican rural Virgnia one just doesn't see any Allen signs, even though by September last year the place was plastered with Kilgore signs (Republican loser for Governor).

Posted by: CJ Burke | September 5, 2006 7:34 AM | Report abuse

"But there doesn't appear -- yet -- to be a sixth seat to put Democrats over the top."

"Yet" is the operative word. Don't gloat too fast, Chris. There are two more months to go before election day.

The GOP will likely mount again campaigns based on slurs and smears. It won't work this time. The Democrats have finally had it with being civil.

The GOP has nothing positive to show for its six years in office rubber - stamping a catastrophic Administration. Voters know that.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 5, 2006 7:24 AM | Report abuse

REACH OUT TO DISABLED VOTERS

Roughly fifty million voters with disabilities could be a major factor in this election.

Our issues-- poverty, unemployment, inadequate health insurance, access-- are important to not only disabled folks like my son, but our families.

With voter registration help and absentee balloting, voters with disabilities could swing the election.

Posted by: Don C. Reed | September 5, 2006 7:16 AM | Report abuse

"Imminently" winnable? Or "eminently" winnable? More seriously, people here in Michigan don't blame Stabenow for the bad economy. They know it's DC's fault.

Posted by: Lev Raphael | September 5, 2006 7:04 AM | Report abuse

For those who signed off early on Friday--
I would like to repeat the following offer:
I will contribute $100 to the charity of choice of the person who comes closest to predicting the number of Republicans and Democrats elected to the US House of Representatives in the November, 2006, election.
To be counted, the prediction must be posted to Chris' 9/1/06 chain of comments on the HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES RACES by 11:59 PM, Tuesday, September 5.
Only one prediction per pundit, please.

Posted by: Mouse | September 5, 2006 6:47 AM | Report abuse

Hi. You need to fix the text size for your Washington Senate analysis. It seems to be a coding mistake.

Nice analysis, although I'm surprised that you think Michigan has a greater chance of switching than Virginia. The recent article in The Nation about his ties to the Conservative Citizens Council is only adding fuel to the fire of the rumors painting Allen as intolerant.

Posted by: Zzonkmiles | September 5, 2006 6:41 AM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company