TPMDC

GOP Vulnerabilities May Help Dems Hang On To 60 Senate Seats

Spread the word. Share this article on Facebook!

Share

Sen. Christopher Dodd (D-CT) and Sen. Byron Dorgan (D-ND).

Share

Twitter Fark Reddit Send to a Friend

Send to a friend!

To email:    Your Name:    Your email:

With the upheavals that have taken place from Democratic retirements in the past two days, are the Dems doomed to lose their 60-seat, filibuster-proof margin in the Senate this year? On close examination, this is not in any way a certain outcome -- because the Republicans have a lot to lose this year, too.

There are of course some seats that Democrats could potentially lose, and we've all heard a lot about them: Blanche Lincoln in Arkansas, Michael Bennet Colorado, the open seat in Delaware, the open seat in Illinois, the open seat in North Dakota, and Arlen Specter in Pennsylvania -- and Republicans even talk about Barbara Boxer in California. Sen. Chris Dodd's seat in Connecticut used to be at the top of this category, but today's events might well have put this seat out of the GOP's reach again.

At the same time there is a comparable number, depending on how liberally you count it, of Republican-held seats that could shift to the Democrats. Keep in mind that 2004 was a very good Senate cycle for the Republicans, with them winning nearly every state they possibly could. Now, six years later, they have a lot of territory where they have to play defense, and a wide variety of outcomes are possible.

So let's take a look at the states where the Republicans have something to lose.

Missouri
Four-term Republican Sen. Kit Bond is retiring in this perennial swing state, which John McCain carried by about 4,000 votes out 2.9 million. The likely nominees are GOP Rep. Roy Blunt, a former House GOP Whip and father of former Gov. Matt Blunt, and Dem Secretary of State Robin Carnahan, the daughter of the late Gov. Mel Carnahan and former Sen. Jean Carnahan. Early polls have shown a close race, with a possible slight edge for Carnahan.

Ohio
Two-term Sen. George Voinovich is retiring. The favorite for the Republican nomination is former Rep. Rob Portman, who served as Trade Representative and Budget Director under President George W. Bush. The Democratic primary is between Lt. Gov. Lee Fisher and Secretary of State Jennifer Brunner. The most recent polls have given Portman only a narrow advantage over the Dems, with high undecideds.

New Hampshire
Three-term Sen. Judd Gregg is retiring. This state used to be the GOP's New England stronghold, but since 2004 it has swung dramatically to the Democrats, electing a governor, a Senator, both of its two members of the House, and the state legislature, as well as voting for Barack Obama by 54%-45%. Two-term Rep. Paul Hodes is the presumptive Democratic nominee. Former state Attorney General Kelly Ayotte is the frontrunner for the Republican nomination, though she does face a multiple-candidate primary field. The most recent polls gave Ayotte the lead over Hodes, but with very high undecideds.

North Carolina
First-term Sen. Richard Burr was elected in 2004 by a margin of 52%-47%, to the open seat that was vacated by John Edwards when he sought the presidency and vice presidency. Since then, the state has definitely shifted somewhat in the Democrats' direction -- Dems have picked up two House seats, defeated GOP Sen. Elizabeth Dole by a 53%-44% landslide, and narrowly picked up the state's electoral votes for Barack Obama. Recent polling has shown that Burr is running below 50% against unknown Democrats, and has a peculiar problem in that he is neither popular nor unpopular -- the state doesn't have much of an opinion about him either way. He will rise or fall with the national and local climate in November 2010.

Florida
This open seat is held by George LeMieux, who was appointed to the seat by Gov. Charlie Crist -- a candidate for the seat -- after first-term Sen. Mel Martinez resigned. Crist, a relative GOP moderate, is battling in a primary against the more conservative Marco Rubio. Polls have shown both of them leading Democratic Rep. Kendrick Meek -- but races in Florida tend to be close once the general election really heats up. The GOP is currently favored to hold this seat, but that could change if the primary is sufficiently messy and if the Dems are well-organized for the general election.

Louisiana
Sen. David Vitter was first elected in 2004, and would probably have no difficulties at all in this conservative state except for one thing: In 2007 he was implicated in a prostitution scandal, and publicly admitted to an unspecified "serious sin." Early polls have put Vitter ahead against Blue Dog Democratic Rep. Charlie Melancon, but under 50%. Vitter could also be challenged in the primary by Secretary of State Jay Dardenne, who would if elected join House Minority Whip Eric Cantor (R-VA) as only the second currently serving Jewish Republican in Congress. The GOP is favored here, but we'll see what happens.

