Senate 2010 update

I'm confused, is this another attempt at balance? Because frankly, you fall a little short in the equivalency department. Having to increase name recognition in Colorado or contend with Democratic primary challenges in Democratic states is hardly the same as campaigning on GOP policies, that for most people now seem to have crossed the line into crazy.

Why won't you guys call Coleman the "SORE LOSER" that he is like they did for Gore in 2000?

Things are truly looking "up" for a change. I guess we can believe in change!!
.
Thanks for the blog, Jay!!

Eh, the Democrats aren't in as much trouble at you make it out to be. Gillibrand and Bennet have almost two years to deal with any name recognition issues. Burris will either retire or be primaried out. And there's no Republican in California who could pose a threat to Barbara Boxer right now.

So that leaves Reid and Dodd, who are legitimately in danger. Compare that to Vitter, Specter, Burr, Bunning, and the four open GOP seats you mentioned, and it's looking pretty one-sided.

If you actually want to know anything about this topic, leave this post and go visit Nate.
The top 6 2010 races, and 8 of the top 10, all threaten Republican-held seats.
http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/

Yeah, 'cause we all know poll numbers and name recognition levels in April, 2009 will have so much relevance in eighteen months!
Jay, you're a better reporter than this. Your post is analogous to firing a rifle at where you expect a target to be next year, i.e., pointless.

Gillibrand and Bennet have almost two years to deal with any name recognition issues.
_
Gillibrand has a much different problem than Bennet -- Bennet is not expected to face a primary challenger, while Gillibrand will be facing at least one (McCarthy). And, if as expected, McCarthy starts to gain traction, there is a strong likelihood that at least one better known democrat would enter the primary against Gillibrand (McCarthy is running because Gillibrand is a wholly owned subsidiary of the NRA, and McCarthy's husband was murdered by a madman with a gun, and McCarthy may well be a stalking horse who will drop out if a more prominent democrat who favors gun control announces.)
_
As for Bennet, his chances are based on what kind of GOP opponent he gets -- if its a wingnut, his odds go way up.

If Menendez really wants to defend Dodd and Reid's seats, he could explain to them that the easiest way to get re-elected is to not suck horribly at your job. Currently, Dodd and Reid both fail that test by an exceptionally large margin.

"Dodd's aides point to Obama's dominant 61% victory in Connecticut in an election that saw the defeat of the state's (and New England's) lone House Republican, Chris Shays. "Connecticut is trending blue. Even if Dodd only got 70% of Obama's voters, he'd still easily win," says one adviser. "His potential opponent Rob Simmons couldn't even hold Connecticut's Second District — how is he going to win statewide?""
-
CT voters may not think Dodd is a prize, but it doesn't mean they want to contribute to a return to Bush's Happy Time. Many people who say "they won't vote for Dodd" won't vote at all, but Connecticut isn't the kind of place where you can step up on the rainbarrel with a pitchfork and make points talking about "commies". Republicans won't get traction. Leiberman survives only by the pork he brings to the table. Same with any of them.

JNS is just concern trolling for the GOP as usual. What she doesn't mention is that of the Democrats who are "in trouble" they are "in trouble" with primary challenges not general challenges. Chris Dodd is the only one in real trouble and even if he loses its highly doubtful that a Republican will have a chance in CT. But hey as long as it gets the wingnuts hopes up why not point out reality? I mean the GOP is doing SO well in polling right now after all.
.
http://theplumline.whorunsgov.com/economy/economic-crisis-ensures-that-bush-remains-albatross-for-gop/

Don't know about this, JNS.
.
Americans are starting to run against GOP philosphy and ideology. Witness the override of the Vermont governor's veto of a same sex marriage bill:
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2009/04/07/vermont-house-senate-overrid-veto-on-same-sex-marriage/?eref=politicalflipper
.
Here is the NY20 by Nate Silver at 538:
http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2009/04/what-ny-20-tie-means.html
http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2009/04/ny-20-absentee-ballot-distribution.html
.
Palin, as of 1/13, doesn't fly well, either, but don't have later numbers.
.
I think JNS is just barking up the wrong tree. Let's see how those governors (including Palin) do in the battle with their respective state legislatures over overriding their refusal to accept stimulus money.
.
A clue is Palin did a climbdown already, and others may be sensing a flirtation with irrelevance.
.
And Palin herself isn't helping her own cause, I don't think, with this:
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2009/04/07/palin-pushes-for-missile-defense-funds/

While true that Dems don't look to sweep where they might have a few months ago, that's not really a surprise, and it's still a lifetime before the elections. Fun to think about, just the same.
.
OT, but the Vermont legislature just voted to over ride Gov. Douglas' veto of the marriage bill. That was actually a big surprise to most of us, since in the original vote the house only had 95 votes and needed 100 to over ride the veto, which they got. So Vermont becomes the first state to approve same sex marriage by legislative vote.

kathy:
.
Pending too is Obama's performance with respect to the economy, which is starting to look increasingly postitive.
.
Factor that in, provided we get a flattening out and/or beginning of a recovery before then, and the GOP might become even more irrelevent.

