Good News in Maine?

Maine's a funny state: almost no one lives there (errant Canadians and moose aside). It's also a politically wacky state: Gore and Kerry won it, it has a Democratic governor and two Democratic Representatives, and two Republican Senators. Now Republican here is a loose usage of the term, less so than with Linc Chafee in Rhode Island, but Susan Collins and Olympia Snowe are hardly conservative firebrands.

Democrats and the Left have been busy attempting to paint Senator Susan Collins, up for reelection next year, as an out of touch conservative as well as a warmonger. Democrats already have as good a candidate as they're going to get in Congressman Tom Allen, who represents Maine's 1st District - aka the inhabited one. The race has consistently been listed in the lower half of the top 10 most competitive races by Chris Cillizza (latest update is here, worth reading in full).

Yet things don't seem to be going the Democrats' way. Two polls show Snowe sitting pretty; one has her up 54-34, though it's worth noting that 12% of respondents (408 likely voters over an 18 day period) are presently undecided. The other (and I link to DailyKos because they commissioned it, though with a notably independent pollster) has 55% saying they'd reelect Collins and shows the incumbent with a 23 point lead over Allen.

Republicans meanwhile are trumpeting this race; this email was sent out by the NRSC yesterday:

Dear Republican Supporter,

The race in Maine is shaping up to be nothing like the Democrats imagined. They have mistakenly named Susan Collins as one of the most vulnerable Republican Senators running for re-election in 2008. But their predictions are turning out to be off the mark.

In a new poll out last week, Sen. Collins has a stunning 20-point lead. The poll shows Collins leading her opponent, Tom Allen, 54 percent -- 34 percent with only 12 percent of Maine voters undecided -- a great sign this early in the race. These results nearly mirror another poll out earlier this month that shows Sen. Collins leading the race with an even stronger 23 point lead.

Partisan Democrat U.S. Rep. Tom Allen cannot seem to gain the traction he is looking for to compete against Senator Collins, no matter how hard he tries. Though there is one thing that makes him stand out in the race: He has the grand distinction of being the Democrat that liberal extremist group MoveOn.org has donated the most money -- an astounding $250,000 so far this year. This distinction will show voters where his true loyalties lie.

Sen. Collins has an accomplished record of working hard for Mainers and its clear that the people of Maine respect that drive and dedication. Senator Collins has never missed a vote in the Senate and in contrast to that stellar record, her opponent, Rep. Tom Allen, has never had sponsored legislation enacted into law. It's this record that Tom Allen will be taking to Maine voters in his run against Sen. Susan Collins.

Not only is Tom Allen a MoveOn.org puppet, he's also an ineffective legislator.

Help us keep liberal, MoveOn.org-supported Democrat Tom Allen out of the U.S. Senate and support our efforts to ensure a Republican majority.

We're gaining the momentum we need to win. But we can't do it alone. Donate today, and together we will capture the U.S. Senate.

Thank you for your continued support.

Scott Bensing, Executive Director
National Republican Senatorial Committee

This is all well and good, but let's be clear: one race that doesn't look like a massacre in the making doesn't make up for Republican woes elsewhere. But I'll look at those separately.

DiFi versus Her Own Party

I've come to have a rather grudging respect for Dianne Feinstein in recent weeks and months; especially on judicial issues, California's senior senator has had the chutzpah to do whats right and stand up to the rabid among her party (who am I kidding? They're all rabid). This was especially evident on two votes - to get Leslie Southwick (confirmed by the Senate on 10/24) out of committee and to get AG Mukasey out committee - for which she was widely reviled.

Now she may get a slap on the wrist from the California Democratic Party for her...you know...doing what the Constitution says she's supposed to do; a bunch of Left Coast "progressive" organizations are seeking her censure at this weekend's party executive meeting. The story's here, though it's from Huff Po so be warned.

This Larry Craig Kerfuffle

You have to give it up to Idaho Senator Larry Craig. Having recently been accused of being gay, he trots out the wife, denies the story, and goes on with his life. He then allegedly engages in lewd behavior/propositions an undercover cop in Minneapolis-St. Paul airport.

Now it turns into a firestorm, with Mitt Romney, whom the Senator supported, calling his behavior "disgusting," and comparing it to Bill Clinton and Mark Foley. That is, of course, an entirely unfair comparison, given that we know, thanks to the little blue dress, the real nature of Clinton and Lewinsky's relationship, and thanks to instant message records, the explicit nature of Foley's advances to pages. However this is entirely different - Craig wasn't in a position of power over the fellow in the next stall, the cop presumably was of age, and it didn't happen in Craig's office. Ed Morrissey does a far better job of dissecting this than I, so be sure to read it.

