The down-ballot races

Our top Senate contests, in rough order of competitiveness:

1. Virginia
2. New Mexico
3. Colorado
4. New Hampshire
5. Minnesota
6. Alaska
7. Maine
8. Oregon
9. Mississippi
10. Louisiana
11. Texas
12. Kentucky
13. North Carolina
14. Nebraska
15. Idaho
16. Oklahoma
17. Kansas

Per Pollster.com poll composites when available, Obama runs stronger than Clinton in Virginia (+13), Colorado (+12), New Hampshire (+9), Minnesota (+14), Alaska (+20), Maine (+7), Oregon (+7),  Texas (+2), North Carolina (+13), and Kansas (+4, per SUSA).

Clinton runs stronger in New Mexico (+4), Louisiana (+9, per Southern Media & Research), and Kentucky (+31).

No polling is available in Mississippi, Nebraska, Idaho, and Oklahoma.

Now, Virginia and New Mexico flip no matter what. Warner in Virginia probably has his own coattails for his party's nominee. But for the rest, the top of the ticket can either be a hindrance or a help.

How many down-ballot candidates do you think will clamor to have Clinton campaign with them? How many others, like IL-14, will clamor for fundraising and campaign help from Obama?

Of course the super delegates know this. It's the reason Obama keeps getting his steady trickle of supers while Clinton waits for the occasional crumb.

•  We're going to have a 56 seat majority.

  Say goodbye to Lieberman!

  by filmgeek83 on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 07:27:49 AM PDT

  •  Reid must kick Holy Joe out

    ...of the caucus after '08.

    by jds1978 on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 07:28:50 AM PDT

    •  Still need 60

      Still need 60 for cloture.  But hopefully the Rs will be running scared.

      by Nina Katarina on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 07:33:18 AM PDT

      •  60's a toughie. But...

        after the past 6 years, I think that 2010 is gonna be particularly interesting.

        I'd like to see someone here in PA go against Specter, or whomever is penciled in to take his place should he retire.  

        Perhaps Patrick Murphy.

        ::::::

        by nowheredesign on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 07:50:34 AM PDT

        •  Specter is probably safe

          He feignts to the center just enough on social and economic issues to satisfy PA liberals and has strong appeal among centeral PAns who like his pro-Republicans stance.

          Unlike Santorum who was a party hack, Specter can actually cite a record that shows he's been a good senator for PA.

          Not that I wouldn't mind seeing him get pushed by a strong Dem in the general.   Every letter I've ever written to the Specter office has been replied to by the same form letter.   Specter gets no love from me.

          by BigBensBeermaster on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 09:05:20 AM PDT

      •  Forget About Minnesota as a Pickup

        The Rasmussen poll showing Obama beating McCain by 14pts in Minnesota also has Al Franken losing to Norm Coleman by 7 pts! (thats a 21 pt variance)

        Unfortunately this is accurate. The memory of Jesse Ventura and his 'celebrity' governor's run is still vividly remembered and dooms any chance for Franken to win.  The polling numbers show that even a wildly popular Obama cannot carry Al over the finish line.

        The DFL had the opportunity for a certain win had they nominated Mike Ciersi, but they blew it.  Also blew it in the 3rd Congressional district where they went with a rookie Madia vs. Terry Bonoff who would have won in a walk.

        We have no one to blame but ourselves.

        by richmond199 on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 08:04:45 AM PDT

        •  Franken will beat Coleman by high single digits

          Coleman would have lost to Wellstone by double digits, is an unremarkable Publican who is significantly to the right of the state he currently represents.

          Franken is quite popular and will win the seat.

          by Ajax the Greater on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 08:11:42 AM PDT

          •  How do you explain the poll?

            Fine sentiments, but how do you explain the poll with Obama plus 14 vs. McCain and Coleman plus 7 vs Franken.  Same polling firm, same day, same polling call.

            Doesn't this demostrate, like nothing else, Franken's extreme weakness as a candidate?

            by richmond199 on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 08:34:15 AM PDT

            •  How I would explain it

              When Franken ran boigraphical ads earlier in the year his numbers spiked against Coleman. I think it got Coleman's attention and he has been in the state much more often recently.

              I think once Franken starts dialing up the ads and appearances against Coleman this summer and into the fall, this race will tighten considerably.

              I love it when Norm is up for election. We get to see his true flip-flopping ways and we get to see him as a family man when his "wife" flies in from LA with the kids.

              That family is like a comet, you only see them about every 6 years.

              I think there's about a 40-50% chance we unseat Coleman with Obama on the ticket. 0% if Clinton in the nominee. I think Clinton loses all of the competitive upper midwest states to McCain (WI, MN, IA).

              by savvyspy on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 08:42:47 AM PDT

              •  Wisconsin

                Yep, Obama plays better here than Clinton.  In other states you might view your candidate as "someone who feels familiar" -- in the midwest we look for "someone we'd hire."

