Thank you, Mark. Never heard of it before, but my first readings look interesting. I'll research it some more. Thanks again.

Hey Jeebie - until we get Instant Runoff Voting instituted in this electorally primitive country (we are way behind the rest of the developed world) third parties will have a very hard time getting represented accurately at the ballot box. I urge you and others to read up on IRV. It's the future.

Here are my poll numbers. Democrats and republicans will win some, lose some. Washington, D.C. will remain the capital of corruption. With rare exception, your representatives still won't give a damn what you think or what you need, nor will they do anything to protect this Nation or its Constitution, unless they can personally profit in the process. Cynical? Yes. 60 years experience watching both parties claim things will be different or better when they win. There are other parties, other choices. Read what the Independant, Green or Libertarian has to offer. Might be suprising. For republicrat voters who expect things to be different after tomorrow, get ready to be disappointed. Here is my tip...vote for the candidate who will do the least harm to America. God bless you all...now go VOTE.

Zev, the catch is that the overall Senate control contract over at Intrade.com is still selling 68% for GOP control. That's because the Dems have to win all of those races that you listed. Though favored in each of them, if someone breathes the wrong way in any one of them the Senate stays GOP. It's going to be close.

Best predictor is Intrade.com, which trades futures of various events including outcomes of political races.

Looking at all 33 Senate races, Intrade money is on 22 D's, 9 R's and 2 I's. Not up for reelection are 27 D's, and 40 R's.

Net if current money holds up: 49 D's, 49 R's and 2 I's.

Closest money races:
MD 72:32 D:R;
MO 57:47 D:R;
MT 75:31 D:R;
RI 73:28 D:R;
VA 64:47 D:R

From BB, "Or is it just poli-junkies love a close race so much, they unconsciously lend more credence to close polls over blowouts, comeback stories over status quo?"

One reason I won't miss Dan Rather is that, on Election Night Rather would report returns as if the election was a horse race in progress, "Jones gaining on Smith, with Smith doing their best to hold off Jones; and of course when they get to those down state votes..."

The polls were closed and all the votes cast. The only thing which was being done was counting. No candidate could do any more to direct the outcome of the election. The changes in numbers didn't need fake enthusiasm to make the story.

Latching onto a skewed poll for no apparent reason makes you guys look like Rather.

Chris, I love the column, but you (like most of the media) have got to start doing better as far as polling goes. You quote one poll like it's the gospel. It may be the latest poll, but in Rhode Island for example, in the past week there have been two polls showing substantial leads for the Democrat, and looking at the trendline, the latest poll sure looks like an outlier.

Someone's already commented, but this Chaffee poll... seriously, Chris, why is a single poll, so out-of-synch with all others on the race, getting all the attention? This is not hyperbole: whenever the race is discussed now, it's the ONLY poll mentioned and it's taken as gospel. "Chaffee opening up a slight lead"- which as you well know, even if the poll were consistent with other available data wouldn't be true because of the margin of error.

So why does this happen? Are reporters getting off-the-record corroboration from the campaigns that the poll's accurate? Or is it just poli-junkies love a close race so much, they unconsciously lend more credence to close polls over blowouts, comeback stories over status quo?

Sorry I mangled that post. The point is, all the republicans have to campaign on is this lame and lie-riddled claim that 9/11 was all clinton's fault. The CIA numbers are invented, and it's sure the first time I've heard that osama has been 'neutralized'.

And the idea that all we need to protect us from another attack is for the CIA to hire sadistic murderers is so far from the America I grew up in it's hard to even recognize.

I mean, back then if we had heard that say, Russia, was torturing prisoners to death with no recourse to courts and then keeping the torture methods a state secret, we would have been ouutraged. But here in Gulag America, it's now something to run for election on.

In talking about the war on terror, the Democrats have focused on how to beef up port security and why Osama bin Laden wasn't captured years ago at Tora Bora. But the key to stopping an attack is uncovering a plot before a nuclear device has been slipped on board a ship. Nor is bin Laden relevant to the war on terror. He has been neutralized, unable to communicate to his underlings because of fear of being killed.

The Republican administration understands that what is necessary to stop the next attack is a fragment of information that might lead to uncovering a plot. Obtaining that clue requires giving the FBI and CIA the necessary tools and funds to penetrate terrorist cells and make use of intercepted phone calls and emails.

In cutting the CIA's budget by eighteen percent, after taking inflation into account, and reducing the number of covert officers by 25 percent, the Clinton administration provided an example of how not to uncover those clues.

Here's the kinnd of atrocious crap I'm getting frm Newsmax, the far rright wing attack amchine:

'Under Clinton and John M. Deutch, his director of Central Intelligence, the CIA imposed a rule that its officers needed high-level clearance before recruiting an agent with so-called human rights violations.

Yet agents who had murdered or tortured people were the ones who would know what the bad guys were up to. '

Oh, the horrible Clinton. He wouldn't recruit vicious murderers as CIA agents. Just wasn't manly like our Presidnet HomoErotic S&M Torture Boy....