Kentucky
This state might seem deep-red based on its hefty margins for Republican presidential candidates, but its Senate races have been close. Two-term Sen. Jim Bunning, who is retiring, only won by 51%-49% in 2004, and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell was held to a 53%-47% margin in 2008. The Republican candidates are Secretary of State Trey Grayson and conservative activist Rand Paul, with Lt. Gov. Dan Mongiardo and Attorney General Jack Conway on the Democratic side. A recent poll give the GOP a clear advantage in the general election, but the potential for a close race does exist.

To be clear, I am not predicting that the Republicans will lose all of these seats, or even necessarily any of them. Some of them are clearly longer shots than others for the Democrats. The point is that no firm prediction can be made about what is going to happen this November, and both parties have a lot to lose, or a lot to gain.

At today's White House press briefing, Press Secretary Robert Gibbs brushed off a question about how the White House would handle having less than 60 Senate seats: "But I think to surmise what a strategy would look like based on an election that's 11 months away from happening, like I said, it's a little bit like predicting not who's going to win this Super Bowl, but who's going to win the next Super Bowl." Obama might have to worry about this contingency, and he might not -- but it won't happen until the next Super Bowl, and a whole lot can happen between now and then.

Comments (63) | Join the Conversation!

Recommend Recommend (1)

January 6, 2010 6:43 PM   

Pipe dream. Democratic apathy over the President's mishandling of the health care issue, and the Senate's general disdain for the public will is going to keep voters at home, ensuring they loose 4 or 5 seats.

In Republican terms, this means the GOP will have an overwhelming majority, seeing as how 60 seats was only a tie for the Democrats.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

January 6, 2010 6:50 PM    in reply to jeromeoneil

Then the liberals in this country deserve to lose. If they need miracles to get them out to vote in elections, then they're in for eternal disappointment.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

January 6, 2010 6:57 PM    in reply to dtOZONE

I'm a "liberal," and I vote in every election. So both of you can suck on my left nut.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

January 7, 2010 2:55 AM    in reply to commie atheist

If Obama signs a bill with a public option I will gladly meet you at the polls and take you up on that offer.

Er, for humanity and all.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

January 7, 2010 8:29 AM    in reply to JorgeOrwell

The bill won't have a public option. So, settle in for some more bitching and TV watching.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

January 6, 2010 6:59 PM    in reply to jeromeoneil

Wishful thinking or dreaming from repugnut lunatics. Democrats and independents will not forget how the Repugnut congress almost ruined the Republic with their majorities in the nineteen nineties. Besides the majority of Americans are not as stupid as the tea party fringe hopes.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

January 7, 2010 2:40 AM    in reply to jeromeoneil

Wishful thinking indeed.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

January 7, 2010 10:34 AM    in reply to jeromeoneil

jeromeo--Who wrote the HC reform bill..It was not Obama..It was the Dems in both houses..repeatedly, laying the blame on the President--still does not make it true!

The majority we, the voter gave the dems, has yet to be used effectively for anything the people need..That is laid at the feet of the Dems in the Congress--the reopubs continue to do nothing for the people!...Contortion is a republican tool---selll it to your deminishing choir!

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

January 6, 2010 6:54 PM   

Thanks, Eric, for finally injecting some common-sense reporting into the "Woe-is-Democrats" meme. While you're at it, please give Michael Steele a call and ask him about the 20 Republicans in Congress not running for re-election this year, and whether or not that's a sign of the weakness of the Republican brand.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

January 6, 2010 10:47 PM    in reply to commie atheist

Another idiot who can't see the difference between Republicans retiring in districts that haven't voted Democrat since the Stone Age and conservative Democrats retiring in districts and states that voted for Bush and McCain.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

January 7, 2010 12:59 AM    in reply to masanf

Shut up, fool. And read something to educate yourself. Here's a good place to start:

http://tpmlivewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/01/steele-retirements-are-major-wakeup-call-for-dems.php#comment-3730744

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

January 7, 2010 8:42 AM    in reply to commie atheist

Don't waste your breath on masanf. He's got a persecution complex. He just loves to come here and get his ass handed to him.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

January 7, 2010 8:30 AM    in reply to masanf

You mean districts like NY-23? HA!

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

January 7, 2010 9:36 AM    in reply to masanf

yeah, the NH and MO senate seats have been in Republican hands since the stone age, that's why they each already have one Democratice Senator--MORON.

