Senate recap & forward

The Republicans gain in the Senate, taking away seats in Louisiana, Georgia, North Carolina, South Carolina, and South Dakota. The Democrats gained two seats, taking away Colorado and Illinois. Obama and Salazar are the 2 newest Democratic Senators; the GOP added 5 more white guys, and a couple of real wingers too.

Others are uncalled, like in Alaska, where it looks like Murkowski is going to win, but it's not declared. And in Florida, Castor trails by about 80K, with votes absentee and otherwise still to be counted. If those results above hold up, Republicans will have gained 3 seats in the Senate, for a 54-46 majority.

The biggest question is, who will become the new Senate minority leader for the Democrats?  Dodd of CT, Durbin of IL, and Reid of NV are the likely contenders. In terms of being a leader that speaks his mind, and has a Democratic voice, I'd want Durbin as the choice.  But all three of these Senators would be an improvement over the red-state compromised Daschle.

Republicans also will have to choose their new leader in the Senate; it's going to be a case of who is the most ultra-radical-conservative, Santorum or McConnell.

Democrats will have a stronger 46 than it was a weaker 49.

Tags: Senate 2006 (all tags)

Comments

16 Comments

Didn't the Dems lose LA too last night
Looks like the Dems lost five seats, that makes it 55 to 45.  A thoroughly frightening night, but even worse than you wrote.
by davidscott 2004-11-03 03:55AM | 0 recs
Reid
You don't think Harry Reid would be red-state compromised? Plus, isn't he pro-life? I'd imagine a fair number of Democrats would be wary of that with so many possible Supreme Court vacancies.

Out of those three, I like Dodd best, though I don't mind Durbin.

by ScottC 2004-11-03 03:58AM | 0 recs
Barbara Boxer=new minority leader?
She's been around for a while, and won massively, and doesn't need to run again till 2010.  
by Valatan 2004-11-03 03:59AM | 0 recs
a CA Senator
I was thinking Diane Fienstein.  I find her less annoying/ more diplomatic than Boxer.  I'd like it to be woman in any case when it comes to SCOTUS battles.
by shlenny 2004-11-03 04:14AM | 0 recs
I like
Schumer, Durbin, Clinton, or Kerry. But the danger is choosing someone whose radioactive in red states.
by skipper2379 2004-11-03 04:51AM | 0 recs
Midwestern or western Democrats...
I think the Senate leader needs to hail from anywhere BUT New England.  Look at the Electoral map... we need a Senate leader who can be partisan, but will be able to do it in a way that appeals to midwestern and western voters... Dodd is definitely not the guy.  Durbin would be great, and Reid would be good.
by FieldRat 2004-11-03 04:58AM | 0 recs
For Christ's sake
Tom Daschle made the Contract with America a dead letter, engineered the Jeffords defection and enraged the White House to no end with his opposition to judicial nominees.  He paid a real price for his party leadership yesterday.  Try not to piss on him the morning after!
by therob 2004-11-03 04:59AM | 0 recs
Re: For Christ's sake
I wonder just what the heck the people of SD were thinking ... it's one thing to throw a sitting senator out of office but to throw someone with the power that he had from a state that really had no reason to even wheel that kind of power, it beyond me, why would you ever give up a senator who wheeled that kind of power?
by Monkei 2004-11-03 06:21AM | 0 recs
Re: For Christ's sake
I don't think anyone is pissing on him.  We all appreciate his contribution to the party.  Having him as leader was a tactical error.  Nothing personal, I would say the same for almost any senator in a RED-OWNED state other than someone who was dynamic and being touted as a future VP or President.  
by yitbos96bb 2004-11-03 11:38AM | 0 recs
Re: For Christ's sake
I can appreciate the sentiment.  Someone elsewhere at MyDD said good riddance to him and I can't tell you how distasteful and ungrateful that is to me.  Hence my real anger.
by therob 2004-11-12 02:07PM | 0 recs
Will we ever get the Senate back?
I mean, let's looka thow things sit.  In 2006, there will once agian be more Democrats up for reelection than Republicans.  Only in 2008 will there be more Republicans up for reeleciton,a nd most of those are in states that have proven very hard for us to win.