                Obama looks smart enough to understand what's important to me (though he won't always agree), and lean enough to not get tired halfway through a hard day's work.

                He's slightly soft at the finish where McCain picks up 2pts just because it's hunting season.

                by Sussemilch on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 08:56:25 AM PDT

              •  21 pt variance?

                You're avoiding the question.  A 21pt variance between Obama's result in Minnesota vs. Franken's?

                The other big problem with Franken is that Coleman is now attracting hug national campaign contributions due to Franken's celebrity and Air America target status.  527's are pulling out all of the TV clips, Air America recorded segments, and Al's 'Trading Places' gorilla scene to use against him.

                Folks who think Franken can win in Minnesota are smoking and inhaling.

                by richmond199 on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 09:52:33 AM PDT

                •  I'd agree with that

                  I don't see Franken getting much over 40% in Minnesota.  Which is awful, because Coleman sucks bad.  If the Dems would just put up a normal non-flashy small business owner or educator, Coleman would go down in flames.

                  I like Franken.  I like laughing at Franken.  I wouldn't vote for him though.

                  by Sussemilch on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 11:16:07 AM PDT

                •  Are you new to this?

                  43-50 is no bad place for a challenger to be more than six months out from polling day.

                  All that large gap represents is Obama's superior name recognition to Franken's.

                  by lurker on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 05:39:10 PM PDT

            •  Also ... Obama will help this race ...

              re: turn out ... Coleman is going down  ... bank on it .. it will be a naibiter .. but Al will prevail in the end .. do you really think Minnesota will want a Repuke representing them ... come November?

              by Calvin Jones and the 13th Apostle on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 08:51:35 AM PDT

            •  how do you explain Franken is #1 in $ raised?

              and that most of it is from inside Minnesota?  $10M raised so far and still over $4M left CoH to continue to introduce himself as a serious candidate.

              it's all good.  and with Barack at the top of the ticket, I have already begun to focus on the OR and ME seats; MN is a 65%+ chance of winning whereas OR and ME are still about 50/50...

              by Ajax the Greater on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 09:00:47 AM PDT

            •  recent change in poll numbers

              due to recent republican attacks on his sloppy personal finances.  (Plug for my diary here.) This should be a temporary dip. Coleman is an opportunistic nimrod.

              by glassbeadgame on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 11:17:12 AM PDT

        •  Ha ha

          I didn't realize elections were decided six months before election day by one poll! In that case, we've already picked up Colorado, New Mexico, Virginia, New Hampshire, and Alaska. Hurray!

          By the way, Robert Novak has this race as "Lean Democratic".

          by kos on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 09:35:13 AM PDT

      •  Leberman will fade no matter what.

        Once Obama is President Lieberman will be persona non grata in the Democratic party. He will kept around like a old doll you keep in the closet and can't bring yourself to toss it.

        by eddieb061345 on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 08:39:01 AM PDT

      •  Is he needed for that?

        I thought he was caucusing with us so we would still have control of the committee assignments.  Cloture is a vote by vote issue and there is little no guarantee that liebeRman will reliably vote for cloture.

        by hillgiant on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 09:48:58 AM PDT

    •  I think that would be really

      stupid. As much as I despise Lieberman, if he chooses to vote along with the Dems even 30% of the time it's better than nothing. Don't throw the baby (and boy is Joe ever a baby) out with the bathwater.

      by sloopydrew on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 07:41:28 AM PDT

    •  the problem with Joe

      is that he's the ultimate insider.

      He's a sanctimonious and condescending gasbag to voters, but he's spent decades cultivating personal friendships in the Senate.

      Removing Lieberman will require force from a higher power (i.e., President Obama), and given that Lieberman has signalled that he's going to be Lieber-groaning about Wright and Farrakhan on McCain's behalf, there's a good possibility that that will happen (but not until 2009).

      by Stroszek on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 07:57:58 AM PDT

    •  Lieberman will come back in line

      He wants to be on the side that's winning.  After we increase our Senate majority and retake the White House, Traitor Joe will come back and pretend to have been one of us all along.  Probably will even start voting the right way a lot more often.

      Sickening, I know.  But that's one more vote for the things we need. Might be a better idea to use him for our purposes than to just have the pleasure of taking revenge on him.

      I'd still count the spoons after any meeting when he was around if I were Reid, though.

      by AdmiralNaismith on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 08:42:52 AM PDT

      •  Use him till 2012...

        Then Ned or Murphy can kick his ass.

        by dieharddemocrat on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 12:44:37 PM PDT

  •  When he is neutralized... I propose

    A CT super party.

    Perhaps a pajama jammy jam.

    (Yes, I watched House Party 2 this week.)

