Ed...you had me until the "Lincoln Chaffee must run" comment on Rhode Island.

You were kidding...right??

(a) Chafee has already indicated he is jumping ship and only hung around because he thought Republican MONEY could help him win...which brings me to
(b) draining ONE PENNY from Republican coffers to help this Quisling would be ONE PENNY less to spend on a REAL Republican!

Want to recruit someone that will REALLY help us? Recruit someone to replace Libby Dole as head of the Senate Campaign Committee.

yeah I was pretty much kidding about Chafee. Rhode Island is a lost cause.

John Ensign will be the new chairman of the NRSC. He needs all the help he can get.

In my own state of Arizona, CD8, the conservative candidate for the House was Randy Graf. The Republican National Committee had backed his more liberal, though still Republican, opponent in the primaries. That guy lost; Graf won the primary. As the RNC usually does, they threw the conservative Graf overboard and didn't help his campaign with the kind of money he needed. Graf lost to a liberal Democrat.
The RNC needs to decide whether they will back Conservatives or will they lose everything next time.

Ed:

Good summary. As for IL, Edgar won't run against Durbin. The IL GOP has been begging him to run for various offices since his Gov. term ended in '98. Though he's widely liked, (probably the only Republican who has any chance in this deep blue state), he clearly does not want to get back into politics. Durbin, as awful as he is, is very popular and will be the #2 guy in the Senate. He's not revered like Obama, but his lock on the state is quite secure.

I hate to say it, but the GOP is dead in IL for at least another ten years. We should focus our resources on other states which are winnable (and on keeping our house members such as Kirk, Roskam, Weller, etc.).

Roy, do we have a chance of picking up the Illinois state senate before this decade is up?

I think there are a lot of stretches there--even in a gop year. Without a gop TIDE (like Dems had this year), or retirements (WV is a good example--easy hold for Rockafeller, very difficult hold if he retires), I don't see many Dem vulnerabilities. Landrieu could definitely be in trouble. Johnson's in trouble if Rounds jumps in, otherwise probably not. You can fantasize about MI, MA, DE, etc, but they're really not likely. VERY tough year coming up for the gop, as the Dems have a number of good opportunities for pickups. Also don't be surprised to see a few retirements from people currently on the fence (like Allard and Dominici), because being in the minority isn't nearly as fun as being in the majority.

Ed,

Jeremy is right, we have a lot more seats up in '08 than the Dems do. Who on our side do you see as vulnerable in '08??

And..if you're feeling really good - what do you see in '10 when the Dems have a lot more seats up than we do?? I don't think we have much change of taking the Senate back until '10.

ShuShu---You have more seats up in '10. It's 2012 when we'll have WAY WAY more and a really tough year.

NJ - Tom Kean Jr. has zero chance of getting the nomination.

Jeremy,

My understanding is the Dems have more seats up in '10 (about 24 to our 7 or 8) - is that incorrect? You said "we'll" have way way more in '12 - if we take it in '10 are you anticpating us having problems in '12. If we stick to "conservative" principles I think we would fine in '12 even with more seats up.

Shushu,

Yes you're incorrect. In 2010, reps have 19 and Dems 15--from the looks of it it's about 50-50 in terms of vulnerable seats. There don't look to be many, but in 4 years, who knows.

But in 2010, the gop only has to defend 8 seats while the Dems have 25. That'll be a very tough year obviously. But that's a long time away. Hard to see the gop winning back the Senate before then though.

Here are the numbers:

2008 - Republicians defend 21 seats; Democrats defend 12

2010 - Republicians defend 19 seats; Democrats defend 15

2012 - Republicians defend 9 seats; Democrats defend 24 if we count the two Independents

2008 - up for reelection:

