I hate to say it but, according to the polls... we may only get 58 or 59 in the Senate.

[Up2Late]

How bad is that going to suck if true? :shrug:

<http://www.electoral-vote.com/evp2008/Senate/Maps/Nov04-s.html>

<http://www.electoral-vote.com/>

[Ian David]

1. Once Congressional Investigations start, I expect a few more seats to open in mid-term. n/t

[featherman]

2. Doesn't matter really... 60 is not a magic number

[leftofthedial]

3. with the same gutless leadership,

59 = 0 in effect.

[Romulox]

9. The leadership wasn't going to change if the number was 60, so...

[sharp_stick]

11. That's the Spirit..... n/t

[leftofthedial]

20. that's all we've heard for two years

"we are helpless without 60 votes"

"we didn't do the right thing because we didn't have 60 votes"

[Marr]

21. No kidding.

I have a feeling that, assuming Obama is serious about the reforms he wants to make, his biggest obstacles will be the Democratic "leadership" in Congress. They're bought-and-paid-for corporate shills.

[leftofthedial]

28. the Democrats in Congress were an obstacle to Clinton early on

before he found his stride embracing free trade corporatism and mild neoconservativism.

[Romulox]

4. The number 60 is arbitrary anyhow. Search the Constitution for the word "fillibuster"

[dubeskin]

5. It's not. We're going to get 60+

And you know it. Don't doubt the skills of the Democratic Party. YES WE CAN!!!

[Buck Laser]

6. I'd like more, but 58 or 59 is good enough.

[Dennis Donovan]

7. There's always the threat of the nuclear option...

Of course, I don't want to see it enacted, but they threatened us with it - we should threaten them back.

[Romulox]

13. Nuclear option = basic democracy, no?

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

8. Honestly. 60 wouldn't help most of us, as some of the Democratic Senators are blue dogs and

very often vote with the Repukes.

[Sebastian Doyle]

17. Yeah, it's time to put the Landrieu's and Nelson's on notice.

No more of this "voting with the Repukes" horseshit. Every DLC'er up for election in 2010 should be taken out in the primaries anyway, but I'll start worrying about that on January 21.

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

29. And that is why we will still be DemocraticUnderground after today.

There's still work to be done.

[Mz Pip]

10. As long as Obama wins

I'll be happy. That's what I'm concentrating on now. I never really expected we'd hit 60 anyway.

[Winterblues]

12. Remember the NUKE option the Republicans threatened us with?

We have that option now....They will have taken a lickin and not all that anxious to demonstrate the same character that got them thrown out of Power..

[roamer65]

14. If we don't get 60, we can blame the Rethugs for obstructionism in 2010.

...and beat them silly in the midterms.

[Sebastian Doyle]

22. Except they'll be floating the message that "One Party DemoncRAT Rule accomplished nothing"

which would be because of their obstruction. But with the full cooperation of the whore media, they might get away with it.

Look at the crap Newt and Dole got away with in 1994, and the media wasn't nearly as bad then.

[onenote]

15. I assume you forgot the sarcasm smilie

As others have pointed out, 60 isn't a magic number. In the past, Democrats have not voted in perfect lockstep on cloture and they won't in the future.

58 or 59 is better than any number less than 58 or 59.

[maxsolomon]

16. i almost hope we don't

i would love to see the dem leadership make the GOP work every time they filibuster. don't give in when they threaten. literally make them do it, over & over & over, until they physically can't. it shouldn't take that long till they drop from exhaustion or embarass themselves nationally.

call their bluff!

[jobycom]

18. So? If Obama wins in a landslide and we get 58 seats in the Senate, you'll find a lot of

willingness by moderate Republicans to side with us on many, many issues, as long as Obama handles it skillfully. 58 will be quite enough to save America.

[Hawkowl]

19. Turncoat to 60

Oh if the dems get to 59, I think they might be able to bribe a Rethug or two with a committee assignment to switch parties. Other than Lieberman of course.

Although I agree with a lot of the above posters who say the Senate leadership has to change to truly make the most of a majority. Reid is effin worse than useless.

[BulletproofLandshark]

24. Maybe one of the ladies from Maine would be willing to leave the dark side. nt

[roamer65]

23. I really want a true supermajority, 67 seats.

With 290 in the House and 67 in the Senate, you can go "parliamentary". We'll have a shot at that in 2010 if we play our cards right.

[charlie]

25. If nothing else

it makes it easier to demote Lieberman to spitoon cleaner. If we hit exactly 60, that smug bastard will be the lynchpin again, and as swollen and insufferable as ever.

[APL Productions]

26. Two years...

It will be a hard two years if we don't get to sixty, but two years is all it's going to take.

John McCain will be running for re-election. He's going to be weakened after today. If Napolitano runs against him, he's toast.

Mel Martinez isn't popular. He won in a Bush-friendly environment. He's gonna lose his bid at re-election.

Chuck Grassley's getting up there. His retirement could bring a possible Democratic gain.

Jim Bunning will lose if he runs. Of course, if he retires, the race would be a bit more difficult.

Judd Gregg's in New Hampshire. His days are numbered.

George Voinovich is in Ohio. It's getting bluer.

Arlen Specter could retire. I don't see the Santorum wing of the Pennsylvania Republican Party making a comeback.

[Sheets of Easter]

27. I heard that this morning. Still an impressive number, though.

And only two more years until the midterm election.

[Rob H.]

30. 58 or 59 still lets Lieberman feel the mighty boot of the Democratic Party

and that's one huge upside.