    :)

    :::

    by nowheredesign on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 07:36:55 AM PDT

•  They're hardly "supers," they're cowardly,

  spineless, bottom feeding vermin.

  by Pazuzu on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 07:28:25 AM PDT

  •  Now, Now

    ....We Do need these folks

    by jds1978 on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 07:31:25 AM PDT

  •  Not all of them. Think about it.

    Take Rep. Jason Altmire. He's a vulnerable freshman representative in a red district in Pennsylvania. His district just voted 66% in favor of Hillary. And he's got his own re-election to consider.

    And yet, Altmire has NOT endorsed Hillary -- at a time when she needs him to endorse and is probably leaning on him hard. That's pretty courageous of him, I think, and smart.

    by jeepdad on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 07:34:13 AM PDT

  •  Spineless, bottom feeding vermin

    And compared to Republicans, they're Prince Charming, every last one of them.

    by AdmiralNaismith on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 08:45:16 AM PDT

  •  Great way

    to woo them.

    Straight out of the Condi Rice school of diplomacy.

    by kos on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 09:36:01 AM PDT

•  Did you just call John Tanner a crumb?

  He's gonna be pissed.

  by jeepdad on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 07:29:30 AM PDT

•  In New Hampshire? Really?

  That can only be explained by a defection of independents from Clinton.  I gotta see some crosstabs to support that...

  by mspicata on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 07:29:36 AM PDT

  •  Just took a look at Pollster's NH

    numbers:  There's clear trendlines on Clinton/McCain; she's going down, he's going up.  Obama is indeed performing better on a composite basis; but the trendlines are not clear.  Moreover, there's no recent data.

    by mspicata on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 07:35:20 AM PDT

•  9-17 will be in play with Obama

  at the top of the ticket.

  Finally, a true blue majority.

  by Alfonso Nevarez on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 07:29:49 AM PDT

  •  And putting more in play

    means the Republicans have to spread their money out more thinly, too. They can't defend them all.

    by Osaka on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 07:37:29 AM PDT

  •  I definitely think Obama will help

    here in Oregon. We have a large independent block here, and with an Obama candidacy we have a good shot at beating Republican Gordon Smith in November. I do hope that we nominate Merkley who is not only progressive but imo, is the most electable Democrat running in the primary.

    by sarahlane on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 08:57:15 AM PDT

•  Precisely

  It's about building the party or dooming it to permanent minority status. There's but one option for those that want a majority...

  by The Bagof Health and Politics on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 07:30:07 AM PDT

•  Obama will win the primary eventually

  But at an opportunity cost of focusing on mcSame early.
  Look at mcsams's strategy, he is trying mightly hard to cultivate a 'moderate' image by visiting with AA inNew orleans though he wont get their vote.
  While Obama is being held up by HRC ina race she has already lost.
  Sad.
  Obama would be doing the same.
  Obama was at his best whenhe was going to conservative groups and adressing them ans showing that he can connect withthem.
  Now HRC has tarnished him and it will take time before he assumes his past shine.
  Does he have the time?

  by wuod kwatch on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 07:30:23 AM PDT

  •  He Has Plenty of Time

    McSame is going to Selma and the Lower Ninth precisely because he knows that what he's doing right now doesn't matter.  Many people have forgotten he's even a candidate.  The reason everyone's getting so invested in the Clinton v. Obama struggle is because that's the race for the presidency.  

    In a typical election year, voters don't start thinking about the election until September/October.  Obama's doing the things he needs to do to win in November.  

    by karateexplosions on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 07:38:18 AM PDT

    •  I personally

      think that he is hedging his bets there.  If Clinton does get in, McCain will easily be able to say that during this infighting time he respected African Americans and went to great lenghts to understand their problems.

      by housesella on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 08:36:08 AM PDT

      •  If He Truly Thinks That

        Then he's dumber than I thought, and that's saying something.

        by karateexplosions on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 08:44:48 AM PDT

      •  Reaching out to African Americans

        When Republicans like McCain do this, I don't think they're really expecting to win over many black voters.

        They're trying to assuage the fears of centrist white voters who might fear that they're racists.

        by SadTexan on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 08:56:05 AM PDT

      •  It depends.

        Did his handlers get him to throw away his old Lester Maddox campaign buttons?  If he happens to wear one of those, he might not get a good reception.

        by AdmiralNaismith on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 08:56:16 AM PDT

  •  The damage has been done

    If he can still win the Presidency he can undo the damage. But I think his chances of winning have been cut in half thanks to the constant Hillary endorsed attacks on him by the MSM. They haven't brought up the Mark Penn issue or Bill's $800,000 from the Colombian Free Trade idiots or Bill claiming Hillary had a "senior moment" since "bittergate." It's been bittergate and Wright. There's no way a person could seriously think this hasn't tarnished him in a lot of people's minds on a permanent basis. The same people who still haven't gotten over Bill's blowjob. Those people haven't really been a part of the party for a long time, but as you pointed out, Obama was bringing them back in and it was great. And what has happened is tragic. I'm not even religious and I find myself praying he can win the White House and win back the hearts and minds of Americans and citizens of the world.

    by sloopydrew on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 07:51:38 AM PDT

    •  I respectfully disagree (in hope)

      I share your perspective and disdain for what has been wrought by the Clintons and her campaign. But as I stated in an earlier diary, I believe the mud would have hit Obama sooner or later, in one form or another, as unjust as that is. Better to have him a bit tarnished now with time to recover. Lots of time. He will recover and then be compared to a badly tarnished McSame later on.