This is why you teabaggers will always be a minority, because nobody wants such stupid ignorant morons running the country ever again. Been there, done that, massive fail.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

January 6, 2010 6:55 PM   

Thanks, Eric, for finally injecting some common-sense reporting into the "Woe-is-Democrats" meme. While you're at it, please give Michael Steele a call and ask him about the 20 Republicans in Congress not running for re-election this year, and whether or not that's a sign of the weakness of the Republican brand.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

January 6, 2010 7:13 PM   

Cal Cunningham is challenging Burr in North Carolina. I believe he was the second choice of the DSCC headhunters.

Kendrick Meek is the invisible candidate. I don't know what he is doing, but Crist and now Rubio will have much higher name recognition given Meek is hiding in a basement somewhere.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

January 7, 2010 1:57 AM    in reply to Walter Mitty

Laying low is the right thing for Meek to do while Crist and Rubio are going after each other. They're getting higher name recognition at the expense of much higher negatives, especially among the independents that are going to be critical to Meek's chances.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

January 7, 2010 8:32 AM    in reply to Walter Mitty

Meek really has no opponent. Kinda like how Bob McDonnell had no opponent in Virginia and kept completely quiet until the general election. See how that works?

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

January 6, 2010 7:29 PM   

You're forgetting that 60 seats aren't enough for the Democrats to do anything anyway.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

January 6, 2010 7:41 PM   

All 60 need to go back home. No lobbying jobs, no defense contractor jobs, no access to Washington. Old rascals out, new rascals in.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

January 6, 2010 9:35 PM    in reply to Sailormarlowe

Where do you get these waggish, nineteenth century snips from? "old rascals out, new rascals in"... Do you own a 'book of yore?'
And I'm surprised Sailormanlove that you didnt work the "comely", as you call her, Bristol Palin in to all this, perchance she could ready herself for a jump into the legislative breech, by Jove!!

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

EdA

user-pic

January 6, 2010 7:47 PM   

Of course, one thing that would help in Ohio (and elsewhere) would be for Democrats to call out Republicans on their records. I think that Rob Portman should be given all the credit he deserves for being in charge of running up the hugest government deficit that the world has ever seen. And on the House side, people should point out daily, if not more often, that as one of the major architects of the Contract on America in 1994, John Boehner promised that he would step down in 12 years -- which was 2006 -- which was four years ago. Now THAT's a campaign promise that he and other defaulters like Indiana's Mark Souder can deliver on, completely by themselves.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

January 6, 2010 10:46 PM    in reply to EdA

Actually Obama's deficit is the hugest ever.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

January 7, 2010 1:01 AM    in reply to masanf

Yes, and he created it all by himself.

Admit it, you're just a parody troll, right? JNo one could be that clueless.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

January 7, 2010 8:44 AM    in reply to commie atheist

You finally got masanf pegged. Ignore "it" whatever it is - It's pathetic.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

January 6, 2010 8:03 PM   

The White House DOESN'T have 60 seats. It doesn't have even 59 or 58 that it can count on to reliably vote for the Democratic Agenda. As we have learned, simply having a D behind one's name doesn't mean that one supports the People who elected one over the Corporations that gave one money.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

January 6, 2010 8:14 PM   

What the Obama Welfare Health Care Dog and Poney Show has been Ugly Unpopular Politics at its worst. All Democrates all the time. When Republicans came to conference rooms the door was locked. This is a Democrate and Democrate only bill.
All Democrates running for office will have to wear slickers when the fan gets turned on.
And worst of all poor people will get ACORN Health care, and congress will get Limbaugh Health Care.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

January 6, 2010 8:18 PM   


If it took Norm Coleman losing a scrap fight and the MA legislature changing the law to get to the current 60, it's gonna take a lot of fairy dust and and wishes to keep it.

TheWeekinRebuke.com

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

January 6, 2010 9:35 PM   

Hot damn, this place is really becoming Troll City.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

January 7, 2010 12:58 AM    in reply to Stroszek

Indeed! The teabaggers can be teabagging all the time.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

January 7, 2010 1:18 AM    in reply to merlot

They really took that "Teabag the liberals before they teabag you!" sign literally, didn't they?

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

January 6, 2010 10:17 PM   

What difference will it make if they keep 60 votes? None that I can see.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

January 7, 2010 10:05 AM    in reply to oleeb

they can't pass off conservative legislation as if it were progressive

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

January 8, 2010 2:37 PM    in reply to Indie Pro

That's what their doing with the corporate healthcare bill isn't it?

