Control of Senate hinges on 4 races: How many will we win?

[Totally Committed]

Poll question: Control of Senate hinges on 4 races: How many will we win?

Control of Senate hinges on 4 races
By DAVID ESPO, AP Special Correspondent

RICHMOND, Va. - With designs on the White House, Republican Sen. George Allen hoped all along his 2006 Virginia re-election campaign would draw national attention. But what he probably didn't have in mind was a stumble-marred race that is so close his party recently felt obliged to pay for $1.4 million in television ads to safeguard a seat long thought safe. Allen's attempt to hold off Democratic challenger Jim Webb is one of four races that strategists in both parties say will likely settle the overall battle for Senate control. In a reflection of the stakes, the two parties will spend more than $20 million combined on television in the campaign's final two weeks in Tennessee, Missouri, New Jersey and Virginia, a lineup that could not have been forecast even a few weeks ago.

"A year ago the focus was on the more traditionally competitive states like Pennsylvania and Ohio," Sen. Chuck Schumer of New York, head of the Democratic campaign effort, said recently, referring to two races where Democrats appear likeliest to defeat Republican incumbents.

>snip

Democrats must gain six seats to win control, and have strong leads in Rhode Island and Montana as well as Pennsylvania and Ohio.

Entire story:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061028/ap_on_el_se/close_s...

The Democrats have leads in Rhode Island and Montana as well as Pennsylvania and Ohio, but now have started to take the lead in Tennessee, Missouri, New Jersey and Virginia, as well.

We only need to win six races to take the Senate. How many of the above races to you think we'll ultimately win?

TC

Poll result (47 votes)
1	(1 votes, 2%)	Vote
2	(1 votes, 2%)	Vote
3	(4 votes, 9%)	Vote
4	(6 votes, 13%)	Vote
5	(8 votes, 17%)	Vote
6	(10 votes, 21%)	Vote
7	(11 votes, 23%)	Vote
All of them.	(1 votes, 2%)	Vote
None of them.	(1 votes, 2%)	Vote
It won't matter; the election will be rigged.	(4 votes, 9%)	Vote

[MrModerate]

1. I picked 5, RI, MT, PA, OH, NJ. I don't think Dems will make it . . .

in TN, MO, or VA.

This presumes that the result is not already coded into Diebold's ETDs -- Election Theft Devices.

I don't think Dems can make up the gaps in the three states above, even though Ford is a pretty appealing campaigner. I'm not sure he's a Democrat, but he is appealing.

Allen looks to hold on in Virginia -- the lewdgate kerfuffle (although total bullshit) will interfere with Webb gaining momentum. MO, the numbers look bad for being 10 days out.

[fooj]

2. IMO, Lieberman MUST GO.

He stands for everything that is corrupt and wrong in our system. I'm stunned that the Democratic leaders don't understand the IMPORTANCE of the WILL OF THE PEOPLE! I've said it once and I'm certain I'll say it a thousand times before this is all over...

JOE LIEBERMAN LOST THE PRIMARY. The people of Connecticut voted him OUT. That's REALITY. No spin. No BS. Th lack of support from Democratic leaders is APALLING. Period.

I just hope that the people of Connecticut say NO JOE, YOU MUST GO...one more time!

[Debi]

3. NJ, MO, VA n/t

[Totally Committed]

4. I REALLY agree with you!

JOE MUST GO!....

TC

[MrCoffee]

5. Again with this? Can I ask you one thing...

Why can't Joe run in the general? I don't understand why losing the primary should automatically foreclose a run in the general.

I'm not picking a fight, I really just don't understand where that argument comes from.

[Totally Committed]

7. I can only speak for myself:

I find his disregard of the Primary outcome disrespectful of the voters of CT. I also find this arrogance in a year when we need to win every election possible unnecessarily devisive, and indicative of his ultimate disloyalty to this Party.

TC

[MrCoffee]

8. that's fine, it's a legitimate opinion...

and thanks for answering, btw. you're the first person who's ever given me an actual answer on that question.

FWIW, i absolutely agree with you. but that's not enough (in my mind, anyway), to want to shut someone out of an election entirely.

based on everything i'm reading out of CT (and i live clear across the country, so what i read is what i get), Holy Joe has been loyal enough to CT for them to want to keep him in the Senate. The last poll i saw indicated that fully 1/3rd of CT Democrats were still supporting Joe. As is their right. Ned didn't win the primary with 100% of the vote, and to ask Lieberman supporters in CT to switch simply because Joe's pissing on the party isn't going to work.

IMO, if he gets reelected, he can go shove off and caucus with himself. Personally, I find more fault with the ACTUAL Democrats who are supporting him than with Joe himself. He told the party good-bye, and they're pretending like it never happened. Did Jeffords get that kind of reception from the Republicans after he defected?

[Totally Committed]

9. Jeffords was stripped of his seniority and committee assignments,

if I remember correctly. I can't understand why he has been promised the retention of thise things by the Senate leadership. Don't even get me started about the "Democrats" who are supporting him over Lamont, the genuine nominee for this Party. I'm with you... Joe can go caucus by himself if he wins. I despise him for doing this.

And, you're welcome about hte answer. Glad you agreed with me!