Maybe now that its crunch time, they (the 'top pundits') are showing thier political loyalties rather than thier journalistic bona fides.

Nor'easter;

Makes me wonder about Tennessee, too, sure seems like the pundits are taking the very best numbers available for Cracker.

Neither the C-Span people today (Ahem! Chris) nor the CNN or MSNBC people during hours long discussions of the Senate races mentioned that the Rhode Island poll with Chaffee with a 1% point lead is an aberration, compared to all of the other polls of the last two weeks. Those polls had Whitehouse with moderate to significant leads, all outside the Margin of Error.

Either the McClatchy/MSNBC poll is skewed, or all of the other ones are.

Just returned from the rally for Nancy Boyda in Topeka, well over 1000 people showed up to this last-minute event to support thier candidate, mainly because Bush was in Topeka later in the afternoon, having a "private. ticket-holders only" event.

Great rally, lots of serious speeches and some funny ones too. Boyda is an exceptinal campaigner and a real smart lady. And her husband gives a great speech, too.

Labor leaders, teachers, child safety advocates, state level administrators and high ranking former military personel (remember, this is the home of The Big Red One) all put forth a long list of very good reasons why we need to remove the R's from power.

And Nancy's campaign theme was oft repeated, and it says it all...

"We can't change Congress until we change the people IN Congress."

Here here, right on and salooot!

The Dems need a national ad during the Monday Night Football game that says "those phone calls are coming from Republicans, not Democrats!"

I hope the Post has reporters covering the scummy robocall harrassment a mess of congressional swing districts. The Talking Points Memo is all over the story as well as Americablog and DailyKos....

PUT DOWN YOUR MOUSE AND HELP JIM WEBB IN VIRGINIA. YOU DON'T EVEN HAVE TO LIVE HERE
There's plenty to do between now and 7 p.m. Tuesday when the polls close.
Try phone banking. We're making short, easy calls to previously identified Webb voters reminding them to vote. There's probably no more important activity you can do between now an Election Day. If our voters vote, we win. If they stay home, George Allen wins.
If you'd rather not phone bank or rather phone from home, check out other volunteer activities at webbforsenate.com.
One phone bank is at the Fairfax City Firefighters Union, 10500 Sager Ave., in Fairfax City, VA 22030. Hours are 10 a.m. to 9 p.m. Monday and 9 a.m. to 6:50 p.m. Election Day. There 17 phone lines, so just show up.
Or call 703-359-0028 or 301-602-6703
If this phone bank is inconvenient, here are others in northern Virginia and even DC. Except where indicated, we have plenty of phones--so there's no need to call; just show up.

Arlington:
Webb HQ - 1916 Wilson Blvd. Suite 204 , Arlington VA 22201

Hours: Mon 10 a.m. - 9pm., Tues. 9 a.m. to 6:50 p.m.

Contact: 703-778-4080 x229 or 703-778-2781

Virginia Square - 3440 N. Fairfax Dr., Arlington VA 22201

Hours: Mon: 10am - 9pm, Tues: 9 a.m. to 6:50 p.m.

Contact: 703-310-6756, BJ_303@yahoo.com

ACDC - 4620 Lee Highway, Ste. 214 Arlington, VA 22207 [Only 2 phone lines so call Liz Griffith at 334-538-6860 before you go.]

Mon: 10am - 9pm, Tues: 9 a.m. to 6:50 p.m.
703-528-8588

Alexandria:

Alexandria Dems HQ - 618 N. Washington St., Alex., 22314

Hours: Mon: 10am - 9pm, Tues: 9 a.m. to 6:50 p.m.

Contact: 703-549-3367 amanda@jimmoran.org, info@alexdems.org

Fairfax County :

Merrifield/FCDC - 2815 Hartland Rd. #110, Falls Church, 22043

Mon: 10am - 9pm, Tues: 9 a.m. to 6:50 p.m.

Contact: 703-573-6811 or 703-778-4080 x229

Tysons/Leesburg Pike - 7700 Leesburg Pike, Ste 300&301, Falls Church,22043

(Law offices across from Marshall High)

Mon: 10am - 9pm, Tues: 9 a.m. to 6:50 p.m.
Contact: 703-485-2990 or Jim Simos (c) 703-231-6280

Washington,DC :

Local 25 Hotel Restaurant Workers - 1003 K St. NW, 6th Fl., DC 20001

Hours: Mon: 10am - 9pm, Tues: 9 a.m. to 6:50 p.m.

Regan Assoc. Chartered - 1003 K St. NW, 3rd Fl., DC 20001

Hours: Mon: 10am - 9pm, Tues: 9 a.m. to 6:50 p.m.

I don't know whether the Demcorats will take the senate, but I am spitting nails over the national strategy of the National Republican Congressional Caucus to make repeated calls to voters in toss up districts that pretend to be from the Democrat. This is a nationalized strategy to suppress turnout by turning voters against the Demcoratic candidates. At a time when we have soldiers dying to bring democracy to Iraq, these cynical Republican operatives are showing they care nothing about democracy, and everything about keeping power at any cost. At least in New Hampshire they got the NRCC to stop making calls to people on the do not call list, but how much damage has been done? I am just sick and disgusted by the Republican Party.

