By: Jane Hamsher Sunday November 9, 2008 7:26 am

• Nate Silver is saying the ballots yet to be counted could see Alaska going to Begich.

• JMM thinks that Coleman’s response to the Minnesota recount means that Franken could pull it out there, too. AP:

An Associated Press analysis of the nearly 25,000-vote difference in Minnesota presidential and U.S. Senate race tallies shows that most ballots lacking a recorded Senate vote were cast in counties won by Democrat Barack Obama.

• Turnout could be a problem in the Martin/Chambliss runoff. Olbermann and Crawford discuss it in our YouTube.

6 Comments

Spotlight

6 Responses to “Senate Shakeout”

MayDaze November 9th, 2008 at 7:55 am

I’m really hoping they both win, which would be 59 Senators. (That was my guess in the contest, btw.) I don’t really have much hope for Martin in GA, but you never know; I agree that the probable lower turnout will favor Chambliss. Maybe Obama could take some time from his transition to campaign…

BooRadley November 9th, 2008 at 8:10 am

Thanks Jane.

digg

foothillsmike November 9th, 2008 at 8:28 am

Morning Jane,
I was a poll watcher here in CO. The ballots here were scanned into a reader that was highly sophisticated and would eject a ballot which it could not read all of the marks giving the voter the opportunity to fix it. (It would indicate which items could not be read) The judge would explain it to the voter. Ultimately about 1 in 80 only voted for president.

Jkat November 9th, 2008 at 10:07 am

jane .. tbogg says you’re “just a composite character” .. say it ain’t so .. eh ?? lol

cinnamonape November 9th, 2008 at 11:11 am

I think that, rather than Lieberman, the number of options increases. I think both Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins, Lugar, Chuck Hagel and maybe even John Ensign and Wayne Allard on some issues.

Even more interesting are those that will be under pressure to moderate their positions because they are up for election in 2010. Gregg Judd of New Hampshire, Arlen Spector, Lisa Murkowski, John Voinovich, Chuck Grassley (Iowa) and John Thune (SD) may all be compelled to break from the Conservative caucus.

The announcement by Harry Reid that he intends to pare down the Republican committee memberships will reduce the amount of “rewards” available for patronage by the Republican party leadership. A moderate who jumps to “independent” or joins the Democratic caucus might even be rewarded with on of the additional seats that will be available. as the Democratic caucus increases in size.

I don’t think that Lieberman is anywhere near essential. The Republican centrists are going to be vilified by the right-wing even more than they ever were. Each time they vote as a “RINO” there will be calls for their expulsion. Yet if they are the Democrats go above 60…so essentially the moderates (and there are a bunch of them that will be tempted) can vote as they wish for self-preservation or without regard to partisan pressure.

It’s the reverse of the Lieberman situation. The Whips on the Republican side have very little leverage, and there are simply too many cats to herd. If they push too hard they lose even the chance of “cloture”.

Furthermore the Democrats don’t have to worry about getting the votes to override a veto.