      I'm in no way condoning what has transpired in the Dem campaign. But it has and that can't be changed. What I'm saying is, in the end, it was probably better for early mud to be flung, rather than all of it at the end ... not that I will be thanking Hillary for her words and deeds anytime soon ... or ever, for that matter!

      by RevJoe on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 08:27:30 AM PDT

•  It's over by early June

  "The sky is falling!" people seriously have to calm down.

  by unertl on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 07:30:43 AM PDT

•  Great news Kos. Thanks.

  Obama for president and additional seats won in congress. And without the help of the DLC.

  

  by notquitedelilah on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 07:30:51 AM PDT

  •  Stick that 'fork in her, Obama

    she's done!

    by RevJoe on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 08:28:04 AM PDT

•  And yet...

  Paul Krugman continues he descent from serious voice to shill for Hillary. It's really sad.

  by iowabosox on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 07:31:55 AM PDT

  •  Thats politics

    I'm sure his madness will be cured as soon as obama is our candidate!

    by eddieb061345 on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 08:31:49 AM PDT

  •  Krugman ..

    is a bit miffed ... because Obama's people attacked him personally(over health care) .. so to him .. it is a bit personal .. his emotions are boiling over in this primary .. just like everyone else(meaning here .. MyDD ... you name it)

    by Calvin Jones and the 13th Apostle on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 08:54:37 AM PDT

•  Alaska in particular is key here

  Obama as nominee gives Begich probably a greater than 50% chance of winning, while Hillary as nominee probably reduces his chances to something like 25%.

  by typo ink on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 07:32:23 AM PDT

•  Get rid of Inhofe

  Come on Oklahoma!!

  http://www.andrewforoklahoma.com/

  by juslikagrzly on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 07:32:30 AM PDT

  •  As much as I personally prefer Obama

    Hillary would help Andrew Rice much more in Oklahoma than Obama. Surprising but true. Most other states the opposite is obviously true.

    by oriole223 on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 07:38:02 AM PDT

    •  That was what I was thinking until

      Brad Henry comes out for Obama. I mean the friggin governor of the state endorsing Obama even though he was blown out in the primary there. Man, that's something, huh?

      Plus Obama got the Add-on delegate from the Sooner state. Go figure. Somebody in Oklahoma loves them some Obamaness.

      by PointGuard on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 07:44:06 AM PDT

      •  agree pointguard

        their primary was fairly early and the endorsement of gov. and ex-senator Boren (now president of OU but we'll forgive him) really helps.

        There are truly lots of dems in OK, they've just been ignored for so long that it will take an Obama to get them fired up again.

        by juslikagrzly on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 08:13:39 AM PDT

      •  And keep in mind...

        Gov. Brad's approval numbers are in the 70% range. That's huge. People in this state really like him.

        I've talked to people at my job, who otherwise would be dyed-in-the-wool Repubs (with not much reason for it, btw) who are already in the tank for Obama. They figure they've got nothing to lose.

        Okies are a peculiar bunch. I think the war plays here as an issue more than anyone thinks, and from a strictly practical point of view. I've talked to these same people who think that we long ago should have given up. "Either say we're in it for the oil and just take it, or get out."

        I think with an extremely popular Governor, a popular OU president, and a young, populist upstart Senate candidate already on his side, Obama could pull out a surprise here. Clinton is a known quantity and that quantity is same ol', same ol'.

        The Wright thing will definitely hurt here in the Buckle of the Bible Belt, but I think charisma might just counter-balance it.

        by rottenart on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 11:35:03 AM PDT

    •  I disagree

      If she's the candidate, the turnout for McCain will be much higher, and downticket races like Rice's will suffer.

      Plus, Rice has been a supporter of Obama since forever, so I doubt Sen Clinton would offer much help.

      by gypsy on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 08:41:04 AM PDT

      •  agree gypsy!

        even though she won Oklahoma's primary I do believe there's some buyer's remorse going on.  At least I hear that from friends who still live there.

        by juslikagrzly on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 09:38:07 AM PDT

    •  Did Obama ever make an appearance in OK? ...

