WSJ: GOP Sees Path to Control of Senate

[Omaha Steve]

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704875004575375122374132154.html

* JULY 18, 2010, 9:20 P.M. ET

By NAFTALI BENDAVID

WASHINGTON—Democrats for the first time are acknowledging that Republicans could retake the Senate this November if everything falls into place for the GOP, less than two years after Democrats held a daunting 60-seat majority.

Leaders of both parties have believed for months that Republicans could win the House, where every lawmaker faces re-election. But a change of party control in the Senate, where only a third of the members are running and Republicans must capture 10 seats, seemed out of the question.



That's no longer the case. The emergence of competitive Republican candidates in Wisconsin, Washington and California—Democratic-leaning states where polls now show tight races—bring the number of seats that Republicans could seize from the Democrats to 11.

Democrats now control the Senate 59-41—after the death of Democratic Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, who was replaced by Republican Sen. Scott Brown—including two independents who usually vote with them. That means Republicans need 10 seats to take a 51-49 advantage.

Republicans would have to win virtually every competitive race to retake the Senate, without losing any seats of their own—clearly an uphill climb. The trouble for Democrats is that many trends are against them. Surveys show that Republicans are more motivated than Democrats to go to the polls, and that voters are looking for new leadership in Congress.

FULL story at link.

[spanone]

1. wishful thinking from rupert murdoch's wall street urinal

[MadMaddie]

2. Yawn

More crap to attempt to sway the masses..

[sfwriter]

3. If we had elected a Democrat, they wouldn't be here...

How many votes has Obama lost in Wisconsin, Washington and California?

[jaxx]

6. "?"

[KingFlorez]

4. They aren't running the table this year

They only have a real shot at 5 seats and even two of those might not fall, plus they could lose 1 or 2 of their own, some of their gains could be canceled out.

[BzaDem]

8. I think they could EASILY win 8.

They have AK/IN/DE/ND in the bag, and they are ahead in most polls in CO/IL. PA/NV are closer, but I could still imagine them winning them without much trouble if the environment continues the way it is.

That leaves CA (where Boxer is holding to a slight lead), WA (where they are tied), and WI (where they are also tied). In a normal election, they will not win all of them and they will lose some of their own. But in 2004, 2006, and 2008, nearly ALL the close races went one way (R in 2004, D in 2006/2008). The chances of them taking over the Senate are low at the moment, but clearly not 0 and maybe not as low as people think.

[Dawson Leery]

5. Republican have to defend OH, MO, KY, NC

Who will Crist caucus with?

[Skip Intro]

7. "Who will Crist caucus with?" - Good question. nt

[tsuki]

9. I thought they had control of the senate. nt

[BzaDem]

10. They do. That's why the stimulus passed, HCR passed, and FinReg passed. n/t

[Arkana]

11. Well, clearly the WSJ saying it is so makes it gospel truth!

Seriously, does ANYONE out there not think this is just one arm of a many-limbed strategy to defeat us in the fall? To demoralize us to the point where we think "What's the point in voting"?