TC

[MrCoffee]

11. The Democratic response to Joe's run pisses me off way more than

Joe's run does. If he can fund an indy run, then let him. If the general electorate of CT votes him into office, the will of the people trumps everything.

But if Senate Democrats continue to even talk to the dickhead at the water fountain, then shame on them. That's the disgusting part of the whole thing.

[Totally Committed]

14. I agree with you...

I feel angry at the whole situation. I think Reid should have stripped him of seniority and committee assignments the minute he announced his indy run. It's total disrespect of us, AND even more importantly, the voters of CT.

You are so right.

TC

[MrCoffee]

15. Reid is most deserving of outrage over this...Joe's just being a politician.

And, in all fairness, he's being a pretty good politician right now. If he can run rough-shod over the Democratic party like this with no repercussions, do we really, honestly expect him not to?

He's acting like a turdblossom, but the problem is that Reid and the Senate Democrats are letting him get away with this shit. It's disgusting.

[Totally Committed]

16. I've never liked Reid as Leader of the Senate, anyway....

Reid is only *this* much less wussy than Daschle. I know this'll never happen, but I'd truly love to see someone truly Liberal, like Ted Kennedy lead our side in the Senate.

TC

[fooj]

10. Spot on!

...find more fault with the ACTUAL Democrats who are supporting him than with Joe himself. He told the party good-bye, and they're pretending like it never happened.

Here's the thing about "the polls"...
They don't seem to take into account that the union support that Judas Joe enjoyed during the primaries is no longer an issue. They have pulled their support for Lieberman and given it to Lamont. The unions are the only reason Joe came in with the numbers that he did in certain areas.

Think about it. Joe and Ned BOTH ran in the primaries, yes? How then, can Joe SUDDENLY gain the support of 1/3 Dems in CT? Ned WON the primary. How could people who voted for Ned the first time throw their vote to Joe after all he has done and all that he has said? It doesn't make sense. Especially if one factors in the unions.

This blatant and complete disregard for the will of the people is apalling in my view. Seriously, how would YOU feel if you voted in Connecticut and your voice didn't count because Judas Joe wanted a DO OVER? It's wrong on so many levels...

Just my 2 cents...

[Totally Committed]

12. Just your 2 cents???

This blatant and complete disregard for the will of the people is apalling in my view. Seriously, how would YOU feel if you voted in Connecticut and your voice didn't count because Judas Joe wanted a DO OVER? It's wrong on so many levels...

Just my 2 cents...

That's way better than 2 cents-worth! I totally agree with you.

TC

[MrCoffee]

13. It was a very close primary race...

and Joe's Democratic support didn't all flock to Ned... that was a seriously close primary. It's not that surprising that, with Joe still in it, he has a decent amount of Democratic support. It's really sick that Joe's getting all the puke support (no pun intended), and that Joe's "Democratic" supporters are simply ignoring that fact.

I don't think that Ned's primary supporters are going back to Joe, why would they? I just don't think that Joe's primary supporters are necessarily going over to Ned. That's the part that (from what I can tell) Ned's campaign dropped the ball on. There seems to be an assumption that Ned automatically gets the CT Democrats support, but there also appears to be an equally strong sense in CT that Joe has been pretty good to the state for the past 18 years, otherwise this wouldn't be a race, and Joe wouldn't be running.

The last polling info I saw was from Oct. 20, and it showed Joe with a 12 point lead over Ned, and Schlesinger somewhere around 5%. I absolutely refuse to believe that CT is only 5% repuke. The pukes are voting Joe. That right there should indicate to the "Democrats" who are continuing to support Joe that he's a weasel-faced asshat.

[fooj]

18. "weasel-faced asshat"...

LMAO



Good one.

[MrCoffee]

19. I'll be here all week, don't forget to tip your servers...

that tells me you read my post, which is deeply and profoundly appreciated. i have a hard time discussing the CT Senate race with certain DU'ers, and this thread has been a refreshing change from that.

So thanks to you and to TC for a nice discussion.

[Totally Committed]

20. It was my pleasure!

Love a good discussion, too.

Thanks to you, as well!

TC

[cali]

21. Although I'd love to see Lieberman defeated in

the general, you're wrong about the people of CT voting him out. The dems voted him out, but they don't constitute the full electorate of that state. I don't like what he's doing one little bit, but he certainly has the right to run as an independent.

[Parisle]

6. "Started to take the lead?"

----The democratic candidates still trail by a point or two in Virginia, Tennessee and Missouri. It will take a virtual miracle to close the deal in any one of those three states. Case in point: When George Allen's problems with "macaca" and racism emerged in Virginia, local observers felt this would STRENGTHEN Allen's appeal with as many as 15% of Virginia voters. Nice, eh? I figure we'll get five,.... and with six, you get Cheney's tie-breaking vote.

[rep the dems]

17. I'm being optimistic and saying 7.

I think the only one we'll lose is Virginia, unfortunately.

[Robbins]

22. 6

We will keep New Jersey.We will win Montana,Ohio,Pennsylvania,Rhode ISland,and Missouri.Lieberman will win.Control will depend on who wins In Virginia and Tennessee.If there Is a wave for dems on
Election day a upset Is possible In Arizona.Some may disagree but my gut tells me Webb IS more likely to win than Ford.Virginia like Montana I think IS on the verge of becoming a swing state Instead of a solid Republican state.