It is quite possible at this point that the Dems will have 51 Senate seats

[rpannier]

if Lamont wins CT we will have 52.

http://www.nytimes.com/ref/washington/2006ELECTIONGUIDE.html?currentDataSet=houANALYSIS

Using the Times Guide we should take all the seats that are up for grabs and the ones that lean Dem.
I think we'll take Allen's seat as well.

In my opinion we have no chance of taking the safe puke seats: Utah, Nev, WY, TX, MS and ME.

Still, even w/o those seats and if we lose AZ (which I think we will), it will be a very good night for us.

[robbibaba]

1. Hmmmm, what about those bloody machines?

[Kagemusha]

2. What about those bloody fillibusters.

Winning isn't everything here.

[paulk]

16. what about 'em?

you don't want Democrats to win?

please explain...

[Kagemusha]

21. I resent that accusation.

I'm saying that winning by a nose won't solve all the world's problems anyway. A majority can't save you if you can't even get members of the majority party to vote for you. That takes spine and strong public support.

[paulk]

23. winning the majority means a lot more than that

it means committee control, subpoena power, the ability to set the agenda, etc.

[Hawkeye-X]

18. The repukes threatened us with nuclear option

We'll nuke 'em and restore order.

Hawkeye-X

[FogerRox]

6. I object to the "What about the machines" stuff.

I dont think this is the time for that. THis is the time for campaigning. I dont mean to bust on you personally but I have heard this way too much.

Its like when buying a car, you spend hours researching, and just before you sign on the dotted line, your wife starts whing about this or that. Well .. you can walk out of the show room, but you cant do that with an election. THe election is NOv 7th. WE cant change that date. SO shut your piehole, and work hard to get DEMs elected, we are winning and much is at stake, we can win big if peole work hard.

Then if we dont get the House or the Senate, we know its rigged. THen you can join the revolution, unless you want to whine about that too.

I would ask that you ask yourself what are your values, do you wish to contirbute? Or do you wish to complain about the color of the car just before you buy it?

I worked hard against the HAVA forced purchase of Seqoia Advantage DREs in my county, and in my state. I took a break to work in the governors race last year. FOr the last 4 months I have been envolved in a Congresional race.

Do you understand why I have made that choice?

[Kagemusha]

22. I agree with your choice. It's the only sane one with 1 month to go

Worry about the machines again after. Besides, unless your visible political strength is overwhelming, a lot of people will look at the results and say, "oh well, another close election one side thought it won but it didn't" rather than "omg, that can't be right, there must be fraud!".

[Eric J in MN]

3. I've donated to James Webb, the Democrat running...

...for US Senate from Virginia, more than once.

But poll after poll shows George Allen ahead, in spite of all the negative stories about Allen. I'm not optimistic about Virginia.

[magnolia]

20. Thank you, Eric!

From all Virginians! We are working hard for Webb and very optimistic. Your money won't be wasted.

[Eric J in MN]

28. You're welcome. NT

NT

[Singular73]

4. Its much tougher to rig a senate race.

Takes a much larger conspiracy.

[Erika]

5. I think you fail to register the disgust of the Foley scandal

We will take over the Senate.

[FogerRox]

7. yes, I think the upside is as high as

winning 8-10 seats in the senate and 40 in the House. THe Most Conservative estimates I have seen have DEMS winning 17 seats in the House and the senate being 50 -50.

[rpannier]

9. I wrote that we'd have 51-2 seats

How do we not control the Senate with 51 or 52 seats?

[Joe Bacon]

11. We need 52 because LIEberman will go over to the GOP

51 isn't enough. LIEberman will sell us out. He's addicted to kissing that Bush ass.

[cali]

13. Ridiculous

Lieberman cares for Lieberman far more than he cares about kissing bush's ass. No way he'll pull a reverse Jeffords. It's only 2 years until the next election, and he understands the gamble he'd be taking. Not to mention that if he wants another term, a switch will totally kill that, and lots of these guys don't want to retire from the senate until they're wheeled out. Hey, my Senator's been there for almost half his life. He's in his 6th term.

[rpannier]

15. I agree

But, as I said Lamont would be 52.

[elocs]

25. I think that is a distinct possibility.

The Republicans will make him a great offer. I think that after all is said and done, Lieberman will feel abandoned by the Democratic Party. If he is elected he does not have to worry about reelection until 2012 and a lot can happen between now and then. I think Lieberman will do what he thinks is best for him now and worry about 2012 later.

[Cosmocat]

26. Flat wrong ...

Lieberman is kissing Bushco butt ... The senate is a whole different scene ...

His ego has been what has driven all of this ... And, his ego will keep him with the Ds ... He is in line to chair committees and has good tenure as a D, if he flips to R, he will get bumped back ... They ALL have egos, and there is no way that the number of R senators it would take to step back to let Lieberman get in front of them will occur ... No way he flips to the Rs and gives up seniority ...

Also, he WILL worry about 2012 ... He went from winning reelection in a sleepwalk to losing the primary cause he took a hard turn right as a democrat ... If he flips over all the way to an R, he will get run out of Connecticut with pitchforks and torches ... Fact is, IF he can clear this election, he will take a hard turn back to the left ...

[elocs]

27. In your opinion, I am flat wrong.

As the saying goes, opinions are like assholes, everybody has one. You have yours and I have mine. You cannot say "flat wrong" like you can say that the Tigers beat the Yanks today, 8-3. If I said the Yanks won, then I could be told I was flat wrong.

[grasswire]

8. Scarborough said it Friday night.

He said the Dems will take the House and the Senate.

He said the only thing that could prevent the "disaster" is if it is determined that Democrats faked the Foley IMs.

[Larry Allen]

10. senate majority

As things stand now, there is about a 15% chance of the dems sweeping RI, OH, NJ, TN and MO which would be required if we are to take control of the Senate.
While we need to see considerably more movement in our direction, the situation is an order of magnitude better than it was a couple of weeks ago. The most likely scenario for republicans to retain control is for them to win in VA and MO. Dollars need to be flowing to all the close races, but especially Claire McCaskill.

[ncrainbowgrrl]

17. Hi Larry Allen! Welcome to DU!!

:hi:

[MGD]

12. Smells like revolution. If we do take over, we need to waste no time

correcting the problems caused by the fascists. The Republicans will quickly try to entangle us so we'll want to ensure that they are the ones entangled first. That means we need to have investigations. While they're busy defending every dollar they've taken in the past ten years on C-SPAN, we can quickly set about undoing the damage and preparing for 2008. I will, however, be pleasently surprised if we seize a majority of anything. I'm anticipating widespread disenfranchisement in battlegrund states.

[cnlst8]

14. MO has been the closest race this election for months.

For win the Senate, I believe winning MO is a must. I will Donate to McCaskill this week.
TN and NJ will also be close too.
I wait for more info on VA to come, before I get my hopes up.

[alfredo]

19. Here's a good run down by a guy I worked with in 2004.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/10/7/161943/722

He was one of the four activist that revived the grassroot Dems in our county.

[cmkramer]

24. No, they'll still have 51 seats if Lamont wins

Lieberman's likely victory means the seat is staying with the Democrats so he would be part of the 51 Democrats. If Lamont did manage to win, all he'd be doing is replacing Joe.