      He'll have the money ... what do you think will happen if he visits places like OK .. that haven't had a Preisidential candidate appearance in what would seem forever? .. I hope Obama takes it to the Rethugs on their own turf

      by Calvin Jones and the 13th Apostle on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 08:56:52 AM PDT

      •  sure wish he would

        don't live there anymore (thank you god and fsm) but as a native Okie we were (are) forgotten for the most part.  We did get all the dem 04 primary candidates at a forum in Stillwater.  Big big turnout too.

        Bush actually spoke at Ok State's graduation in 06.  We had a nice sized protest of about 750 folks.  Of course, we weren't allowed within sight distance of the football stadium where he spoke.  It was fun!  

        by juslikagrzly on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 09:36:24 AM PDT

        •  well ...

          call for any Okies that read DK ... call Obama's campaign .. and request an appearance once the GE kicks off

          by Calvin Jones and the 13th Apostle on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 10:13:43 AM PDT

          •  I'm betting that his 50 state strategy

            WILL include Oklahoma, especially since Rice is a supporter.  

            by juslikagrzly on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 10:20:01 AM PDT

•  we know this answer

  The New Yorker wrote this story two years ago:

  Hillary Clinton is a sensitive subject for McCaskill. After the governor’s race two years ago, many Missouri Democrats assumed that in 2008 McCaskill would make another run against Matt Blunt, the Republican who defeated her. But she has told people in Missouri and in Washington that a ticket led by Clinton would be fatal for many Democrats on the ballot, and that a Clinton candidacy would rule out her chance to win the governorship. "The Democratic Party has to look at candidates who can be competitive in all fifty states," she said. A few days later, at the annual Jackson Day dinner of the Greene County Democrats, in Springfield, Republican protesters held signs labelling her "New York’s third senator."

  In states like Missouri, coolness toward Hillary Clinton puts many Democrats in an uncomfortable position. Harold Ford, Jr., is close to both Clintons. He is running a strong race in Tennessee—if he wins, he would be the first popularly elected African-American senator from the South. When I asked Ford if Hillary Clinton would be campaigning with him, he said, "I’m not running away from her position on the war or her position on energy independence. I’m doing events with her." When I asked him where, he said, "In Washington."

  Some Democrats fear any association with national Democrats, who are perceived to be too liberal. "I had this notion that I could convince people who were skeptical of national Democrats to vote for me because I could bring home the bacon, or because I could find some personal pitch to them," Brad Carson, the former Oklahoma congressman, said. "But it was very hard for people to separate me out from Hillary Clinton. All their ads were Hillary Clinton, John Kerry, John Edwards, and me. They said I was more liberal than these guys, and that if I went to Washington I’d be supporting their agenda. I found that extremely difficult to overcome."

  Across Missouri, I heard similar fears. At a breakfast fund-raiser for McCaskill in Kansas City, Katheryn J. Shields, a Democrat who is the chief executive of Jackson County, which encompasses Kansas City, said of Hillary Clinton, "She’s great." But when asked if Clinton should be the Party’s nominee, Shields said, "That would be a hard one." The outgoing executive director of the Greene County Democrats, Nora Walcott, was more direct. Though she said she was to the left in the Party, she feared that Clinton’s liberal credentials would alienate Missouri voters. "You’ve got to tell the people in Washington not to nominate Hillary," she told me. "It would do so much damage to the Missouri Democratic Party."

  Only a few nationally known Democrats have been invited to Missouri to speak on Claire McCaskill’s behalf; one was Obama, whom she described as "so popular that we have to get him back."

  by Adam B on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 07:32:50 AM PDT

  •  Yep.

    True in Iowa, too. Although we don't particularly like McCain, since he ignored us for the past two elections, we prefer him to Hillary.

    Remember, we're the only state where Hillary came in third.

    (Yay for Iowa!)

    by iowabosox on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 07:36:23 AM PDT

    •  almost makes up

      for what you did to Howard Dean. Almost.

      by elmo on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 08:26:10 AM PDT

    •  Yet ...

      McBush came in fifth in Iowa this year .... right?

      by Calvin Jones and the 13th Apostle on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 08:57:42 AM PDT

•  Obama forces McCain to play defense

  In a campaign where we actually have a money advantage- it helps us to compete for states like Kansas where McCain is going to have to spend money/time.

  by jgkojak on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 07:33:18 AM PDT

  •  Kansas?

    Your joking, eh?

    How about Massachusetts where Obama is essentially tied with McCain?

    by richmond199 on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 11:07:01 AM PDT

    •  Mass. is not going REpublican

      In a million years.  Come on.

      If Obama, who has KS ties, picks Sebelius as Veep, then I think he has a real shot at winning.

      by jgkojak on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 12:33:25 PM PDT

•  Let us not forget Bill Clinton's legacy of

  winning at the expense of downballot races, rather than assisting them.  Methinks, we will see a repeat if HRC is the nominee.

  by Its the Supreme Court Stupid on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 07:33:39 AM PDT

  •  We've seen how it works with Clintons:

    One might add that one of the reasons we lost congress was the health care debacle run by HRC.

    by Inland on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 07:36:30 AM PDT

•  N.B., superdelegates and elected dems started

  moving to Obama before it was clear he would be the winner.  IMO, that indicated that elected officials wanted to keep their distance even from a President HRC.  The calculus is that a pol should be scared of the vindictiveness of the Clintons, but a pol should be even more scared of being blamed for making her a first choice for president.  