Also, let's see how toxic Palin is outside the zone of her dittohead synchophants:
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2009/04/07/now-featured-in-virginia-governors-race-sarah-palin/

As a point to increasing confidence in the economy I mentioned, see this:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/30083725/

53-3 not to mention the benefit of Obama campaigning for dem candidates, and the use of his email list. And I agree with you that if the economy turns up he's going to look very good.

Would losing Reid actually be bad for the Democrats?

Senate 2008 update-
With Votes Counted, Franken Now Leads By 312 Votes
.
http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/04/with-votes-counted-franken-now-leads-by-312-votes.php

Got to agree with several points the other swamplanders make. Yes there may be real concerns for some of these pols in the respective primaries, but JNS, do you really think that will necessarily give the GOP a chance to win in those States, let alone defend against Dems in several others?

In fact, considering some of the folks you mentioned, like Gillibrand, I'm no fan. She was an olive-branch to the upstate conservatives who just had to scream and shout about their needs. Fact is, if she doesn't swing more the other way, she will have serious problems. But that does not suggest that NYers would ever lose their senses and vote in a GOP senator. Hell, Bloomberg knows that ship won't sale and he will do anything to avoid being branded solely GOP.

As a point to increasing confidence in the economy I mentioned, see this:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/30083725/
_
might I suggest that you look at the actual data -- like here (http://tinyurl.com/cwlzvn) and here (http://tinyurl.com/cdekth)
_
because while more people may say things are "getting better" in the economy, when asked questions like "are you concerned that someone in your household will lose their job" the numbers are up considerably...and are flat when asked about actual confidence in the economy as a whole.

That there are two corrections to the facts in the space of ONE sentence says a lot about JNS's reporting skills.
.
Like her buddy Michael Scherer she is just concern trolling for the GOP. A more accurate appraisal of the situation is that the Democrats are still on offense. The approval ratings for the Congressional Democrats as a whole are higher than the Republicans. And Obama's "honeymoon" is continuing, despite what conservative wishcasters like David Broder and George Will are writing.
.
What IS true is that all politics are local. And the good citizens of Nevada and Connecticut have a right to be dissatisfied with the jobs that Reid and Dodd, respectively, are doing. Reid especially needs to face a stiff primary challenge from a Democrat who will stand up for himself. Dodd has badly misplayed his hand, from moving his family to Iowa to totally screwing up the banking committee.
.
Not coincidentally, both of these gentlemen are in trouble because they are not standing up for the progressive ideals and expectations that Democrats are expecting from their elected representatives. Reid never met a Republican idea that he wouldn't cave in to. Dodd is a toady of the big banks. They adopted bad ideas. Those bad ideas blew up on them. People notice those kinds of things.
.
Too bad Evan Bayh isn't running this cycle. Whomever his primary challenger happens to be is going to raise millions overnight via the Internet. I'd give at least $100 to whomever his primary challenger happened to be.
.
As for the Republicans, the fact remains that the demographics of the country are trending away from them. They are a regional party with strength in places like Wasilla, AK, Opelika, AL, and Wenatchee, WA. The Democrats have locked up NYC, LA, and Chicago and are building strength in places like Houston, Las Vegas, Atlanta, and Anchorage.
.
Last time I checked elections were decided by the number of votes cast, not by the land mass lived on by a voter. Maybe the Republicans should push to have votes allocated by area. That way their (potentially) continued dominance of the middle part of the country and the South can count for something.

"...because while more people may say things are "getting better" in the economy, when asked questions like "are you concerned that someone in your household will lose their job" the numbers are up considerably...and are flat when asked about actual confidence in the economy as a whole."
.
And if you want data that's even, um, harder, take a look at this. (Warning: Not Safe for Confidence).

Pending too is Obama's performance with respect to the economy, which is starting to look increasingly postitive.
.
hahahahahaha what
.
http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/04032009/transcript1.html
.

WILLIAM K. BLACK: There are two reasons. One, they're much closer to the bankers. These are people from the banking industry. And they have a lot more sympathy. In fact, they're outright hostile to autoworkers, as you can see. They want to bash all of their contracts. But when they get to banking, they say, 'contracts, sacred.' But the other element of your question is we don't want to change the bankers, because if we do, if we put honest people in, who didn't cause the problem, their first job would be to find the scope of the problem. And that would destroy the cover up.

I've never given money to a Republican candidate in my entire life, but I fully intend to donate to Harry Reid's GOP challenger in the general election if no serious primary challenger emerges.
.
Harry Reid is doing more to set back the progressive agenda than anything Boehner, Cantor, Limbaugh or any of the other half-wits who control the Republican Party could dream of.

piper 1: I'm a diehard democrat. I'll support anybody that runs against him. The guy is useless. Mybe more than useless. He'll stand up to fellow democrats but get all weak-kneed just at the thought of offending the republicans. We're better off without him. A net gain of two senarte seats and he becomes nothing more than a burden.