The GOP is just stronger in more and more state sit seems.  wE are practically locked out of the Mountain states with a few exceptions, and the South.  Two years ago, there were three Southern states with two Democratic Senators apiece.  Now there is only one such state.  Compare that to eight  southern states with two Republican senators.

You can see our problem I think.

by Matusleo 2004-11-03 08:09AM | 0 recs
Most radical right-winger?
You mentioned Santorum vs. McConnel, but based on the things he said in his "Congratulations, you just won" interview last night, Coburn looks to be a real winner.  Unless I'm thinking of DeMint.  I get them confused, but I'm thinking the one who was under investigation for sterilizing a woman against her will and spent most of his interview bitching about gays.
by Kjorteo 2004-11-03 10:01AM | 0 recs
Re: Most radical right-winger?
That's Coburn from OK.  Actually, Novak was saying he didn't think the Bushie's liked Coburn because they were afraid he would be too independent...IE reign in the deficit spending and not allow the patriot act, etc.  Basically, the old style GOP.

DeMint wanted the VAT.  Start saving your money kids, because the IRS just had it's death warrant signed.  Hope Bush can create new jobs because that will put a lot of people out of work.  Really would make H & R block worthless.  

by yitbos96bb 2004-11-03 11:47AM | 0 recs
Re: Most radical right-winger?
Only in the Bush administration would someone like Coburn be yelled at for not being right enough.

Meh, maybe I should start deleting bookmarks and trying to stop keeping up on things like this.  We had the highest energy and most turn-out ever and got our asses handed to us.  I don't see what even pretending anymore is going to do at this rate aside from just getting our hopes up.

Especially because absolutely none of the youth vote we were counting on actually showed up, even with the highest zeal in recent memory.  Good luck stopping the right with this air of despair and dejection that I know I'm not the only person who feels.

by Kjorteo 2004-11-03 12:37PM | 0 recs
Dodd
I'd like to see Dodd get the spot. He lost the vote in 1994 by just a single vote to Daschle. (Ben Nightmare Campbell cast the deciding vote to Daschle, just before he switched parties.)

I am incredibly pissed at Schumer, who set a record for margin of victory in NY and yet barely lifted a finger to help other candidates. He is the ultimate showboater and would be a terrible leader in my opinion.

by DavidNYC 2004-11-03 10:29AM | 0 recs
Must Leave North East
Sorry for all you North Easterners (Including NYers).  We can't have a leader there.  They are kryptonite to the southern areas.  This is an entrenched Dem area (except NH) and it does us no good.  Dodd will get tagged as just another tax and spend liberal (even if it is BS) and be ineffective.  

Right now we are consolidated in the NE and Pacific States.  The GOP rules the Southeast and whatever the hell you consider Kansas, the Dakotas, Montana, Idaho etc...Great Plains I guess, who knows.  The best place for us to establish ourselves is in the Midwest and in the 4 states of CO, NV, NM, and AZ.  Things did not go terribly in those states and with the right planning we can tip the scale.  Also a creep into VA and Bringing back WV is critical too.

We need to get a leader in a Blue state that is in an up for grab area preferably trending Dem.  I would say the Midwest is that area.  A little work will bring WI and IA back to more secure numbers.  Ohio is another I think we can work on making solid blue.  

Also, I think the next person would be better off as a social moderate.  I think a social moderate will play better in the south than any of the New Englanders.

It will be a hellish 2 years.  Lets work our asses off to win this back.  If this war drags on for another 2 years, the mid terms will be interesting.

by yitbos96bb 2004-11-03 11:59AM | 0 recs

Diaries

Advertise Blogads