But let's turn to the political side of things: Craig is up for reelection next year, and hasn't yet indicated whether or not he'll run again. Democrats are licking their chops, but this is a state that Bush won with 68% of the vote in '04, and which hasn't sent a Democrat to Washington since 1994. If Craig chooses to step down, the state's Republican governor will appoint another Republican to fill out his term, maintaining the balance of power. Even if more salacious tales come out (such as the one about Craig in a Union Station bathroom), it's entirely unclear whether or not the Democrats could find a viable candidate to run against him or his successor. Right now, as with Vitter in Louisiana, this doesn't look to change the political calculus - let's hope it stays that way.

More Arlen Specter

Two recent themes (that Arlen Specter may not be as crazy as once thought, and that nothing in Washington really dies) converge: Arlen Specter says immigration still has 'momentum.' Enough, he thinks, to pass a measure legalizing illegals without giving them citizenship. I couldn't disagree more vehemently - whatever momentum immigration as an issue maintains is in the opposite direction: at a minimum, Americans want the border secured before anything more is even discussed. Why Congress hasn't gotten the message (and $3 billion more in funding for that purpose is only a step in the right direction) is beyond me.

Feinstein's Vote for Justice?

As I'd previously noted, Democratic opposition to judicial nominee Leslie Southwick was appearing both absurd and insurmountable; it didn't look like the impeccably-credentialed Iraq veteran would ever make it to the Senate floor, that Democrats would keep him bottled in Judiciary.

Then Dianne Feinstein did something inexplicable: she voted honestly, refusing to kowtow to the loons in her party. And boy oh boy, the loons are angry - especially the members of the Congressional Black Caucus. The bloggers over at Bench Memos have sampled some of the venom, including one pundit who slanderously labeled Southwick both "archconservative" and "neoconfederate." BM also highlights an interesting article from the SF Chronicle, which reports the threats of retaliation from Feinstein's left (hard as it is to believe that such a place exists).

So let's review: a judge with impeccable credentials (including the highest marks from the left-leaning ABA) squeaks through the Judiciary Committee on a largely party-line vote, despite strident opposition from a coalition of left-wing interest groups. I think we call that obstructionism. Now my question is this: how many Democratic Senators will bow to that pressure and try and scuttle this nomination? Will they be dumb enough to filibuster? Do they understand that by no stretch of the imagination (and their reality is more fantastical than anything else) can Southwick be maligned as a judicial extremist? This'll be interesting to watch. It's also endlessly amusing that Democrats continue to fuel the flames of judiciary battles, one of the few topics which still excites the Republican base.

Data Shows Durbin Vulnerable?

That's the claim from a poll cited on Illinois Review, which pegs the approval rating of the Senate's #2 Democrat at 49% favorable/24% unfavorable, and almost a dead heat (36%-33%) on whether he puts Illinois or Washington first.

As much as I'd love to see Durbin returned to private life, none of this data paints a picture of vulnerability by any stretch of the imagination. It's actually difficult to gauge any sort of vulnerability on Durbin's part due to a real paucity of polling data. No Senator's invulnerable, but Durbin's not exactly an endangered incumbent at present.

Oh and I treat these numbers with the greatest degree of skepticism because of the poll itself - only 400 respondents, MOE +/-4.9%, no notes as to who the pollster is etc.

South Dakota Senate

Last night, I ran through the top 10 Senate races, including South Dakota's, where incumbent Democrat Tim Johnson's recent medical emergency has created some unique challenges for Republicans looking to run against him. Politico's got the story as well as some updates on his rehabilitation.

Senate Race Notes

Chris Cillizza (second post referencing him - any guess where I am on my bloglines?) has another excellent roundup and ranking of next year's Senate contests, with a couple of surprises. The first one that hits you is Mitch McConnell's presence, even without a serious challenger (though check out CC's later post for a potential emergence of one); I'm not discounting the possibility of McConnell being in hot water for all the reasons he lists (Kentucky GOP and governor besieged, McConnell as the face of an unpopular party, etc.), but he's also an extraordinarily strong campaigner. So was Daschle - just saying.

Speaking of South Dakota, does Governor Mike Rounds run even if Senator Tim Johnson decides to seek reelection despite his recent brain surgery (from which he hasn't yet returned to work)? I dunno about that one, primarily because South Dakotans may be inclined to give Johnson the sympathy vote, even if Rounds may be more in line with many of their views (though the presidential dynamic may change things, as it likely did in Thune's victory over Daschle in 04). Talking to my sole friend from South Dakota, I get the sense that no one there wants another nasty, brutish, and overly-long race like the 04 contest, with an absurd amount of money spent by both candidates in a state with dirt cheap advertising. Everyone got sick of it pretty quick, and that's the sort of race Rounds may have to run to win.

Cilizza's got Nebraska too low on the list (#8) for my taste. Why? Because Hagel looks unlikely to seek reelection, even if he does, there's a credible Republican challenger in Jon Bruning (who also raised credible sums last quarter), and it's a very red state in a presidential year. There's also no serious Democratic contender at present, though Cillizza is the first credible source I've seen to note the rumors of Bob Kerrey coming back to run. I'd put this higher on the list, maybe replacing Oregon at #7, given that Democrats haven't got an announced, credible candidate yet.