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

January 6, 2010 10:44 PM   

This and other left wing sites are so desperate to whistle past the graveyard and spin away what is quickly shaping up to be a terrible year for the Democrats. Everyone one of those seats you mention have the Republicans up in the polls but one, Missouri.


The intensity and enthusiasm numbers all favor the Republicans and Obama is incompetent beyond the wildest dreams of his detractors. And when November rolls around unemployment will be over 9% still. The only pundits who think the Dems are holding onto sixty are those on Democrat cheerleading sites like this one.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

January 7, 2010 1:04 AM    in reply to masanf

Two words: Doug Hoffman.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

January 7, 2010 8:47 AM    in reply to masanf

Keep your head up your butt masanf. You look better that way.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

January 7, 2010 9:01 AM    in reply to masanf

Yeah, Obama's incompetent beyond the wildest dreams of his detractors and he's also a brilliantly conspiratorial socialist who has completely restructured American society!

Step right up folks, as idiotic wingnuts push completely contradictory memes!

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

January 6, 2010 10:45 PM   

The only way the Dems hold on to sixty is if they get the 2008 turnout. And without Obama on the ticket, that ain't happening.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

January 7, 2010 8:51 AM    in reply to masanf

ROFLMAO. You get funnier every day. Amazing!!

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

January 7, 2010 9:33 AM    in reply to masanf

Wait? I thought Obama was incompetent and electoral poison? Now he's the key to awesome turnout for the Dems?!

Pick a story, ya' moran!

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

January 7, 2010 12:54 AM   

As Chairman Mao said about the the Frenc Reveloution, it's too soon to tell. Suppose that the health care bill passes and the parts that kick in immediately are popular and people begin to understand that the other parts are going to help them or at least give them a greater degree of certainty and we start adding jobs and unemployment drops to 9.9% and Steele remains head of the RNC thru election day? We could end up with one more Senate seat and two more House seats.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

January 9, 2010 11:48 AM    in reply to dick_data

Unfortunately, the parts that kick in right away are only good for the very poor and the very old. The only part of that equation you can count on at the polls is the old half.

Don't forget it was the young and middle class who put '08 together.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

January 7, 2010 1:37 AM   

It was Zhou Enlai, not Mao, but the principle is still valid.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

January 7, 2010 1:45 AM   

An awful lot changed in a year, and a lot can change in a year. If disgruntled liberals sit home the Democrats lose big, but in what election is that not true? In what election are there not races that could go either way? Anyone ever seen an election that went well without a big effort? All I take from this article is it's not hopeless, and all I take from "Democrats in trouble" stories is we should take nothing for granted. The fact is we don't and can't know what unemployment will be, what new crises will erupt, whether the Republicans will tear themselves apart, or whether we'll be alive to see it. We control whether we participate enough, and that's about it.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

January 7, 2010 1:51 AM   

In Connecticut, replacing a 30 year incumbent with a stronger candidate made a toss-up or lean Republican seat safe Democratic. The thing is... Democrats don't have to wait for incumbents with electability problems to retire. We can make the decision for them in primaries. Specter and Reid are struggling. What compels Democrats in those states to nominate the incumbents? Inertia? Let's replace Bill Halter with Blanche Lincoln for more than electability reasons too.

http://fdlaction.firedoglake.com/2009/12/04/blue-arkansas-interviews-founder-of-draft-bill-halter/

"But even better for Halter are the favorability numbers among independents — 37-55 for Lincoln, 32-24 for Halter (with 44% having no opinion)."

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

January 7, 2010 2:11 AM    in reply to sirclown

I think you mean replace Blanche Lincoln with Bill Halter...(Which, despite being an anal-retentive I fully support.)

The reason you can't do that with Reid is that the Nevada is a state with a very strong party structure and Harry Reid runs that show. No up and coming Dem is going to risk his or her career in a primary against Harry Reid, and there isn't a self-financing candidate a la Ned Lamont anywhere in sight.

The same is true in Indiana. Evan Bayh's people run the Democratic party here. We have some pretty exciting candidates currently holding House seats and mayor's offices, but none of them are going to primary Ev.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

January 7, 2010 2:05 AM   

Something else about the Florida race that no one is talking about immigration. This is going to be a huge and ugly issue for whoever wins the Republican primary.

Get outside of Miami/Dade and Broward and there is overwhelming support among Republicans for the Teabagger/movement conservative position against any form of amnesty or easier immigration, but the Cuban/Hispanic voters in Broward and Miami/Dade insist on supporting amnesty and easier immigration. The Cuban vote has trended more to the Democrats in the last two cycles, but it's still critical for any Republican who wants to win a statewide race.