  Now that HRC is alienating activists, blacks, purple states and red states and small states, the college educated, and the young, it's pretty clear where the down ticket interests lie.  Even backing Obama and losing in the general is better for state and local dems than siding with HRC.

  by Inland on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 07:34:08 AM PDT

•  I think we might live to see a blue virginia!

  by nowheredesign on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 07:34:13 AM PDT

  •  hurray!

    I grew up in MD but have been a NoVA resident since the mid 90s.  I love the area but have always felt it's a little too right-leaning for my taste.  Very happy to see that's been changing over these last several years :D

    by grrtigger on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 07:50:27 AM PDT

  •  It's what I've been dreaming of for 8 yrs

    by turn Virginia blue on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 08:23:38 AM PDT

•  Virgina

  is a great place to be right now. We've got Kaine handling the State budget beautifully- very popular. And Webb is about to be joined in the senate by Mark Warner. Gilmore is a joke around here-he was terrible with the state budget.
  Hear me now, if Obama is the nominee, Virgina will go blue.

  by orphanpower on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 07:34:26 AM PDT

  •  But need more Dems in Congress

    and if HRC is at the top of the ticket-it won't happen

    I really would like to see Drake, Goode, Goodlatte etc LOSE!

    by VA Breeze on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 08:47:37 AM PDT

    •  Goode, what a nightmare!

      I really hope we can get him out of congress this time. He actually represents (more like resents) Charlottesville. We went over 70% for Kerry and 74.3% for Obama. Goode is totally wrong for us, but because the state Republicans "redistriced" we are in the same district as Danville.
      Something, ain't right.

      by orphanpower on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 09:33:10 AM PDT

    •  You've got Glenn Nye

      I really think you've got a great shot at taking out Drake with Glenn Nye.

      Show him some love, or give to his ActBlue link.

      by sccs on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 10:48:52 AM PDT

      •  Already donated to him-and will do more!

        Nye would be GREAT in contrast to Drake!

        by VA Breeze on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 02:59:18 PM PDT

•  why can't Warner be both VP and Senator? nt

  by Yirmiyahu on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 07:35:08 AM PDT

  •  Because Then He'd Have to Votes in the Senate

    His own, and then the tie-breaker.  Doesn't seem fair.

    Also, unlike Dick Cheney, who is in a magical fourth branch of government, a VP who is also a Senator would be split between the executive and legislative branches "for REALSIES", which seems a constitutional no-no.

    by karateexplosions on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 07:41:32 AM PDT

    •  it was a joke

      by Yirmiyahu on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 07:55:10 AM PDT

      •  Still

        by karateexplosions on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 07:57:34 AM PDT

    •  You get tipped ..

      just for that 4th branch comment alone   ;-)   ... speaking of which .. anyone see Lil' Bush last night?

      by Calvin Jones and the 13th Apostle on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 08:59:07 AM PDT

  •  Why can't he be both Pope and King?

    by AdmiralNaismith on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 08:57:41 AM PDT

•  It will be nice to see Obama freed up to raise $$

  Downticket. When Hillary concedes and McCain proves himself to not be the money-raising Casanova he needs to be to catch Obama, it will free up Barack to help raise money downticket at levels never-before seen. With so many energized small donors alligned with Obama, the online contirbutions of $10-100 put towards fellow dems could make ALOT more races competitive this fall.

  by Stumptown Dave on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 07:35:36 AM PDT

•  If the super delegates know this

  why aren't they putting an end to this already? This is hurting the party. Obama was the clear winner after Wisconsin. Since then it's been a prolonged attack from the corporate media that hurts Obama and hurts the Dems. Obama is as far from a "Dukakis" candidate as you can get, but if the super delegates don't grow a pair and end this thing, the media will continue to do their best to paint him as one. It's getting to the point where I want to throw my hands up in the air and refuse to vote for ANY super delegate who hasn't stepped up and brought this nightmare to an end. Hillary has been an attack dog and any true Democrat supporting her should be ashamed. I know I'd feel pretty miserable if I was out campaigning for the same person Rush Limbaugh, Joe Scarborough, Sean Hannity and the RNC were supporting (seriously, they've been praising Hillary far more than they have John McCain).

  by sloopydrew on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 07:36:33 AM PDT

  •  They're hoping Indiana and NC end it for them.

