Vulnerable Democrats in '08

[Jacobtm]

Well, here's the list of Democrats up for re-election in '08:

Baucus, Max (MT)
Biden, Joseph R., Jr. (DE)
Durbin, Richard (IL)
Harkin, Tom (IA)
Johnson, Tim (DD)
Kerry, John F. (MA)
Landrieu, Mary L. (LA)
Lautenberg, Frank R. (NJ)
Levin, Carl (MI)
Pryor, Mark L. (AR)
Reed, Jack (RI)
Rockefeller, John D., IV (WV)

Mary Landrieu has long been thought to be the most vulnerable, until her predicted challenger dropped out. Now she seems to have at least a good shot at winning.

Johnson's poor health is a serious issue, and common sense would have him retiring, but his ego seems to have gotten the best of him.

Lautenberg is horrible, but it is a representative government, and he is from NJ, so that's that.

Does Levin have any serious challengers? Anyone else?

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

SD, NJ, and LA are the only 3 even worth mentioning. The other 9 win with their eyes closed.

[Jacobtm]

SD, NJ, and LA are the only 3 even worth mentioning. The other 9 win with their eyes closed.

People would've said the same about Lieberman, Allen and Talent in March '05 however. There's gotta be some juicy tidbits outside of conventional wisdom that could put some Democrats at risk.

And even if those three are the only ones worth mentioning, let's get into specifics.

[minionofmidas]

Dems *could* end up in the same comfortable situation as last time around - no seat to seriously defend.

Apart from Louisiana, I guess.

[Adlai Stevenson]

At the moment Louisiana is the only realistically vulnerable seat that presents an opportunity for the GOP and even that is beginning to look less likely; Landrieu is in a strong position. 

[TheresNoMoney]

Lautenberg is horrible

How is he "horrible"?

[JSojourner]

I wouldn't consider any Democrat a shoo-in where Montana is concerned.  That said, Baucus has more money than God right now.  And Denny Rehberg doesn't strike me as a particularly fearsome challenger.  I have heard some speculation that Connie Burns will try to get a Senate seat back by trying to beat Baucus.  God, I hope so.

Delaware is Biden's forever, unless he quits and his boy doesn't want it.  Then, Mike Castle could take it.

Is Harkin set in Iowa?  Probably.  But could Jim Leach challenge him?  Personally, I'd prefer to see Leach switch parties and challenge Grassley next time around.  He'd make a wonderful Democrat.

Though I have said Johnson  (or Herseth or Daschle) could easily defend this seat in SD, I also have said I wouldn't UNDERestimate Mike Rounds.

As to Landrieu, the same thing is now true of her that is true of Baucus.  It's her seat.  But it's a Republican state.  So you bet she could lose to the right candidate.

Lautenberg is safe in the general election.  Probably.  But what if he were to lose in the primary?  

Levin is as safe as any Senator.  Is Fred Upton gonna run?  Jane Abraham?  Come on.

Pryor is probably safe.  But in the South, there are no guarantees for Demcorats.

Reed is safe.  Yes, even against Linc.  

Jay Rockefeller could face a stiff challenge from Shelley Moore-Capito (sp?) but I think he wins.

[JSojourner]

Lautenberg is horrible

How is he "horrible"?

Haven't you heard?  Every New Jersey Democrat who ever took a breath is corrupt.  ::: eyeroll :::

People can't get it through their heads that Bob Toricelli is not EVERY Democrat.  Just like Duke Cunningham is not every Republican.

[minionofmidas]

Lautenberg is horrible

How is he "horrible"?

Apart from the fact that by the next elections, he'll be 84 years old and belongs in a retirement home, this is the only horrible bit on Wikipedia:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Adlai Stevenson]

Lautenberg currently has a 53%-25% approval rating: next.

[JSojourner]

Lautenberg is horrible

How is he "horrible"?

Apart from the fact that by the next elections, he'll be 84 years old and belongs in a retirement home, this is the only horrible bit on Wikipedia:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I think it's a shame that age is considered a "disqualifier".  While it's not an automatic plus, sometimes elderly people have a lot to teach us.  And a wealth of experience to draw from. 

Sure, Byrd is kooky.  Thurmond was nuttier-n-a-fruitcake.  But Claude Pepper did just fine.  Claiborne Pell was a freedom fighter.  John Stennis represented his state effectively. And though not holding elective office later in life, I don't think anyone would dispute the wisdom of Gerry Ford up to his final days.

[Adlai Stevenson]

Lautenberg is horrible

How is he "horrible"?

Apart from the fact that by the next elections, he'll be 84 years old and belongs in a retirement home, this is the only horrible bit on Wikipedia:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I think it's a shame that age is considered a "disqualifier".  While it's not an automatic plus, sometimes elderly people have a lot to teach us.  And a wealth of experience to draw from. 

Sure, Byrd is kooky.  Thurmond was nuttier-n-a-fruitcake.  But Claude Pepper did just fine.  Claiborne Pell was a freedom fighter.  John Stennis represented his state effectively. And though not holding elective office later in life, I don't think anyone would dispute the wisdom of Gerry Ford up to his final days.

Actually Byrd is a pretty sharp and effective Senator.  And I think the same of John Warner.  The ones who are old and should go are Bunning, Stevens, Domenici and Inhofe - he is not even particularly old by Senate standards, he is just a terrible Senator.

[Deano963]

Johnson's poor health is a serious issue, and common sense would have him retiring, but his ego seems to have gotten the best of him.

Johnson is not in "poor health". He unknowingly had a brain condition that is genetically inherited, the condition was successfully corrected by surgery, and he is having a very, very successful recovery. He is speaking again and was working from his hospital bed, and he has now been moved out of the hospital to a rehabilitation center. All signs are good that he will make a full recovery.

Therefore, "common sense" would have an otherwise healthy, 59-year-old Senator who regularly has stratospheric approval ratings running for reelection. His "ego" has nothing to do with it.

Please do same basic research before you say such stupid things.

[HardRCafé]

Personally, I'd prefer to see Leach switch parties and challenge Grassley next time around.  He'd make a wonderful Democrat.

Is that more often accomplished by biting or placing a large pod beside the victim?