Can we quit talking about "losing" Zell Miller's seat?

[ButterflyBlood]

In order to lose something, you must already have it. Therefore, saying that we'll likely lose Zell Miller's seat implies that we already have it. And I have to say we most certainly don't.

[bluestateguy]

1. You are correct

But the media only sees that little (D) next to his name and they will spin it as a Republican pickup. You never know, we might even get a Republican who is less nauseating than Zell Miller.

[ButterflyBlood]

2. I would take Isakson over Zell

He might be to the left of Zell. But at least he isn't going to bitch about how the party is out of the mainstream and abandoned him and all that nonsense. Zell appears to think that the fundies in Georgia are the country's political mainstream, if he thinks the Repukes are closer to the mainstream than the Democrats.

[Dookus]

3. regardless of how conservative it is,

it really *IS* very meaningful to have that -D next to his name, when it comes to winning back the Senate.

[Liberal Christian]

4. Actually, we do have it now

Even though Zell Miller votes with the Republicans more than the Democrats and even though he's supporting Shrub, that "D" next to his name keeps the Democratic party numbers up in the Senate. If we lose a Democratic and don't gain a Republican one in its place, we slip even farther from a Democratic majority. With the current situation of 51-R, 48-D, and 1-I, we are three people away from chairing and holding the majorities on committees that determine how legislation gets to the floor. THAT'S why it's important to have even a Zell Miller in the D column.