His #6, Virginia, deserves to be higher, especially as the rumors of John Warner's retirement grow. If John Warner retires, Virginia Democrat friends tell me Mark Warner will run, and likely win (especially if ex-presidential nominee Jim Gilmore and Rep Tom Davis start attacking each other).

His #3 is Louisiana, but given the state's topsy-turvy politics, Mary Landrieu may not be in too much trouble, dropping this one a spot or two. We've got a Democrat-turned-Republican looking to run against her and (if I'm not mistaken) a Republican-turned-Democrat running for governor. Assuming that Rep Bobby Jindal wins this year's gubernatorial contest (seems likely), he won't run against her; he might be the GOP's best hope. On top of all of this is the Vitter mess, and the fact that he seems determined to tough it out, further muddying the waters (though if Jindal runs, I think the chances of Vitter resigning increase noticeably). I haven't recently talked to my Louisiana source, so maybe her insights will change my thinking.

Given what he says, I'd flip his #2 and #1 races, especially due to that New Hampshire poll showing Jeanne Shaheen just walloping John Sununu (not surprising since the state went left in a big way last year).

So let's sum it up; my ten:
1) New Hampshire
2) Colorado
3) Maine (blue state, not a good time for a Republican, even if she's a moderate)
4) Virginia
5) Minnesota (see logic on #3, but change pronoun)
6) Lousiana (I know, gasps of protest that it's dropped this far; also sad that this the Republicans' best pick-up opportunity)
7) Oregon
8) Nebraska (if we're sticking with CC's formula of likely to change parties, this may go RINO to R)
9) South Dakota
10) Kentucky

At present, I see no reason to put Dole on this list; the Democrats can't find anyone credible to run against her (best shot Mike Easley is a no-go, as are a lot of less-notable others), Dole's savvy and tough (and can always trot out Viagra Bob), and it's a presidential year.

But it's an overall bad picture for the GOP: I don't see them picking up a seat unless Landrieu blunders or Louisiana politics get a little more straightforward (ha!) or unless Johnson announces he's not running again, or something crazy happens elsewhere (still think Dick Durbin's more vulnerable than is acknowledged for all the crap he spews). Democrats stand to pick up some combination of at least two (VA if J.Warner backs out or NH if Shaheen gets in are my most likely). But again, a lot can change and if the environment for Republicans improves, they may be able to hold steady (and even if it doesn't, Warner's repositioned himself on the war to a degree that if he chooses to run again, he may be okay - and may help the Republican presidential nominee carry Virginia, a less surefire proposition than in 04). Sorry this is so lengthy and convoluted, hope it was at least somewhat insightful.

Senator Kennedy of Louisiana?

It may just happen, according to Bob Novak. Louisiana State Treasurer John Kennedy - currently a conservative Democrat - is rumored to be on the verge of switching parties and running against Democratic Senator Mary Landrieu. Even with this development, the Fix only rated the Louisiana Senate race the third most competitive, after New Hampshire and Colorado. Colorado's debatable, but Democrats still don't have a candidate to challenge Sununu in New Hampshire; furthermore, Landrieu has looked pretty vulnerable for a while. Her latest financials (out tomorrow?) should be telling about exactly how vulnerable.

Byrd....

He's now speaking for 20 minutes after the death of the immigration bill. He looks and sounds ancient and awful; his left hand is visibly palsied.

I'm wondering if he might resign? Or he may just be refuting critics who seem to be preemptively dancing on his grave?

Immigration Bill Dead?

I'm watching the cloture vote live on C-Span 2 right now; if the bill's proponents can't get 60 votes, Reid will pull the bill (again). Coastal Democrats seem generally supportive, as do some interior lefties (Kohl just voted aye). I'll keep up with this one as well.

UPDATE: It's dead!! 46-53 (Johnston not voting, I suspect).

UPDATE 2: Finally got the roll call (thanks to Hotair!). Almost all of the Republicans who voted for cloture are either up for reelection, RINOS, both, or "mavericks." One of the few exceptions to this rule is Jon Kyl, whose conservative credentials are beyond criticism. I feel like his support was based on this being a somewhat workable fix and him being a border-stater.

Democrats and Choice

I've come to realize that when Democrats talk about "choice," you usually have to get suspicious. Like the "Employee Free Choice Act," involving unionization procedures. For decades now, the standard has been secret balloting by employees as they decide whether or not to unionize. But Democrats, in what they illogically describe as choice, want it to be conducted by the so-called "card-check" method which is less secret and thus more open to intimidation. I'd suggest you call your Senators - this little bit of ugly is up for a vote this week.

John Fund had a great piece in yesterday's OpJo here.
Senator McConnell has an op-ed on it here.