[TomGuy]

They seemed to have a concensus of opinion that the Republicans would not get close to getting a 60 majority, but would get maybe 54 or 55.

This could allow the Dems to continue their obstructionism, unless the Senate Republicans find and elect some leaders with steel, not cotton, 'thingies'.

[CROSSHIGHWAYMAN]

They seemed to have a concensus of opinion that the Republicans would not get close to getting a 60 majority, but would get maybe 54 or 55.

If the President were to make the composition of the Senate a major issue this year, I believe an aggressive recruitment of quality GOP candidates could tally a 57 ot 58 GOP majority.

The 5 southern Democrat retirements are the GOP's to lose - and that's just the start.

Reid in Nevada is beatable.
So is Lincoln in Arkansas and Murray in Washington.

If the President's coattails are of historical proportions as I guess, Daschle is also toast.

And there might be a couple of upsets either way.

We need to encourage JC Watts to step up to the Senate and hold onto Nickles' seat.

How great would it be to see Watts and Herman Cain in Georgia both win Senate seats!!

History might be made this year.

I'll be working hard, that's for sure.

[Jim Noble]

They seemed to have a concensus of opinion that the Republicans would not get close to getting a 60 majority, but would get maybe 54 or 55. This could allow the Dems to continue their obstructionism, unless the Senate Republicans find and elect some leaders with steel, not cotton, 'thingies'.

The problem is not the leadership (at least, not this problem).

The problem is that all of the RAT senators, Miller possibly excepted, are committed warriors for socialism and centralization.

The GOP caucus is much more diverse. Even IF there were 60 Republican senators after 1/6/05, I doubt they could or would break RAT filibusters-because there are at least ten proabortion Republican senators (and probably more) who will not countenance the nomination of judges who will uphold the Constitution.

[Timmy]

Pubbies don't need 60 to end Dim obstruction. They just need a few more (55 is probably enough) to vote to change the rules (excluding judges from filibuster) at the start of the next Congress. Right now, they don't have the votes because McCain, Snowe, and others won't support changing them in mid-stream. However, because it would be the start of a new Congress, I think they could get the votes if they had a bit more margin.