As predicted here, the Santorum Surge seems to have petered out. Races generally tighten as you approach the finish line but Rick (he who makes creep the flesh of decent people) Santorum had closed at a time when he was the only guy running ads. Even then he barely edged above 40%, which is not good when you are an incumbent Senator and neck deep in cash. The pundits love to talk about how Santorum finishes well. I don't think he'll do it this time. Bob Casey is a weak campaigner as we saw on Meet the Press, but Santorum is not achieving escape velocity.

But a bigger problem looms on the horizon for Democrats in the Senate. The usual math says Dems have to take six seats to gain control. (The Senate is 55/45 with the Veep casting the deciding vote in the event of a tie.) Six would be hard enough. Six would involve surfing a tidal wave. But my own personal suspicion is that the number is seven, not six: if Joe Lieberman wins Connecticut and the overall balance comes to 51 Dems to 49 Reps, Joe will flip to the Republicans. In fact he may flip regardless of balance.

Yes, he's said many times he'll caucus as a Dem, but I doubt it. I'm tired of hearing what a great, stand-up guy this windbag is. I think Joe is all about Joe, and he must know the Dems will shunt him aside in punishment for his disloyalty. If the Dems lose he'll be ranking member on the Senate Bait and Tackle Committee. If they win he'll be chairman. Whereas, if he flips, and especially if doing so saved the Senate for the GOP, they'd give him whatever he wanted. Perhaps his own Special Committee on Righteousness, Sanctimony and Pontification.

So I don't think the magic number is six, I'm afraid it's seven.

The possible Republican "take-aways" are sparse. GOP hope is fading in Minnesota, although it is neck-and-neck in New Jersey, and that could very easily go to the Republicans.

The possible Democratic "take-aways" appear to be Arizona (nah,) Missouri (eh,) Montana (could be,) Ohio (could be,) Pennsylvania (looks good,) Tennessee (nah,) Rhode Island (pray for Laffey to beat Chaffee in the primary,) and Virginia where that insufferable asshole George (the bully) Allen has been hurt some, but probably not enough, by his public display of assholery.

What does it all matter? Well, it might help the Democrats in 2008 if the Senate remained Republican. If the Dems take the House and Senate they'll have a full two years to demonstrate their inability to set any agenda other than Bush-bashing. Democrats would have far less opportunity to bob and weave and avoid serious issues. If they held some modicum of actual power people might start expecting them to answer questions and put forward solutions.

On the other hand, a Democratic House can amuse itself writing crowd-pleasing legislation and setting up giddy investigations without anyone taking it very seriously. They could write wondrously one-sided campaign reform legislation, for example, without any danger that it might become law. They could bring up for a vote any number of bills designed only to embarrass Republicans without any of the risk or effort involved in actual legislation. In other words: all fun, no work.

On the other hand, it's the Senate that votes on Supreme Court justices and there's some very old men and women on that court. If you could guarantee me Justice Stevens (current age: 149) wouldn't die in the next two years I'd say don't sweat the Senate, let's win the House, have some fun for two years, and focus energy and barely-suppressed rage on 2008.

Follow the polls as they develop at Pollster.com the new, and instantly indispensable site for political junkies.

This entry was posted by Michael Reynolds, on Tuesday, September 05, 2006. You can leave your response.