I think AZ could be the surprise of the night.

Rob
http://robwire.com

Hopeless Optimism, the tsunami.

Even as a die hard Blue, My feeling is best will be split with DArth Vader as the deciding vote.

Actually, the irony is Joe L.

He will get his pound of flesh....

Forget what Mr. Cillizza says, and get the real uncensored polls.

ELECTION ALARM!! SPREAD THE WORD!!

For uncensored news please bookmark:

otherside123.blogspot.com
http://www.waynemadsenreport.com/
www.wsws.org
www.takingaim.info

http://www.democrats.com/node/10823

The Senate Races Already Done

Submitted by Bob Geiger on November 5, 2006 - 3:06pm.2006 Races

On Monday, I will be coming out with my final predictions for how the United States Senate will look after America votes on Tuesday. Before I do that, I just want to close the loop on the fact that there were indeed 33 Senate seats up for grabs this year and not just the 10 to 12 you've heard so much about.

While it is undeniably true that the ultimate balance of power in the Senate comes down to a handful of competitive races, you should at least get the names involved with the others and a one-liner for how they'll turn out. Here it is:

California: Incumbent Democrat Dianne Feinstein will easily hold her seat over little-known Republican Richard Mountjoy.

Delaware: Democrat Thomas Carper will defeat an obscure challenger, Temple University professor Jan Ting.

Florida: Bill Nelson will hold his seat for the Democrats over election-stealing Republican Congresswoman Katherine Harris.

Hawaii: Democrat Daniel Akaka, having survived a tough primary challenge from Ed Case, will cruise to an easy victory over Republican state Rep. Cynthia Thielen.

Indiana: The GOP's venerable Richard Lugar goes unopposed.

Maine: Republican Olympia Snowe will easily defeat Democrat Jean Hay Bright.

Massachusetts: Are you kidding me? Ted Kennedy gets reelected in a tsunami over Republican Ken Chase.

Mississippi: Regrettably, Republican Trent Lott will be returned to the Senate over Democrat Erik Fleming

Nebraska: We may not like DINO (Democrat in Name Only) Ben Nelson, but he will easily best Republican Pete Ricketts.

Nevada: We had high hopes for Jimmy Carter's eldest son, Jack, but when you can go to Carter's campaign web site and have to search forever for any reference to Republican John Ensign's opposition to a minimum wage increase, it's no wonder Carter's candidacy never got traction. Unfortunately, Ensign will retain his seat.

New Mexico: It was never a contest between incumbent Democrat Jeff Bingaman, who will beat Republican Allen McCulloch.

New York: The closest Republican John Spencer has come to Hillary Clinton in the polls is 30 points -- and even that seemed generous.

North Dakota: Kent Conrad is a popular Democrat in a very-red state and will win handily over the GOP's Dwight Grotberg.

Texas: Bush rubber-stamper Kay Hutchison will defeat Barbara Ann Radnofsky.

Utah: Orrin Hatch is the Republican version in Utah of Hillary Clinton in New York -- he ain't losing to Democrat Pete Ashdown.

West Virginia: Incumbent Democrat Robert Byrd will continue his lengthy Senate tenure after knocking off challenger John Raese.

Wisconsin: Democrat Herb Kohl will trounce GOP challenger Robert Gerald Lorge.

Wyoming: In the universe of red states, Wyoming may be second only to Utah, meaning that Democrat Dale Groutage never stood much of a chance against Republican Craig Thomas.

I've left these two for last because they're kind of special cases:

Connecticut: We're all pretty disgusted with Joe Lieberman and there's a lot of speculation about him bolting the party and causing the Democrats major problems if he wins -- that's not how it's going to happen. The same stubbornness that caused him to not accept the will of Connecticut Democrats, will make him adamantly against making us right about what a turncoat he really is.

He may still give us heartburn with his support of Team Bush on the Iraq war, but he will continue to caucus with the Democrats. So whether he or Ned Lamont wins, this Senate seat continues to contribute toward a Democratic majority.

Vermont: When it comes to the balance of power in the Senate, it's all about who you caucus (align yourself) with. Independent Bernie Sanders is more liberal than most Democrats, is enormously popular in Vermont and will destroy Republican Richard Tarrant on Tuesday. This counts effectively as a Democratic hold as Independent Jim Jeffords, who is retiring, also caucused with the Democrats.

So when you add up the 67 Senate seats that were not contested this year, with the expected results detailed above, we are at 47 seats for the Republicans and 40 for Democrats. With 13 races outstanding, you can see that the conventional wisdom that Democrats need to "run the table" on the rest to take control really is true.

I predict the Democrats will do it and will explain how tomorrow.

You can read more from Bob at BobGeiger.com.

www.onlinejournal.com