The Dems Go Into Survivial Mode; Triage Is Job One

[Small Business Owner of Any Repute]

The flip side is that after 2010, Republicans wont be dealing with a political environment anywhere near as freindly as 2009.  I expect a big backlash against Christie and Republicans by 2011.

The most important factor in who wins what will almost assuredly be redistricting. There's not an awful lot of room for Democrats to eat away at seats under the current map anyway -- Republicans only have 2 vulnerable state senate seats [SD-07 (if Diane Allen retires, which I presume she will) and SD-14 (which will be decided in a 2010 special election)]. In the Assembly, there's only one Republican vulnerable to defeat (AD-04), though more could be winnable with retirements (like 2xAD-02).

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Didn't you post an article about this last week?

Why don't the Democrats try to allocate more of their money towards the DGA and legislative races so that they can have an impact on redistricting, which actually has long term affects? It could be disastrous in the short term but in 2012 they would be reaping the benefits when it matters. The Firewall strategy + heavy investments in Pennsylvania, Ohio, Illinois, Florida, Michigan, California and Texas (maybe)? Is that feasible?

No amount of DGA cash will save Onorato and Bernero. And the coatails of Corbett and Snyder will likely bring in Republican legislatures. They will likely abandon them.

Democrats have a two to one edge in the Michigan state House.  That isnt going anywhere.

Really? The Republicans had a majority prior to 2006. If Snyder is racking up a 15 to 18 point Victory, do you really want to bet your life on the survival of a Democratic Majority? Especially the way things are right now.

lol:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michigan_House_of_Representatives

Since when is 60-40 Rounded up to 2:1. Its 3:2.

I seem to recall there being another body that is held be Dems by a 3:2 Margin on the national level. I think that Dems have a whole lot more going against them in MI then the nation at-large as well. The members are elected to two year terms and 18 Democrats are term limited, to 11 Republicans are (MI has the three term limit on its legislature). What am I missing here?

1. Currently 3:2 margin of control or 66-43 (Was 58-42 after 2006)
2. Unpopular Dem Governor
3. Unpopular Dem President
4. Expectations of Solid Republican Victory in the Governors mansion
5. 18:11 margin of Term Limited Democrats to Republicans.
6. GOP controlled from 1994-2006.

Sure, bet your life on that.

A similar sized 14 point victory for Jennifer Granholm in 2006 only netted Democrats six state House seats.  I expect the GOP to gain a similar number this year in the state House.

I think Torie is right about the broad based swing. Also because of the term limits, incumbency matters less then other states and incumbency has already been knocked down a peg or two this year. I think several Dem seats will flip, the question is how many. Granted you can have a Governor win and not effect the legislature like the 5% margin for Christie but a 5% margin is not the same as a 15% to 18% margin. As for the MN comparison, notice I am not relying on Snyder's win as the only factor. The environment is probably a bigger factor towards GOP gains which will drive the gains in MN, as well as potential over-extendedness which likely exists in MI as well. Only thing about MI is, Snyder win will come on top of what exists in MN. Its not guarrenteed for sure but its a definately possibility. When you add all the factors together that the GOP will either take it or come very close to doing so.