Democrats Keep the Senate in Sight

[Thom Little]

It has been a while since Democrats have held such high hopes for an election year - confident of, at the least, making significant gains in the Republican-controlled House and Senate.

In truth, Democratic hopes of winning back the House are somewhat remote. They have a better shot at capturing the Senate. A few races are worth tracking for early signs about how realistic these hopes are.

Republicans hold 55 seats in the Senate, to 44 for Democrats, with 1 independent. Republicans have reason to worry about seats in Ohio, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Montana and Missouri, and conceivably Tennessee and Arizona. If Senator Trent Lott of Mississippi does not run again, even that seat could be in play, strategists for both parties say.

But this is not an easy road for the Democrats. Not only would they have to win races in the South, hardly friendly territory, they would need to hold off potentially strong Republican challenges to Democratic seats in New Jersey, Minnesota and Maryland.

"It's not likely, but I can see the math," said Jennifer Duffy, an analyst for The Cook Political Report, a nonpartisan newsletter.




http://www.nytimes.com/2006/01/01/weekinreview/01nago.html

[bemildred]

1. NYT's concern for the welfare of the Democrats is touching.

But not convincing.

[Flabbergasted]

2. It would be a lot more likely if the elections were fair

Even Probable...

[EST]

3. Maybe that nasty little Stevens from Alaska

will fall victim to his next temper tantrum and decorate the senate floor, opening another venue.