    Then they won't have to make a "controversial" decision.

    by AdmiralNaismith on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 08:58:27 AM PDT

•  "Clinton runs stronger in New Mexico (+4)"

  Until perhaps, Obama chooses Richardson as his running mate.

  by anth on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 07:36:39 AM PDT

  •  Or even until

    Hillary gets the nomination and the corporate media spit their venom her way. Don't think for a second they haven't been planning some massive attacks on her the entire time they've been slamming Obama. Hopefully this won't happen. But Kos is far more optimistic than me and I am wondering if the super delegates know Obama will help them more than Hillary or if they just fall for all the same crap the public is falling for about Obama being the next McGovern or Dukakis.

    by sloopydrew on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 07:39:25 AM PDT

  •  Think that would help in Texas, too?

    by jeepdad on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 07:39:51 AM PDT

  •  That's my hope

    And then forget it, we win NM easy and become even MORE competitive in Texas.

    by kos on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 09:41:31 AM PDT

    •  Oh, happy happy

      I can't tell you how happy it makes me to hear those three little words: "Competetive In Texas"

      Nice!

      by sccs on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 10:36:38 AM PDT

      •  Second that - rare to hear those words

        or read them.

        btw, for some reason I'm showing an HR on kos' post from you. Is the matrix bugging out? ;-)

        by Spathiphyllum on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 12:29:47 PM PDT

        •  Really?

          Crap.  I had a hell of a time getting to where I could post at all.  The office network doesn't like loading the pages, and frequently hangs.  I never clicked anything but Rec, so I don't know how that could have happened.  

          I'll see if I can fix.  Thanks for pointing it out.  Crap...

          by sccs on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 12:39:56 PM PDT

          •  Checked, but I'm ok

            It hadn't registered my rating at all, so I added a rec.  Must be an agent popping in. :)

            by sccs on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 12:41:43 PM PDT

•  The corporate media,

  by promoting the idea that Clinton could still win the nomination somehow, encourages people to send money to her campaign - money that they might otherwise be sending to Dem. Senate and House candidates, or the DNC in general.

  So,IMHO, that's another way we all lose by Hillary's madness, by not having one definite nominee.

  by mem on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 07:36:41 AM PDT

•  And further down the ballot too

  I know an Illinois House candidate who believes Obama at the top of the ticket will be his ticket to victory....

  by Jim in Chicago on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 07:38:47 AM PDT

•  count on the first 4

  Looks like Coleman may hang on, last poll had him up 7. At this time I don`t see any other sure bets.
  Forget Maine, Collins is to popular.
  Alaska may be a possibility if they are really sick of Stevens. Other than that I wouldn`t count on any of the others unless we have a democratic tidal wave.
  If McCain loses, I bet you Joe is still in the caucus, Reid has already stated that. I figure if McCain gets elected Joe gets a job with him but any republican appointed can`t be any worse.

  by JOEL1954 on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 07:40:09 AM PDT

  •  One poll, single digits

    and people are writing off Franken? Sheesh.

    by kos on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 09:47:12 AM PDT

    •  Yes, Al is written off in Minnesota

      What everyone is missing, outside of Minnesota, is the "Jesse Ventura" effect.

      The level of embarrassment and disgust in Jesse's years as our governor cannot be fully described to those who lived outside of Minnesota.  Franken is a reminder of that time and experience.  He simply has zero chance of winning.

      The Rassusem Poll showing Obama up 14pts vs McCain but Franken down 7 pts vs. Coleman (same poll, same day) says it all.  Any generic Democrat would beat Coleman this year with Obama leading the ticket. With Franken running there will be a 'negative' coattail effect that could possibly threaten Obama's winning the state in the fall, particularly if Pawlenty is McCain's VP choice.

      by richmond199 on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 11:12:10 AM PDT

•  Clyburn is wishy-washy

  James Clyburn gives a comment that Clinton is trying to kill Baracks chances in November so she can run again in 2012, with all that, he still would not endorse Obama and tell her to get out of the race. If he won't emdorse why should the other SD's endorse.

  by buckeyemike on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 07:43:18 AM PDT

  •  This is true, perhaps,

    but Clyburn has been politically aligned with the Clintons in the recent past (though not necessarily identified with her in the campaign), if I'm not mistaken. So this was really going out on a limb for him. Please correct me -- anyone -- if I'm wrong.

    by RevJoe on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 08:35:31 AM PDT

•  Why can't Obama take Warner for VP

  He really is one of the best options.  

  by Hope08 on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 07:43:38 AM PDT

  •  we need the Senate seat

    and having Warner constantly on the air in VA will be nearly as good for Obama as having him on the ticket.

    On top of that, there are plenty of other similar options for Obama's VP.

    by Stroszek on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 07:49:35 AM PDT

    •  Very few governors though.

      I know Richardson is an option, I just think Warner would help him in most in VA as VP which would guarantee he could still win without OH or FL.  

      by Hope08 on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 07:59:54 AM PDT

      •  Bill Ritter, Jim Doyle

        and if he's inclined to appease the Clinton Bloc, Ted Strickland is a definite possibility.

        by Stroszek on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 08:03:06 AM PDT

        •  Announce running mate now?

