Dems in 2008: 12 Pickup Opportunities in Senate?

[Keystone Phil]

Nebraska, Texas, North Carolina, Mississippi and Virginia won't be competitive.

New Mexico, New Hampshire, Minnesota, Maine and Oregon are pretty much leaning one way as well but they have the potential to be competitive unlike the ones listed above.

[Keystone Phil]

Mississippi rarely gets polled, but Musgrove will pick up the seat, since Wicker is such a bad candidate.

Saved

It's really a shame that Harry sets himself up like this. I did a similar thing four years ago (and again two years ago) and now it's infamous. He'll just have to deal with it afterwards.

[Keystone Phil]

I think that the Democrats will pick-up Virginia, New Hampshire, New Mexico and Colorado at least - so thats D+4 taking them up to a 53-47 majority in the Senate. 

Which would actually be 55-45 considering Sanders and Lieberman siding with the Dems (assuming Lieberman is still in the Senate and still siding with the Dems ).

[Keystone Phil]

How about this:

If Musgrove doesn't get at least 47.5% of the vote against Wicker, I'll put whatever Phil, HRC, and Mr. "Moderate" want in my sig for a year.  And I'll make this message by sig for a while so that everyone knows.
If Musgrove loses at all, I'll put whatever they want in my sig for (1 month)*(the margin in %) months.

Also, I'll have whatever avatar they want.  I'm serious about Musgrove.

If the race turns ugly against Musgrove, like a scandal or something, then too bad for me.

I'm not out looking for that, Harry. I'm just asking you to be a bit cautious. Learn from my mistakes. Stop being so cocky about your chances.

[Keystone Phil]

How about this:

If Musgrove doesn't get at least 47.5% of the vote against Wicker, I'll put whatever Phil, HRC, and Mr. "Moderate" want in my sig for a year.  And I'll make this message by sig for a while so that everyone knows.
If Musgrove loses at all, I'll put whatever they want in my sig for (1 month)*(the margin in %) months.

Also, I'll have whatever avatar they want.  I'm serious about Musgrove.

If the race turns ugly against Musgrove, like a scandal or something, then too bad for me.

I'm not out looking for that, Harry. I'm just asking you to be a bit cautious. Learn from my mistakes. Stop being so cocky about your chances.

I have to be, to make up for everyone else being so cocky about Wicker's chances, when they could barely pick him out of a lineup.  How many of you have ever seen either of these candidates on your local news?  How many of you could tell me any biographical details?

I don't hear much about my own Congressional candidates yet I know who they are. I pick obscure races to follow both here and across the country so you don't need to make it seem like I know nothing about these candidates and that I'm just talking out of my ass, trying to upset you.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

How is a former Democratic Governor who was defeated by a fairly comfortable margin the slight favorite in a Presidential year? Just because you think Wicker is stupid? Ok so a black man being the nominee for President helps boost black turnout. Fine. You're saying he'll get about 43% in MS? Ok so that means Musgrove starts off guaranteed 43% of the vote. Do you really think his crossover appeal will be that great? Now you'll tell me some white Dems won't be showing up and just voting straight Republican...

[Keystone Phil]

This is in response to Phil, or anyone else who happens to be curious:

I believe Musgrove will pull this race out for these reasons:
Musgrove is a statewide wellknown name.  He was elected lieutenant governor in 1995 over a sitting ltgov Eddie Briggs in an upset, and then elected in 1999 over former Congressman Mike Parker in another upset.  He knows how to win statewide races that people think he won't.  Yes, he did lose in 2003, but Barbour is a once-in-a-lifetime great campaigner and organizer, and Wicker is nowhere near his level.  Wicker is not a well-known figure outside of his district.  So Wicker starts out right there with the name recognition disadvantage.  Certainly the disadvantage will lesson with the election in November from what it would have been had Barbour not ignored the law and held the election in March like it was supposed to have been done, but Musgrove is the better-known figure.

And being better known now means nothing. By the time the fall rolls around, that advantage is gone.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

And no where is it mentioned in that post that many whites - Republicans and Democrats - will be voting straight Republican in November in this racially polarized state.

Musgrove will not break 45% of the vote.

[Keystone Phil]

Mississippians split their ballots ALL THE TIME.  In 2007, Barbour won by 16 points, but Democrat Jim Hood broke 60% in the AG race, lt. gov. has a Republican blowout, but Democrats took back the state senate.
White Mississippians have no qualms about splitting their ballots.

With all due respect, Harry, this is a Presidential election year. It's very different especially in a state like MS.

[Keystone Phil]

Mississippians split their ballots ALL THE TIME.  In 2007, Barbour won by 16 points, but Democrat Jim Hood broke 60% in the AG race, lt. gov. has a Republican blowout, but Democrats took back the state senate.
White Mississippians have no qualms about splitting their ballots.

With all due respect, Harry, this is a Presidential election year. It's very different especially in a state like MS.

In 1996, 2000, and 2004, Gene Taylor was overwhelmingly reelected, despite his district going overwhelmingly to Dole or Bush.
Unfortunately, I cannot provide more and better examples, as Lott and Cochran were entrenched for so long, as our statewide elections are held in odd years.
However, if you want to look at 1995, 1999, 2003, 2007, whenever, you will find numerous examples of white Mississippians splitting their ballots, and people of differing parties being elected.

So you gave me Gene Taylor (one example) and that wasn't a statewide contest in a Presidential election year.

[Keystone Phil]

However, ,I would like to sign up to help Phil and the others find suitable content for Harry's post-November signature

You can take up the responsibility. I'm not about rubbing it in someone's face when they're calling for an upset like this. Harry has his reasons. I think they're illogical. If he's wrong, maybe he'll learn.