If Crist wins the nomination he'll either have to refute his earlier support of immigration reform and lose a lot of support in Broward and Dade, or maintain his position and run a high risk of bringing in a Teabagger independent candidate. I think it's even worse for Rubio. I'm not aware of any Cuban candidate or elected politician who has even hinted that he was against immigration reform and amnesty. The backlash from the Cuban community would be huge.

Florida is going to be one of the strongest pickup opportunities for Dems in 2010. Write it down.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

January 7, 2010 2:36 AM   

Majority parties always lose seats in the first midterm. We will hang onto majorities in both ends. Nancy's face will continue to enrage you silly righties for a long time. And 2012 will be fun on O's re-election. By the way, can any of you angry righties tell me exactly what the GOP & the conservative "movement" (apropos) have done for America? I didn't think so

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

January 7, 2010 2:42 AM    in reply to hockeygrin

They gave us Obama and thereby gained total control of government. Diabolical, really.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

January 7, 2010 2:47 AM    in reply to JorgeOrwell

lol

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

January 7, 2010 4:06 AM    in reply to baldheadeddork

I stand corrected :-)

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

January 7, 2010 4:16 AM    in reply to hockeygrin

The trivia isn't important. What matters is that the partisanship and the position of the parties in 2010 is a lot closer to 1934 than 1994.

We can pick up seats this year - with better Democrats - if we want it enough.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

January 9, 2010 11:43 AM    in reply to baldheadeddork

And if Obama follows FDRs lead he could have it all!

There is still time Mr. Obama. Don't become another Jimmy!

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

January 7, 2010 2:51 AM   

All they seem to be able to do is say "No" like a parrot (or a spoiled child). They offer no solutions of their own.
The fact that they are the oppostion party in this first midterm will help them gain a few seats, but I doubt seriously it will be anything near a blowout. This will further serve to enrage them, and I do predict that, by the time of Obama's re-election, we will see some serious right wing militia violence in this nation. We are dealing with a portion of the far right that is mentally unstable, and if you thought it was bad during Clinton....whooo boy, just wait.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

January 7, 2010 4:53 AM   

I question the wisdom of 60 votes as a target in the next election cycle. It cedes a priori to the minority party too much power over the legislative process. It speaks to a defeatist attitude that assumes we are stuck with strategies requiring 60 votes in the senate to bring about needed changes.
We need to start thinking about how we get what's needed for the country with whatever majority we are lucky enough to have. I don't pretend to have the answers, but by beginning with a strategy of 60 votes or bust, we are condemning ourselves to defeat and disappointment. The country is already too polarized to allow many future senates with 60+ votes for the majority party. And even when we get those 60 votes, we find enough cowards in the majority to make the 60 vote advantage a joke.
Perhaps it's time to start reforming the rules of the senate to fit the times, along with a lot more executive orders, possibly including executive permission enabling states to begin conducting pilot social experiments, thereby bypassing the dysfunctional legislative process altogether, at least for a while.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

January 7, 2010 7:30 AM    in reply to rbe1

You're right. I think there are only two rational possibilities. 1) We need at least 62 seats; not 60. This is possible with with a good voter turnout and a good strategy which I think the White House will come up with.
And/Or, 2) reform the filibuster rules in the way that Harkin proposed (not eliminate it completely, but make it less crippling).

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

January 7, 2010 6:35 AM   

Dodd did himself a real favor personally. Dems unlikely to keep the current 60, and Dodd will be able to say "Can't blame me, I turned over seat at a time of great promise for new blood to hold onto it." So he goes out with head held high.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

January 7, 2010 9:44 AM    in reply to Overreach THIS!

No, I think he took one for the team. He possibly could have won in the end, but it would have been close, and the GOP would have made hay out of his minor scandals. Him leaving was good for Dems.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

January 7, 2010 2:33 PM    in reply to AnswerFrog

Both things can be true, though, you responsive amphibian anuran. Doing good by them allows him to hold head high. Everybody wins, literally.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

January 7, 2010 9:18 AM   

The Democrats have a 60 seat majority? When did this happen? What legislation have they passed using it? Honestly, other than the raw number, (Which includes "Independent Democrat" Joe Lieberman.) what evidence is there that 60 votes have made any difference what so ever?

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

January 7, 2010 9:43 AM    in reply to henk

That's what I thought.

This should be, can Dems hang on to 58?

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

Leave a comment

Your response:

Follow us!

Most Popular

TPM Stories Now Surging on