VANITY: Do the Math of Senators

Self | 9/9/2009 | Self

[Dr. Sivana]

#		STATE	NAME	YEAR STARTED	DOB
1		Arkansas	Blanche Lincoln	1999	1960
2		California	Barbara Boxer	1993	1940
3		Colorado	Michael Bennet	2009	1964
4		Connecticut	Chris Dodd	1981	1944
5		Hawaii	Daniel Inouye	1963	1924
6		Illinois	Roland Burris	2009	1937
7		Indiana	Evan Bayh	1999	1955
8		Maryland	Barbara Mikulski	1987	1936
9		Nevada	Harry Reid	1987	1939
10		New York	Chuck Schumer	1999	1950
11		North Dakota	Byron Dorgan	1993	1942
12		Oregon	Ron Wyden	1996	1949
13		Pennsylvania	Arlen Specter	1981	1930
14		Vermont	Patrick Leahy	1975	1940
15		Washington	Patty Murray	1993	1950
16		Wisconsin	Russ Feingold	1993	1953

[Dr. Sivana]

If it all comes down to the Senate, we have to look at the list of Senators who are up for election in 2010. There are only 16 Democrats up for re-election. Some may be getting ready tp retire. Some are safe seats. Some are in trouble regardless of vote (Dodd). I would like this thread to focus on which of these Senators might vote against the package because of re-election concerns.

[Dr. Sivana]

My first take on the list:

Boxer, Dodd, Mikulski, Leahy and Feingold are true believers, and are also unlikely to have their re-election status change by a yes vote.

Burris is unlikely to get past the primary. His vote will easily be bought.

Lincoln, Bayh, Dorgan all have electoral considerations.

I don’t know enough about the rest.

[Tenacious 1]

Evan Bayh is, by all accounts a “Blue Dog”. He is a D in an otherwise R state. Every election year, Evan Bayh drops off the radar. He becomes invisible and stays away from any media attention. He works hard to avoid reminding hoosiers that he is a democrat. He manages to keep getting re-elected. I presume he will vote for the bill. But I would bet he could be easily swayed if some energy went into getting him to talk about it.

[Dr. Sivana]

Looking at the numbers, I’m starting to think the best way to defeat this is to make it very clear that WE WILL TAKE OUT REID. He is way too high profile to duck his vote, and if he can be swayed, ALL the rest have cover. In a small state like Nevada, a well organized and funded campaign (on both sides) should benefit the challenger in 2010.

[campaignPete R-CT]

someone is doing something constructive. I guess you got the memo urging that the birther threads be ignored. I would like to see that memo.

[campaignPete R-CT]

i could make an argument that the HOUSE is a better bet to stop ObamaCare.

DO not assume that the House Dems are disciplined.
Do not assume that the House Dems are not disciplined.

[Dr. Sivana]

i could make an argument that the HOUSE is a better bet to stop ObamaCare.

You sure could, but 200+ names was more than I felt like dealing with on this thread.

The plusses: They are ALL up for election in 2010. Districts are small enough that people are more able to make their voices heard locally.

The minuses: They only need 50%+1

[campaignPete R-CT]

I think they have their 60 cloture votes and only need 50 plus one. Some will vote for cloture and then vote against the bill. Just because they will.

[campaignPete R-CT]

http://drudgereport.com/flashwc.htm

We have the HOUSE breakdown for ya.

“At least 44 more moderate Members of the Democrat Caucus have gone on the record in opposition to the current health care bill in the House, a Hill source claims. Likewise, at least 57 liberal Members of the Democrat Caucus have gone on the record saying they will vote against a health care bill without a strong public option.”

[campaignPete R-CT]

There are enough shaky votes among the other 43 DEMs who are not up in ‘10. Lieberman for example.

[Dr. Sivana]

Lieberman for example.

The only thing I can count on Joe "Hamlet" Lieberman for is to break my heart on anything that doesn't have to do with war and defense.

As far as the Dems who say they want a public option or else, that may just be posturing. If they can get something without one, rather than nothing at all, they may cave. Perhaps someone should light a fire under the lefties claiming that "no public option" means the probem won't get fixed for a whole other generation.