Alabama - Jeff Sessions-R
Alaska - Ted Stevens-R - (he has got to retire!)
Arkansas - Mark Pryor-D
Colorado - Wayne Allard-R - (say Mark Udall - - )
Delaware - Joe Biden-D
Georgia - Saxby Chambliss-R
Idaho - Larry Craig-R
Illinois - Dick Durbin-D
Iowa - Tom Harkin-D
Kansas - Pat Roberts-R
Kentucky - Mitch McConnell-R
Louisiana - Mary Landrieu-D
Maine - Susan Collins-R
Massachusettes - John Kerry-D
Michigan - Carl Levin-D
Minnesota - Norm Coleman-R
Mississippi - Thad Cochran-R
Montana - Max Baucus-D
Nebraska - Chuck Hagel-R - President, you think?
New Hampshire - John Sununu-R
New Jersey - Frank Lautenberg-D (come'on, retire!)
New Mexico - Pete Domenici-R (no money, no run)
North Carolina - Libby Dole-R (Gov'nr looks good)
Oklahoma - Jim Inhofe-R
Oregon - Gordon Smith-R
Rhode Island - Jack Reed-D
South Carolina - Lindsey Graham-R
South Dakota - Tim Johnson-D
Tennessee - Lamar Alexander-R
Texas - John Cornyn-R (proves popularity doesn't matter)
Virginia - John Warner-R
West Virginia - Jay Rockefeller-D
Wyoming - Michael Enzi-R

Libby Dole has got to go if the Republicians expect to win any of these seats back. Heck, even to hold steady is going to be tough.

Another IL person here. Roy is correct. There is no statewide Republican Party left in IL. Once the Chicago 'burbs went Democrat, that was the end for all extents and purposes. The Republicans hold no statewide offices and no conservative Republican could be elected to statewide office in my opinion. Blogo was viewed very unfavorably by the voters with Blogo surrounded by potential scandals and whatnot, and he was still overwhelmingly reelected. That a RINO like Topinka was the best the Party could come up with says everything one needs to know.

Edgar is too old to run anyway. At most he could serve one term. He's lost a lot of mojo over the years by not being involved. Many Republicans have gained a dislike for him because he's not been very willing to help the party since his retirement. Even the congressional Republican Reps lack enough name recognition and popularity to make a statewide challenge. The days of electing moderate Republican senators in the mold of Percy and Dirksen are behind us. The Chicago area overwhelms the rest of the state.

Those of us downstate can only hope for the Dems to nominate someone from downstate so they at least know we're here and maybe will reside in the governor's mansion in the capital instead of in Chicago. I guess we can always hope for scandal that can't be ignored or a fiscal crisis to bail out the Republican Party. It worked the last time for several years.

In 2008, Republican seats held by Sununu, Collins, Stevens, Coleman, Domenici and Allard are all vulnerable. If Warner and Collins retire, there seats are in play as well. Landrieu's seat is the only Democrat one that seems remotely vulnerable to me. There will be likely Republican retirements in 2010 as well in purplish and bluish states like PA (Spector), OH (Voinovich), AZ (McCain), MO (Bond), and IA (Grassley).

Laddy,
I'm amused at the comment of Ev Dirksen and Chuck Percy as "moderates." Dirksen was a Conservative champion of Civil Rights while Percy was a hard-left anti-Zionist/anti-Semite (he had even managed to win a segment of Chicago Blacks by exploiting their prejudices against Jews, an absolutely despicable move). There was a reason why Percy lost reelection in 1984 to Dem Paul Simon even as Reagan won in a landslide, a lot of Republicans knew Simon was a better man.

Laddy,

If the senile Ted Stevens retires so he can play with the "tubes" of the Internet, I think Alaska could be in play. Alaska's junior senator didn't win by all that much last time. (Gary Rowell asserts that Stevens is up for re-election in 2008).

Laddy,

If the senile Ted Stevens retires so he can play with the "tubes" of the Internet, I think Alaska could be in play. Alaska's junior senator didn't win by all that much last time. (Gary Rowell asserts that Stevens is up for re-election in 2008).

WOW. How funny to come across such a large bunch of idiots. To say things like "We have to force . . . " so-and-so to run. Do you realize how the 2006 elections have changed you? You have to force, plead or bribe Republicans to run for office. Congress is lost to the GOP for at least 6 more years. What you don't get "Whiz-bangers" is that politics is in cycles and you are on the losing end at this point. You had a good run from the late 70s till now, but it is over. By 2012 we'll be seeing the re-birth of the 60s! Remember when D'Amato and others in your attack dog party ran ads like "He's too Liberal for New York"? Can you imagine anyone saying something like that? Wouldn't even work in the racist south! Conservatism has run its course and it is over for the next 20-30 years. We are approaching an era of liberalism that will make FDR pale.

Here is to Obama and black and women presidents in the future!

Bye-bye homo-phobes, racists, angry white men! Your time is past and all you got was a couple of Supreme Court justices and the chance to ruin our economy in the 80s and today. IT IS OVER CONSERVATIVES, go preach your Jesus somewhere else!