          Do you think that might be helpful?

          by rernst on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 08:31:47 AM PDT

          •  no, we've won the Democratic nomination

            there's really no use wasting media cycles.

            by Stroszek on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 09:36:40 AM PDT

•  Looks like Kentucky will remain RED

  Mitch will be reelected Whitfield will stay in the House. Damn can't win for loosing. i was out trying to put yards signs out one of the little stores here in the county had a sign up that read QUOTE " Monica Lewinsky ex-boyfriend wife running for president" and they still Use the "N" word before Obama name..and that he is a Muslim
  heaven help us if we don't get control of both the senate and the House

  by vet on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 07:45:14 AM PDT

  •  Hey, hey now!

    Don't cry before you're hit!

    We're gonna have some exciting contests in Kentucky.  And I LOVE your nominee in the 1st district! Give us a few more women like that, and they'd rule America!

    by AdmiralNaismith on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 09:01:05 AM PDT

•  YOO-HOO!!! TOM ALLEN!!

  ENDORSE OBAMA ALREADY. Maine already went his way...what's the holdup??

  by ablington on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 07:49:22 AM PDT

  •  60% of Maine Dem's went for Obama - the

    Maine SG's have said that they want to be proportoinal to the Caucus vote.

    Of course, if HRC dropped out, then all this would be moot.

    by Spud1 on Sun Apr 27, 2008 at 11:58:03 AM PDT

•  Edit needed:

  "But for the rest, the top of the ticket can either be a hindrance or a drag."

  I think at least one of those was meant to be a more positive option...?

  by reklemrov on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 07:51:18 AM PDT

  •  Reminds me of "Nuclear Power: Threat or Menace?"

    by Ohiobama on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 08:37:30 AM PDT

    •  Ha ha

      that's funny. And thanks reklemrov. Fixed.

      by kos on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 09:48:29 AM PDT

•  KOS does anyone know...if any more superdel's

  Went to Obama after PA?  I saw a piece somewhere that he, Obama, was going to announce three more gained superdelegates and I have not seen that yet.

  by Boca Babs on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 08:00:22 AM PDT

  •  There have been 3 or 4 announced in the last two

    days.

    A DNC member from Nebraska (that makes all 6 NE supers for Obama)
    Brad Henry (Gov-OK)
    David Wu (Rep-OR)

    and Rep.  Barry (PA-01) said he will follow his district and vote for Obama, but he hasn't officially announced yet.

    by bawbie on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 08:03:31 AM PDT

    •  Wu HOO!

      GO Oregon!  Our SD for Obama!

      by AdmiralNaismith on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 09:01:46 AM PDT

•  anyone see this about Franken in Minnesota?

  To me, it looks kind of bad, but maybe it's much ado about nothing...

  http://www.startribune.com/...

  by Maditude on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 08:01:18 AM PDT

•  My worry

  being in NC have you seen the new ad from the NCGOP, I didn't know we had KKK running the GOP in NC, I don't think they are understand that since Harvey Gant NC has changed and this is going to blow up in their faces. I hope I am right.

  by red states blues on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 08:04:25 AM PDT

•  consider a non-Clinton older woman VP choice...

  All the polls ignore the fact that a VP will be in the picture.  Consider an Obama & non-Clinton woman ticket.  It could considerably change the demographics.  The electability surveys really are incomplete right now.

  by Big Apple on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 08:08:05 AM PDT

•  Senate contest in New Mexico

  I don't see Udall losing to either Pearce or Wilson and while Clinton squeaked by in New Mexico, Udall will not be looking to her for any help.  

  by Larry of Corrales on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 08:08:16 AM PDT

•  Do you guys think that when Sen. Levin retires

  that Michigan will become a major target of the Rethugs?  Michigan, outside of the SouthEast, is pretty Red in places.

  I can't imagine having a Republican Senator.

  by WSComn on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 08:08:42 AM PDT

  •  Granholm Is Term-Limited As Governor...

    ...and I bet she wouldn't mind moving to Washington. I think everyone in Michigan would like to see her leave, but whether a majority wants her to do so as U.S. Senator is somewhat doubtful. The Dems in the Michigan Congressional delegation are either old (Dingell, Conyers), corrupt (Kilpatrick), or borderline Republican (Stupak). Everyone, Republican or Democrat, in the legislature is an idiot, and that's been true for 40 years or more. Hopefully, someone will emerge from the private sector who can unite Detroit, its suburbs, and the rest of the state.

    by FredNietzsche on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 08:36:14 AM PDT

    •  David Bonior could do it for us easy!

      What's he up to these days?

      by AdmiralNaismith on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 09:02:47 AM PDT

      •  I Think He's Chairman of Michigan's Dem. Party

        b